The Mystery of the Trinity by Eugene A. Skilton 1901

This Kindle book, The Dark History of the Trinity, is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and it is only $1.99

Visit a description of this book here.

The Mystery of the Trinity by Eugene A. Skilton 1901

See also The Pagan Origin of the Trinity - 60 Books on CDrom

For a list of all of my digital books click here

Since the primeval man was forced to fear the superhuman, in the raging of the elements, the mind of man has sought vainly, an intuition of the Idea of the Spirit that rules all.

The Hebrews grasped the idea of Unity, of Monotheism, and in the simplicity of their belief, there is much more to obtain credence, than in the incomprehensive tangle of dualisms and tritheisms. Yet all through the Hebrew theology there runs a vein of semi-polytheism, a mystic adoration of angels and archangels, a mysterious and innumerable host of heaven, also a dualism of Jahveh and Satan. Throughout the Psalms, Prophets and Talmud, there are many veiled references to these mysterious beings, and Christianity has assumed that many of these passages refer to the Hypostases or persons of the Trinity.

The Iranians saw two elements of divinity in the Universe and their theology partook of a dualism of good and evil, in eternal conflict. The many blendings of opposites, dualisms of contrasts in the laws of nature, all seem to token a di-theism of opposing yet dual forces—an I and a Not I, a Being and a Not-Being, a Law and a Not-Law, a Good and a Not-Good. Conditions force upon man the ideas of justice, recompense and punishment and in this system, it is a dualism that presents itself as the immutable condition of the Universe.

As to the triune idea, no one can trace its origin; we know that the Egyptians conceived of a trinity, of which the Theban was Amen-ra, Maut and Khousu, while the Hindu conceived of a Creator, Preserver and Destroyer. The Babylonian worship was to Anu, an abstract idea of Deity, Hea the God of the under-world and Bel—the demiurgus, or Lord of the visible universe. These conceptions, however, contain more tri-theism than unity. Plato, by some called "Moses atticising," conceived of a system undoubtedly more closely resembling the Christian Trinity than any other. He assumed a triad of Supreme God (PATHR) a divine understanding (LOGOS or SOFIA) and a world-soul. Though many assert this is the origin of the Logos doctrine, yet it notably lacks the ideas of unity and personality expressed in the Nicene creed.

Philo, an Alexandrian Jew, contemporary with, but probably not conscious of Christ's advent or teachings accepted the Platonic trinity. The Jews, dreading the mere mention of the awful name Jehovah, often designated Him by His attributes. Philo taking up the Greek cult blended it with these Hebrew expressions— "Word," "Wisdom," "Lord," etc., and personified Plato's Logos as the expected Messiah. Plato did not personify his abstract Logos while Philo did. Philo represented Him as a created being, yet creator of the worlds; an intermediate between God and his children. Thus the Platonism of Philo was, in the main, very similar to the heresy condemned at Nicaea, 325 A. D. Philo said, "This sensible world is the junior son of God; the senior is the Idea or Logos." "God is not to be grasped by human knowledge, but the Word is."

From its very inception, the Christian Church believed in the divinity of Christ. The disciples who walked and talked with Christ kept this impression above all others. The great question of the world's salvation and the kingdom of heaven overshadowed all else. No doubt some of the disciples may have had tritheistic ideas as well as trinitarian. They had little time to philosophize on the nature of God's substance; His mercy sufficed.

As the Church advanced (though still persecuted), the proselitizing influence reached the hearts of many of the Grecian philosophers and then the metaphysical minds began to search for the secret of the mystery. The word Triad was first used in about the middle of the second century in reference to the Christian Godhead. While the abstract word had been employed in the philosophy of Plato, yet it was not until this time that the mystic unity gave it an ambiguity that incented the whole Christian world to solve the mystery.

Various creeds had been promulgated before the full meaning of the word Trinity had been established. Irenaeus in Gaul 170 A. D., Tertullian in Northern Africa 200, Origen in Alexandria 230, Cyprian in Carthage 250 and Novatian in Rome, 250, all submitted creeds to their churches that their communicants might have a plain statement of their belief and confession; but these creeds contained no phrase of express unity and the confessor might be orthodox and yet be unitarian or tritheistic.

Many different sects, from the middle of the first century held various conceptions of the character of Christ. The Docetic belief was that Christ's advent was merely a phantasm, a deception of God. The Manicheaus, the Ebionites and all the various Gnostics, each held a different idea of the person of the Saviour— some believed him to be merely human, some, wholly divine, others that he was but a spiritual manifestation of the Deity, and very few of the early sects professed what we to-day would call an Athanasian belief in the Trinity. The general belief was in three distinct substances or Beings, or in only one Person, or two, but not in a unity of the Three.

The sect that first commanded the attention of the Church Fathers and caused them to build their doctrine around the theology or Logos doctrine of John, was the Monarchians or Unitarians. They were first called the Alogi. Theodotus, however, was the first to give the theory a systematic exposition. He denied Christ's divinity and claimed that Jesus was influenced by the Holy Spirit just as others were. Tertullian called Praxeas the first Patripassian, because he denied the Godhead of the Three; according to Praxeas, the One God became incarnate in Christ voluntarily; the flesh, he called the Son and the Son thus enveloped the Father; Christ was at the same time Father and Word. When Praxeas was accused by Tertullian of having crucified the Father, he referred him to Isaiah 45:5, John 10:30 and 14:9.

Sabellius believed in the Three, but as different manifestations of the One God. He held the essence of the Monad Father evolved Himself in the Son and Spirit; while Pope Calistus I., 218-223, called trinitarians ditheists, saying "The Father took flesh, made it God and uniting it to Himself becoming one God, and therefore cannot be two." Paul of Samosata believed the Logos merely a power of God, more developed in Christ than in any other human prophet, evolving through its help, his divinity and thus becoming by his own effort the Saviour of the world. It was the opposition to these Monarchian theories that developed the tritheism of the Arians and compelled the Church to promulgate the Nicene creed of the Trinity.

Arius, a presbyter of Alexandria, was the originator of a theory which, in the early part of the fourth century, was generally accepted by the laity of the whole Christian Church, and even many years after the council of Nicaea, about 361, was almost universally accepted. Arius believed that there was one God, who was truly God and God alone, uncreated, unoriginate, alone everlasting, eternal and unchangeable forever. At one time, He was the Sole Essence, all else was non-existent. Before all the ages and the worlds, Christ was created by the Father, the first of all creatures and all things, but not as other creatures. His glory was immeasurably above the archangels, who worshipped him. He was perfect God, but of a substance like the Father's, but not the same, therefore not one with the Father; the only begotten Son, the Saviour of the world; perfect visible image of invisible Deity, but not Supreme.

This doctrine aroused the fiery spirit of Athanasius a very young but brilliant ecclesiast of Alexandria, and the influence of the Arian heresy was brought to the attention of the Bishops. The emperor Constantine, endeavoring to concilliate both factions called a council at Nicaea 325, to forever make plain the authorized belief of the Church and anathematize all other heresies. It was wise to call a convention in the incipiency of the heresy while all the Bishops accepted the Eternal Logos doctrine of John.

Athanasius, though only twenty-nine, assumed at the very beginning, the leadership of the session, both in offensive operations against Arianism and in defending the unity of the Trinity. Arius asserted that "Christ is not God by Nature, but merely by Adoption and Participation." Athanasius replied by quoting Isaiah 40:28, "The everlasting God, the Lord Creator of the ends of the earth." When Athanasius said "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God," Arius finished the quotation, "And the Word was with God," laying special emphasis on "with." In quoting Hebrews 1:3, "The express image of His Person," and John 8:58, "Before Abraham was, I am," Athanasius did not controvert Arius. Arius had as much foundation for his belief as Athanasius could find in the Old Testament in justification of his own. In all of Athanasius' authorities, there was a subtle mystery, which Arius could as well use himself. Thus nothing in Jeremiah 1:5, even if applicable to Christ could establish his co-eternity with God; nor would Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, to-day and forever" be asserted by Athanasius with more vehemence than by Arius.

