The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction, Vol. 12, by Various
V >>
Various >> The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction, Vol. 12,
Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this
file which includes the original illustration.
See 11320-h.htm or 11320-h.zip:
(http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/1/1/3/2/11320/11320-h/11320-h.htm)
or
(http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/1/1/3/2/11320/11320-h.zip)
THE MIRROR OF LITERATURE, AMUSEMENT, AND INSTRUCTION.
VOL. 12, No. 331.] SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1828. [PRICE 2d.
* * * * *
Charlecote Hall, near Stratford-upon-Avon.
[Illustration]
"One of the most delightful things in the world is going a journey." Now
if there be one of our million of friends who, like the fop in the play,
thinks all beyond Hyde Park a desert, let him forthwith proceed on a
pilgrimage to _Stratford-upon-Avon_, the birthplace of SHAKSPEARE; and
though he be the veriest Londoner that ever sung of the "sweet shady
side of Pall Mall," we venture to predict his reform. If such be not the
result, then we envy him not a jot of his terrestrial enjoyment. Let him
but think of the countless hours of delight, the "full houses," the
lighted dome and deeping circles, of the past season; when
Dread o'er the scene the ghost of Hamlet stalks;
Othello rages, &c.
and then will he not enjoy a visit to the place where--
----Sweetest Shakspeare, Fancy's child,
Warbled his native wood-notes wild.
Sterne, the prince of sentimental tourists, says, "Let me have a
companion of my way, were it but to remark how the shadows lengthen as
the sun declines;" but, for our part, we should prefer a visit to
Stratford, _alone_, unless it were with some garrulous old guide to
entertain us with his or her reminiscences.
This brings us to _Charlecote Hall_, one of the Shakspearean relics. It
consists of a venerable mansion, situated on the banks of the Avon,
about four miles from Stratford, and built in the first year of the
reign of Elizabeth, by Sir Thomas Lucy;
"A parliamente member, and justice of peace.
At home a poor scare-crow, at London an asse,"
and so well known as the prosecutor of Shakspeare.[1]
The principal front, here represented, assumes, in its ground plan, the
form of the letter E--said to have been intended as a compliment to the
queen, who, as appears from the Black Book of Warwick, visited this
place in 1572.
[1] At Stratford, the family maintain that Shakspeare stole Sir
Thomas Lucy's buck, to celebrate his wedding-day, and for that
purpose only. But, in that age, when half the country was
covered with forests, deer-stealing was a venial offence, and
equivalent to snaring a hare in our days.
The above is copied from one of a Series of Views illustrative of the
Life of Shakspeare, drawn and etched by Mr. W. Rider, of Leamington.
These engravings are five in number, but the artist explains that he has
selected such subjects only, "as from tradition, or more certain record,
might fairly be presumed to bear direct relation to the life of the
poet. But while he regrets that the number of authenticated subjects are
so few, he feels that from innovation or decay, they are almost hourly
becoming fewer; and is, therefore, prompted to secure the few remnants
left, while they are yet within his reach."
There is no doubt that the grounds around Charlecote Hall, were the
early haunts of SHAKSPEARE; and that in the house itself sat the
magisterial authority, before which he was doomed to meet the charges,
to which his youthful indiscretions had rendered him liable; and, as it
remains, to the present time, for the most part, unaltered, and
_presents to the spectator of the present day the same image that was
often, and under such peculiar circumstances, impressed on the eye of
our_ SHAKSPEARE, it cannot but be regarded with the most intense
interest by all his admirers.
In conclusion, we would recommend the illustrators of Shakspeare to
possess themselves of a set of Mr. Rider's "Views;" whilst the visiter
of Stratford-upon-Avon would do well to lay a copy in his
portmanteau--for they are in truth so many faithful memorials of the
great poet of nature.
* * * * *
ON NATIONAL VARIETIES.
(_For the Mirror_.)
