In 1846, Emil Weller published “De Tribus Impostoribus,” and also a later edition in 1876, at Heilbronn, from a Latin copy of one of the only four known to be in existence and printed in 1598. The copy from which it was taken, consisting of title and forty-six leaves, quarto, is at the Royal Library at Dresden, and was purchased for one hundred gulden. The other three, according to Ebert in his “Bibliographical Lexicon,” are as follows: one in the Royal Library at Paris, one in the Crevanna Library and the other in the library of Renouard. An edition was published at Rackau, in Germany, in 1598, and Thomas Campanella (1636), in his “Atheismus Triumphatus,” gives the year of its first publication as 1538. Florimond Raimond (otherwise Louis Richeome,) claims to have seen a copy owned by his teacher, Peter Ramus, who died in 1572. All the talk of theological critics that the booklet was first printed in the seventeenth century, is made out of whole cloth. There is nothing modern about the edition of 1598. It may be compared, for example, with Martin Wittel’s print of the last decade of the sixteenth century, by which it is claimed that it could not have been printed then, as the paper and printing of that period closely resembles that of the eighteenth century. With the exception of the religious myths, few According to John Brand it had been printed at Krakau, according to others, in Italy or Hungary as a translation of an Arabic original existing somewhere in France. William Postel mentions a tract “de Tribus Prophetis,” and gives Michael Servetus, a Spanish doctor, as the author. The Capuchin Monk Joly, in Vol. III of his “Conference of Mysteries,” assures us that the Huguenot, Nic. Barnaud, in 1612, on account of an issue of “de Tribus Impostoribus,” was excommunicated as its author. Johann Mueller, in his “Besiegten Atheismus,” (Conquered Atheism), mentions a certain Nachtigal who published at Hague, in 1614, “De Trib. Imp.,” and was therefore exiled. Mosheim and Rousset accuse Frederick II as the author with the assistance of his Chancellor, Petrus de Vineis. Vineis, however, declares himself opposed even to the fundamental principles of the book, and in his “Epist. Lib. 1, ch. 31, p. 211,” says he never had any idea of it. Others place the authorship with Averroes, Peter Arretin and Petrus Pomponatius. Heinrich Ernst accuses the above mentioned Postel. Postel attributes it to Servetus, who, in turn, places it at the door of the Huguenot Barnaud. The instigator of the treatise, it is claimed, should have been Julius Cesar Vanini, who was burned at Toulouse in 1619, or Ryswick, who suffered at the stake in Rome in 1612. Other persons accused of the authorship are Macchiavelli, Rabelais, Erasmus, Milton (John, born 1608,) a Mahometan named Merula, Dolet, and Giordano Bruno. According to Campanella, to whom the authorship was attributed occasionally, Muret, or Joh. Franz. Poggio, were responsible. Browne says it was Bernhard Ochini, and Maresius lays it to Johann Boccaccio. The “three cheats” are Moses, Jesus and Mahomet, but the tracts of each of the latter alleged authors treat only of Moses, of whom they say that his assertions in Genesis will not hold water, and cannot be proved. Weller, in his edition of 1876, speaking of the copy of 1598, says that this issue should never be compared with any of the foregoing. Many authors have written “de Tribus Impostoribus” because they had some special object in view; for instance, John Bapt. Morinus, when he edited, under the name of Vincentius Panurgius, in Paris, 1654, an argument against Gassendi, Neure, and Bernier. Joh. Evelyn with a “Historia de tribus hujus seculi famosis Impostoribus,” Padre Ottomano, Mahomed Bei, otherwise Joh. Mich. Cigala, and Sabbatai Sevi (English 1680, German 1669,) Finally, Michael Alberti, under the name of Andronicus, published a “Tractatus Medico-historicus de tribus Impostoribus,” which he named the three great Tempters of Humanity: 1. Tea and Coffee. 