<p><SPAN name="link2HCH0083" id="link2HCH0083"></SPAN></p>
<h2> CHAPTER XXVII——COWARDICE THE MOTHER OF CRUELTY </h2>
<p>I have often heard it said that cowardice is the mother of cruelty; and I
have found by experience that malicious and inhuman animosity and
fierceness are usually accompanied with feminine weakness. I have seen the
most cruel people, and upon frivolous occasions, apt to cry. Alexander,
the tyrant of Pheres, durst not be a spectator of tragedies in the
theatre, for fear lest his citizens should see him weep at the misfortunes
of Hecuba and Andromache, who himself without pity caused so many people
every day to be murdered. Is it not meanness of spirit that renders them
so pliable to all extremities? Valour, whose effect is only to be
exercised against resistance—</p>
<p>"Nec nisi bellantis gaudet cervice juvenci"—<br/>
<br/>
["Nor delights in killing a bull unless he resists."<br/>
—Claudius, Ep. ad Hadrianum, v. 39.]<br/></p>
<p>stops when it sees the enemy at its mercy; but pusillanimity, to say that
it was also in the game, not having dared to meddle in the first act of
danger, takes as its part the second, of blood and massacre. The murders
in victories are commonly performed by the rascality and hangers-on of an
army, and that which causes so many unheard of cruelties in domestic wars
is, that this canaille makes war in imbruing itself up to the elbows in
blood, and ripping up a body that lies prostrate at its feet, having no
sense of any other valour:</p>
<p>"Et lupus, et turpes instant morientibus ursi,<br/>
Et quaecunque minor nobilitate fera est:"<br/>
<br/>
["Wolves and the filthy bears, and all the baser beasts,<br/>
fall upon the dying."—Ovid, Trist., iii. 5, 35.]<br/></p>
<p>like cowardly dogs, that in the house worry and tear the skins of wild
beasts, they durst not come near in the field. What is it in these times
of ours that makes our quarrels mortal; and that, whereas our fathers had
some degrees of revenge, we now begin with the last in ours, and at the
first meeting nothing is to be said but, kill? What is this but cowardice?</p>
<p>Every one is sensible that there is more bravery and disdain in subduing
an enemy, than in cutting, his throat; and in making him yield, than in
putting him to the sword: besides that the appetite of revenge is better
satisfied and pleased because its only aim is to make itself felt: And
this is the reason why we do not fall upon a beast or a stone when they
hurt us, because they are not capable of being sensible of our revenge;
and to kill a man is to save him from the injury and offence we intend
him. And as Bias cried out to a wicked fellow, "I know that sooner or
later thou wilt have thy reward, but I am afraid I shall not see it";
—[Plutarch, on the Delay in Divine Justice, c. 2.]—and pitied
the Orchomenians that the penitence of Lyciscus for the treason committed
against them, came at a season when there was no one remaining alive of
those who had been interested in the offence, and whom the pleasure of
this penitence should affect: so revenge is to be pitied, when the person
on whom it is executed is deprived of means of suffering under it: for as
the avenger will look on to enjoy the pleasure of his revenge, so the
person on whom he takes revenge should be a spectator too, to be afflicted
and to repent. "He will repent it," we say, and because we have given him
a pistol-shot through the head, do we imagine he will repent? On the
contrary, if we but observe, we shall find, that he makes mouths at us in
falling, and is so far from penitency, that he does not so much as repine
at us; and we do him the kindest office of life, which is to make him die
insensibly, and soon: we are afterwards to hide ourselves, and to shift
and fly from the officers of justice, who pursue us, whilst he is at rest.
Killing is good to frustrate an offence to come, not to revenge one that
is already past; and more an act of fear than of bravery; of precaution
than of courage; of defence than of enterprise. It is manifest that by it
we lose both the true end of revenge and the care of our reputation; we
are afraid, if he lives he will do us another injury as great as the
first; 'tis not out of animosity to him, but care of thyself, that thou
gettest rid of him.</p>
<p>In the kingdom of Narsingah this expedient would be useless to us, where
not only soldiers, but tradesmen also, end their differences by the sword.
