SCOPE AND INFLUENCE OF IRISH SCHOLARSHIP
In the preceding chapter we discussed at length the nature of the curriculum of the Irish monastic schools. Our conclusions were based on the evidence supplied by an examination of the writings and other material remains which attest their Irish authorship. Here we shall attempt to determine the extent as well as the limitations of Irish scholarship, and briefly indicate the influence which that scholarship may reasonably claim to have exerted on the history of mediÆval education. As illustrations of types of Irish scholars who attained eminence in a special field and yet displayed considerable versatility we have selected five: Virgilius, Dicuil, Dungal, Sedulius and Eriugena. These may fairly be considered as representing Irish scholarship of the period at its best.[477] All except Virgilius belong to the ninth century.
Virgilius, bishop of Salzburg (766–7–784–5 A.D.) whose name is a latinised form of the Irish name Fearghal, was one of the few men who in the eighth century cultivated the profane sciences.[478] Indeed the age in which he lived was equally unfavourable to the pursuit of science or to the encouragement of speculative thought, as Virgilius found from experience. On one occasion, Boniface, the Papal Legate, denounced him for promulgating false doctrines inasmuch as he maintained that the sun and moon passed under the earth, and that there must be inhabitants on the other side.[479] Boniface had a previous dispute with Virgilius over a theological question in which the Pope decided in favour of Virgilius. Either from ignorance of Astronomy or, as some think, through pique, Boniface appears to have misrepresented the real views of Virgilius so as to convey the impression that he taught that there was another world and another sun and moon and consequently other men who were not redeemed by Our Lord.[480] The versions of Virgilius’ teaching which we have given would appear to represent his real views on the subject. At any rate he seems to have explained his doctrine to the satisfaction of the Pope; for we find no further mention of the controversy and he retained his see until his death in 784–5A.D.[481] His teachings show that he must have held that the world was spherical, though he was wrong in his theory that the sun and stars revolved round the earth. Even this semi-correct theory was a decided advance on contemporary views on astronomical matters and shows that Virgilius was an original thinker on scientific subjects, or else it argues for his acquaintance with Greek literature in which he may have become familiar with the doctrine of Eudoxus and Eratosthenes, as to the sphericity of the earth.[482] As Virgilius was bishop of Aghaboe in Ireland before he went to the Continent, it is most improbable that he received his education any place other than in an Irish monastic school. Unlike many of the Irish scholars who went abroad the name of Virgilius is recorded in the Irish annals, a circumstance which would lead us to suppose that he was already famous for his scholarship before he went abroad. An additional reason for believing that he had acquired a reputation as a scientist is the fact that he is called in the annals Virgil or Fergal the “Geometer.”[483]
Dicuil (d. 825A.D.) is another instance of an Irish scholar who was interested in secular studies. His chief claim to fame rests on a Latin tract entitled De Mensura Orbis Terrarum.[484] As the name would suggest, this was a work of geography in the sense that the term is now used. The internal evidence leaves no doubt as to the Irish birth and education of the author. He speaks of nostri Scoti, nostra insula Hibernia, alludes to the Irish poet Sedulius whom he styles noster Sedulius and he shows an accurate knowledge of the islands near Britain and Ireland.[485] He tells that a certain Suibneus (in Irish Suibhne anglicised Sweeney) was his master to whom under God he owed whatever knowledge he possessed. This Suibhne has been identified with Suibhne, abbot of Clonmacnoise, who died 810A.D.[486] This would suggest that Dicuil was a pupil of the famous school of Clonmacnoise.
He derived his material from three sources:
1. He utilised the report of the Theodosian survey. He tells us that he made it the basis of his work because though vitiated by false MSS. it was less faulty than Pliny especially in its measurements.
2. He utilised the works of previous geographers.
3. He made several interesting additions to existing knowledge which he derived from trustworthy accounts of Irish monks who were the greatest travellers of the time.
The list of authors from whom he borrowed is very large, including Pliny, Solinus, Isidore, Virgil, Crosius, Servius, Hectateus, Homer, Herodotus and other Greek writers.[487]
Dicuil is the first writer to refer to Iceland, which he describes under the name Thule from an account given to him by some Irish monks who visited that island about thirty years previously (c. 795A.D.) and remained there from February to August.
He was also the first to give authentic information about the Faroe Islands, which were visited by Irish hermits a hundred years before, but were forsaken on account of the piratical incursions of the Northmen.
