Part 3 (1/2)

'But let us bend our minds to the details of this matter. Let us ask first, _who_ is this Ul-Jabal? I have said that he is a Persian, and of this there is abundant evidence in the narrative other than his mere name. Fragmentary as the doc.u.ment is, and not intended by the writer to afford the information, there is yet evidence of the religion of this man, of the particular sect of that religion to which he belonged, of his peculiar shade of colour, of the object of his stay at the manor-house of Saul, of the special tribe amongst whom he formerly lived. ”What,” he asks, when his greedy eyes first light on the long-desired gem, ”what is the meaning of the inscription 'Has'”--the meaning which _he_ so well knew. ”One of the lost secrets of the world,” replies the baronet. But I can hardly understand a learned Orientalist speaking in that way about what appears to me a very patent circ.u.mstance: it is clear that he never earnestly applied himself to the solution of the riddle, or else--what is more likely, in spite of his rather high-flown estimate of his own ”Reason”--that his mind, and the mind of his ancestors, never was able to go farther back in time than the Edmundsbury Monks. But _they_ did not make the stone, nor did they dig it from the depths of the earth in Suffolk--they got it from some one, and it is not difficult to say with certainty from whom. The stone, then, might have been engraved by that someone, or by the someone from whom _he_ received it, and so on back into the dimnesses of time. And consider the character of the engraving--it consists of _a mythological animal_, and some words, of which the letters ”Has” only are distinguishable. But the animal, at least, is pure Persian. The Persians, you know, were not only quite worthy compet.i.tors with the Hebrews, the Egyptians, and later on the Greeks, for excellence in the glyptic art, but this fact is remarkable, that in much the same way that the figure of the _scarabaeus_ on an intaglio or cameo is a pretty infallible indication of an Egyptian hand, so is that of a priest or a grotesque animal a sure indication of a Persian. We may say, then, from that evidence alone--though there is more--that this gem was certainly Persian. And having reached that point, the mystery of ”Has” vanishes: for we at once jump at the conclusion that that too is Persian. But Persian, you say, written in English characters? Yes, and it was precisely this fact that made its meaning one of what the baronet childishly calls ”the lost secrets of the world”: for every successive inquirer, believing it part of an English phrase, was thus hopelessly led astray in his investigation. ”Has” is, in fact, part of the word ”Hasn-us-Sabah,” and the mere circ.u.mstance that some of it has been obliterated, while the figure of the mystic animal remains intact, shows that it was executed by one of a nation less skilled in the art of graving in precious stones than the Persians,--by a rude, mediaeval Englishman, in short,--the modern revival of the art owing its origin, of course, to the Medici of a later age. And of this Englishman--who either graved the stone himself, or got some one else to do it for him--do we know nothing? We know, at least, that he was certainly a fighter, probably a Norman baron, that on his arm he bore the cross of red, that he trod the sacred soil of Palestine. Perhaps, to prove this, I need hardly remind you who Hasn-us-Sabah was. It is enough if I say that he was greatly mixed up in the affairs of the Crusaders, lending his irresistible arms now to this side, now to that. He was the chief of the heterodox Mohammedan sect of the a.s.sa.s.sins (this word, I believe, is actually derived from his name); imagined himself to be an incarnation of the Deity, and from his inaccessible rock-fortress of Alamut in the Elburz exercised a sinister influence on the intricate politics of the day. The Red Cross Knights called him Shaikh-ul-Jabal --the Old Man of the Mountains, that very nickname connecting him infallibly with the Ul-Jabal of our own times. Now three well-known facts occur to me in connection with this stone of the House of Saul: the first, that Saladin met in battle, and defeated, _and plundered_, in a certain place, on a certain day, this Hasn-us-Sabah, or one of his successors bearing the same name; the second, that about this time there was a cordial _rapprochement_ between Saladin and Richard the Lion, and between the Infidels and the Christians generally, during which a free interchange of gems, then regarded as of deep mystic importance, took place--remember ”The Talisman,” and the ”Lee Penny”; the third, that soon after the fighters of Richard, and then himself, returned to England, the Loculus or coffin of St. Edmund (as we are informed by the _Jocelini Chronica_) was _opened by the Abbot_ at midnight, and the body of the martyr exposed. On such occasions it was customary to place gems and relics in the coffin, when it was again closed up. Now, the chalice with the stone was taken from this loculus; and is it possible not to believe that some knight, to whom it had been presented by one of Saladin's men, had in turn presented it to the monastery, first scratching uncouthly on its surface the name of Hasn to mark its semi-sacred origin, or perhaps bidding the monks to do so? But the a.s.sa.s.sins, now called, I think, ”al Hasani” or ”Ismaili”--”that accursed _Ishmaelite_,” the baronet exclaims in one place--still live, are still a flouris.h.i.+ng sect impelled by fervid religious fanaticisms. And where think you is their chief place of settlement? Where, but on the heights of that same ”Lebanon” on which Sir Jocelin ”picked up” his too doubtful scribe and literary helper?