The king never denies the field to any who wish to fight; and when they
are persons of quality; he looks on, rewarding the victor with a chain of
gold,—for which any one who pleases may fight with him again, so
that, by having come off from one combat, he has engaged himself in many.</p>
<p>If we thought by virtue to be always masters of our enemies, and to
triumph over them at pleasure, we should be sorry they should escape from
us as they do, by dying: but we have a mind to conquer, more with safety
than honour, and, in our quarrel, more pursue the end than the glory.</p>
<p>Asnius Pollio, who, as being a worthy man, was the less to be excused,
committed a like, error, when, having written a libel against Plancus, he
forbore to publish it till he was dead; which is to bite one's thumb at a
blind man, to rail at one who is deaf, to wound a man who has no feeling,
rather than to run the hazard of his resentment. And it was also said of
him that it was only for hobgoblins to wrestle with the dead.</p>
<p>He who stays to see the author die, whose writings he intends to question,
what does he say but that he is weak in his aggressiveness? It was told to
Aristotle that some one had spoken ill of him: "Let him do more," said he;
"let him whip me too, provided I am not there."</p>
<p>Our fathers contented themselves with revenging an insult with the lie,
the lie with a box of the ear, and so forward; they were valiant enough
not to fear their adversaries, living and provoked we tremble for fear so
soon as we see them on foot. And that this is so, does not our noble
practice of these days, equally to prosecute to death both him that has
offended us and him we have offended, make it out? 'Tis also a kind of
cowardice that has introduced the custom of having seconds, thirds, and
fourths in our duels; they were formerly duels; they are now skirmishes,
rencontres, and battles. Solitude was, doubtless, terrible to those who
were the first inventors of this practice:</p>
<p>"Quum in se cuique minimum fiduciae esset,"<br/></p>
<p>for naturally any company whatever is consolatory in danger. Third persons
were formerly called in to prevent disorder and foul play only, and to be
witness of the fortune of the combat; but now they have brought it to this
pass that the witnesses themselves engage; whoever is invited cannot
handsomely stand by as an idle spectator, for fear of being suspected
either of want of affection or of courage. Besides the injustice and
unworthiness of such an action, of engaging other strength and valour in
the protection of your honour than your own, I conceive it a disadvantage
to a brave man, and who wholly relies upon himself, to shuffle his fortune
with that of a second; every one runs hazard enough himself without
hazarding for another, and has enough to do to assure himself in his own
valour for the defence of his life, without intrusting a thing so dear in
a third man's hand. For, if it be not expressly agreed upon before to the
contrary, 'tis a combined party of all four, and if your second be killed,
you have two to deal withal, with good reason; and to say that it is foul
play, it is so indeed, as it is, well armed, to attack a man who has but
the hilt of a broken sword in his hand, or, clear and untouched, a man who
is desperately wounded: but if these be advantages you have got by
fighting, you may make use of them without reproach. The disparity and
inequality are only weighed and considered from the condition of the
combatants when they began; as to the rest, you must take your chance: and
though you had, alone, three enemies upon you at once, your two companions
being killed, you have no more wrong done you, than I should do in a
battle, by running a man through whom I should see engaged with one of our
own men, with the like advantage. The nature of society will have it so
that where there is troop against troop, as where our Duke of Orleans
challenged Henry, king of England, a hundred against a hundred; three
hundred against as many, as the Argians against the Lacedaemonians; three
to three, as the Horatii against the Curiatii, the multitude on either
side is considered but as one single man: the hazard, wherever there is
company, being confused and mixed.</p>
<p>I have a domestic interest in this discourse; for my brother, the Sieur de
Mattecoulom, was at Rome asked by a gentleman with whom he had no great
acquaintance, and who was a defendant challenged by another, to be his
second; in this duel he found himself matched with a gentleman much better
known to him. (I would fain have an explanation of these rules of honour,
which so often shock and confound those of reason.) After having