The truth of these interesting accounts is proved in two ways: 1, the tolerably exact statements as to the length and shortness of the days could only be determined by a resident of the place; 2, from northern and independent sources we learn that the first Norwegian settlers who were of course pagans found Christians whom they called Papar. These Papar left Irish books, croziers, bells and other things behind them when they went away.[488]
When describing the Nile he introduces the narrative of a brother Fidelis who with a party of priests and monks made a journey from Ireland to the Holy Land.[489]
To be fair to Dicuil, we must judge his work not by modern scientific standards but by the standards of the ninth century. We must at least acknowledge that he made a genuine effort to obtain the most accurate available information and that he was more than usually conscientious, for when Pliny’s figures seemed to him to be inaccurate, he left a blank space.[490]
In addition to the Liber de Mensura Orbis Terrarum, Dicuil is the author of a short poem of twenty hexameters which he prefixed to a copy of a short treatise by Priscian,[491] and of an astronomical work in prose and verse which is still unpublished.[492] This latter is dedicated to Louis the Pious and mentions Dicuil by name. We may therefore infer that this geographer, astronomer and poet was one of the versatile Irish scholars whose work must have contributed in no small degree to the Carolingian revival of learning. This distinguished scholar is believed to be identical with the Dicuil who was abbot of Pahlacht in the ninth century.[493]
Dungal is another of those ninth century scholars of whose life the details are all too meagre. From a few fragmentary references and his existing works we are led to the conclusion that he was a very capable man distinguished not only as a theologian and poet but also as an astronomer and schoolmaster.[494]
In the year 811A.D. he wrote a letter to Charlemagne to explain the double eclipse of the sun that was supposed to have occurred the previous year. This letter is written in excellent Latin showing familiarity with Virgil and Cicero.[495]
Moreover it shows an intimate acquaintance with the whole field of astronomical literature of the time, but it is chiefly remarkable for the expression of astronomical views that were considered advanced because they seemed to call in question the truth of the Ptolemaic system.[496]
In the year 825A.D. the Emperor Lothair desiring to carry out the enlightened educational policy of his ancestor Charlemagne issued an Edict[497] complaining that through the extreme carelessness and indolence of certain superiors true teaching was shaken to its very foundations, and urging that persons engaged in teaching in all those places hereinafter mentioned should throw all their zeal and energy into securing the progress of their disciples and that they should apply themselves to science as the necessity of the times demanded. He laid out for this exercise certain places chosen in such a manner that neither time nor distance nor poverty might any more serve as an excuse to the people. He desired therefore at Pavia and under the superintendence of Dungal all students should assemble from Milan, Brescia, Lodi, Bergamo, Novara, Vercelli, Tortona, Acqui, Genoa, Asti, and Como.[498] Thus we see what a responsible position Dungal occupied as head of the school of Pavia—the precursor of the famous university.
Dungal himself informs us that he was an Irishman in a poem in praise of Charlemagne which commences with these words: “These verses the Irish Exile (exul Hibernicus) sends to King Charles.” He composed several other poems,[499] but that written to Charlemagne is his longest and best effort. The shorter poems display considerable taste but not much imagination.[500]
In 828A.D. Dungal appeared in a controversy against Claudius, bishop of Turin, who had written against the veneration of images. It will be recalled that this Claudius was the learned and gifted Spaniard who described the Council of Italian bishops as a “council of asses” (congregatio asinorum). Against this formidable opponent Dungal was called upon to undertake the defence of the veneration of images. As Zimmer remarks, “these two learned adversaries, Claudius the Spaniard and Dungal the Irishman, who met on the soil of Lombardy, were the representatives of two countries—the only ones—which offered an asylum to Graeco-Roman culture at the beginning of the seventh century when it had declined in the West. Ireland was especially conspicuous in introducing it anew in the form of Christianity, principally into France, these efforts being made when civilization was at its lowest ebb and the country in its most degraded condition.”[501]
We are not concerned here with the theological question at issue, but it may be remarked that Dungal’s reply[502] shows that he was a man of wide culture, “accomplished too in sacred literature, and at the same time trained in grammatical laws and in the classical excellence of style as will readily appear to anyone who reads his writings.”[503] Alzog informs us that the sophistical reasoning of Claudius was refuted by Jonas, bishop of Orleans, but much more ably by Dungal. He is styled an excellent theologian (theologus excellans) by a contemporary and Healy declares that Dungal’s is the first and best work that was written on the subject.[504] The many quotations from Greek and Latin poets which occur in his reply to Claudius as well as in his epistle to Charlemagne prove that Dungal had a strong love for poetry and that he was well read in classic literature.[505] Thus we see that Dungal’s education was built on a broad foundation, for he was distinguished as an astronomer and a theologian as well as a poet and a schoolmaster.