There are few more familiar subjects than that of the varieties of
national character, and the resemblances and differences that exist
between ourselves and the inhabitants of other countries. Few
conversations occur upon circumstances which may have happened abroad,
in which some one has not an anecdote to relate to illustrate the known
peculiarities of the nation in question; and the greater part of the
travels and tours which now issue in such formidable numbers from the
press, are naturally filled with stories and incidents, either to show
the correctness of our ideas of the manners and opinions of our
neighbours, or (perhaps more frequently) to prove that the public were
in error in that respect, up to the time when the traveller in question
had discovered the truth, or a clue to it. The daily accounts of the
outrages perpetrated in Ireland, and the alarms that are sounded ever
and anon, touching the state of that unhappy country, are continually
exciting surprise, that the natives of the sister island should be so
unaccountably deficient in that sense of order and sobriety which
prevails in Great Britain. We associate with a Scotchman the ideas of
shrewdness and prudence; with a Frenchman, gaiety and frivolity; with a
Spaniard, gravity and pride; with an Italian, strong passions of love
and revenge: with a German, plodding industry and habits of deep
thinking; and with the northern nations, an honest sincerity and
persevering courage. We sometimes judge with tolerable correctness; at
others are wholly mistaken, and not unfrequently run into such extremes,
that having established a principle, that a particular people are
knavish, or cowardly, or stupid, we are unwilling to admit any
exceptions, but include the whole race in our sweeping censure. We are
prejudiced at first sight against a Portuguese or Italian, and are
careful of our communications with him, even though we meet him on the
high road, or by mere accident in a public place. There can, however, be
no mistake in the common notion, that each nation has a peculiar
collection of qualities and habits, distinguishing it in a greater or
less degree from its neighbours, and the rest of the world; and it is,
therefore, at all events, an interesting, if not an useful topic, to
reflect a little how these differences arise. Not that we intend here to
give even any particular description of the various races of mankind, or
to enter into any inquiry upon the degrees of their mental and bodily
capacities; such would be foreign to our purpose, and would exceed our
limits. We shall merely hazard a few observations upon the several
causes to which the diversities in men have been referred, not
pretending to any decided opinion on so nice a point, as whether these
causes are wholly of a physical or of a moral kind, or whether they are
compounded of both. The question is, perhaps, one of the most difficult
in the whole range of philosophical experience; we say experience,
because it is obvious that all theory on the subject must be the result
of observation and analysis; and that no general principles can be laid
down in the first instance, as the ground work of any hypothesis we
might be inclined to frame.
The scientific men to whom we are chiefly indebted for the facts
accumulated on this subject, are Dr. Blumenbach, of Goettingen, Dr.
Pritchard, of Edinburgh, and the eminent surgeon, Mr. Lawrence. It has
been a favourite matter of speculation with Lord Monboddo, as well as
with Voltaire, Rousseau, and the philosophers of the French school, who
have endeavoured to show that men and other animals are endowed with
reason or instinct of the same kind, but of different degrees. According
to these fanciful writers, the monkey is but another species of the
human race, and has been termed by them _Homo Sylvestris_. They made the
most diligent researches into all accounts concerning men in a savage
state, and were delighted beyond measure with the discovery alleged to
have been made in the island of Sumatra, of men with tails regularly
protruding from their hinder parts, who, according to Buffon, walked and
talked in the woods like other gentlemen:--
And backwards and forwards they switched their long tails,
Like a gentleman switching his cane.
The appearance of Peter the Wild Boy, who was found in the woods of
Hamela, in Hanover, living on the bark of trees, leaves, berries, &c.