Thus Arius, by agreeing to so much, was considered deceptive in what he did believe. Yet when Athanasius cited Isaiah 7:14, why should Arius object? Many of us to-day will think that Athanasius anticipated Arius in quoting Hebrews 1 :3, "When he had by himself purged our sins, he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high, being made so much better than the angels, as he hath, by inheritance, obtained a more excellent name than they." Athansius declared the foundation of the Trinity in John 14:10, "I am in the Father and the Father in me." To this Arius could not voluntarily subscribe, as he maintained that the Logos was homoeusion, like in substance, but not homoousion, the same substance, and here the controversy waged the fiercest. There was only the difference of one letter, yet on that one letter depended the belief in the unity of the Trinity.

Athanasius asserted that Christ was "Very God of very God;" "The Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." "'He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.'"

Arius could not answer Hebrews 10:11, "Creations shall perish," and if created, then Christ shall perish, except to say, "Then all men shall perish." Nor could he reply to Athanasius' citation of John 1:3, "All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made," except to feebly assert that Christ was the First Creation and all else was the second creation. While Arius could reconcile his belief to Genesis 1:26, "Let us make man," Proverbs 8:27-30, "When he prepared the heavens, I was there" * * * "I was by him, disposing and adjusting as a Master Workman;" yet there were some extracts that Athanasius could not confute, Isaiah 45:8, "Salvation have I brought forth. I have created it;" Isaiah 45:11, "Thus saith the Holy One of Israel and His Maker." Arius maintained that Son implied birth, the only-begotten then had an origin of existence; therefore once the Son was not; therefore He is created out of nothing. Some of Arius texts were Proverbs 8:22; Matthew 19:17; 20:23; Mark 13:32; John 5:19; 18:28; 1 Cor. 15:28; Col. 1:15; Hebrews 1:5; Romans 1:4.

Of the 318 Bishops at the Council of Nicaea, 325 A.D., but five or six were with Arius and these were compelled to publicly recant, while Arius was banished. Though since, the Creed of this Council has been declared infallible, it was not until the fifth century that the heresy of Arianism was effectually stamped out. The Athanasian Creed is now almost universally accepted by all Christian denominations, with very few exceptions, but to show that it was not always so, a short account of the rise and fall of Arianism follows.

In 326, Athanasius was elected Bishop of Alexandria; two years after, Eusebius was in favor with Constantine and two years later Constantine recalled Arius from exile, but Athanasius declined to restore to Arius the communion of the Church. In 334, sixty Bishops, the Council of Caesarea, condemned Athanasius who refused to attend. In 335, at the Council of Tyre and Jerusalem, Athanasius and Arius were both admitted. Athanasius was deposed from the See of Alexandria and Constantine banished him to Treves.

The Council of Constantinople, in 336, recognized Arius and on the same day that he was to take communion, he died. His opponents claimed his death a miraculous punishment, although Gibbon suggests that those who press the narrative of his death might find that orthodox saints contributed more efficaciously with poison (his bowels suddenly bursted) than by their prayers to rid themselves of their most formidable rival.

In 337 Constantine died. Constantius, a semi-Arian, became Emperor of the East and Constans, an orthodox Christian, Emperor of the West. The following year saw Athanasius recalled from exile. The Council of Alexandria, 340, defended Athanasius and the Council of Rome the following year proclaimed him innocent. In the same year the Council of Antioch, over ninety Bishops, superseded Athanasius with an Arian, condemned consubstantialists and adopted a great many creeds antagonistic to the Nicene.

In 345, at the Council of Antioch, the word homoousion was suppressed in the Macrostich Creed, while in 347, the Council of Sardicia vindicated Athanasius. The Council of Sirmium, 351, dropped the all-important controversial word homoousion and the Council of Aries, two years later, condemned Athanasius, while only one Bishop stood up for Nicene Creed and was banished for so doing. In 355, at the Council of Milan, three hundred Bishops of the West, almost unanimously condemned Athanasius. In 357—359, Arians and Semi-Arians drew up creeds at Sirmium. In 357, Hosius, the President of the Council of Nicaea, held communion with Arians. In the same year Liberius, the Pope, condemned Athanasius. In 357, the Creed of Ancyra against homoousion was signed by Liberius. In 358, Liberius signed the Third Sirmium Creed (Semi-Arian). The Council of Constantinople, 359, and the Council of Antioch, 360, were both anti-Athanasian. Jerome, in 361, said "Nearly all the churches of the world, under the pretence of peace and of the Emperor, are polluted with the communion of Arians." The edict of the Council of Constantinople, 381, however, killed Arianism forever.

During the fourth century, almost every city and village of Christendom was either a fortress of Arianism or Trinitarianism. It was not an uncommon occurrence for a stranger to be halted and challenged as to his belief, whereupon, after a short discussion, the mob would divide and a pitched battle would ensue.

With all these varying assumptions of Councils, the Christian of the twentieth century, though mainly believing in the Athanasian Creed, may well believe as he interprets; that Christ is very God of very God, one with the Father, that the Godhead is One in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, or as we wish. But if we assume that there is efficacy in Christ's life and death and that He is divine, it would be judicious to believe that Christ is not a created being, but co-eternal with the Father, not of like substance with the Father, but the same substance, He in the Father and the Father in Him. "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father."

For a list of all of my digital books click here

Socialism - Is it American? by William Starr Myers 1919

Socialism - Is it Americanism? by William Starr Myers 1919 [Professor of History and Politics, Princeton University]

See also Over 300 PDF/Acrobat Books on Socialism, Communism and Economics and The History & Mystery of Money & Economics-250 Books on DVDrom

For a list of all of my digital books on disk click here

It is rather interesting and curious to find that a great many of the people who have taken literally President Wilson’s declaration that we must make the world safe for democracy are also making it their business to spill a sort of altruism over the entire world. They are so busy attempting to spread democracy that they are not always certain in their own minds, it seems, as to what you mean by democracy. In fact, many of their confreres are extremely active just at the present time in trying to so transform their own country that they go to prove that they have very little confidence in the brand of democracy that we usually have known as American. In other words, they are trying to change our government from a democratic government into an autocratic one, from an American government into one modeled on European paternalism. That is, they are trying, whether by fair means or foul, whether openly or secretly, whether in an acknowledged way or tacitly, to put us upon a socialistie basis. And socialism, to my mind, is not only un-American, but it is undemocratic.

Of course, in discussing such a thing as socialism, the first difficulty we have is to get a definition of socialism. I know a great many socialists, and seldom do you find them agreeing upon what socialism is. It is just about as hard as trying to define religion. But, by talking with a number of socialists, we work out a definition which they are willing to accept, and it is this: that socialism is the government ownership of manufacture and distribution of all forms of wealth; and by that they mean the manufacture and distribution, that is, the production and transportation, of all forms of wealth; not merely in the sense of money, but in the sense of anything that is for the economic good of man or his welfare and enjoyment.

If we are going upon that basis, where the state takes over the means of manufacture, distribution, transportation and such, it means inevitably that we are going to substitute a government judgment for the individual emulation and competition, and it will become the duty of the government to decide how people shall be happy and what their measure of happiness shall be. Now, it seems to me that just as soon as you undertake to substitute a government judgment for the individual judgment, you are on ground that is anything except American, because if the Government is to decide as to the happiness of the individual, of course it first relieves him of all responsibility. In a socialistic state there is not the same responsibility of citizenship as you find in democracy, like America.

It seems to me that after all ambition is not only right, but it is one of the most valuable attributes of the human mind. Because what is ambition? Is not ambition just like any other thing—the greater the value of it the greater is the wrong when it is wrongly used, the greater is the abuse? Is not ambition, after all, the desire for greater service? And, mark you, what is every business man trying to do in order to increase his business? He is trying to appeal to the service of the public, public service, in order that, by serving the public, he may increase his business. Ambition is not only one of the most valuable but one of the most necessary human attributes.