2. Laziness. 3. Home apothecaries. Cosmopoli Bey (Peter Martin Roman), issued at Russworn in Rostock in 1731, and a new edition of same treatise—De Trib. Imp.—1738 and 1756. For a long time scholars confused the genuine Latin treatise with a later one. De la Monnoye fabricated a long dissertation in which he denied the existence of the original Latin edition, but received a well merited refutation at the hands of P. F. Arpe. The false book is French—“La vie et l’esprit de Mr. Benoit Spinoza.” Richard la Selve prepared a third edition under the original title of “The Life of Spinoza,” by one of his Disciples. Hamburgh (really in Holland,) 1735. In 1768 there was printed by M. M. Rey, at Amsterdam, a new edition called a “Treatise of the Three Impostors;” immediately after another edition appeared at Yverdoner 1768, another in Holland 1775, and a later one in Germany 1777. The contents of “L’esprit de Spinoza” (German) by Spinoza II, or Subiroth Sopim—Rome, by Widow Bona Spes 5770—(Vieweg in Berlin 1787,) are briefly Chap. I, Concerning God. Chap. II, Reasons why men have created an invisible Being which is commonly called God. Chap. III, What the word Religion signifies, and how and why so many of these Religions have crept into the world. Chap. IV, Evident truths. Chap. V, Of the Soul. Chap. VI, Of Ghosts, Demons, etc. Then follows fifteen chapters which are not in the treatise (? Edition 1598.) The following became known by reason of peculiarities of their diction: 1. Ridiculum et imposturae in omni hominum religione, scriptio paradoxa, quam ex autographo gallico Victoris Amadei Verimontii ob summam rei dignitatem in latinum sermonem transtulit ††† 1746. Which according to Masch consists of from five to six sheets and follows the general contents, but not in the order of the original edition. 2. A second. Quaedam deficiunt, s. fragmentum de libro de tribus impostoribus. Fifty-one pages is a fragment. 3. One mentioned by Gottsched. De impostoris religionum breve. Compendium descriptum ab exemplari MSto. quod in Bibliotheca Jo. Fried. Mayeri, Berolini Ao. 1716, publice distracta deprehensum et a Principe Eugenio de Sabaudio 80 Imperialibus redemptum fuit. (forty-three pages.) The greater part of the real book in thirty-one paragraphs, the ending of which is Communes namque demonstrationes, quae publicantur, nec certae, nec evidentes, sunt, et res dubias per alias saepe magias dubias probant, adeo ut exemplo eorum, qui circulum currunt, ad terminum semper redeant, a quo currere inceperunt. Finis. 5. Straube in Vienna made a reprint of the edition of 1598 in 1753. 6. A new reprint is contained in a pamphlet edited by C. C. E. Schmid and almost entirely confiscated, entitled: Zwei seltene antisupernaturalistische manuscripte. Two rare anti-supernaturalistic manuscripts. (Berlin, Krieger in Giessen, 1792.) 7. There recently appeared through W. F. Genthe an edition, De impostura religionum compendium s. liber de tribus impostoribus, Leipsic, 1833. 8. Finally, through Gustav Brunet of Bordeaux an edition founded upon the text of the 1598 edition was produced with the title, de Tribus Impostoribus, MDIIC. Latin text collated from the copy of the Duke de la Valliere, now in the Imperial Library; 9. An Italian translation of the same appeared in 1864 by Daelli in Milan with title as above. 10. A Spanish edition also exists taken from the same source and under the same title. London (Burdeos) 1823. Note. All the preceding Bibliography is from the edition of Emil Weller, Heilbronn 1876.