threw Voltaire into transports of joy. He declared the event to be the
most wonderful and important that ages had recorded in the annals of
science, as it demonstrated the fact of man living after the fashion of
beasts, without the least spark of civilization, and without speech;
thereby forming a species of a nature having more in common with monkeys
than with men, and presenting the regular degree, or intermediate class,
between the _homo civilis_ and the _homo sylvestris_. The circumstance,
however, which afterwards transpired, of Peter's having been found with
the remains of a shirt-collar about his neck, threw considerable
discredit on the whole story; and the young savage, on being brought to
England by order of Queen Caroline, lived in Hertfordshire for many
years, perfectly harmless and tractable, and behaving pretty much the
same as other idiots. The idea, therefore, of a race of men, in a
healthy, natural condition, having ever existed without the possession
of reason, is now deemed wholly fallacious. It is even maintained by
Schlegel, and other authorities of great weight, that the civilized
state is the primitive one, and that savage life is a degeneracy from
it, rather than civilized society being a graft upon barbarity. By
Schlegel's theory, the East, especially India, was the earliest seat of
arts and sciences; from the Sanscrit, or Indian language, now extinct,
are the Hebrew, the Chaldaic, the Greek, and many others of the most
ancient tongues, derived; and from the wisdom and learning of the East
"was the whole earth overspread." Undoubtedly it is difficult to imagine
by what gradation language could have proceeded, from the howl of
savages, and the cries of nature, till it reached the eloquent music,
the heart-stirring oratory of the Greek; and besides this, and other
considerations, Schlegel is supported by the opinions of Adelung, the
learned author of "Mithridates, oder Allgemeine Sprachenkunde," upon the
probable habitation of the first family of the human race. Adelung says,
that civilization began in Asia, as is, indeed, universally admitted to
have been the case; and that when the waters of the flood subsided, the
highest ground, we may naturally conclude, must have been the earliest
inhabited. We may also reasonably presume that a beneficent Providence
would place the first family in a situation where their wants could be
easily satisfied; in a garden, as it were, stocked with all herbs and
fruits, fit and agreeable to their use and taste. Now such a country is
actually to be found in Central Asia, between the degrees of 30 and 50
North lat. and 90 and 110 long. E. of Ferro; a spot as high as the
Plains of Quito, or 9,500 feet above the level of the sea. It contains
the sources of most of the great rivers of Asia; the Seleuga, the Ob,
the Lena, the Irtisch, and the Jenisey flow from hence to the North; the
Jaik, the Jihon, and the Jemba to the West; the Amur and the Hoang Ho to
the East; and the Indus, Ganges, and Burrampooter to the South. The
valleys within this space, which our readers, by referring to a map,
will find to be correctly delineated, abound with nutritive fruits and
vegetables, and with all animals capable of being tamed. There is
evidently, therefore, some plausibility in the notion that mankind
sprung originally from the East, and that from that quarter civilization
is derived; but what portion of knowledge was allotted to the primitive
people, or how far their descendants have surpassed or fallen short of
these olden times, must, we fear, be for ever beyond the reach of our
investigation.
If we call to mind a summary of the general divisions of human beings
throughout the world, we shall find little room to doubt of the identity
of their genus, and shall, without much trouble of reflection, class
them as different species of that genus:--
------Facies non omnibus una,
Nec diversa, tamen.
Such seems to be the result of Mr. Lawrence's judgment; and though we
are aware that the descent of mankind from one common stock has been
much questioned and controverted, particularly in Germany, we prefer
resting upon the received opinion at present, to running the risk of
shocking established notions, by entering into the merits of the
contrary theory.
Men are classed by Dr. Blumenbach under five great divisions, viz. the
Caucasian, Mongolian, Ethiopian, American, and Malay. The Caucasian
family may be asserted, though by its own members, to have been always
pre-eminent above the rest in moral feelings and intellectual powers,
and is remarkable for the large size of their heads. It need not be more
minutely described, than by saying it includes all the ancient and
modern Europeans, (except the Laplanders and Fins;) the former and
present inhabitants of Western Asia as far as the Ob, the Caspian Sea,
and the Ganges, viz. the Assyrians, Medes, Chaldeans, Sarmatians,
Scythians, Parthians, Philistines, Phoenicians, Jews, and Syrians; the
Tartars on the Caucasus, Georgians, Circassians, Mingrelians, Armenians,
Turks, Persians, Arabs, Hindoos of high caste, Northern Africans,
Egyptians, Abyssinians, and Guanches. They are supposed to have
originally had brown hair and dark eyes.
The Mongolian family is of an olive colour and black eyes, flat nose and
face, small stature, black hair, no beard, and thick lips. It comprises
the people of Central and Northern Asia, Thibet, Ava, Pegu, Cambodia,
Laos, and Siam; the Chinese, Japanese, Fins, and Esquimaux.
The Ethiopian family is black, with black and woolly hair, compressed
skull, low forehead, flat nose, and thick lips. It includes all Africans
not comprehended in the Caucasian family.
The American family has a dark skin, a red tint, straight hair, a small
beard, low forehead, and broad face. It includes all the American
tribes, except the Esquimaux.
The Malay family is brown, varying from a light tint to black. Their
hair is black and curled, head narrow, bones of the face prominent, nose
broad, and mouth large. They inhabit Malacca, Sumatra, Java, and the
adjacent islands; Molucca, the Ladrones, New Holland, Van Dieman's Land,
New Guinea, New Zealand, and the South Sea Islands. They speak generally
the Malay language.