What is the object of the American government? It is to give equality of opportunity. As the Declaration of Independence said, men are born free and have equal rights to the pursuit—not to the gift of happiness but to the pursuit—of happiness. The object of our Government is common equality of opportunity for each individual to work out his own salvation. To have to work it out in the business sense, the economical sense, and the spiritual sense. You cannot legislate men's happiness.

Again, socialism is essentially un-Christian. I bring this up because I have a great many friends who call themselves Christian Socialists. To my mind Socialism and Christianity are mutually exclusive terms. The whole appeal of the Christian religion is to individual impulse and to individual responsibility. We hear in church that it is more blessed to give than to receive. Giving is democratic. Sitting back and receiving the results of somebody else's work is socialism. I defy any socialist to show how the socialist state will call forth love from the human heart, because that comes from the well spring of the heart and not by outward direction. Parents who are successful in training their children usually do it by appealing to the love in their hearts, and not by outward direction.

Socialism is also opposed to the Jewish religion, which is the foundation on which the Christian religion is based. It is the fact that the Christian and Jewish religions, which are the same in essence, appeal to the individual responsibility; that, to my mind makes them the highest form of religion; and it is not socialism.

Democratic government is a government of cooperation, the working together of individuals. The socialists are strong on cooperation. There is one thing they are extremely fond of, and that is cooperation, but it is a word they have no right to use, because cooperation is the working together, the result of individual impulse. Socialism is working together as the result of government and outward direction. That is the difference between socialism and the cooperation with which men worked together in the Liberty Loans. Democracy is working together through an inward impulse; socialism, through an outward direction.

I hold no brief for the labor man, but I have learned this, that if you take the average labor man, and talk to him, he will say that he likes certain things in socialism; but, to come right down to facts, you will find that he likes working together, cooperation. And when you say to him, “Are you willing to go on the socialistic basis, where the state determines each wage and job and so on?" he will say, “No!” He will say he wants to cooperate. It is the word cooperation that catches his imagination.

The Romance of Words by Ernest Weekley 1921

The Romance of Words by Ernest Weekley 1921

See also Over 200 Books that have CHANGED the World on DVDrom

For a list of all of my digital books click here

Professor Weekley interests us in philology no less than Professor Wyld, but he treads an entirely different path. His aim is to select the unexpected in etymology, to show us the close connection between jilt and Juliet, to trace assegai back to Chaucer, to explain the true meaning of phrases like curry favour, which really means the combing down of a horse of a particular colour.

The result of this system is that we begin for ourselves to eye every word with suspicion, and work out by ourselves reasons why trivial means commonplace (it can be picked up anywhere, at the meet of "three ways," trivium), and so on.

Why are the series of monosyllables by which notes are indicated, do, re, mi, fa, so, la? They are supposed to be taken from a Latin hymn:

"Ut (do) queant laxis resonare fibris
Mira questorum famuli tuorum
Solve polluti labü reatum
Sancte Iohannees ..."

Professor Weekley invites us to watch words as they travel, an amusing game.

Apricot starts in mediæval Greek, through vulgar Latin as præcox (early ripe), through Arabia. It first crossed the Adriatic, passed on to Asia Minor or the north coast of Africa, and then travelling along the Mediterranean re-entered Southern Europe. Carat does much the same, being a corruption through French, Italian and Arabic of the Greek KERATION (fruit of the locust-tree, little horn). Hussar is a doublet of corsair, and has travelled a long way since the separation first took place. The cocoa of cocoanut is a Spanish baby word for a bogey-man.

Then there are words of popular manufacture like ortolan, guinea-pig (which is not a pig and does not come from Guinea), parrot ("little Peter"), pinchbeck and nicotine (from the names of men), and so on.

Phonetic accidents account for many vagaries, as we see only too commonly with the letter "h." It is noteworthy that in Imperial Rome educated people sounded the aspirate, while it completely disappeared from the everyday language of the lower classes, the vulgar Latin from which the Romance languages are descended, so far as their working vocabulary is concerned.

That is why the Romance languages have no aspirate. Our "educated" h in modern English is mainly artificial, as we saw before: cf. Armitage with hermitage.

Then there are sound changes by assimilation, dissimilation and metathesis: the lime and linden is an example of the first; tankard for cantar, wattle and wallet examples of the third. Some words shrink, like Spittlegate near Grantham for hospital gate, gin for Geneva, grog from the admiral who wore grogram breeches, navvy for navigator. Words have a habit too of completely changing their meaning. Treacle used for balm in Coverdale's Bible from theriaca, a remedy against snake-bite, a lumber-room, is really a Lombard room, where the pawnbrokers stored pledged property.

Adjectives are especially subject to change. Quaint used to mean acquaint; restive used to mean standing stock still; smug used to mean trim, elegant, beautiful; homely used to mean ugly, disagreeable, coarse.

Miniature ought to mean something painted in minium (red lead).

The original scavenger was an important official.

There is too the study of semantics—the science of meanings as distinguished from phonetics, the science of sound.

The exchequer is really a chess-board; chancel a cross-bar, so cancel.

The study of metaphors is a little startling, when we find that to "take the cake" is paralleled by the Greek LABEIN TON PURAMOUNTA, and that "to lose the ship for a ha'porth of tar" is merely dialect for sheep. Tar is used as a medicine for sheep.

Folk etymology is worth spending time over, if only to discover such things as the derivation of humble-pie, a pie made from the umbles of a stag; umpire (non per), not equal; ramper, causeway, a doublet of rampart; purley, a strip of disforested woodland from pour-allée; taffrail from tafel, picture; posthumous, from postumus, latest-born. Witch-elm has nothing to do with witches; it is for weech-elm, the bent elm.

Ignorance of the true meaning of a word leads to vain repetitions: greyhound means hound-hound; Buckhurst Holt Wood means beech wood wood wood; a cheerful face means a face full of face.

And before taking leave of us and sending us off on a thousand different scents of our own in chase of words Professor Weekley warns us to preserve the rules of the hunt. A sound etymology must not violate the recognised laws of sound change (these may be found in Professor Wyld's book); the development of meaning must be clearly traced, and it must start from the earliest or fundamental sense of the word.

With the few delicious examples that I have quoted before you, multiplied by a thousand in The Romance of Words, this is a game to send you into ecstasies, and one of which you can never tire.

For a list of all of my digital books on disk click here

Love Potions in History, article in Chamber's Journal 1893

Love Potions in History, article in Chamber's Journal 1893

LOVE—PHILTRES

See also Folk Medicine, Alternative Remedies & Herbal Cures - 100 Books on DVDrom and Alternative Medicine & Spiritual Healing - 175 Books on DVDrom

For a list of all of my digital books on disk click here

AN expedient much practised in bygone years for inspiring and securing love was the Love-philtre, or amatory potion. It has been remarked that one of the grandest musical works in existence would never have been written had not Tristram and Ysonde drank the magic love-potion, which was so strong that it united them even after death; for ‘from his grave there grew an eglantine which twined about Ysonde's statue above, and though three times they cut it down, it grew again, and ever wound its arms about the image of the fair Ysonde.’ Going back to still earlier times, it is well known that the Roman poet Lucretius took his life in an amorous fit caused by a love-potion; and Lucullus lost his reason in the same way. In the middle ages, love-powders were advertised for sale, the pernicious effects of which became a matter of serious comment. At a period, too, when credulity in all kinds of occult influences taught that enchantment could be introduced into the human frame in the shape of food, or along with it, many an unlucky person was accused of using forbidden charms, and occasionally burnt at the stake as a witch. Indeed, the composition of love-philtres was supposed to be one of the most powerful of witches’ functions, and as such they fell under the legislative ordinances of our forefathers.