'It now becomes evident that Ul-Jabal was one of the sect of the a.s.sa.s.sins, and that the object of his sojourn at the manor-house, of his financial help to the baronet, of his whole journey perhaps to England, was the recovery of the sacred gem which once glittered on the breast of the founder of his sect. In dread of spoiling all by over-rashness, he waits, perhaps for years, till he makes sure that the stone is the right one by seeing it with his own eyes, and learns the secret of the spring by which the chalice is opened. He then proceeds to steal it. So far all is clear enough. Now, this too is conceivable, that, intending to commit the theft, he had beforehand provided himself with another stone similar in size and shape--these being well known to him--to the other, in order to subst.i.tute it for the real stone, and so, for a time at least, escape detection. It is presumable that the chalice was not often _opened_ by the baronet, and this would therefore have been a perfectly rational device on the part of Ul-Jabal. But a.s.suming this to be his mode of thinking, how ludicrously absurd appears all the trouble he took to _engrave_ the false stone in an exactly similar manner to the other. _That_ could not help him in producing the deception, for that he did not contemplate the stone being _seen_, but only _heard_ in the cup, is proved by the fact that he selected a stone of a different _colour_. This colour, as I shall afterwards show you, was that of a pale, brown-spotted stone. But we are met with something more extraordinary still when we come to the last stone, the white one--I shall prove that it was white--which Ul-Jabal placed in the cup. Is it possible that he had provided _two_ subst.i.tutes, and that he had engraved these _two_, without object, in the same minutely careful manner? Your mind refuses to conceive it; and _having_ done this, declines, in addition, to believe that he had prepared even one subst.i.tute; and I am fully in accord with you in this conclusion.

'We may say then that Ul-Jabal had not _prepared_ any subst.i.tute; and it may be added that it was a thing altogether beyond the limits of the probable that he could _by chance_ have possessed two old gems exactly similar in every detail down to the very half-obliterated letters of the word ”Hasn-us-Sabah.” I have now shown, you perceive, that he did not make them purposely, and that he did not possess them accidentally.

Nor were they the baronet's, for we have his declaration that he had never seen them before. Whence then did the Persian obtain them? That point will immediately emerge into clearness, when we have sounded his motive for replacing the one false stone by the other, and, above all, for taking away the valueless stone, and then replacing it. And in order to lead you up to the comprehension of this motive, I begin by making the bold a.s.sertion that Ul-Jabal had not in his possession the real St. Edmundsbury stone at all.

'You are surprised; for you argue that if we are to take the baronet's evidence at all, we must take it in this particular also, and he positively a.s.serts that he saw the Persian take the stone. It is true that there are indubitable signs of insanity in the doc.u.ment, but it is the insanity of a diseased mind manifesting itself by fantastic exaggeration of sentiment, rather than of a mind confiding to itself its own delusions as to matters of fact. There is therefore nothing so certain as that Ul-Jabal did steal the gem; but these two things are equally evident: that by some means or other it very soon pa.s.sed out of his possession, and that when it had so pa.s.sed, he, for his part, believed it to be in the possession of the baronet. ”Now,” he cries in triumph, one day as he catches Sir Jocelin in his room--”_now_ you have delivered all into my hands.” ”All” what, Sir Jocelin wonders. ”All,”

of course, meant the stone. He believes that the baronet has done precisely what the baronet afterwards believes that _he_ has done--hidden away the stone in the most secret of all places, in his own apartment, to wit. The Persian, sure now at last of victory, accordingly hastens into his chamber, and ”locks the door,” in order, by an easy search, to secure his prize. When, moreover, the baronet is examining the house at night with his lens, he believes that Ul-Jabal is spying his movements; when he extends his operations to the park, the other finds pretexts to be near him. Ul-Jabal dogs his footsteps like a shadow. But supposing he had really had the jewel, and had deposited it in a place of perfect safety--such as, with or without lenses, the extensive grounds of the manor-house would certainly have afforded--his more reasonable _role_ would have been that of unconscious _nonchalance_, rather than of agonised interest. But, in fact, he supposed the owner of the stone to be himself seeking a secure hiding-place for it, and is resolved at all costs on knowing the secret. And again in the vaults beneath the house Sir Jocelin reports that Ul-Jabal ”holds the lantern near the ground, with his head bent down”: can anything be better descriptive of the att.i.tude of _search_?