despatched his man, seeing the two principals still on foot and sound, he
ran in to disengage his friend. What could he do less? should he have
stood still, and if chance would have ordered it so, have seen him he was
come thither to defend killed before his face? what he had hitherto done
helped not the business; the quarrel was yet undecided. The courtesy that
you can, and certainly ought to shew to your enemy, when you have reduced
him to an ill condition and have a great advantage over him, I do not see
how you can do it, where the interest of another is concerned, where you
are only called in as an assistant, and the quarrel is none of yours: he
could neither be just nor courteous, at the hazard of him he was there to
serve. And he was therefore enlarged from the prisons of Italy at the
speedy and solemn request of our king. Indiscreet nation! we are not
content to make our vices and follies known to the world by report only,
but we must go into foreign countries, there to show them what fools we
are. Put three Frenchmen into the deserts of Libya, they will not live a
month together without fighting; so that you would say this peregrination
were a thing purposely designed to give foreigners the pleasure of our
tragedies, and, for the most part, to such as rejoice and laugh at our
miseries. We go into Italy to learn to fence, and exercise the art at the
expense of our lives before we have learned it; and yet, by the rule of
discipline, we should put the theory before the practice. We discover
ourselves to be but learners:</p>
<p>"Primitae juvenum miserae, bellique futuri<br/>
Dura rudimenta."<br/>
<br/>
["Wretched the elementary trials of youth, and hard the<br/>
rudiments of approaching war."—Virgil, AEneid, xi. 156.]<br/></p>
<p>I know that fencing is an art very useful to its end (in a duel betwixt
two princes, cousin-germans, in Spain, the elder, says Livy, by his skill
and dexterity in arms, easily overcoming the greater and more awkward
strength of the younger), and of which the knowledge, as I experimentally
know, has inspired some with courage above their natural measure; but this
is not properly valour, because it supports itself upon address, and is
founded upon something besides itself. The honour of combat consists in
the jealousy of courage, and not of skill; and therefore I have known a
friend of mine, famed as a great master in this exercise, in his quarrels
make choice of such arms as might deprive him of this advantage and that
wholly depended upon fortune and assurance, that they might not attribute
his victory rather to his skill in fencing than his valour. When I was
young, gentlemen avoided the reputation of good fencers as injurious to
them, and learned to fence with all imaginable privacy as a trade of
subtlety, derogating from true and natural valour:</p>
<p>"Non schivar non parar, non ritirarsi,<br/>
Voglion costor, ne qui destrezza ha parte;<br/>
Non danno i colpi or finti, or pieni, or scarsi!<br/>
Toglie l'ira a il furor l'uso de l'arte.<br/>
Odi le spade orribilmente utarsi<br/>
A mezzo il ferro; il pie d'orma non parte,<br/>
Sempre a il pie fermo, a la man sempre in moto;<br/>
Ne scende taglio in van, ne punta a voto."<br/>
<br/>
["They neither shrank, nor vantage sought of ground,<br/>
They travers'd not, nor skipt from part to part,<br/>
Their blows were neither false, nor feigned found:<br/>
In fight, their rage would let them use no art.<br/>
Their swords together clash with dreadful sound,<br/>
Their feet stand fast, and neither stir nor start,<br/>
They move their hands, steadfast their feet remain.<br/>
Nor blow nor foin they strook, or thrust in vain."<br/>
—Tasso, Gierus. Lib., c. 12, st. 55, Fairfax's translation.]<br/></p>
<p>Butts, tilting, and barriers, the feint of warlike fights, were the
exercises of our forefathers: this other exercise is so much the less
noble, as it only respects a private end; that teaches us to destroy one
another against law and justice, and that every way always produces very
ill effects. It is much more worthy and more becoming to exercise
ourselves in things that strengthen than that weaken our government and
that tend to the public safety and common glory. The consul, Publius
Rutilius, was the first who taught the soldiers to handle their arms with
skill, and joined art with valour, not for the rise of private quarrel,
but for war and the quarrels of the people of Rome; a popular and civil
defence. And besides the example of Caesar, who commanded his men to shoot
chiefly at the face of Pompey's soldiers in the battle of Pharsalia, a
thousand other commanders have also bethought them to invent new forms of
weapons and new ways of striking and defending, according as occasion