The difference of character and disposition of these five families is
familiar to every one; they are as well known as is the superiority of
the Caucasian to the other races, and as the outward distinctions of
their bodies and complexions. The reasons of this difference have been
variously assigned, some ascribing it to natural, others altogether to
moral causes. By natural causes we understand either that the
constitutions of the races are such, that their capabilities of
informing their minds, and raising their intellectual powers, are
essentially not the same; or that the climate has an influence over both
their bodies and minds. By moral causes, we mean artificial or
accidental ones arising out of the state of society; such as the nature
of the government, the plenty or poverty in which people live, a period
of war or peace, the power of public opinion, and such circumstances.
The effect of climate cannot of itself be sufficient to change the
manners and habits of a people. The instances of migratory nations seem
to show this; the Jews are as cunning and fond of money in Asia or
Africa as they are in Poland or England; that extraordinary race, the
Gipsies, (which are now ascertained to be a Hindoo tribe, driven from
their country in the fifteenth century,) are not less thievish in
Transylvania than in Scotland. The Armenians of Constantinople, and
other parts of the Levant, are represented to be of the same mild and
persevering temper, of the same honesty and skilfulness in their
dealings, and the same kindness and civility of manners, as before they
were driven from their country by Sha-Abbas the Great. The changes,
however, in the habits and character of this people seem to mark the
influence of their several domestic situations. They were originally the
most warlike of the Asiatic tribes; after their subjection by the
Persians, they engaged themselves entirely in the patient cultivation of
the soil; and since the period of the depopulation of Armenia, and their
migrations into Persia, Russia, Turkey, and other countries, they have
been celebrated for their industry in commercial concerns. They are
bankers, money-brokers, merchants, surgeons, bakers, builders,
chintz-printers, and of all trades that can be imagined, and are
represented as the most useful subjects in the Ottoman empire, retaining
at the same time an almost patriarchal simplicity in their domestic
manners. The English in the East and West Indies, in New South Wales,
and in Canada, seldom lose a relish for the habits and enjoyments they
have been bred up in, whether they migrate to the extremes of heat or of
cold. John Bull is an Englishman in heart, and will remain so under
whatever sun his lot of life may be cast; for,
Coelum, non animum, mutant, qui trans mare currunt.
We rarely find the Spaniards or Italians, or the natives of the South of
Europe, lose their ideality of character and their warm passions when
settled permanently in England; the only alteration in them seems to be
such as the forms of society and intercourse with others has led them
to. Still the man is the same, though he may have adopted a new regime
in the fashion of his clothes, or the dishes of his dinner.
(_To be continued_.)
* * * * *
FAIR ROSAMOND.
(_To the Editor of the Mirror_.)
In a late Number of the MIRROR, in which you have given a view of the
Labyrinth at Woodstock, and several particulars respecting Fair
Rosamond, many doubts are stated relative to her death, viz. _how_ and
what time. I therefore send you the following account from _Collins's
Peerage of England:_--
"Rosamond de Clifford was the eldest of the two daughters of Walter de
Clifford, by Margaret his wife, daughter and heir of Ralph de Toeny,
Lord of Clifford Castle, in Herefordshire, (and had with her the said
castle and lands about it as an inheritance.) This Rosamond was the
unfortunate concubine of Henry II., for whom the king built that famous
Labyrinth[2] at Woodstock, where she lived so retired, as not easily to
be found by his jealous queen. The king gave her a cabinet of such
elegant workmanship,[3] as showed the fighting of champions, moving of
cattle, flying of birds, and swimming of fish, which were so artfully
represented, as if they had been alive. _She died 23rd Henry II. anno
1176_, by poison (as was suspected) given her by Queen Eleanor, and was
buried in the Chapter-house of the Nunnery of Godstow."
G.F.
[2] Chron. Joreval, 1151.
[3] Ibid.
* * * * *
GODSTOW NUNNERY.
