Gesta Romanorum

by Charles Swan

  * [There is an anacoluthon in the Latin text: “Et ideo a societate avunculi est expulsus, dicensque ei, &c.”—ED.]

  TALE III.

  OF JUST JUDGMENT.

  A CERTAIN emperor decreed, that if any woman were taken in adultery, she should be cast headlong from a very high precipice. It chanced that a woman, convicted of the crime, was immediately conveyed to the place of punishment, and thrown down. But she received no injury in the fall. They therefore brought her back to the judgment-seat; and when the judge perceived that she was unharmed, he commanded that she should again be led to the precipice, and the sentence effectually executed. The woman, however, addressing the judge, said, “My Lord, if you command this, you will act contrary to the law, which punishes not twice for the same fault. I have already been cast down as a convicted adultress, but God miraculously preserved me. Therefore, I ought not to be subjected to it again.” The judge answered, “Thou hast well said; go in peace: “and thus was the woman saved.

  APPLICATION.

  My beloved, the emperor is God, who made a law that if any one polluted the soul (which is the spouse of Christ) by the commission of any mortal sin, he should be precipitated from a high mountain—that is, from heaven; as befel our first parent, Adam. But God, by the sufferings of His Son, hath preserved us. When man sins, God does not instantly condemn him, because His mercy is infinite; but “by grace we are saved,” and not cast headlong into hell.

  TALE IV.

  OF JUSTICE.

  DURING the reign of Cæsar a law was enacted, that if a man maltreated a woman, and overcame her by violence, it should remain with the aggrieved party, whether the person so offending should be put to death, or married to her, without a portion. Now, it fell out that a certain fellow violated two women upon the same night; the one of whom sought to put him to death, and the other to be married to him. The violator was apprehended and brought before the judge, to answer respecting the two women, according to law. The first woman insisting upon her right, desired his death; while the second claimed him for her husband. The first woman said, “It cannot be denied that the law ordains that I should obtain my wish.” The other replied, “In like manner the law raises its voice for me. But because my demand is of less importance, and more charitable, I doubt not but that sentence will be given in my favour.” Both women complained, and both required the enforcement of the law. When either side had been heard, the judge ordered that the second woman should obtain the man for her husband. And so it was done.

  APPLICATION.

  My beloved, the emperor, who framed the law, is our Lord Jesus Christ. The violator, any sinner, who violates two females, that is, Justice and Mercy, which are both the daughters of God. The violator is brought before the Judge, when the soul separates from the body. The first woman, that is, Justice, alleges against the sinner that by law he is subject to eternal death: but the other, that is, Divine Mercy, alleges that by contrition and confession he may be saved. Therefore, let us study to please God.

  TALE V.

  OF FIDELITY.