The last act of Dungal of which we have any record is his gift of books to the library of Bobbio.[506] Dungal is greatly praised by Muratori, Mabillon, Bellarmine and others for his learning and he was valued both in Italy and France for his varied attainments. Muratori, who published a catalogue[507] of the library of Bobbio, says that “Dungal carried into Italy the Scotic love of learning.” Among the books which Dungal presented to Bobbio is one which was catalogued as Psalterium but named by Muratori as the Antiphonary of Bangor,[508] a book of hymns compiled expressly for the use of the monastic community of Bangor in Co. Down (Ireland). It is written in Latin, but it contains the strongest internal evidence of its Irish origin. On the strength of the evidence furnished by the fact that Dungal possessed this book many believe that Dungal himself was a pupil of Bangor. If so, we have in Dungal an excellent example of the type of education available in this famous monastic school in the ninth century.
SEDULIUS:
Under the Emperor Lothair 840–855 there was at LiÈge a colony of Irish teachers and writers of whom the best known is Sedulius, sometimes called Sedulius the Younger to distinguish him from the author of the Carmen Paschale. We have already referred to the fact that he was a distinguished poet[509] and a learned grammarian.[510] He is no less famous as a scribe[511] and as a writer on other subjects.
He wrote an important treatise on the theory of government entitled De Rectoribus Christianis.[512] This work was written at LiÈge probably about the year 855A.D. It is in reality the first systematic contribution of the Middle Ages to the theory of political government and should rank in importance with St.Thomas’s De Regimine Principis, with Colonna’s De Regimine Principum and with Dante’s De Monarchia.[513] As its latest editor Dr. Hellman has remarked, if this work is not drawn from exclusively Irish sources, it is drawn at least from sources which were held in high esteem by Irish writers of the Carolingian Age. This Celtic conception of the duties of a Christian ruler is of very special interest to the student of mediÆval political theories. Its sources are Christian and classical, its immediate object was the direction of a Frankish ruler (probably Lothair II.), the mind that conceived it was Celtic and here we have at the beginning of mediÆval speculation a combination of forces and interests which went to make up the mediÆval policy.[514]
Sedulius also wrote a commentary of Porphry’s Isagoge (or Introduction to the Logic of Aristotle) for which the basis may have been the Greek text though the work was known to other Christian logicians only in the Latin translation.[515]
JOHANNES SCOTUS ERIUGENA (d. 877A.D.):
This was by far the greatest Irish scholar of the ninth century. Indeed in many ways he was the most remarkable man of his age. Of his early life we have no details. He was born between the years 800–815A.D. The general opinion of scholars is that he was born in Ireland as his name would indicate.[516] His learning itself is sufficient proof that he was educated in Ireland where alone he could get the benefit of such an education as the continental schools could no longer have furnished.[517]
About the middle of the ninth century he appeared at the court of King Charles the Bald by whom he was placed at the head of the Palace School. Though in some respects a worthless sovereign, Charles had at least one redeeming quality inasmuch as he emulated the example of his grandfather (Charlemagne) as a patron of letters. During his reign Irish scholars flocked in great numbers to the Continent. The monarch was fond of discussing knotty questions, and had a keen taste for the subtle disputations to which Irish dialectitians were devoted. Encouraged by his patronage the Irish monks emigrated in so great numbers to France that hostelries were built for their exclusive use.[518] The most eminent of these exiles[519] was Eriugena. No sooner had he reached France (c. 845A.D.) than he was recognised as a remarkable linguist. Certain reputed works of Dionysius the Areopagite had been sent by Pope Paul I. to Pepin-le-Bref, and a splendid MS. of the mystical writings of the same author was subsequently presented to Louis the Pious by the Byzantine Emperor Michael. The works were of course in the Greek language and the greatest scholars of France were unable to translate them or to interpret their meaning.[520] The task was finally entrusted to Eriugena and he produced a satisfactory version. The learned Anastasius, the papal librarian, on reading the version of Eriugena, wrote to King Charles expressing his surprise that “a barbarian who hailed from the extreme confines of the world and who might have been deemed to be as ignorant of Greek as he was remote from civilization could have proved capable of comprehending the mysteries of the Greek tongue.”[521]
Great as was his fame as a linguist his reputation as a philosopher is still greater. His philosophical speculations gave rise to discussions and controversies which even to the present day occupy the attention of the greatest thinkers. In his own day his views were nothing short of sensational. In addition to his translation of the Pseudo-Dionysius already referred to, Eriugena wrote a comprehensive philosophical work De Divisione Naturae[522] and a treatise De Egressu et Regressu Animae ad Deum of which only a fragment has come down to us.[523] He also contributed a treatise De Predestinatione to a theological controversy that was waged at that time. This work seems to have given offence to both parties. His expositiones or commentaries on the Pseudo-Dionysius are helpful in determining his philosophical views. He also wrote a commentary on the work of Martianus Capella, De Nuptiis.