But the ignorant empiric, also confident in his own qualifications, never scrupled about the preparation of love-philtres, maintaining that they could be produced by the pharmaceutical art, apart from any mystical process. Hence, relying on his own medical skill, he sold these much-coveted compounds to anxious lovers, who readily paid exorbitant prices for them. As such amatory powders and potions only too frequently contained pernicious ingredients, injurious effects were occasioned by taking them, an abuse which necessitated legal interference. Again, conjurers and mountebanks made a profitable trade of love-philtres at country fairs, enticing the simple-minded folk by rehearsing to them the wonderful properties of their love-producing commodities. Shakespeare has represented Othello as accused of winning Desdemona by such means:

She is abused, stolen from me, and corrupted 
By spells and medicines bought of mountebanks. 

Formerly, too, the village apothecary kept love-philtres among his stock of drugs; and Gay, in his Shepherd's Week, relates how Hobnelia was guilty of resorting to this questionable practice:

As I was wont, I trudged, last market-day,
To town with new-laid eggs, preserved in hay.
I made my market long before twas night;
My purse grew heavy, and my basket light. 
Straight to the 'pothecary’s shop I went, 

And in love-powder all my money spent.
Behap what will, next Sunday, after prayers, 
When to the alehouse Lubberkin repairs, 
These golden flies into his mug I‘ll throw,
And soon the swain with fervent love shall glow.

Similarly, in the Character of a Quack Astrologer, published in the year 1673, we are told how he induces a young heiress to run away with a footman by persuading a young girl ’tis her destiny; and sells the old and ugly philtres and love-powder to procure them sweethearts.’ It will be seen, therefore, from how many sources love-philtres were procurable, a proof of the wide extent to which this curious delusion prevailed in bygone times. Even at the present day it survives in our midst, cases occurring every now and then of persons being fined, in different parts of the country, for either selling or persuading love-sick damsels to purchase various mysterious compounds for influencing the affections of others.

In the preparation of the love-philtre, much importance has from the earliest period of its history been attached to the numerous ingredients used in its composition. Both in ancient and modern days, certain animals and plants have been supposed to be specially adapted for such a purpose, and have long gained a notoriety through being thus employed. Italian girls still practise the following method: a lizard is caught, drowned in wine, dried in the sun, and reduced to powder, some of which is thrown on the obdurate man, who thenceforth is theirs for evermore. A favourite Slavonic device, writes Mr Finck, in his Romantic Love and Personal Beauty, ‘is to cut the finger, let a few drops of her blood run into a glass of beer and make the adored man drink it unknowingly. The same method is current in Hesse and Oldenburg; and in Bohemia, the girl who is afraid to wound her finger may substitute a few drops of bat’s blood.’ Another form of this mode of procedure current in the Netherlands is thus: Take a host or holy wafer, but which has not yet been consecrated; write on it certain words from the ring-finger, and then let n priest say five masses over it. Divide the wafer into two equal parts, of which keep one, and give the other to the person whose love you desire to gain. Formerly, in our own country, a nest of young swallows was buried in the earth and such as were found with their mouths shut when disintepred were supposed to allay a lover’s feelings.

In Scotland, according to Mr Walter Gregor in his Folk-lore of the North-east of Scotland, two lozenges were taken, covered with perspiration, and stuck together and given in this form to the one whose love was sought, the eating of them being thought to excite affection. A curious old recipe once popular amongst the English peasantry, informs us that ‘inside a frog his a certain crooked bone, which, when cleaned and dried over the fire on St John's Eve, and the ground fine and given in food to the lover, will at once give his love to the administerer.'

From time immemorial flowers have been much in request as love-philtres, a highly popular one having been the pansy. In A Midsummer Nights Dream, Oberon tells Puck to place a pansy on the eyes of Titania, in order that, on awakening, she may fall in love with the first object she meets:

Fetch me that flower; the herb I showed thee once
The juice of it on sleeping eyelids laid
Will make a man, or woman, madly dote
Upon the next live creature that she sees.

A favourite plant with the old herbalists was satyrion, a name applied to several species of orchis. As far back as the days of the Roman Empire, it was commonly supposed that the roots of the satyrion supplied the satyrs with food, and prompted them to commit those excesses for which they became proverbial. Kircher relates the case of a youth who whenever he visited a certain corner of his garden, became so love-sick that he mentioned this strange circumstance to a friend. On examining the spot, it was found to be overgrown with a species of satyrion, the odour of which alone had the effect of inspiring love.

Vervain has long been in repute as a love-philtre, and in many rural districts has the reputation of securing affection from those who take it to those who administer it. Another ingredient of the amatory potion once highly prized was cumin-seed. It is still popular with country lasses in Italy, who endeavour to make their lovers swallow it in order to insure their continued attachment and fidelity. Or, if the lover is going to serve as a soldier, or has obtained work in a distant part of the country, his sweetheart gives him a newly-made loaf seasoned with cumin, or a cup of wine in which cumin has been previously powdered and mixed. Then there is the basil, with its strange mystic virtues, which in Moldavia is said to stop the wandering youth on his way, and make him love the maiden from whose hand he happens to accept a sprig. Rarely does the Italian girl pay a visit to her sweetheart without wearing behind her ear a sprig of this favourite plant. Hence, it was considered an invaluable ingredient in love-potions. The mandrake, which is still worn in France as a love-charm, was in demand for the same purpose because, writes Gerarde, ‘it hath been thought that the root hereof serveth to win love.’ He also speaks of the carrot as ‘serving for love-matters,’ and adds, that the root of the wild species is more effectual than that of the garden. The root of the male fern was in olden times much sought for in the preparation of love-philtres, and hence the following allusion:

’Twas the maiden’s matchless beauty 
  That drew my heart a-nigh; 
Not the fern-root potion, 
  But the glance of her blue eye. 

Among further plants employed for the same purpose may be mentioned the crocus, purslane, and periwinkle; while the leaves of hemlock, dried and powdered and mixed in food or drink, were said to influence the affections of another. The well-known wild-flowers, Our Lady’s Bedstraw and the Mallow were thought to possess the same property; and among the Scottish peasantry the roots of the orchis were dug up, and, when dried and ground, were secretly administered as a potion.

With the Indians, the mango is a favourite plant for the production of the love-philtre. Tradition tells how once upon a time a young girl plucked one of its blossoms and offered it to Cupid, uttering these words:

God of the bow, who with spring's choicest flowers
Dost point the five unerring shafts; to thee
I dedicate this blossom; let it serve
To barb thy truest arrow; be its mark 
Some youthful heart that pines to be beloved.

Other plants equally in request are the lotus and the champak, the latter being a plant of the greatest rarity. The jasmine, too, is reputed to be all-potent in love-matters; and it may be remembered how Moore represents the enchantress Namouna, who was skilled in all manner of charms and talismans, instructing Nourmahal to gather at midnight certain blossoms which would have the effect, when twined into a wreath, of recalling her Selim's love. Accordinly, the flowers having been duly gathered as directed, the enchantress Namouna, whilst singing the following invocatory lines, weaves the mystic chaplet which is to have such wondrous influence:

The image of love, that nightly flies 
  To visit the bashful maid, 
Steals from the jasmine flower, that sighs 
  Its soul, like hers, in the shade. 
The dream of a future or happier hour, 
  That slights on Misery's brow, 
Springs out of the almond silvery flower, 
  That blooms on a leafless bough. 

Beans are said to have been accounted efficacious as love-philtres. The case is recorded of an old woman who was scourged through the city of Cremona for having endeavoured to conciliate the affections of a young man through the medium of some beans over which mass had been celebrated. Indeed, all kinds of ingredients seem to have been used in the preparation of these amatory spells, and it is recorded how a young woman in the seventeenth century was indicte by the legal authorities of Leipsic for administering a love-philtre composed of bread, hair, and nails, to a man, whom it sickened.