Yet each is so sure that the other possesses the gem, that neither is able to suspect that both are seekers.

'But, after all, there is far better evidence of the non-possession of the stone by the Persian than all this--and that is the murder of the baronet, for I can almost promise you that our messenger will return in a few minutes. Now, it seems to me that Ul-Jabal was not really murderous, averse rather to murder; thus the baronet is often in his power, swoons in his arms, lies under the influence of narcotics in semi-sleep while the Persian is in his room, and yet no injury is done him. Still, when the clear necessity to murder--the clear means of gaining the stone--presents itself to Ul-Jabal, he does not hesitate a moment--indeed, he has already made elaborate preparations for that very necessity. And when was it that this necessity presented itself?

It was when the baronet put the false stone in the pocket of a loose gown for the purpose of confronting the Persian with it. But what kind of pocket? I think you will agree with me, that male garments, admitting of the designation ”gown,” have usually only outer pockets--large, square pockets, simply sewed on to the outside of the robe. But a stone of that size _must_ have made such a pocket bulge outwards. Ul-Jabal must have noticed it. Never before has he been perfectly sure that the baronet carried the long-desired gem about on his body; but now at last he knows beyond all doubt. To obtain it, there are several courses open to him: he may rush there and then on the weak old man and tear the stone from him; he may ply him with narcotics, and extract it from the pocket during sleep. But in these there is a small chance of failure; there is a certainty of near or ultimate detection, pursuit--and this is a land of Law, swift and fairly sure. No, the old man must die: only thus--thus surely, and thus secretly--can the outraged dignity of Hasn-us-Sabah be appeased. On the very next day he leaves the house--no more shall the mistrustful baronet, who is ”hiding something from him,” see his face. He carries with him a small parcel. Let me tell you what was in that parcel: it contained the baronet's fur cap, one of his ”brown gowns,” and a snow-white beard and wig. Of the cap we can be sure; for from the fact that, on leaving his room at midnight to follow the Persian through the _house_, he put it on his head, I gather that he wore it habitually during all his waking hours; yet after Ul-Jabal has left him he wanders _far and wide_ ”with uncovered head.” Can you not picture the distracted old man seeking ever and anon with absent mind for his long-accustomed head-gear, and seeking in vain? Of the gown, too, we may be equally certain: for it was the procuring of this that led Ul-Jabal to the baronet's trunk; we now know that he did not go there to _hide_ the stone, for he had it not to hide; nor to _seek_ it, for he would be unable to believe the baronet childish enough to deposit it in so obvious a place. As for the wig and beard, they had been previously seen in his room. But before he leaves the house Ul-Jabal has one more work to do: once more the two eat and drink together as in ”the old days of love”; once more the baronet is drunken with a deep sleep, and when he wakes, his skin is ”brown as the leaves of autumn.”

That is the evidence of which I spake in the beginning as giving us a hint of the exact shade of the Oriental's colour--it was the yellowish-brown of a sered leaf. And now that the face of the baronet has been smeared with this indelible pigment, all is ready for the tragedy, and Ul-Jabal departs. He will return, but not immediately, for he will at least give the eyes of his victim time to grow accustomed to the change of colour in his face; nor will he tarry long, for there is no telling whether, or whither, the stone may not disappear from that outer pocket. I therefore surmise that the tragedy took place a day or two ago. I remembered the feebleness of the old man, his highly neurotic condition; I thought of those ”fibrillary twitchings,”

indicating the onset of a well-known nervous disorder sure to end in sudden death; I recalled his belief that on account of the loss of the stone, in which he felt his life bound up, the chariot of death was urgent on his footsteps; I bore in mind his memory of his grandfather dying in agony just seventy years ago after seeing his own wraith by the churchyard-wall; I knew that such a man could not be struck by the sudden, the terrific shock of seeing _himself_ sitting in the chair before the mirror (the chair, you remember, had been _placed_ there by Ul-Jabal) without dropping down stone dead on the spot. I was thus able to predict the manner and place of the baronet's death--if he _be_ dead. Beside him, I said, would probably be found a white stone. For Ul-Jabal, his ghastly impersonation ended, would hurry to the pocket, s.n.a.t.c.h out the stone, and finding it not the stone he sought, would in all likelihood dash it down, fly away from the corpse as if from plague, and, I hope, straightway go and--hang himself.'

