(Linde. Lowndes.)
The "Game and Play of the Chess" is an interesting specimen of mediæval English literature. It is so near our own time that the language prefents few difficulties, in spite of its many Gallicisms, and yet it is so remote as to seem like the echo of an unknown world. The distinctly dogmatic portions of the book are but few, and their paucity is indeed a matter of some surprise, since it is in effect a detailed treatise on practical ethics, and is, in part if not wholly, systematized from the discourses of one distinguished preacher, who had borrowed much of his matter from another eminent ecclesiastic. The author aims not at the enforcement of doctrine, but at the guidance of life, though he no doubt assumes that his hearers are all faithful and orthodox sons of the Church.[22]
The ideal of the commonwealth of the middle ages finds an interesting expression. The sharp lines of demarcation between class and class are stated with the frankness that comes of a belief that the then existing social fabric was the only one possible in the best of worlds. There is no doubt in the author's mind as to the rightful position of king and baron, of bishp and merchant. The "rights of man" had not been invented, apparently, and the maxim that the king reigns but does not govern, would have perplexed the souls of Cessoles and his translators. They had no more doubt as to the divine right of the monarch, than the Thibetan has of the divine right of the grand lama. The Buddhist thinks he has secured the continuous re-appearance of supernatural wisdom in human form, and the regular transmission of political ability in the same family was the ideal for which the devotees of mediæval despotism had to hope. Nothing could be further from the aspirations of our author than a race of mere palace kings seeking enjoyment only in self-indulgence. The king was to be the ruler and leader of his people. The relation and interdependence of the several classes is emphatically proclaimed, and the claims of duty are urged upon each.
The book enables us to gauge the literary culture of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. Poor as it may now seem, it belonged, in those days, to the "literature of power," and had great influence. The form is one which lent itself readily to poetic and historic illustration, and indeed demanded such treatment. The authors and translators were chiefly learned and distinguifhed ecclesiastics. Caxton, the representative of the new time when literature was to be the common heritage, was filled to overflowing with the best literature then accessible. A writer of the present century, probably borrowing his sentiment, has defined originality to be undetected imitation. Such refinements were unknown to Cessoles and his contemporaries. A writer took whatever suited his purpose from any and every source that was open to him. A quotation was always as good as an original sentiment, and sometimes much better. Why should a man take the trouble of laboriously inventing fresh phrases about usury or uncleanness when there were the very words of St. Augustine or St. Basil ready to hand? Why seek modern instances when the great storehouse of anecdotes of Valerius Maximus was ready to be rifled? Very frequently the author is given, mostly it may be imagined from a sense of the value of the authority of the names thus cited. Whatever the intention of the writer, the effect is to show us what were the authors known, studied, and quoted in the middle ages.
The authors named are:--Saint Ambrose (2 references), Anastasius (1), Avicenna (2), Saint Augustine (9), Saint Basil (1), Saint Bernard (2), Boethius (3), Cassiodorus (1), Cato (5), Cicero (6), Claudian (2), "Crete" (1), Diomedes (1), Florus (1), Galen (1), Helinand (4), Hippocrates (4), Homer (1), Saint Jerome (3), John the Monk (1), Josephus (4), Livy (2), Lucan (1), Macrobius (1), Martial (1), Ovid (6), Paulus Diaconus (1), Petrus Alphonsus (2), Plato (4), Quintilian (3), Sallust (1), Seneca (15), Sidrac (1), Solinus (1), Symmachus (1), Theophrastus (1), "Truphes of the Philosophers" (2), Turgeius Pompeius (1), Valerius Maximus (23), Valerian (7), Varro (1), Virgil (2), "Vitas Patrum" (2).
It will be seen that the great classical writers are but poorly represented, and the main dependence has been upon the later essayists, and chiefly upon Valerius Maximus, who has pointed many of the morals enforced in this book. It may, perhaps, be doubted if the writer had more to work from than Valerius, Seneca, and St. Augustine, with occasional quotations such as memory would supply from other sources. The verification of all these quotations would not repay the labour it would involve; but in most cases where the experiment has been tried, the result has been fairly creditable to the old author.
The biblical allusions may be taken as typical. There are references to the "bible," "holy scripture," "Ecclesiastes," and "Canticles." There also occur the names of Adam, Eve, Abel, Cain, Noah, Ham, Lot, David, Abner, Joab, Abishai, Solomon, Isaiah, Evilmerodach, Belshazzar, Darius, Cyrus, Tobias, John the Baptist, and Paul. The citations are not all literally exact. Solomon had not a very good opinion of his fellow-men; but the comprehensive estimate of the number of fools with which he is credited on p. 3 is not to be found in the writings canonically attributed to him. The quotation from the Canticles on p. 25 may be compared with the translation in the Wicliffite verfion made by Nicholas de Hereford, A. D. 1380. This passage is rendered: "His left hond is vndur myn heed; and his ri3t hond shal biclippe me" ("Song of Solomon," ii. 6). Clip is still current in Lancashire, in the sense of embrace.
The extract from St. Paul, with which the prologue to the second edition opens, is no doubt intended for the following passage: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Tim. iii. 16).
In the reference to the Athenians (p. 16), we seem to hear an echo of the words: "For all the Athenians and strangers that were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell or to hear some new thing " (Acts xvii. 21).
The most curious reference to a biblical personage is that relating to Evilmerodach (p. 10). Cessoles seems to have been the first to associate the name of the son of Nebuchadnezzar with the invention of the game of chess. The biblical references to Evilmerodach are few; they throw no light on the reason of his selection by the mediæval scribe for a bad pre-eminence of parricide. The epithet of joli applied to the king has an odd effect, followed as it is by the narrative of his most unfilial conduct. Dr. Van der Linde shows how widely the legend spread. Lydgate evidently hesitates between the divided authority of Guido--that is, Colonna, the author of the Troy book--and Cessoles, whom he quotes through Jacobus de Vitriaco.[23]