Occasionally, in foreign countries, confidence was reposed in the power of written charms, which were administered in drink or food to the person whose love it was desired to secure. In some cases, it would seem, such philtres were considered to have the desired effect without being swallowed. Thus, St Jerome relates how a young man passionately enamoured of a damsel of Gaza, having failed in the usual amatory charms, repaired to the priests of AEsculapius at Memphis, from whom he acquired magical faculties. Returning after a year’s absence, he introduced certain mystical words and figures sculptured on Cyprian brass beneath the lady’s door. This contrivance had the desired effect, for soon she began to rave on his name, ‘to wander with uncovered head and dishevelled hair, for she had become distracted through the vehemence of love.' But in cases of this kind there was not always the same success. We are told, for instance, how a Norwegian peasant whose suit had been rejected sought to inspire the lady he loved with corresponding affection by mystical means. So he carved certain Runic characters on pieces of wood; but not being sufficiently skilful in this mode of talismanic science, instead of furthering his purpose, he did the reverse, and threw the damsel into a dangerous illness. Fortunately, a northern chief witnessing her sufferings, and hearing that Runic characters had been carved, sculptured those that he considered more appropriate, which being laid beneath her pillow, soon restored her to convalescence.

Oftentimes philtres were expressly given to counteract the effects of love, and to soothe the susceptibilities of those who were suffering from misapplied affection. Thus the Savaea Indica, a species of the willow, one of the sacred plants of India, had the reputation of driving away all feelings of love; and the amaranth was thought to be a good antidote to love. The water-lily was supposed to possess a similar property, and the Agnus castus was given to calm despairing lovers. In short, there was no lack of expedients resorted to in bygone years either for inspiring or dispelling love, many an amusing instance being given in our old romances and fairy tales. Such a practice may seem ludicrous in the present age; but it cannot be forgotten how great a hold it once had on the popular mind. How far this was due to the stories circulated, is a matter of uncertainty; but tales like the following one, handed down with every semblance of truth, no doubt largely helped to propagate a piece of folly which was once productive of so many mischievous effects. The story goes that Charlemagne was enamoured of a very unattractive woman, whose corpse at her death he would not quit. Archbishop Turpin, suspecting sorcery, searched the body, and underneath the tongue found a ring. This he put on his own finger, whereupon the monarch became strangely attached to the Archbishop, who flung the ring into the lake near Aix. But the mysterious influence of the ring did not cease, for the king became so enamoured of the lake that he built a palace on its shore, where he spent the remainder of his life.

For a list of all of my digital books on disk click here

Northern Mythology and the Trolls' Christmas By Benjamin Thorpe 1851

THE TROLLS CELEBRATE CHRISTMAS

See also Over 250 Books on DVDrom on Mythology, Gods and Legends

For a list of all of my digital books click here

Of the manner in which the Trolls celebrate Christmas eve there are traditions throughout the whole North. At that time it is not advisable for Christian men to be out. On the heaths Witches and little Trolls ride, one on a wolf, another on a broom or a shovel, to their assemblies, where they dance under their stones. These stones are then raised on pillars, under which the Trolls dance and drink. In the mount are then to be heard mirth and music, dancing and drinking. On Christmas morn, during the time between cock-crowing and daybreak, it is highly dangerous to be abroad.

This Kindle book is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and it is only $1.99

 Visit here for a description

One Christmas night in the year 1490, as Fru Cissela Ulftand was sitting in her mansion at Liungby in Scania, a great noise was heard proceeding from the Trolls assembled at the Magle stone, when one of the lady's boldest servants rode out to see what was going on. He found the stone raised, and the Trolls in a noisy whirl dancing under it. A beautiful female stept forth, and presented to the guest a drinking horn and a pipe, requesting him to drink the Troll-king's health and to blow in the pipe. He took the horn and pipe, but at the same instant clapped spurs to his horse, and galloped straight, over rough and smooth, to the mansion. The Trolls followed him in a body with a wild cry of threats and prayers, but the man kept the start, and delivered both horn and pipe into the hands of his mistress. The Trolls promised prosperity and riches to Fru Cissela's race, if she would restore their pipe and horn; but she persisted in keeping them, and they are still preserved at Liungby, as memorials of the wonderful event. The horn is said to be of an unknown mixture of metals with brass ornaments, and the pipe of a horse's leg-bone. The man who stole them from the Trolls died three days after, and the horse on the second day. Liungby mansion has been twice burnt, and the Ulftand family never prospered afterwards. This tradition teaches that Christians should act justly even towards Trolls.

It is also related of some priests, who were riding before daybreak by a mount on a Christmas morning, while the Trolls were at their sports, how a Berg- or Mount-woman came out and offered them drink in metal bowls; and how they cast the drink behind them, but that some drops chanced to fall on the horses' loins and burned the hair off. The bowls they carried away with them, and such are still to be found in several churches, where, it is said, they were formerly used as chalices.

This drink, which the Trolls were in the habit of offering so liberally, was believed to have the property of obliterating from the memory all the past, and of rendering the guest who partook of it contented with all he met with in the mount.

ORIGIN OF THE NOBLE NAME OF TROLLE.
On the wall of Voxtorp church in Smaland there is a painting representing a knight named Herve Ulf, when one Christmas morning he received a drinking horn from a Troll-wife with one hand, while with his sword he struck off her head with the other, kept the horn and rode to church. In remembrance of this deed, the king commanded him to call himself Trolle, and to take a Troll without a head for his armorial bearing. Such is the origin of the noble name of Trolle. This wonderful horn was of three hundred colours, and was first preserved in the cathedral of Wexio; but when the Danes in 1570 burned Wexio, the horn was carried to Denmark.

It is said that the Trolls are very prolific, but that their offspring for the most part dies when it thunders; whence the saying: "Were it not for thunder, the Trolls would destroy the world."

My Kindle book is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and it is only $1.99

 Visit here for a description

Anglo-Saxon Medicine by Joseph Frank Payne 1903

Anglo-Saxon Medicine by Joseph Frank Payne, M.D. Oxon. 1903 

See also Folk Medicine, Alternative Remedies & Herbal Cures - 100 Books on DVDrom and Alternative Medicine & Spiritual Healing - 175 Books on DVDrom

For a list of all of my digital books on disk click here

Beside their native herbal medicines and the more scientific therapeutics and pathology which they had borrowed from the Greeks the Anglo-Saxons made a large use of charms and what are called magical rites in the treatment of disease. It would be a mistake to suppose, as is sometimes thought, that this was their only or chief method of treatment or that it was in any way peculiar to the Anglo-Saxons. A great deal of it was taken from the later Greek and Latin medical writers who show a credulity and superstition quite equal to that of the Anglo-Saxons. Again, the magical and superstitious medicine lasted much longer than the Anglo-Saxon period. It went on all through the Middle Ages up to recent times and is not extinct even at the present day. But it is by no means characteristic of our own country. Indeed, the numerous collections of “folk-lore,” or what is called “folk medicine,” from the peasantry of continental countries show that these ancient superstitions are more prevalent and more inveterate among them than they are among our own people. What is most remarkable is not only that the same general beliefs have survived but that the very same forms of words have in many cases been preserved for centuries and may be even now recited in certain places.

It is very difficult to define precisely what is meant by magical medicine or what by charms. But, broadly, they imply a belief in some supernatural efficacy belonging to verbal formulae, recited or written, in special circumstances or with reference to special objects. Originally it would seem that this belief implied also the belief in spirits, demons, or some supernatural beings who could be either conciliated or coerced by the use of certain words. The belief in supernatural personages gradually waned and in the case we are now considering heathen or mystical conjurations were to a large extent replaced by Christian prayers and benedictions, while the occult rites of unknown origin were superseded by the services of the Church.