—A. N. From this I transcribe the following notes: NOTE BY THE AMERICAN PUBLISHER.We publish this valuable work, for the reasons contained in the following Note, of which we approve: NOTE BY THE BRITISH PUBLISHER.The following little book I present to the reader without any remarks on the different opinions relative to its antiquity; as the subject is amply discussed in the body of the work, and constitutes one of its most interesting and attractive features. The Edition from which the present is translated was brought me from J. Myles. PREFACE BY THE TRANSLATOR.The Translator of the following little treatise deems it necessary to say a few words as to the object of its publication. It is given to the world, neither with a view to advocate Scepticism, nor to spread Infidelity, but simply to vindicate the right of private judgment. No human being is in a position to look into the heart, or to decide correctly as to the creed or conduct of his fellow mortals; and the attributes of the Deity are so far beyond the grasp of limited reason, that man must become a God himself before he can comprehend them. Such being the case, surely all harsh censure of each other’s opinions and actions ought to be abandoned; and every one should so train himself as to be enabled to declare with the humane and manly philosopher “Homo sum, nihil humani me alienum puto.” Dundee, September 1844. The Vale production is evidently translated from an edition derived from the Latin manuscript which is the basis of the translation given in this volume. The variations in the text of each not being important, but The Treatise in Vale’s edition concludes with the following: “Happy the man who, studying Nature’s laws, Through known effects can trace the secret cause; His mind possessing in a quiet state, Fearless of Fortune, and resigned to Fate.” —Dryden’s Virgil. Georgics Book II, l. 700. There is also in the Library of Congress a volume entitled “TraitÉ des Trois Imposteurs.” En Suisse de l’imprimerie philosophique—1793. Boards 3½ × 5¾ inches, containing the Treatise proper 112 pp. Sentimens sur le traite des trois imposteurs, (De la Monnaye) 32 pp. Response a la dissertation de M. de la Monnaye 19 pp. signed J. L. R. L. and dated at Leyden 1 Jan., 1716, to which this note is appended: “This letter is from Sieur Pierre Frederic Arpe, of Kiel, in Holstein, author of the apology of Vanini, printed at Rotterdam in 8o, 1712.” The letter contains the account of the discovery of the original Latin manuscript at Frankfort-on-the-Main, in substance much the same as the translation given in this edition. In the copy at the Congressional Library, I find the following manuscript notes which may be rendered as follows: “Voltaire doubted the existence of this work, this was in 1767. See his letter to his Highness Monseigneur The Prince of ——. Letter V, Vol. 48 of his works, p. 312.” See Barbier Dict. des ouv. anon. Nos. 18250, 19060, 21612. De Tribus Impostoribus. Anon. L’esprit de Spinosa trad. du latin par Vroes. In connection with this latter note, and observing the name written at end of the colophon of the manuscript from which the present edition is translated, it is probable that this same Vroese was the author of another translation. Another remarkable copy is contained in the Library of Congress, the title page of which is displayed as follows: TRAITÉ CONTENANT nombre d’observations morales, analogues À celles mises À l’ordre du jour, pour l’affermissement de la RÉpublique, sa gloire, et l’Édification des peuples de tous les pays. ORNÉ DE TROIS GRAVURES. À PHILADELPHIE M.DCC.XCVI. Note.—This edition has undoubtedly been translated from the original Latin manuscript.—A. N. Translation. Treatise of the Three Impostors of the governing Religions and worship, after an examination conformable to history, containing a number of moral observations, analogous to those placed in the order of the day for the support of the republic, its glory, and the edification of the people of all countries. Ornamented with three engravings. At Philadelphia under the auspices of General Washington, and may be found at Paris at the house of Citizen Mercier (Claude Francois Xavier On the following page may be found the following: LE PEUPLE —— TRAITÉ
“Les prÊtres ne sont pas ce qu’un vain peuple pense Notre crÉdulitÉ fait toute leur science.” Priests are not what vain people think, Our credulity makes all their science.
Paragraph 2. Politics; paragraph 6. Morals.
