Life Of John Milton by Richard Garnett (free children's online books TXT) 📕

Who Hangs On The Cross!"  The Cry Rolled Through The Crowd Like The

Dull Noise Of An Avalanche; Like A Shriek Of Terror,  Like The Inward

Consciousness Of A Fearful Mistake,  The Most Fearful That Had Been Made

Since The World Began.  He Who Hangs Yonder On The Cross Is The Son Of

God.  Far Below In A Cleft Of The Rock Is A Poor Sinner.  He Struggles

Up To His Feet,  Holding On With His Lean Hands,  He Looks Up To The

Cross With Rolling Eyes.  A Prayer For Mercy Wells Up From His Heart

Like A Bloody Spring.  And Beside Him A Woman Kneels And Folds Her

Hands Against The Cross.  And She Who Thus Stands Under The Cross

Wrings Her Hands,  And Implores Mercy For Her Child.

The Letters I.N.R.I,  Over The Cross Begin To Gleam.  And A Voice Is

Heard In The Air: "Jesus Near Redeems Ill-Doers."

"The Son Of God!  The Son Of God!"  The Cry Went On Without Ceasing.

"The Son Of God On The Cross!"

"The Son Of God's Coat!  A Hundred Gold Pieces For The Coat!" Shrieked

Old Schobal,  Lifting The Garment Up On A Stick Like A Flag.  The Dealer

Swore By That Flag,  For Its Value Had Risen A Thousandfold In An Hour.

"A Hundred Gold Pieces For The Son Of God's Coat!"  But It Was High

Time That The Dealer Made Himself Scarce,  For The People Of Jerusalem

Were Enraged At A Man Who Wanted To Do Business In Presence Of The

Dying Saviour.  The Good,  Pious Citizens Of Jerusalem!

Not A High Priest Was To Be Seen.  They Had All Gone Away.  The

Hoarse-Voiced Rabbi Was Still There,  Reciting Psalms Aloud To The Dying

Man.

"Stop That!" Someone Shouted At Him.  "You Killed Him."

"We've Killed Him?  Who Do You Mean?" Asked The Rabbi With Well-Feigned

Innocence.

"Why You,  You Expounders Of The Scriptures,  You Brought Him To His

Death; It Was You,  And You Alone!"

The Rabbi Replied Very Seriously: "Think,  My Friend,  What You Are

Saying.  Can You Prove This Charge Before The Dread Jehovah?  We

Expounders Of The Law Brought Him To His Death!  Every One Knows Who

Condemned Him.  It Was The Foreigners.  They Have Ever Been The Ruin Of

Our Nation!  Every One Knows Who Crucified Him At The Desire Of The

People."

It Was High Time That He Shou One Knows Who Crucified Him Awas

Impossible Under A Dispensation Which Allowed A Parliament To Sit Till A

Protector Turned It Out Of Doors. He Was,  Therefore,  Only Acting Upon

His Own Theory,  And He Seems To Us To Have Been Acting Wisely As Well As

Courageously,  When He Consented To Become A Humble But Necessary Wheel

Of The Machinery Of Administration,  The Orpheus Among The Argonauts Of

The Commonwealth.

Milton Was Appointed Secretary For Foreign Tongues On March 15,  1649. He

Removed From High Holborn To Spring Gardens To Be Near The Scene Of His

Labours,  And Was Soon Afterwards Provided With An Official Residence In

Whitehall Palace,  A Huge Intricacy Of Passages And Chambers,  Of Which

But A Fragment Now Remains. His First Performance Was In Some Measure A

False Start; For The Epistle Offering Amity To The Senate Of Hamburg,

Clothed In His Best Latin,  Was So Unamiably Regarded By That Body That

The English Envoy Never Formally Delivered It. An Epistle To The Dutch

On The Murder Of The Commonwealth's Ambassador,  Dorislaus,  By Refugee

Cavaliers,  Had A Better Reception; And Milton Was Soon Engaged In

Drafting,  Not Merely Translating,  A State Paper Designed For The

Press--Observations On The Peace Concluded By Ormond,  The Royalist

Commander In Ireland,  With The Confederated Catholics In That Country,

And On The Protest Against The Execution Of Charles I. Volunteered By

The Presbytery Of Belfast. The Commentary Was Published In May,  Along

With The Documents. It Is A Spirited Manifesto,  Cogent In Enforcing The

Necessity Of The Campaign About To Be Undertaken By Cromwell. Ireland

Had At The Moment Exactly As Many Factions As Provinces; And Never,

Perhaps,  Since The Days Of Strongbow Had Been In A State Of Such Utter

Confusion. Employed In Work Like This,  Milton Did Not Cease To Be "An

Eagle Towering In His Pride Of Place," But He May Seem To Have

Degenerated Into The "Mousing Owl" When He Pounced Upon Newswriters And

Ferreted Unlicensed Pamphlets For Sedition. True,  There Was Nothing In

This Occupation Formally Inconsistent With Anything He Had Written In

The "Areopagitica"; Yet One Wishes That The Council Of State Had

Provided Otherwise For This Particular Department Of The Public Service.

Nothing But A Sense Of Duty Can Have Reconciled Him To A Task So

Invidious; And There Is Some Evidence Of What Might Well Have Been

Believed Without Evidence--That He Mitigated The Severity Of The

Censorship As Far As In Him Lay. He Was Not To Want For Better

Occupation,  For The Council Of State Was About To Devolve Upon Him The

Charge Of Answering The Great Royalist Manifesto,  "Eikon Basilike."

The Controversy Respecting The Authorship Of The "Eikon Basilike" Is A

Remarkable Instance Of The Degree In Which Literary Judgment May Be

Biassed By Political Prepossession. In The Absence Of Other Testimony

One Might Almost Stamp A Writer As Royalist Or Parliamentarian According

As His Verdict Inclined To Charles I. Or Bishop Gauden. In Fact,  It Is

No Easy Matter To Balance The Respective Claims Of Two Entirely

Different Kinds Of Testimony. The External Evidence Of Charles's

Authorship Is Worth Nothing. It Is Almost Confined To The Assertions,

Forty Years After The Publication,  Of A Few Aged Cavaliers,  Who Were

All Morally Certain That Charles Wrote The Book,  And To Whom A Fiction

Supplying The Accidental Lack Of External Testimony Would Have Seemed

Laudable And Pious. The Only Wonder Is That Such Legends Are Not Far

More Numerous. On The Other Hand,  The Internal Evidence Seems At First

Sight To Make For The King. The Style Is Not Dissimilar To That Of The

Reputed Royal Author; The Sentiments Are Such As Would Have Well Become

Him; The Assumed Character Is Supported Throughout With Consistency; And

There Are None Of The Slips Which A Fabricator Might Have Been Thought

Hardly Able To Avoid. The Supposed Personator Of The King Was

Unquestionably An Unprincipled Time-Server. Is It Not An Axiom That A

Worthy Book Can Only Proceed From A Worthy Mind?

                       "If This Fail,

    The Pillared Firmament Is Rottenness,

    And Earth's Base Built On Stubble!"

Against Such Considerations We Have To Set The Stubborn Facts That

Bishop Gauden Did Actually Claim The Authorship That He Preferred His

Claim To The Very Persons Who Had The Strongest Interest In Exploding

It; That He Invoked The Testimony Of Those Who Must Have Known The

Truth,  And Could Most Easily Have Crushed The Lie; That He Convinced Not

Only Clarendon,  But Charles's Own Children,  And Received A Substantial

Reward. In The Face Of These Undeniable Facts,  The Numerous

Circumstances Used With Skill And Ingenuity By Dr. Wordsworth To

Invalidate His Claim,  Are Of Little Weight. The Stronger The Apparent

Objections,  The More Certain That The Proofs In Gauden's Hands Must Have

Been Overwhelming,  And The Greater The Presumption That He Was Merely

Urging What Had Always Been Known To Several Persons About The Late

King. When,  With This Conviction,  We Recur To The "Eikon," And Examine

It In Connection With Gauden's Acknowledged Writings,  The Internal

Testimony Against Him No Longer Seems So Absolutely Conclusive. Gauden's

Style Is By No Means So Bad As Hume Represents It. Many Remarkable

Parallels Between It And The Diction Of The "Eikon" Have Been Pointed

Out By Todd,  And The Most Searching Modern Investigator,  Doble. We May

Also Discover One Marked Intellectual Resemblance. Nothing Is More

Characteristic In The "Eikon" Than Its Indirectness. The Writer Is Full

Of Qualifications,  Limitations,  Allowances; He Fences And Guards

Himself,  And Seems Always On The Point Of Taking Back What He Has Said,

But Never Does; And Veers And Tacks,  Tacks And Veers,  Until He Has

Worked Himself Into Port. The Like Peculiarity Is Very Observable In

Gauden,  Especially In His Once-Popular "Companion To The Altar." There

Is Also A Strong Internal Argument Against Charles's Authorship In The

Preponderance Of The Theological Element. That This Should Occupy An

Important Place In The Writings Of A Martyr For The Church Of England

Was Certainly To Be Expected,  But The Theology Of The "Eikon" Has An

Unmistakably Professional Flavour. Let Any Man Read It With An Unbiassed

Mind,  And Then Say Whether He Has Been Listening To A King Or To A

Chaplain. "One Of _Us_," Pithily Comments Archbishop Herring. "I Write

Rather Like A Divine Than A Prince," The Assumed Author Acknowledges,  Or

Is Made To Acknowledge. When To These Considerations Is Added That Any

Scrap Of The "Eikon" In The King's Handwriting Would Have Been

Treasured As An Inestimable Relic,  And That No Scrap Was Ever Produced,

There Can Be Little Question As To The Verdict Of Criticism. For All

Practical Purposes,  Nevertheless,  The "Eikon" In Milton's Time Was The

King's Book,  For Everybody Thought It So. Milton Hints Some Vague

Suspicions,  But Refrains From Impugning It Seriously,  And Indeed The

Defenders Of Its Authenticity Will Be Quite Justified In Asserting That

If Gauden Had Been Dumb,  Criticism Would Have Been Blind.

According To Selden's Biographer,  Cromwell Was At First Anxious That The

"Eikon" Should Be Answered By That Consummate Jurist,  And It Was Only On

His Declining The Task That It Came Into Milton's Hands. That He Also

Would Have Declined It But For His Official Position May Be Inferred

From His Own Words: "I Take It On Me As A Work Assigned,  Rather Than By

Me Chosen Or Affected." His Distaste May Further Be Gauged By His

Tardiness; While "The Tenure Of Kings And Magistrates" Had Been Written

In Little More Than A Week,  His "Eikonoklastes," A Reply To A Book

Published In February,  Did Not Appear Until October 6th. His Reluctance

May Be Partly Explained By His Feeling That "To Descant On The

Misfortunes Of A Person Fallen From So High A Dignity,  Who Hath Also

Paid His Final Debt Both To Nature And His Faults,  Is Neither Of Itself

A Thing Commendable,  Nor The Intention Of This Discourse." The Intention

It May Not Have Been,  But It Was Necessarily The Performance. The Scheme

Of The "Eikon" Required The Respondent To Take Up The Case Article By

Article,  A Thing Impossible To Be Done Without Abundant "Descant" Of The

Kind Which Milton Deprecates. He Is Compelled To Fight The Adversary On

The Latter's