Without pretending to a complete classification the various magical processes and charms may be brought under the following heads: 1. Prayers or invocations addressed to medicinal herbs or to supernatural beings supposed to have power over them. 2. Special verbal formulae or observances employed in collecting the medicinal herbs or other natural remedies. 3. Prayers and mystical words repeated over the patient or written and applied to some parts of his body, with or without ordinary remedies. Such words are very often in a foreign tongue unknown to those who use them, such as Latin among the barbarous or uneducated, Greek or Hebrew among the Latins, and so on, sometimes in a quite unknown language, which have been called Ephesian charms. But they may also be in the vernacular. 4. Direct conjurations or exorcisms addressed to diseases as if they were evil spirits. 5. Narrative charms—that is, trivial stories relating to sacred or legendary persons who suffered from or did something analogous to what the patient is suffering from. 6. Material magic—that is, the attribution of magical power to certain objects, such as plants or parts of animals, stones, or engraved gems called amulets, these objects being not used medicinally but applied in some way to the patient's body. 7. Transference of disease, by a magical formula or ceremony, to some animal or material object or in some way to the outside world. Examples of all these can be found in older medical literature as well as in the Anglo-Saxon books and also throughout succeeding centuries.

The actual origin of these beliefs and practices is extremely obscure and cannot here be considered. Doubtless there was an element of traditional popular belief in each particular country and also, as regards European medicine, an introduction of Oriental superstitions. But they formed no part of the regular classical medicine of the Greeks and Romans till the period of its decline. Hippocrates, Galem, Aretaeus, and Celsus are entirely free from such superstitions. The first Greek medical writer of any repute who introduced the incantations into the practice of medicine was Alexander Trallianus, who has been already referred to as having been a great authority with the Anglo-Saxon leeches. Alexander has been blamed, and justly, for thus lowering the character of Greek medicine. He was, however, followed in this by later Greek physicians and by those late Latin writers to whom the Anglo-Saxons were much indebted. The Latin work of Marcellus Empiricus, older than Alexander, which appears to be partly founded on Roman popular medicine or folk-lore, was the great repertory of superstitious rites and formulae.

On examining the Anglo-Saxon charms a considerable number are found to be directly taken from, or founded on, passages in the late Latin writers; a few are suggestive of passages in the Greek physicians. From all these sources it is easy to find examples of the various kinds of magical medicine above spoken of.

1. The invocation of herbs is found in Alexander Trallianus. For instance, he recommends as a remedy for gout that the sacred herb hyoscyamus, or henbane, should be dug up with certain precautions and addressed as follows: “Sacred Herb! I summon thee to the house [of my patient] to stop the rheum of his feet,” &c.; “I conjure thee by the great name Jaoth Sabaoth.” The Anglo-Saxons did not use prayers addressed to the herbs themselves, as benedictions and Christian prayers addressed to God or the saints were often substituted. But there are instances of certain formulae of conjuration. For instance, the herb mugwort (artemisia) had the reputation of preventing a man who carried it with him from getting tired on a journey. But it was to be gathered before sunrise with these words, “Tollam te, Artemisia, ne lassus sim in viá.”

2. Special words and mysterious rites were often made use of in gathering medicinal herbs to give them special virtue. The formulae used by the Greeks and Romans being generally heathenish, the Anglo-Saxons often substituted Christian prayers. For instance, for gathering celandine the directions are: “Delve round the root and take it up with thy two hands turned upwards, and sing over it nine paternosters, and in the ninth, at the words ‘Deliver us from evil,' snap it up, &c.” There are also some very remarkable Anglo-Saxon “lays”—poems celebrating the virtues of herbs. In one of them Wodan (Odin) is referred to, showing that it must have originated in heathen times. In many of the directions for gathering herbs the essential thing was to name the sick man and his father. This was a popular belief among the Romans, as quoted by Pliny. For the old ceremonies the Anglo-Saxons often substituted prayers and litanies. Thus before gathering certain herbs litanies of the saints and the paternoster were to be sung in church. Then the clergy or choir were to go three times round the herbs intended to be gathered singing the same. The herbs were to be brought into the church with the same song and 12 masses sung over them in honour of the Twelve Apostles. Then they could be used.

3. The most important part of magical medicine consisted in mystical formulae, conjurations, and prayers either uttered over the patient or written out and in some way applied to his body. Many, or perhaps all, were, it would seem, originally meant to be sung, as shown by the words “carmen” and “incantamentum.” These were well known among the Greeks and many instances might be quoted from the poets of wounds being healed by the use of magical words. Alexander Trallianus recommends for the gout that a certain verse of Homer (Iliad II., 95) should be written on a gold leaf while the moon was in the sign of Libra, wrapped up and applied, presumably to the patient's joints. Why this particular verse was chosen does not appear; it would not seem specially appropriate.

The Anglo-Saxon charms were mostly in Latin, sometimes with corrupted Greek or possibly Hebrew words. One charm is described in the book as Scottish, but according to the editor the words belong to no known language. On the other hand, in another case, the apparently unintelligible words turn out to be corrupt Irish. In some the words seem to be without doubt mere rhyming or jingling nonsense—as, for instance, “Gonomil, orgomil, marbumel, &c.,"-—words which were to be sung into the right ear of a man but the left ear of a woman in case he or she had swallowed a worm in drinking water. The use of such charms was often combined with the use of drugs. In one prescription a drink made of 12 herbs over which seven masses had been sung was to be drunk out of a church bell with the accompaniment of singing certain psalms. Also the mass priest was to sing a formula of benediction over the patient. This was for a “fiend-sick” man—that is, a demoniac or lunatic. Sometimes charms were written on the “holy dish,” or sacramental paten, and washed off with holy water which was to be drunk.

4. Exorcisms addressed to diseases as evil spirits are not common. An example is a charm for a strange “swelling.” The sufferer was to sing a paternoster, to draw a line round the sore, and to say, “Fuge diabolus! Christus te sequitur.” There is an elaborate charm against agues and fevers in which they are adjured in the name of Christ to depart. A form of words against “poccas”—that is, small-pox-—is remarkable because this word is taken as the equivalent of variola. Many formulae of this kind are found in late Latin writers.

5 Narrative charms—-This class of charms was used by the late Romans—-for instance, by Marcellus Empiricus and probably in still earlier times. In the Anglo-Saxon books they are always scriptural stories or else Christian legends. One of the most extraordinary, or most absurd, is against toothache. It relates how when Christ was sitting with His disciples Peter looked sad and when our Lord inquired the cause he complained of toothache, whereupon Christ uttered a long adjuration addressed to migraine or other pains not to harm the servant of God. This was, of course, to be repeated. The story of Longimus, the traditional name of the centurion who pierced the side of Christ upon the cross, was told in order to take away a stitch in the side. To hasten child-birth the story of the raising of Lazarus with the solemn words, “Lazarus, come forth!” was thought to be efficacious. All these narratives and others like them were used not only by the Anglo-Saxons but frequently in the Middle Ages.

6. Amulets derived from natural objects-—As a preservative from fits a fox was to be caught, its canine tooth knocked out while it was alive, and the animal then set free. The tooth was then to be wrapped in a fawn skin and carried on the body. The eyes of a crab removed from the living animal were good for affections of the eye if hung round the neck. In all cases the animal was to be kept alive. For headache certain herbs were to be bound on the head with a red fillet. There are many similar prescriptions in Alexander Trallianus and Marcellus Empiricus.

7. Transference of disease-—It is a common belief in many parts of the world that disease is something which can be got out of the sick man and transferred to something outside. The Anglo-Saxons had mysterious rites, sometimes combined with forms of words, for this purpose. Often the disease was transferred to running water. Thus for a certain skin disease it is ordered to score or to scarify the neck after the setting of the sun, to pour the blood silently into running water, to spit three times, and to say, “Have you this evil and depart away with it.” Or, again, a hazel or elder stick was to be taken, a name written upon it, and stained with blood. Then it was to be thrown over the shoulders or between the thighs into running water. In another case an oaken stick was to be stained with blood, then four strokes were to be made with it towards the four quarters of heaven. Then it was to be thrown away and a certain charm was to be recited. This was a charm against “flying venom,” or, in modern phrase, air-borne contagion.