Facing page twenty-seven is a medallion copper plate of Moses, around which are these words (translated): “Moses saw God in the burning bush,” and beneath the following from Voltaire’s Pucelle (translated): Alone on the summit of the mysterious mount As he desired, he closed his fortieth year. Then suddenly he appeared upon the plain With buck’s horns Which brilliant miracle in the mind of the philosopher Created a prompt effect.” In a note to par. II. occur the following lines which translated read: “How many changes a revolution makes: Heaven has brought us forth in happy time To see the world——Here the weak Italian Is frightened at the sight of a stole: The proud Frenchman astonished at nothing Boldly goes to defy the Pope at his capital And the grand Turk in turban, like a good Christian, Recites the prayers of his faith And prays to God for the pagan Arab, Having no thought of any kind of expedient Nor means to destroy altars and idol worship. The Supreme Being his only and sole support, Does not exact for offering a single coin From any sect, from Jew nor plebeian: What need has He of Temple or archbishop? The heart of the just and the general good Shines like a brilliant sun on the halo of glory.” Then follows a “Bouquet for the Pope”: “Thou whom flatterers have invested with a vain title, Shalt thou at this late day become the arbiter of Europe? Charitable pontiff, and friend of humanity, Having so many sovereigns as fathers of families, The successors of Christ, in the midst of the sanctuary Have they not placed unblushingly, incest and adultery? Be this the last of imposture and thy last sigh. Do thyself more honor, esteem and pleasure, Than all the monuments erected to the glory Of thy predecessors in the temple of memory. Let them read on thy tomb ‘he was worthy of love, The father of the Church and oracle of the day.’” On the following page is a copper plate profile portrait of Pius VI. surrounded by the words “Senatus Populus Que Romanus.” At the side Principis Ecclesiae dotes vis Cernere Magni. (Senate and People of Rome—Prince of the Church endowed with power and great wisdom.) Beneath: “The talents of the learned and the virtues of the wise, A noble and beneficent manner with which all are charmed, Depict much better than this image The true portrait of Pius VI.” Facing page fifty-one is a copper plate portrait of Mahomet, and beneath this tribute: “Know you not yet, weak and superb man, That the humble insect hidden beneath a leaf And the imperious eagle who flies to heaven’s dome, Amount to nothing in the eyes of the Eternal. All men are equal: not birth but virtue Distinguishes them apart.” Then there are inserted a number of verses, some of the titles reading:
Concluding with “A Picture of France at the Time of the Revolution.” “Nobility without souls, a fanatical clergy. Frightful tax gatherers gnawing a plucked people. Faith and customs a prey to designing persons. A price set upon the head of the Chancellor (Maupeou). The skeleton of a perfidious Senate. Not daring to punish a parricidal conspiracy. O, my country! O, France! Thy miseries Have even drawn tears from Rome. If you have no Republic, and no pure legislators Like exist in America, to deliver you from the oppression Of a tyrannous empire of knaves, brigands and robbers; Like the British cabinet and the skillful Pitt, chief of flatterers, Who with his magic lantern fascinates even the wise ones. This clique will soon be seen to fall, if the French become the conquerors Of this ancient slavery, and show themselves the proud protectors Of their musical Carmagnole. In the name of kings and emperors, how much iniquity and horror Which are recorded in history, cause the reader to shudder with fright. The entrance of friends in Belgium, to the eyes of those who know, Is it not an unique epoch? And this most flattering tie, sustained by a heroic compact, Will be the desire of all hearts.” À BOSTON under the protection of Congress. Bound in this volume is a pamphlet entitled “La Fable de Christ devoilÉe.” Paris: Franklin Press. 75 Rue de Clery. 