It is as a philosopher, however, that Eriugena stands without an equal during his own time. It has been remarked that Eriugena appears to have been born subject to a strange fatality whereby men’s opinions are always changing in regard to his philosophical views and the position to be assigned to him among philosophers. In the criticisms by Maurice Milman, Staudenmaier, St.Rene, Tailander, Christlieb, HaurÉau, and Huber the view of each writer differs in some important respect from the views of the rest.[524] This is no less true of the criticism of living philosophers as the following quotations from two standard works on the History of Philosophy go to show. De WÜlf writes: “In opposition to the majority of historians who describe Eriugena as the first of scholastics, we have no hesitation in calling him the first of anti-scholastics—and the most formidable at the present epoch. For his teaching propounds principles which are opposed to those of scholasticism and which form the starting-point of opposition movements.”[525] Turner, on the other hand, says that Eriugena illustrates the many sidedness of the scholastic movement and proceeds as follows: “To classify as anti-scholastic whatever does not agree with the synthetic systems of the great masters of scholasticism is to break the line of continuous historical development which led through failure and partial success of Eriugena, Abelard, and other philosophers to the philosophy of the thirteenth century. Scholasticism in its final form is the outcome of the forces of Christian civilization which in different conditions and in less favourable circumstances produced the imperfect scholasticism of the period of beginning and the period of growth.”[526]
Whatever may be the difference of opinion as to his place in a particular school or system of philosophy there can be but one as to his abilities as a scholar and an original thinker. According to De WÜlf, “he must be regarded as one of the most striking personalities in the world of culture and learning in the early Middle Ages. He was far in advance of his time. While his contemporaries were only lisping in philosophy and his successors for centuries did little more than discuss a small number of disconnected philosophical questions, Eriugena in the ninth century worked out a complete philosophical synthesis. … He was at once a scholar and a man of genius. What was altogether unique in the ninth century, he knew Greek, of which Alcuin scarcely knew the alphabet.”[527] Turner while wishing to give a fair estimate of his place in history, warns us “not to let his brilliant qualities blind us to the enormity of his errors,”[528] but the same writer acknowledges that “he was without doubt the most learned man in his century, he was the first of the representatives of the new learning to attempt a system of constructive thought and he brought to his task a truly Celtic wealth of imagination and a spiritual force which lifted him above the plane of his contemporaries—mere epitomisers and commentators. His philosophy has all the charm which pantheism always possesses for a certain class of minds. It is subtle, vague, and poetic. When we come to examine its contents and method we find it dominated with the spirit of Neo-Platonism. Through the works of Pseudo-Dionysius and of Maximus, Eriugena made acquaintance with the teaching of Plotinus and Proculus; and when he came to construct his own system of thought he reproduced the essential traits of Neo-Platonic philosophy—pantheism, the doctrine of intuition, and universal redemption.”