Later books of Anglo-Saxon medicine.--One book contained in the three volumes of “Leechdoms” differs a good deal from the rest. It is that which bears a Greek title interpreted as meaning. “Of Schools of Medicine.” This title, however, only refers to the first chapter of the work. The rest consists of a collection of medical receipts differing from those in the other books of the Anglo-Saxon library. It is entirely free from charms and superstitions and the prescriptions are for the most part simpler than those of the Anglo-Saxon leeches. This treatise has been shown by a German philologist, Dr. Max Löweneck, to be based upon a Latin work belonging to the first period of the school of Salerno—viz., the Practica of Petroncellus or Petronius—a work written probably about A.D. 1035 and printed in the “Collectio Salernitana.” One fragment has been traced to the writings of another Salernitan teacher, Gariopontus, of the same period. But these identifications do not account for the whole of the Anglo-Saxon text, and it does not seem that this was translated directly from the Latin. The actual origin of the work is therefore still somewhat obscure. The date of this manuscript is the first half of the twelfth century, probably before 1150. It shows that the Anglo-Saxons were beginning to profit by the teaching of the school of Salerno before that school was influenced by the Arabian medicine. It also shows that the Anglo-Saxon medicine like the other written literature of that language went on for some time after the Norman Conquest. To this same period belongs another manuscript which contains a version of the Herbarium of Apuleius later than that previously spoken of. This is not included in the Rev. O. Cockayne's “Leechdoms” but has been published in Germany, as edited by Herr Berberich. This manuscript is referred to the middle of the twelfth century, about 1150. It therefore touches on the extreme limit of Anglo-Saxon written literature, and, indeed, is called by Herr Berberich “Early Middle English"; but, like the last-mentioned work, it shows the long continuance of Anglo-Saxon medicine after the Conquest. This work closes the early English medical library and as the celebrated Anglo-Saxon Chronicle came to an end in 1150 the general literature and medical literature of our early ancestors reached their limit about the same time.

This Kindle book is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and it is only $1.99
See my blog listing for this here.

The Evolution of Christmas By William Shepard Walsh 1909

This Kindle book is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and it is only $1.99

 Visit here for a description

The Evolution of Christmas By William Shepard Walsh 1909

For a list of all of my digital books click here

If all the devils in hell had put their heads together to devise a feast that should utterly scandalize Christianity, they could not have improved upon this one.

Now I must own that at first sight it is difficult to explain how the Christ-child of the past—the Holy One whose birth is remembered and honored in that feast which we call Christmas, should gradually have been changed into the white-haired, white-bearded, merry-hearted and kindly old pagan whom we sometimes call Christ-Kinkle but more frequently Santa Klaus.

Yet at the very moment when we come face to face with this difficult problem we have reached the explanation which seemed impossible when we strove to understand the much less startling transformation of Saint Nicholas, Bishop of Myra, into Santa Klaus, patron of the Christmas season.

We remember that the Christmas festival of to-day is a gradual evolution from times that long antedated the Christian period. We remember that though it celebrates the mightiest event in the history of Christendom, it was overlaid upon heathen festivals, and many of its observances are only adaptations of pagan to Christian ceremonial.

This was no mere accident. It was a necessary measure at a time when the new religion was forcing itself upon a deeply superstitious people. In order to reconcile fresh converts to the new faith, and to make the breaking of old ties as painless as possible, these relics of paganism were retained under modified forms, in the same way that antique columns, transferred from pagan temples, became parts of the new churches built by Christians in honor of their God and his saints.

Thus we find that when Pope Gregory sent Saint Augustine as a missionary to convert Anglo-Saxon England he directed that so far as possible the saint should accommodate the new and strange Christian rites to the heathen ones with which the natives had been familiar from their birth. For example, he advised Saint Augustine to allow his converts on certain festivals to eat and kill a great number of oxen to the glory of God the Father, as formerly they had done this in honor of the devil. All pagan gods, it should be explained, were looked upon as devils by the early Christians.

On the very Christmas after his arrival in England Saint Augustine baptized many thousands of converts and permitted their usual December celebration under the new name and with the new meaning. He forbade only the mingling together of Christians and pagans in the dances.

From these early pagan-Christian ceremonies are derived many of the English holiday customs that have survived to our day.

Now get clearly into your head one very important fact. Although at the time when Augustine visited England the date of Christmas had been fixed upon as December 25 there is no biblical reason why this should be so. The gospels say nothing about the season of the year when Christ was born. On the other hand they do tell us that shepherds were then guarding their flocks in the open air. Hence many of the early fathers of the Church considered it most likely that the Nativity took place either in the late summer or the early fall. The point was of no great moment to them, as the early Church made more fuss over the death day of a great or holy person than over his birthday. The birthday is only the day when man is born into mortality, the death-day chronicles his birth into immortality.

The important fact then which I have asked you to get clearly into your head is that the fixing of the date as December 25th was a compromise with paganism.

For countless centuries before the Christian era pagan Europe, through all its various tribes and peoples, had been accustomed to celebrate its chief festival at the time of the winter solstice, the turning point when winter, having reached its apogee, has also reached the point when it must begin to decline again towards spring.

The last sentence requires further explanation. I shall try to put it into words as simple as possible.

You must be aware of the fact that the shortest day in the year is December 21st. Therefore that is the day when winter reaches its height.

It was on or about December 21st that the ancient Greeks celebrated what are known to us as the Bacchanalia or festivities in honor of Bacchus, the god of wine. [Bacchus is the Latin name for this God. The Greek name was Dionysos. This festival therefore is more properly the Dionysiac feast, but the habit of calling Greek Gods by their Roman names is so general among us that it is as well to stick to Bacchus and Bacchanalia.] In these festivities the people gave themselves up to songs, dances and other revels which frquently passed the limits of decency and order.

In ancient Rome the Saturnalia, or festivals in honor of Saturn, the god of time, began on December 17th and continued for seven days. These also often ended in riot and disorder. Hence the words Bacchanalia and Saturnalia acquired an evil reputation in later times.

We are most interested in the festivals of the ancient Teutonic (or German) tribes because they are most closely linked with Christmas as we ourselves celebrate it.

The pagan feast of the Twelve Nights was religiously kept by them from December 25th to January 6th, the latter day being known, as it is still known to their descendants, as Twelfth Night. The Teutonic mind personified the active forces of nature,— that is to say it pictured them as living beings.

The conflicts between these forces were represented as battles between gods and giants.

Winter, for example, was the Ice-giant,—cruel, boisterous, unruly, the destroyer of fife, the enemy alike of gods and men. Riding on his steed, the all-stiffening North Wind, he built up for himself great castles of ice. Darkness and death followed in his wake.

But the Sun-god and the South Wind, symbols of light and life, gave battle to the Ice-giant. At last Thor, the god of the Thunderstorm, riding on the wings of the air, hurled his thunderbolt at the winter castle, and demolished it. Then Freija, the goddess of fruits and flowers, resumed her former sway. All of which is only a poetical way of saying that after the Ice-giant had conquered in winter he was in his turn overthrown by the Sun-god in spring.

Now the twenty-first day of December, the depth of winter, marked the period when the Ice-giant was in the full flush of his triumph and also marked the beginning of his overthrow. It was the turning point in the conflict of natural forces. The Sun-god having reached the goal of the winter solstice, now wheeled around his fiery steeds and became the sure herald of the coming victory of light and life over darkness and death of spring over winter.

A thousand indications point to the fact that Christmas has incorporated into itself all these festivals, Greek, Roman and German, and given them a new meaning. The wild revels of the Bacchanalia, the Saturnalia and the Twelve Nights survive in a milder form in the merriment and jollity which mark the season of Christmas to-day.