2nd year of the Republic. Also, Another closes the volume: “Lettres Philosophique sur St. Paul: sur sa doctrine, politique, morale, & rÉligieuse, & sur plusieurs points de la rÉligion chrÉtienne considerÉes politiquement.” (J. P. Brissot de Warville.) Translated from the English by the philosopher de Ferney and found in the portfolio of M. V. his ancient secretary. Neuchatel en Suisse 1783. Note translated from the edition “En Suisse, de l’imprimerie philosophique,” 1793. In a response to M. de la Monnoye, who laboriously endeavored to refute the existence of the treatise entitled “The Three Impostors,” and which reply in addition to M. de la Monnoye’s arguments appear in connection with some of the translations of the treatise, occurs the following introduction to the account of the discovery of the original manuscript: “I have by me a more certain means of overturning this dissertation of M. de la Monnoye, when I inform him that I have read this celebrated little work and that I have it in my library. I will give you and the public an account of the manner in which I discovered it, and as it is in my possession I will subjoin a short but faithful description of it.” Here follows a summary of the contents and the Dissertation, in substance the same as our manuscript; the response concluding as follows: “Such is the anatomy of this celebrated work. I might have given it in a manner more extended and “Now although this book were ready to be printed J. L. R. L. “Leyden, 1st January, 1716.” This letter was written by Mr. Pierre Frederick Arpe, of Kiel, in Holstein; the author of an apology for Vanini, printed in octavo at Rotterdam, 1712. Flame surrounded by wreath. 1. Padre Ottomano, a pretended son of the Sultan of Turkey who flourished about 1650, and who latterly, under the above title, became a Dominican Friar. 2. Mahomed Bei, alias Joannes Michael Cigala, who masqueraded as a Prince of the Ottoman family, a descendant of the Emperor Solyman the Magnificent, and in other characters about 1660. 3. Sabbatai Sevi, the pretended Messiah of the Jews, “the Only and First-borne Son of God,” who amused the Jews and Turks about 1666. Kuno Fischer, in his Descartes und seine Schule. Zweiter Theil, Heidelberg, 1889, p. 101, says: “The real author of the work is not known with entire certainty; probably the author was Lucas, a physician at the Hague, notorious in his own day; others name as author a certain Vroese.” Freudenthal, in his Die Lebensgeschichte Spinoza’s. Leipzig, 1899, writing of the various conjectures as to the authorship of the book, states that W. Meyer has lately sought to prove that Johan Louckers, a Hague attorney, was the author, but that the authorship had not been settled. Oettinger in his Bibliographie Biographie Universelle, Bruxelles 1854, p. 1707, gives Lucas Vroese as the author. It has also been suggested that Lucas and Vroese were two men and together wrote the book. The authority for ascribing the book to Vroese, of whose life no particulars seem to have been recorded, appears to be the following passage in the Dictionnaire Historique, par Prosper Marchand, À la Haye, 1758, v. 1., p. 352: “A la fin d’une copie manuscrit de ce TraitÉ que j’ai vÛe et lÛe, on lui donne pour vÉritable Auteur a Mr. Vroese, conseiller de la cour de Brabant À la Haie, dont Aymon et Rousset retouchÈrent le langage; et que ce dernier y ajouta la Dissertation ou RÉponse depuis imprimÉe chez Scheurleer.” The name “Vroese” appears at the side of the colophon at end of our translation, but probably as a reference only. Title, “Literary Forgeries.” “The Duc de la Valliere and the Abbe de St. Leger, once concerted together to supply the eager purchaser of literary rarities with a copy of “De Tribus Impostoribus,” a book, by the date, pretended to have been printed in 1598, though probably a modern forgery of 1698. The title of such a book had long existed by rumor, but never was a copy seen by man. Works printed with this title have all been proved to be modern fabrications—a copy however of the ‘introuvable’ original was sold at the Duc de la Valliere’s sale. The history of this volume is curious. The Duc and the Abbe having manufactured a text had it printed in the old Gothic character, under the title ‘De Tribus Impostoribus.’ They proposed to put the great bibliopobet, De Bure, in good humor, whose agency would sanction the imposition. They were afterwards to dole out copies at 25 louis each, which would have been a reasonable price for a book which no one ever saw! They invited De Bure to dinner, flattered and cajoled him, and, as they imagined at the moment they had wound him up to their pitch, they exhibited their manufacture—the keen-eyed glance of the renowned cataloguer of the ‘Bibliographie Instructive’ instantly shot like lightning over it, and like lightning, destroyed the whole edition. He not only discovered the forgery but reprobated it! He refused his sanction; and the forging Duc and Abbe, in confusion suppressed the ‘livre introuvable’; but they owed a grudge to the honest bibliographer and attempted to write down the work whence the De Bures derive their fame.” |