The sentence enunciated by Eriugena in his work on Predestination[529] as well as elsewhere that the true religion is also the true philosophy and vice versa is the theme of the entire scholastic philosophy. The consequences that follow from this maxim as enunciated that every doubt in regard to religious matters can be refuted by philosophy appeared so preposterous that a meeting of French clergy declared it to be insanity or blasphemy.[530] Religion is to Eriugena in its relations to philosophy what authority is to reason. In respect to rank reason precedes so also in respect to time, since what is taught by authority of the Fathers was discovered by them with the help of reason. The weak must naturally subject themselves to authority, but those who are less weak should be content with this all the less because the figurative nature of many expressions and further the undeniable accommodation exercised by the Fathers toward the understanding of the uneducated demand the use of reason as a corrective.[531] By reason is to be understood, however, not mere subjective opinion but the common thought which reveals itself in conversation when out of two reasons both are made one, each of the speakers becoming as it were the other.[532] While he maintains the priority of reason he is far from being a rationalist. Indeed he is more inclined to take side with the mystics—to belittle all reason unless it is illumined from on high. “Instead of rationalising theology, he would theosophise philosophy.”[533]
Thus we see how Eriugena’s philosophical speculations naturally became the basis for innumerable controversies which are still far from being definitely decided. Such controversies, however, have served a useful purpose in the history of philosophy. Eriugena assigns to philosophy the fourfold task: to divide, to define, to demonstrate, to analyse. This may be described as Eriugena’s definition of the applicability of dialectic to philosophy and theology—a notion which, like the union of faith and science, is destined to develop in the subsequent growth of philosophy.[534]
Eriugena’s knowledge of Greek, and fondness for Greek dogma and Alexandrine philosophy, led to the report that he made several journeys to Greece. But this conjecture has no foundation in fact.[535] Indeed the evidence we have collected with reference to the course of studies pursued in the Irish monastic schools would point to Ireland as the most likely place where he laid the foundations of his classical scholarship.
INFLUENCE OF IRISH SCHOLARSHIP:
The scope of Irish scholarship may in some measure be judged from the existing works of the great and better-known scholars mentioned in this and other chapters, but the precise influence of that scholarship is more difficult to estimate. It is only in very recent years that we have begun to realise how much native Irish literature and history owes to the Irish monastic schools. In the wider field of European scholarship there is still much room for investigation before we can confidently assign to Irish monastic scholarship its proper place. The superiority of Irish classical learning has been demonstrated and is now acknowledged by practically all scholars who have made an intensive study of the early Middle Ages.[536] But as a discerning historian has remarked, “what is of greatest significance is the fact that there reigned not only among the professed scholars but among the plain missionaries (whose name was legion) a classical spirit, a love of literature for its own sake and a keen delight in poetry. They brought imagination, they brought spiritual force to a world well nigh sunk in materialism. … Their lighter productions show but one side of their Scottish nature. Their earnest single pursuit of learning in the widest sense attainable, their solid hard work as scholars is no less characteristic. Ireland was once the university not only of Northern England, but of the Frankish realm and if that progress was arrested after the fatal inroads of the Norsemen after 795 A.D. the seed which the Scots had sown in other lands grew to a nobler maturity than ever it reached on its own soil. … Wherever they went they founded schools.”[537]
Many other tributes to Irish monastic scholarship might be quoted. We have selected but two of these partly because of the weight of authority rightly associated with the author’s name in each case and partly because they summarise the detailed evidence we have presented during the course of our study.
Turner says: “The Irish teachers left a lasting impression on their own and succeeding generations. Not only were they the chief teachers of grammar, poetry, astronomy, music, and geography when these branches had no other, or scarcely any other, representative on the continent of Europe, but they also profoundly influenced the course of mediÆval thought in matters of philosophy and theology. Their elucidation of the Gospel of St.John and their commentaries on the Epistles of St.Paul formed a new school of exegesis. … They introduced the Neo-Platonic point of view in metaphysical speculation and carried the art of dialectic to a higher point than it ever before attained. It is no exaggeration to say that they were the founders of scholasticism and that Ireland is the Ionia of mediÆval philosophy.”[538]
Zimmer too shows that the Irish missionaries were not merely the representatives of Christianity: “they were instructors in every branch of science and learning of the time, possessors and bearers of a higher culture than was at that time to be found anywhere on the Continent, and can surely claim to have been the pioneers,—to have laid the corner stone of western culture on the Continent.”[539]
We have reached the end of our study. We have traced the rise, growth, and influence of the Irish monastic schools during the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth centuries. Their work and influence lasted for several centuries after the ninth, but during the period which we have investigated their influence was a dominant one in the history of European education. In the later centuries other factors contributed to the advancement of learning in Western Europe and while the Irish contribution was by no means negligible it was less distinctive, less significant, than during the period ending with the ninth century. If, then, we would form a correct idea of the position that Irish monastic schools occupy in the history of western culture, we have but to contrast the actual state of contemporary learning in the rest of Western Europe with that available in these schools; or to recall their large number and wide distribution, noting the liberal nature of the course of studies pursued therein and the generosity with which that learning was extended to all irrespective of race or social position. In either case we are driven to the conclusion that these schools were indeed the greatest educational factor of early mediÆval times, that they were, in reality, the universities of the West, the lights that illumined the (so-called) Dark Ages.