  THE subject of a certain king fell into the hands of pirates, and wrote to his father for ransom. But the father would not redeem him; so the youth wasted away in prison. Now, he who detained him in chains had a daughter of great beauty and virtue. She was at this time in her twentieth year, and frequently visited the young man with the hope of alleviating his griefs. But he was too disconsolate to hearken. It one day fell out that, while the damsel was with him, the youth said to her, “Oh, that you would try to set me free, kind maiden! “She replied, “But how am I to effect it? Thy father, thine own father, will not ransom thee; on what ground then should I, a stranger, attempt it? And suppose that I were induced to do so, I should incur the wrath of my parent, because thine denies the price of thy redemption. Nevertheless, on one condition thou shalt be liberated.” “Kind damsel,” returned he, “impose what thou wilt; so that it be possible, I will accomplish it.” “Promise, then,” said she, “to marry me, whenever an opportunity may occur.” “I promise,” said the youth, joyfully, “and plight thee a faith that shall never be broken.” The girl straightway set him free from his bonds, without her father’s knowledge, and fled with him to his own country. When they arrived, the father of the youth welcomed him, and said, “Son, I am overjoyed at thy return; but who is the lady under thy escort ? “He replied, “It is the daughter of a king, to whom I am betrothed.” The father returned, “On pain of losing thy inheritance, I charge thee, marry her not.” “My father,” exclaimed the youth, “what hast thou said? My obligations to her are greater than they are to you; for when imprisoned and fettered by my enemy, I implored you to ransom me; but you would not. Now, she not only released me from prison, but from deadly peril—and, therefore, I am resolved to marry her.” The father answered, “Son, I tell thee that thou canst not confide in her, and consequently ought not to espouse her. She deceived her own father, when she liberated thee from prison; for this did her father lose the price of thy ransom. Therefore, I am of opinion that thou canst not confide in her, and consequently ought not to espouse her. Besides, there is another reason. It is true she liberated thee, but it was for the gratification of her passions, and in order to oblige thee to marry her. And, since an unworthy passion was the source of thy liberty, I think that she ought not to be thy wife.” When the lady heard such reasons assigned, she answered, “To your first objection, that I deceived my own parent, I reply that it is not true. He deceives who takes away or diminishes a certain good. But my father is so rich that he needs not any addition. When, therefore, I had maturely weighed this matter, I procured the young man’s freedom. And if my father had received a ransom for him, he had been but little richer; while you would have been utterly impoverished. Now, in acting thus, I have served you, who refused the ransom, and have done no injury to my parent. As for your last objection, that an unworthy passion urged me to do this, I assert that it is false. Feelings of such a nature arise either from great personal beauty, or from wealth, or honours; or finally, from a robust appearance. None of which qualities your son possessed. For imprisonment had destroyed his beauty; and he had not sufficient wealth even to effect his liberation; while much anxiety had worn away his strength, and left him emaciated and sickly. Therefore, compassion rather persuaded me to free him.” When the father had heard this, he could object nothing more. So his son married the lady with very great pomp, and closed his life in peace.*

  APPLICATION.

  My beloved, the son captured by pirates is the whole human race, led by the sin of our first parent into the prison of the devil—that is, into his power. The father who would not redeem him is the world, which aids not man’s escape from the evil one, but rather loves to detain him in thraldom. The daughter who visited him in prison is the Divinity of Christ united to the soul; who sympathized with the human species—and who, after His passion, descended into hell and freed us from the chains of the devil. But the celestial Father had no occasion for wealth, because He is infinitely rich and good. Therefore Christ, moved with compassion, came down from heaven to visit us, and took upon Himself our form, and required no more than to be united in the closest bonds with man. So Hosea ii.: “I will marry her to me in faithfulness.” But our father, the world, whom many obey, ever murmurs and objects to this. “If thou unitest thyself to God, thou shalt lose my inheritance”—that is, the inheritance of this world; because it is “impossible to serve God and mammon.” Matt. vi.: “He who shall leave father, or mother, or wife, or country for my sake, he shall receive an hundredfold, and possess everlasting life.” Which may Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, vouchsafe to bestow upon us; who with the Father, and the Holy Ghost, liveth and reigneth for ever and ever. Amen.

  * The deliverance of the youth by the lady resembles the 236th Night of the Arabian Tales.—The Gest is mentioned by Warton as the second tale in his analysis; and two or three other variations occur. What edition he followed I know not. I have examined five. T
he sentiment conveyed by this tale (p. 9), that she who has deceived her father will deceive her husband, is thus expressed by Shakspeare:—

  “Look to her, Moor; have a quick eye to see;

  She has deceived her father, and may thee.”

  Othello, Act i. Sc. 3.

  In an 18mo edition of the GESTA ROMANORUM, published at Leyden, 1555, there is prefixed to the fourth tale, by way of argument, the following remarkable passage: “Justitia nempe et misericordia Deorum maximè est: ad quos nonpossumus expeditius et proprius accedere, quàm his ducibus” This is literally what Shakspeare makes Portia observe in the “Merchant of Venice”:—

  “But Mercy is above this sceptered sway,

  * * * * * * *

  It is an attribute of God Himself;

  And earthly power doth then show likest God’s,

  When mercy seasons justice.”—Act iv. Sc. 1.

  TALE VI.

  OF FOLLOWING REASON.

  A CERTAIN emperor, no less tyrannical than powerful, espoused a very beautiful girl, the daughter of a king. After the ceremony was concluded, each solemnly vowed that the death of the one should be followed by the voluntary destruction of the other. It happened once that the emperor went into a far country, and continued, there a long time. Being desirous to prove the fidelity of his wife, he directed a messenger to inform her that he was dead. When this intelligence was communicated, she remembered the oath which had been administered, and precipitated herself from a lofty mountain, with an intention to die. But she received little injury, and in a short space was restored to health. Then once again she desired to throw herself from the mountain, and so die. Her father understanding this, forbade obedience to the mandate and oath prescribed by her husband. Still, as she seemed anxious to comply with them, the father said, “Since you refuse assent to my request, depart at once from my presence.” But she replied, “I will not do that; and I will prove, by good reasons, my right to remain. When an oath is sworn, ought it not to be faithfully maintained ? I have sworn to my husband that I would destroy myself, if I survived him: therefore, it is no crime to fulfil my vow, and I ought not to be driven from your palace. Moreover, no one should be punished for that which is commendable. Now, since man and woman are one flesh, according to the laws of God, it is commendable for a wife to perish with her husband. On which account, there was a law in India, that a wife after the decease of her lord should bum herself, as evidence of her grief and love; or else be deposited alive in his sepulchre. And therefore I think that I do no wrong to kill myself for the love of my husband.” The father answered, “When you said that you were bound by an oath to act thus, you should have remembered that such an obligation is not binding, because its end is deprivation of life. An oath should always be consistent with reason; and therefore yours being unreasonable is of no force. As for the other argument, that it is praiseworthy in a wife to die with her husband, it avails you not. For although they are one in the body, united by carnal affections, yet they are two persons in soul, and are really and substantially different. Therefore, neither does this afford any resource.” When the lady heard these words, she could argue no further, but complied with the request of her parent. She refrained from soliciting destruction; but though apprized of her husband’s existence soon after, she would not return to him.

  APPLICATION.

  My beloved, the emperor is the devil. The girl is the soul created in the likeness of God, but by sin espoused to the evil one. Wherefore, in the commission of sin, there is a covenant established, namely, that if a man die in sin and in remote parts—that is, in hell—it is previously agreed upon by his own pride, that the sinning soul should cast itself from a high mountain—that is, from heaven down to hell: and thus it was, before the advent of our Saviour. But He, by His passion, reinstated it in health. Notwithstanding, the soul still desires to precipitate itself, as often as it acts against the divine command. But God, who is our Father, would not willingly that we should fall, but had rather, by contrition and confession, receive us wholly to Himself, and bind us so firmly to Him, that with Him we might enjoy everlasting life.

  TALE VII.

  OF THE ENVY OF BAD MEN TOWARDS THE GOOD.

  WHEN Diocletian was emperor, there was a certain noble soldier who had two sons, whom he entirely and truly loved. The younger of them married a harlot, without the knowledge of his father, and the infamy of this proceeding overwhelmed him with the greatest grief. He sternly banished him from his presence, and left him to the rebukes of conscience, and to the agonies of approaching want. A beautiful child was born to him, and he was reduced to great distress. In this situation he despatched a messenger to his parent, to supplicate relief; and when his wretchedness was made known, it moved him to compassion, and he forgave him all. After their reconciliation, the son entrusted to his father’s protection the child that the harlot bore him, and it was taken to his house and educated as his own. But when the elder brother heard what had happened, he was exceedingly wroth, and said to his father, “Thou art mad, and I will prove it by satisfactory reasons. He is mad who fosters and adopts a son by whom he has been grievously wronged. Now, my brother, whose son that child is, did you great injury when he espoused a harlot contrary to your will. Therefore, I am persuaded that you are mad—for you both protect the child, and are at peace with him.” Here the father answered, “Son, I am reconciled to thy brother, in consequence of his own contrition, and the urgent entreaties of his friends. Therefore, it becomes me to love my recovered son more than you; because you have often offended me, but never sought a reconciliation: and since you have not humbly acknowledged your transgressions, you are more ungrateful than your brother has been, whom you would have me banish from my house. You ought rather to rejoice that he is reconciled to me. But because you have exhibited so much ingratitude, you shall not receive the inheritance designed for you. It shall be given to your brother.” And so it was done.*

  APPLICATION.

  My beloved, by this father we are to understand our heavenly Father; by the two sons, the angelic and human nature. The human nature was united with a harlot—that is, with iniquity, when it ate the fatal apple, contrary to the divine injunction. Wherefore it was banished by the heavenly Father. The son of the harlot is mankind, which had perished in its perverseness but for the paternal regard. Arid it is described as sickly, because being the fruit of sin, it is placed in a valley of tears. As in Gen. iii.; “By the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread.” But he, by the passion of Christ, is reconciled to God the Father, and fully established by the good offices and prayers of holy men, who daily pour forth their petitions to Heaven, for all the world. So the Psalmist : “They ask that which they desire.” But the other brother, namely, the devil (who is the father of ingratitude), continually attacks us, and murmurs at our reconciliation; alleging that we ought not to obtain our heavenly inheritance because of original sin. But doubtless, if we live a holy and pure life in this world, his allegations will nothing avail; nay, we shall obtain his portion—that is, the place which he has lost in heaven.

  * “This story, but with a difference of circumstance, ends like the beautiful apologue of the Prodigal Son.”—WARTON.

  TALE VIII.

  OF FALSE ALLEGATIONS.

  WHEN the Emperor Leo reigned, his chief pleasure consisted in seeing beautiful women. Wherefore he caused three images to be made, to which he dedicated a stately-temple, and commanded all his subjects to worship them. The first image stretched out its hand over the people, and upon one of its fingers was placed a golden ring bearing the following device: “My finger is generous; behold this ring.” The second image had a golden beard, and on its brow was written, “I have a beard: if any one be beardless, let him come to me, and I will give him one” The third image had a golden cloak and purple tunic, and on its breast appeared these words, in large golden characters, “I fear no one” These three images were fabricated of stone. Now, when they had been erected according to the command of th
e emperor, he ordained that whosoever conveyed away either the ring, or golden beard, or cloak, should be doomed to the most disgraceful death. It so chanced that a certain fellow entering the temple, perceived the ring upon the finger of the first image, which he immediately drew off. He then went to the second, and took away the golden beard. Last of all, he came to the third image, and when he had removed the cloak he departed from the temple. The people, seeing their images despoiled, presently communicated the robbery to the emperor. The transgressor was summoned before him, and charged with pilfering from the images, contrary to the edict. But he replied, “My Lord, suffer me to speak. When I entered the temple, the first image extended towards me its finger with the golden ring—as if it had said, ‘Here, take the ring.’ Yet, not merely because the finger was held forth to me, would I have received it; but, by and by, I read the superscription, which said, ‘My finger is generous—take the ring.’ At once I understood that it was the statue’s pleasure to bestow it upon me, and therefore I took it. Afterwards, I approached the second image with the golden beard; and I communed with my own heart, and said, ‘The author of this statue never had such a beard, for I have seen him repeatedly; and the creature ought, beyond question, to be inferior to the Creator. Therefore, it is fitting and necessary to take away the beard.’ But although he offered not the smallest opposition, yet I was unwilling to carry it off, until I distinctly perceived, ‘I have a beard: if any one be beardless, let him come to me, and I will give him one.’ I am beardless, as your Majesty may see, and therefore, for two especial reasons, took away the beard. The first was, that he should look more like his author, and not grow too proud of his golden beard. Secondly, that by these means I might protect my own bald pate. Again, I came to the third image, which bore a golden cloak. I took away the cloak, because, being of metal, in the winter time it is extremely cold; and the image itself is made of stone. Now, stone is naturally cold; and if it had retained the golden cloak it would have been adding cold to cold, which were a bad thing for the image. Also, if it had possessed this cloak in summer, it would have proved too heavy and warm for the season. However, I should not have borne it away even for these causes, if there had not been written upon the breast, ‘I fear nobody.’ For I discovered in that vaunt such intolerable arrogance, that I took away the cloak, merely to humble it.” “Fair sir,” replied the emperor, “does not the law say expressly that the images shall not be robbed, nor the ornaments upon them molested on any pretence? You have impudently taken away that which did not belong to you, and therefore I determine that you be instantly suspended on a gallows.” And so it was done. (1)