Christmas gifts themselves remind us of the presents that were exchanged in Rome during the Saturnalia. In Rome, it might be added, the presents usually took the form of wax tapers and dolls,—the latter being in their turn a survival of the human sacrifices once offered to Saturn.

It is a queer thought that in our Christmas presents we are preserving under another form one of the most savage customs of our barbarian ancestors!

The shouts of "Bona Saturnalia!" which the Roman people exchanged among themselves are the precursors of our "Merry Christmas!" The decorations and illuminations of our Christian churches recall the temples of Saturn, radiant with burning tapers and resplendent with garlands. The masks and mummeries which still survive here and there, even in the America of to-day, and which were especially prominent in the Middle Ages, were prominent also in the Saturnalian revels.

And a large number of the legends, superstitions and ceremonials which have crystallized around the Christian festival in Europe and America are more or less distorted reminiscences of the legends, superstitions and ceremonials of the Twelve Nights of ancient Germany.

My Kindle book is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and it is only $1.99

 Visit here for a description

And now you may be tempted to ask, "What bearing has all this stuff about the pagan festivals upon the question of the identity of our old friend Santa Klaus?

I am coming to that. In every one of these festivals the leading figure was an old man, with a lot of white beard and white hair rimming his face.

In the Bacchanalia the representative god was not the young Bacchus, but the aged, cheery and decidedly disreputable Silenus, the chief of the Satyrs and the god of drunkards.

In the Saturnalia it was Saturn, a dignified and venerable old gentleman—the god of Time.

In the Germanic feasts it was Thor, a person of patriarchal aspect, and a warrior to boot.

Now, although the central figure of the Christian festival was the child-god—the Christ-Kindlein— none the less the influence of long pagan antecedents was too strong within the breast of the newly Christianized world to be readily dismissed. The tradition of hoary age as the true representative of the holiday period, a tradition, it will be seen, in which all pagan nations agreed, still remained smouldering under the ashes of the past. It burst into flame again when the past was too far back to be looked upon with dislike or disquietude by the Church. No longer did there seem to be any danger of a relapse into the religious errors of that past.

At first the more dignified representative was chosen as more in keeping with a solemn season. Saturn was preferred to Silenus, and was almost unconsciously rebaptized as Saint Nicholas, the latter being the greatest saint whose festival was celebrated in December and the one who in other respects was most nearly in accord with the dim traditions of Saturn as the hero of the Saturnalia.

If you look at the pictures printed in this book you will see that in face and figure the Saint Nicholas of the early painters was not unlike the ancient idea of Saturn.

And it was many, many years before Saint Nicholas had ousted the Christ-child from the first place in the Christmas festivities. Indeed, as we shall see, he often accompanied his Master on His Christmas rounds. It may be added that he still does so in certain country places in Europe where the modern spirit has been least felt.

In course of time, as the idea of worldly merriment at the Christmas season prevailed over that of prayer and thanksgiving, the name Saint Nicholas gradually merged into the affectionate diminutive of Santa Klaus. Under the new name the old saint lost all his austerity. He became ruddier, jollier, more rubicund in aspect, while the Christ-Kindlein faded more and more into the background, until at last the very name of the latter, under the slightly different form of Kris-Kinkle, was transferred to his successor.

And now compare the pictures of Santa Klaus which are scattered through this book with that of Silenus. Is it not evident that the one is a revival of the other, changed, indeed, in certain traits of character, sobered up, washed and purified, clad in warm garments that are more suited to the wintry season which he has made his own, but still the god of good fellows,-the representative of good health, good humor and good cheer?

Extremes meet once more. The most modern hero of the season of merriment is a return to the most ancient. The Santa Klaus of to-day is the Silenus of an unknown antiquity.

Let us learn a little more about Silenus. He was the tutor of Bacchus and seems to have had so much respect for his pupil that his life after the invention of wine was one long spree. It was a merry and good-natured spree, however. Silenus never became maudlin or quarrelsome in his cups. He was the most jovial of tipplers. His outlook upon life was as rosy as his nose. A cheery laugh beamed over his large fat face, the light of humor twinkled in his beady eyes, his rotund stomach spoke of good cheer, his smile beamed assurance of an unruffled disposition.

Among all the brute creation he chose an ass, that caricature of the ·horse, as his favorite charger. He always appeared with a troupe of laughing fauns and satyrs around him, and his advent was everywhere the signal for quips and cranks and wreathed smiles.

Now Saint Nicholas, also, in former times used to ride abroad on an ass, and still continues to do so in certain portions of Europe. In fact, as already noted, all the genial traits of Silenus, save only that of drunkenness, are reproduced in Santa Klaus, the jolly pagan who is to-day the personification of Christmas.

But though a modernized pagan god holds this important position in our festival, everything that could be offensive in the old pagan way of celebrating it has been abolished.

It was not always so. The Church which so wisely sought to retain the old heathen fonns, found it often very hard, and sometimes impossible, to subdue the heathen spirit. In spite of the protests of priests and the anathemas of popes, in spite of the condemnation of all wise and good men, Christians in the early days frequently reproduced all the worst follies and vices of the Bacchanalia and the Saturnalia. Even the clergy were for a period whirled into the vortex. A special celebration, called the Feast of Fools, was instituted in their behalf with a view, said the doctors of the Church, that "the folly which is natural to and born with us might exhale at least once a year." The intention was excellent. But in practice the liberty so accorded speedily degenerated into license.

Early in the history of the Church excesses were so great that a council of bishops held at Auxerre was moved to inquire into the matter. Gerson, the most noted theologian of the day, made an immense sensation by declaring that "if all the devils in hell had put their heads together to devise a feast that should utterly scandalize Christianity, they could not have improved upon this one."

If even among the clergy heathen traditions survived so strenuously, what wonder that they survived among the laity? The wild revels, indeed, of the Christmas period in olden times almost stagger belief. No amount of drunkenness, no blasphemy, no obscenity was frowned upon. License was carried to the utmost limits of licentiousness. Even in the seventeenth century, when the revels had been slightly toned down, Master William Prynne discovered in them those vestiges of paganism which are apparent enough to the historian of to-day.

"If we compare," he says in his Histrio-Mastix, "our Bacchanalian Christmas and New Year's tides with these Saturnalia and feasts of Janus, we shall find such near affinity between them, both in regard of time,—they being both in the end of December and the first of January—and in their manner of solemnizing—both being spent in revelling, epicurism, wantonness, idleness, dancing, drinking, stage-plays, masques and carnal pomp and jollity—that we must conclude the one to be but the ape, or issue, of the other."

The very excesses of the Christmas period proved their own eventual cure. In England the Puritans revolted so bitterly that they for a period put an end to Christmas altogether. In Europe the revolution was more gradual. But everywhere a change of manners and of morals has purified the festival over which Santa Klaus presides, and Santa Klaus himself, even if we look upon him as a revival of the pagan Silenus, is a Silenus freed from all the offensive features of paganism, a Silenus who with his new baptismal name has taken on a new character.

It must be remembered, however, that Santa Klaus does not rule all over the Christian world. There is even a wide difference between our Santa Klaus and the Saint Nicholas of Southern France and Germany. The latter, grave, sedate, severe, preserves more of the Saturn than the Silenus type. He is Saturn christianized and dignified with episcopal robes. He distributes gifts like our Santa Klaus, but in addition to gifts for good little boys and girls, he carries a birch-rod for bad ones. In the more primitive sections, such as certain parts of Lorraine, the Tyrol, Bohemia and so on, he is attended by an evil spirit called Ruprecht who looks after bad boys and girls.

It is also frequently the custom on Christmas Day for a couple or more of maskers to dress themselves up as Saint Nicholas and Ruprecht, and other attendants, such as the Christ-child or St. Peter or who not,—these additional characters varying with the locality. They go from house to house rewarding the good children and punishing the bad.

For a list of all of my digital books click here