should require.</p>
<p>But as Philopoemen condemned wrestling, wherein he excelled, because the
preparatives that were therein employed were differing from those that
appertain to military discipline, to which alone he conceived men of
honour ought wholly to apply themselves; so it seems to me that this
address to which we form our limbs, those writhings and motions young men
are taught in this new school, are not only of no use, but rather contrary
and hurtful to the practice of fight in battle; and also our people
commonly make use of particular weapons, and peculiarly designed for duel;
and I have seen, when it has been disapproved, that a gentleman challenged
to fight with rapier and poignard appeared in the array of a man-at-arms,
and that another should take his cloak instead of his poignard. It is
worthy of consideration that Laches in Plato, speaking of learning to
fence after our manner, says that he never knew any great soldier come out
of that school, especially the masters of it: and, indeed, as to them, our
experience tells as much. As to the rest, we may at least conclude that
they are qualities of no relation or correspondence; and in the education
of the children of his government, Plato interdicts the art of boxing,
introduced by Amycus and Epeius, and that of wrestling, by Antaeus and
Cercyo, because they have another end than to render youth fit for the
service of war and contribute nothing to it. But I see that I have
somewhat strayed from my theme.</p>
<p>The Emperor Mauricius, being advertised by dreams and several prognostics,
that one Phocas, an obscure soldier, should kill him, questioned his
son-in-law, Philip, who this Phocas was, and what were his nature,
qualities, and manners; and so soon as Philip, amongst other things, had
told him that he was cowardly and timorous, the emperor immediately
concluded then that he was a murderer and cruel. What is it that makes
tyrants so sanguinary? 'Tis only the solicitude for their own safety, and
that their faint hearts can furnish them with no other means of securing
themselves than in exterminating those who may hurt them, even so much as
women, for fear of a scratch:</p>
<p>"Cuncta ferit, dum cuncta timer."<br/>
<br/>
["He strikes at all who fears all."<br/>
—Claudius, in Eutrop., i. 182.]<br/></p>
<p>The first cruelties are exercised for themselves thence springs the fear
of a just revenge, which afterwards produces a series of new cruelties, to
obliterate one another. Philip, king of Macedon, who had so much to do
with the people of Rome, agitated with the horror of so many murders
committed by his order, and doubting of being able to keep himself secure
from so many families, at divers times mortally injured and offended by
him, resolved to seize all the children of those he had caused to be
slain, to despatch them daily one after another, and so to establish his
own repose.</p>
<p>Fine matter is never impertinent, however placed; and therefore I, who
more consider the weight and utility of what I deliver than its order and
connection, need not fear in this place to bring in an excellent story,
though it be a little by-the-by; for when they are rich in their own
native beauty, and are able to justify themselves, the least end of a hair
will serve to draw them into my discourse.</p>
<p>Amongst others condemned by Philip, had been one Herodicus, prince of
Thessaly; he had, moreover, after him caused his two sons-in-law to be put
to death, each leaving a son very young behind him. Theoxena and Archo
were their two widows. Theoxena, though highly courted to it, could not be
persuaded to marry again: Archo married Poris, the greatest man among the
AEnians, and by him had a great many children, whom she, dying, left at a
very tender age. Theoxena, moved with a maternal charity towards her
nephews, that she might have them under her own eyes and in her own
protection, married Poris: when presently comes a proclamation of the
king's edict. This brave-spirited mother, suspecting the cruelty of
Philip, and afraid of the insolence of the soldiers towards these charming
and tender children was so bold as to declare hat she would rather kill
them with her own hands than deliver them. Poris, startled at this
protestation, promised her to steal them away, and to transport them to
Athens, and there commit them to the custody of some faithful friends of
his. They took, therefore, the opportunity of an annual feast which was
celebrated at AEnia in honour of AEneas, and thither they went. Having
appeared by day at the public ceremonies and banquet, they stole the night
following into a vessel laid ready for the purpose, to escape away by sea.