It was at this point that the black mask of Ham framed itself between the python-skin tapestries of the doorway. I tore from him the paper, now two days old, which he held in his hand, and under the heading, 'Sudden death of a Baronet,' read a nearly exact account of the facts which Zaleski had been detailing to me.

'I can see by your face that I was not altogether at fault,' he said, with one of his musical laughs; 'but there still remains for us to discover whence Ul-Jabal obtained his two subst.i.tutes, his motive for exchanging one for the other, and for stealing the valueless gem; but, above all, we must find where the real stone was all the time that these two men so sedulously sought it, and where it now is. Now, let us turn our attention to this stone, and ask, first, what light does the inscription on the cup throw on its nature? The inscription a.s.sures us that if ”this stone be stolen,” or if it ”chaunges dre,” the House of Saul and its head ”anoon” (i.e. anon, at once) shall die. ”Dre,” I may remind you, is an old English word, used, I think, by Burns, identical with the Saxon ”_dreogan_,” meaning to ”suffer.” So that the writer at least contemplated that the stone might ”suffer changes.” But what kind of changes--external or internal? External change--change of environment--is already provided for when he says, ”shulde this Ston stalen bee”; ”chaunges,” therefore, in _his_ mind, meant internal changes. But is such a thing possible for any precious stone, and for this one in particular? As to that, we might answer when we know the name of this one. It nowhere appears in the ma.n.u.script, and yet it is immediately discoverable. For it was a ”sky-blue” stone; a sky-blue, sacred stone; a sky-blue, sacred, Persian stone. That at once gives us its name--it was a _turquoise_. But can the turquoise, to the certain knowledge of a mediaeval writer, ”chaunges dre”? Let us turn for light to old Anselm de Boot: that is he in pig-skin on the shelf behind the bronze Hera.'

I handed the volume to Zaleski. He pointed to a pa.s.sage which read as follows:

'a.s.suredly the turquoise doth possess a soul more intelligent than that of man. But we cannot be wholly sure of the presence of Angels in precious stones. I do rather opine that the evil spirit doth take up his abode therein, transforming himself into an angel of light, to the end that we put our trust not in G.o.d, but in the precious stone; and thus, perhaps, doth he deceive our spirits by the turquoise: for the turquoise is of two sorts: those which keep their colour, and those which lose it.'[1]

[Footnote 1: 'a.s.surement la turquoise a une ame plus intelligente que l'ame de l'homme. Mais nous ne pouvons rien establir de certain touchant la presence des Anges dans les pierres precieuses. Mon jugement seroit pl.u.s.tot que le mauvais esprit, qui se transforme en Ange de lumiere se loge dans les pierres precieuses, a fin que l'on ne recoure pas a Dieu, mais que l'on repose sa creance dans la pierre precieuse; ainsi, peut-etre, il decoit nos esprits par la turquoise: car la turquoise est de deux sortes, les unes qui conservent leur couleur et les autres qui la perdent.' _Anselm de Boot_, Book II.]

'You thus see,' resumed Zaleski, 'that the turquoise was believed to have the property of changing its colour--a change which was universally supposed to indicate the fading away and death of its owner. The good De Boot, alas, believed this to be a property of too many other stones beside, like the Hebrews in respect of their urim and thummim; but in the case of the turquoise, at least, it is a well-authenticated natural phenomenon, and I have myself seen such a specimen. In some cases the change is a gradual process; in others it may occur suddenly within an hour, especially when the gem, long kept in the dark, is exposed to brilliant suns.h.i.+ne. I should say, however, that in this metamorphosis there is always an intermediate stage: the stone first changes from blue to a pale colour spotted with brown, and, lastly, to a pure white. Thus, Ul-Jabal having stolen the stone, finds that it is of the wrong colour, and soon after replaces it; he supposes that in the darkness he has selected the wrong chalice, and so takes the valueless stone from the other. This, too, he replaces, and, infinitely puzzled, makes yet another hopeless trial of the Edmundsbury chalice, and, again baffled, again replaces it, concluding now that the baronet has suspected his designs, and subst.i.tuted a false stone for the real one. But after this last replacement, the stone a.s.sumes its final hue of white, and thus the baronet is led to think that two stones have been subst.i.tuted by Ul-Jabal for his own invaluable gem.

All this while the gem was lying serenely in its place in the chalice.

And thus it came to pa.s.s that in the Manor-house of Saul there arose a somewhat considerable Ado about Nothing.'

For a moment Zaleski paused; then, turning round and laying his hand on the brown forehead of the mummy by his side, he said:

'My friend here could tell you, and he would, a fine tale of the immensely important part which jewels in all ages have played in human history, human religions, inst.i.tutions, ideas. He flourished some five centuries before the Messiah, was a Memphian priest of Amsu, and, as the hieroglyphics on his coffin a.s.sure me, a prime favourite with one Queen Amyntas. Beneath these mouldering swaddlings of the grave a great ruby still cherishes its blood-guilty secret on the forefinger of his right hand. Most curious is it to reflect how in _all_ lands, and at _all_ times, precious minerals have been endowed by men with mystic virtues. The Persians, for instance, believed that spinelle and the garnet were harbingers of joy. Have you read the ancient Bishop of Rennes on the subject? Really, I almost think there must be some truth in all this. The instinct of universal man is rarely far at fault.

Already you have a semi-comic ”gold-cure” for alcoholism, and you have heard of the geophagism of certain African tribes. What if the scientist of the future be destined to discover that the diamond, and it alone, is a specific for cholera, that powdered rubellite cures fever, and the chryso-beryl gout? It would be in exact conformity with what I have hitherto observed of a general trend towards a certain inborn perverseness and whimsicality in Nature.'

_Note_.--As some proof of the fineness of intuition evidenced by Zaleski, as distinct from his more conspicuous powers of reasoning, I may here state that some years after the occurrence of the tragedy I have recorded above, the skeleton of a man was discovered in the vaults of the Manor-house of Saul. I have not the least doubt that it was the skeleton of Ul-Jabal. The teeth were very prominent. A rotten rope was found loosely knotted round the vertebrae of his neck.

THE S.S.

'Wohlgeborne, gesunde Kinder bringen viel mit....

'Wenn die Natur verabscheut, so spricht sie es laut aus: das Geschopf, das falsch lebt, wird fruh zerstort. Unfruchtbarkeit, k.u.mmerliches Dasein, fruhzeitiges Zerfallen, das sind ihre Fluche, die Kennzeichen ihrer Strenge.' GOETHE. [Footnote: 'Well-made, healthy children bring much into the world along with them....

'When Nature abhors, she speaks it aloud: the creature that lives with a false life is soon destroyed. Unfruitfulness, painful existence, early destruction, these are her curses, the tokens of her displeasure.']

[Greek: Argos de andron echaerothae outo, oste oi douloi auton eschon panta ta praegmata, archontes te kai diepontes, es ho epaebaesan hoi ton apolomenon paides.] HERODOTUS. [Footnote: 'And Argos was so depleted of Men (i.e. _after the battle with Cleomenes_) that the slaves usurped everything--ruling and disposing--until such time as the sons of the slain were grown up.']

To say that there are epidemics of suicide is to give expression to what is now a mere commonplace of knowledge. And so far are they from being of rare occurrence, that it has even been affirmed that every sensational case of _felo de se_ published in the newspapers is sure to be followed by some others more obscure: their frequency, indeed, is out of all proportion with the _extent_ of each particular outbreak.

Sometimes, however, especially in villages and small towns.h.i.+ps, the wildfire madness becomes an all-involving pa.s.sion, emulating in its fury the great plagues of history. Of such kind was the craze in Versailles in 1793, when about a quarter of the whole population perished by the scourge; while that at the _Hotel des Invalides_ in Paris was only a notable one of the many which have occurred during the present century. At such times it is as if the optic nerve of the mind throughout whole communities became distorted, till in the noseless and black-robed Reaper it discerned an angel of very loveliness. As a br.i.m.m.i.n.g maiden, out-worn by her virginity, yields half-fainting to the dear sick stress of her desire--with just such faintings, wanton fires, does the soul, over-taxed by the continence of living, yield voluntary to the grave, and adulterously make of Death its paramour.