Aneas Sylvius (afterwards Pope Pius II.) intended, when he
was in Scotland, to have visited the library, in search of the
lost books of Livy, but was prevented by the death of the
king, James I. A small parcel of them were, in 1525, brought
to Aberdeen, and great pains were taken to unfold them, but,
through age and the tenderness of the parchment, little could
be read ; but from what the learned were able to make out,
the work appeared by the style to have rather been a fragment
of Sallust than of Livy."
But the account given by Boece is clogged with difficulties.
1. It is said that, besides the chest of books, there fell to the
share of Fergus sacra queda/rn vasa, " certain sacred vessels,"
which he also brought with him. Now, Boece himself lias
told us what we know from other sources, that the Goths
respected the sacred edifices. Alaric gave a peremptory
order, that all the consecrated vessels belonging to St Peter
should be transported, without damage or delay, to his church.
But, although these only are mentioned, in consequence of
their being found by the soldiers under the care of an aged
virgin ; it is most probable that this prince would show the
same regard to all other vessels consecrated to the purposes
of religion.
2. This account involves a gross anachronism. Fergus
must have made his donation to the monastery of Iona about
a hundred and sixty years before the foundation-stone of it
was laid. For Boece says that Alaric sacked Rome A. 412.
Now, Columba did not land in Iona till the year 563, or as
some say, 565. Here, we are told, Fergus employed approved
scribes, for reducing the manuscripts to the form of books,
several ages, as would seem, before the art of writing was
known in the country.
3. The same writer elsewhere says that, although Fergus
had appointed Iona to be a repository for the public records,
yet Alexander I., on account of the great difficulty of the
access to Iona, had caused our annals to be transferred to the
priory of Restennet, in Angus. Maitland has observed that
hence it w T as evident, that in Boece's time there could be no
records at Iona ; and, therefore, that he could not get his
Veremundus from this island.
As Boece mentions our annals only, it may be said, that
he did not refer to the ancient classical works, which
Alexander might not think of demanding from the monks
of Iona.
It might even be supposed, that Maitland had not sufficient
ground for charging Boece with self-contradiction, as to our
annals; as some of them, notwithstanding the requisition
made by Alexander I., might have been retained at Iona,
being concealed by the monks, or afterwards procured by
them from other quarters ; of which circumstance Boece
might be informed, when he made more particular inquiry
with the view of writing his history. But it cannot be
denied, that, by referring to works unknown to all our
historians, as to those of Cornelius Hibernicus, Veremund, and
Campbell, of whose writings, nay, of whose existence, we can
discover no other vestiges, he has greatly injured the credi-
bility of his whole story with respect to the communications
from Iona. The most favourable opinion which can possibly
be formed of the conduct of Boece, and it is very little to
his credit indeed, is, that he had destroyed the manuscripts
which he had used, that his own history might be in greater
request. This, as we learn from Gordon of Stralogh, was the
tradition which, when a young man, he had heard at
Aberdeen.
Nor can it at all be believed, that the classical MSS. were
brought from Koine by Fergus. There is little probability
indeed that Fergus ever was at Rome ; and still less, that an
Irish prince, in that early age, would encumber himself,
during his military labours, with a chest of books, written in a
language to which, we may reasonably suppose, he was an
entire stranger. "(3)