The wind proved contrary, and finding themselves in the morning within
sight of the land whence they had launched overnight, and being pursued by
the guards of the port, Poris perceiving this, laboured all he could to
make the mariners do their utmost to escape from the pursuers. But
Theoxena, frantic with affection and revenge, in pursuance of her former
resolution, prepared both weapons and poison, and exposing them before
them; "Go to, my children," said she, "death is now the only means of your
defence and liberty, and shall administer occasion to the gods to exercise
their sacred justice: these sharp swords, and these full cups, will open
you the way into it; courage, fear nothing! And thou, my son, who art the
eldest, take this steel into thy hand, that thou mayest the more bravely
die." The children having on one side so powerful a counsellor, and the
enemy at their throats on the other, run all of them eagerly upon what was
next to hand; and, half dead, were thrown into the sea. Theoxena, proud of
having so gloriously provided for the safety of her children, clasping her
arms with great affection about her husband's neck. "Let us, my friend,"
said she, "follow these boys, and enjoy the same sepulchre they do"; and
so, having embraced, they threw themselves headlong into the sea; so that
the ship was carried—back without the owners into the harbour.</p>
<p>Tyrants, at once both to kill and to make their anger felt, have employed
their capacity to invent the most lingering deaths. They will have their
enemies despatched, but not so fast that they may not have leisure to
taste their vengeance. And therein they are mightily perplexed; for if the
torments they inflict are violent, they are short; if long, they are not
then so painful as they desire; and thus plague themselves in choice of
the greatest cruelty. Of this we have a thousand examples in antiquity,
and I know not whether we, unawares, do not retain some traces of this
barbarity.</p>
<p>All that exceeds a simple death appears to me absolute cruelty. Our
justice cannot expect that he, whom the fear of dying by being beheaded or
hanged will not restrain, should be any more awed by the imagination of a
languishing fire, pincers, or the wheel. And I know not, in the meantime,
whether we do not throw them into despair; for in what condition can be
the soul of a man, expecting four-and-twenty hours together to be broken
upon a wheel, or after the old way, nailed to a cross? Josephus relates
that in the time of the war the Romans made in Judaea, happening to pass
by where they had three days before crucified certain Jews, he amongst
them knew three of his own friends, and obtained the favour of having them
taken down, of whom two, he says, died; the third lived a great while
after.</p>
<p>Chalcondylas, a writer of good credit, in the records he has left behind
him of things that happened in his time, and near him, tells us, as of the
most excessive torment, of that the Emperor Mohammed very often practised,
of cutting off men in the middle by the diaphragm with one blow of a
scimitar, whence it followed that they died as it were two deaths at once;
and both the one part, says he, and the other, were seen to stir and
strive a great while after in very great torment. I do not think there was
any great suffering in this motion the torments that are the most dreadful
to look on are not always the greatest to endure; and I find those that
other historians relate to have been practised by him upon the Epirot
lords, are more horrid and cruel, where they were condemned to be flayed
alive piecemeal, after so malicious a manner that they continued fifteen
days in that misery.</p>
<p>And these other two: Croesus, having caused a gentleman, the favourite of
his brother Pantaleon, to be seized, carried him into a fuller's shop,
where he caused him to be scratched and carded with the cards and combs
belonging to that trade, till he died. George Sechel, chief commander of
the peasants of Poland, who committed so many mischiefs under the title of
the Crusade, being defeated in battle and taken bu the Vayvode of
Transylvania, was three days bound naked upon the rack exposed to all
sorts of torments that any one could contrive against him: during which
time many other prisoners were kept fasting; in the end, he living and
looking on, they made his beloved brother Lucat, for whom alone he
entreated, taking on himself the blame of all their evil actions drink his
blood, and caused twenty of his most favoured captains to feed upon him,
tearing his flesh in pieces with their teeth, and swallowing the morsels.
The remainder of his body and his bowels, so soon as he was dead, were
boiled, and others of his followers compelled to eat them.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />