"So sung a little clod of clay, Trodden with the cattle's feet; But a pebble of the brook Warbled out these metres meet : "Love seeketh only self to please, To bind another to its delight, Joys in another's loss of ease, And builds a hell in heaven's despite."" His love of animals seems to have been very great, and it is in the poems on his favourite animals that we are brought to acknowledge his tremendous power of graphic description. Take, for instance, his verses on "The Tiger." "Tiger, tiger, burning bright In the forests of the night, Could frame thy fearful symmetry? "In what distant deeps or skies "And what shoulder, and what art Could twist the sinews of thy heart? "What the hammer? what the chain? In what furnace was thy brain? "When the stars threw down their spears, And water'd heaven with their tears, Did He smile His work to see? Did He Who made the lamb make thee?" Charles Lamb called this a "glorious" poem, and another writer has said that these lines make us feel what the tiger is better than a mere detailed description could. Perhaps the most striking line of all is the one last quoted here;-did the GOD who made the fierce, one might almost say, satanic tiger, also make the gentle angelic lamb? It is the climax of all the questions that man would have answered to-day, and which if answered might perhaps open his eyes so that he might see and know something of Him with Whom he will be face to face to-morrow. It is an allegorical question in which is involved the whole existence of and relation between good and evil. But to return to our poet. He is still wandering over the fields, and he stays and leans over a gate, and on the other side a little lamb is cropping the short sweet grass. The lamb looks at him with strange deep eyes, a look of supplicating inquiry; and when he calls it gently, it gradually goes nearer to him, drawn irresistibly by the kind soft voice and the wonderful power of attraction quite imperceptible to human beings, but which most animals recognise at once-the power of the true human heart. He holds its little head in the broad palm of his hand, and he looks hard into its eyes as the fingers of his other hand curl themselves in the soft shaggy coat, and the little lamb, though it understands not the meaning of the sounds, yet knows they are kindly meant-not the husky voice of the shepherd with his heavy crook, not the sharp bark of the dog with its rough friskings, but the soothing sounds of the great kind man : "Little lamb, who made thee? Little lamb, who made thee? Dost thou know who made thee? "Little lamb, I'll tell thee, Little lamb, I'll tell thee, Little lamb, God bless thee, EDWARD CROASDA ILE. 367 THE LIBRARY OF ALEXANDRIA. THERE is a fascination connected with the history of Alexandria which draws the attention of students in an irresistible manner. Founded by the great Greek Conqueror in B.C. 332, this city has experienced the most extraordinary vicissitudes in the course of its long career; has risen to the first rank among capitals; been sacked, plundered, and burnt; and has been the seat of learning, the storehouse of precious literature, and the centre of commerce between the nations of the East and West. It was, in the zenith of its power, the empire city of the world, reckoning a population of 800,000; attracting the greatest trade in corn and other produce, and attaining, through its favourable situation, an unrivalled degree of prosperity. Built on the Delta, with a fine harbour formed by the Island of Pharos and the headland of Lochias, the Alexandrian port constituted the great mart for the Italian Peninsula, the merchants of Constantinople, the Levant, the cities of North Africa and of Spain. As trade developed, wealth increased, and hence the supremacy which Alexandria enjoyed over less favoured cities. Under the government of the Ptolemies the community became one of the most enlightened of the age. Great scholars and writers were attracted to the city, a vast library was accumulated, and a school of Greek poets was founded, showing in a remarkable manner the effect of Egyptian influences on the classic Greek language. We have all of us read of the famous library of Alexandria-that hoard of written history-the loss of which a later civilization has never ceased to deplore. Although uncertainty as to the precise time and mode of destruction exists, the great fact remains; during the ravages of a ruthless soldiery in the sacking of the city, or by the commands of unscrupulous leaders, the wanton ruin and dispersion of a priceless accumulation of knowledge was directly or indirectly brought about. Some few valuable works were saved through being previously transferred to other libraries, but the greater part were irretrievably lost, and a blank occurred in history which has never been filled up. From Strabo we learn that the famous library was situated in that part of Alexandria known as the Bruchion. It was near the shore, and was associated with the palaces and other grand buildings. It was in the reign of Lagos that numbers of philosophers were attracted to the fair city, and it was he who founded the great library. In the reign of his successor Philadelphos, the collection of volumes numbered at least 400,000; a second library, the Serapeum, being then built in another part of Alexandria; the latter building was probably rendered necessary by the vast numbers of volumes added to the original collection at the Bruchion. In the same way our own British Museum has lately been found too small to contain the ever increasing collections, the natural history departments having been moved to Kensington in order to leave the original space for books and antiquities only. It was these two collections in the Bruchion quarter and at the Serapeum which constituted the Alexandrian library of hundreds of thousands of volumes so wantonly destroyed. As to its actual destruction, authorities have disagreed. The fact is tolerably certain, that Cæsar, in the Egyptian wars, set fire to the fleet in the port of Alexandria, which spread to the buildings of the Bruchion; the older library was then doubtless destroyed, unless some portion being rescued was conveyed to the Serapeum library, in the temple of Serapis. This is the first record we have of the loss of Alexandrian manuscripts by fire, probably the greater part of the 400,000 volumes collected by the early Ptolemies being consumed.1 After this disaster Euergetes and later Ptolemies added largely to the remaining Serapeum library. It is also recorded that Cleopatra presented some 200,000 manuscripts, which had been given to her by Mark Anthony. It would be about this later collection that Suetonius writes of Domitian sending copyists to make extracts from certain volumes, proving the existence of a library at Alexandria long after Cæsar's time; the Serapeum possessed some 300,000 volumes over and above those destroyed in the Bruchion, and this temple was destroyed in A.D. 391 in the time of Theodosius. Again it is certain that a great number of manuscripts were lost, although a portion of the library was once more rescued. It is twenty-five years later that presses were seen in the temples full of books.3 From this date, however, all exact record of the once famous library disappears, and it is probable that the remains of the collections of manuscripts were dispersed through Egypt, the various monasteries of the East obtaining possession of some, while Christian emperors of the East and the caliphs also secured portions. Indeed it is absolutely stated that the 1 Seneca, de Tranquillitate Animi, chap. ix. Caliph Mahmoud sent agents to purchase books in Syria and Egypt, who returned laden with valuable treasure. In this manner the discovery of ancient manuscripts in Syrian convents may be accounted for, such as Tischendorf's Sinaitic Codex, and other valuable remains, preserved in a marvellous way through many hundred years; saved from vandalism, pillage, and revolution; handed on from country to country, monastery to monastery, till the mutilated remains are by chance discovered by the research of diligent scholars in the most outof-the-way corners, being the fragments that remain of thousands of similar records. The tradition in the Arabian manuscripts of Abulfarage and Abdollatif of the wilful burning of the Alexandrian library in 638-640, by Amrou, lieutenant of the Caliph Omar, is probably unreliable; the former was unearthed by an Oxford scholar, Edward Pococke, in 1660, the latter by M. Paulus, from the library of Boldei. Both records were critically examined by an impartial writer in "Fraser," who, following Gibbon and other great historians, rejected the tradition mainly on account of the contradictions contained in both the Arabian manuscripts and their many discrepancies, when compared with other authentic histories of similar date. The language of the first of these manuscripts is truly oriental in tone. It records how John of Alexandria visited the conqueror Amrou in order to obtain possession of the rare books seized by him. The incidents are thus described: John one day said to him, 'you have visited all the stores of Alexandria, and you have put your seal on all the different things you found there. I say nothing about those treasures which have value for you; but, in good sooth, you might leave us those of which you can make no use.' 'What, then, is it you want ?' interrupted Amrou. The books of philosophy that are to be found in the royal treasury,' answered John. 'I can dispose of nothing,' Amrou then said, 'without the permission of the lord of all believers, Omar Ebno 'l Chattab.' The request was then made, and the following answer received, ‘As to the books you mention, either they agree with the word of GOD'S holy book, and then GOD's book is all-sufficient without them; or they disagree with GOD's book, in which case they ought to be destroyed.' In consequence of this Amrou ordered them to be distributed amongst the different baths of the city, to serve as fuel. In this manner they were consumed in half a year.” 1 Leo Africanus. VOL. III. BB 2 "Fraser," 1844. |