On the banks of the Isis, about two miles from Oxford, are the remains
of Godstow Nunnery. It was founded towards the end of the reign of Henry
I. by Editha, a lady of Winchester, and when dissolved in the reign of
Henry VIII. it was valued at L274. per annum. A considerable portion of
its buildings remained until the end of the reign of Charles I. about
which time they were accidentally destroyed by fire. The present remains
consist chiefly of ranges of walls on the north, south, and east sides
of an extended area. Near the western extremity of the high north wall
are the remains of two buttresses. There is a small building which abuts
on the east, and ranges along the southern side, which was probably the
Chapter House of the Nuns. The walls are entire, the roof is of wood,
and some of the rafter work is in fair preservation. It is in this
building that the remains of Rosamond are supposed to have been
deposited, when they were removed from the choir of the church, by the
order of Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln, in 1191. On the north wall is painted
a pretended copy of her epitaph in Latin. Many stone coffins have at
various times been found on this spot.
HALBERT H.
* * * * *
SCRAPS FROM TURKISH HISTORY.
(_For the Mirror_.)
_First Landing of the Turks in Europe._--Orchanes, second king of the
Turks, having settled his monarchy in Lesser Asia, was determined to get
footing in Europe. Solyman, his eldest son, being willing to undertake
the enterprise, was accordingly despatched with an army of veterans, who
crossed the Hellespont, and arrived on the European side. They soon
afterwards seized many considerable castles and cities belonging to the
Greeks, who offered little or no resistance to the invaders of their
empire. These occurrences transpired about the year 1358.
_A Woman's Revenge._--Mahomet the Great, on being proclaimed Sultan,
caused his two innocent brothers to be put to death; the mother of the
youngest immediately afterwards went to the new king, and reproached him
severely for his cruelty. In order to appease her, he said, "that it
consisted with the policy of his state to do as he had done, but that
whatever she asked of him should be granted her." The lady, therefore,
determining to be revenged, demanded one of the sultan's chief bassas to
be delivered to her. Mahomet, to keep his word, gave orders that it
should be done without delay; and the enraged lady, seeing the bassa
bound before her, first stabbed him, and then plucked out his liver,
which she cast to the dogs.
_Turkish Superstition._--Scanderbeg, prince of Epyrus, after many
glorious victories, died on the 17th of January, 1466, in the 53rd year
of his age, and 24th of his reign. He was buried with great solemnity in
the cathedral at Lyssa. The Turks, nine years afterwards, took the city,
and dug up his bones for the purpose of setting them in rings and
bracelets, thinking, by this means, that they should partake of his
invincible fortune.
_Amurath's Dream._--About the year 1594, Amurath III. dreamed that he
saw a man of prodigious stature, with one foot raised upon the Tower of
Constantinople, while the other reached over the Bosphorus, and rested
on the Asiatic shore. In one hand, the figure sustained the sun, while
the other held the moon. He struck his foot against the Tower of
Constantinople, the fall of which overthrew the great temple, and the
imperial palace. Amurath, being greatly discomfited by this dream,
consulted his wizard, who informed him, "that it was a warning sent by
their prophet Mahomet, who threatened the overthrow of their religion
and empire, unless Amurath engaged his whole force against the
Christians." This interpretation had so much influence with the emperor,
that he vowed not to lay down his arms until he had utterly exterminated
the Christians.
G.W.N.
* * * * *
TROUT FISHING.
(_To the Editor of the Mirror_.)
Sir,--I shall now sum up this _ticklish_ subject, by acquainting you
with three more methods of catching trout in Westmoreland.
_Flood-netting_.--A flood net is a small net with a semi-circular frame
at the mouth of it, from which projects a long handle. This is used only
when there are floods; the fisher draws it up the rivulets, and every
now and then pulls it up to look for his success. Sometimes he nets a
great many at a time, and especially if he wait the arrival of the
flood, because a large shoal mostly comes down with the first torrents.
_Pod-netting_.--This derives its name from the habitation of the trouts
(the banks of the "becks") which are called "hods" or "holds" and more
frequently "pods," and this net therefore goes by these three names. I
have before described to you the situation generally of these "_holds_"
to be either in the ledge of some rock or stone in the water, or under
some bank reaching over the stream. This net is used in fine weather,
and when the water is "_clear as crystal_;" the fisherman takes hold of
the handles of the net,[4] and wades through the stream as gently as
possible, placing the net just at the side of a trout's "hold," taking
care to keep it as close to the bottom as possible, to afford the trout
no room for escape. Then another with a long pole drives the trouts from
the mouth of the "_hold_," when they immediately dart into the net, and
nothing remains but to draw the net quickly up. This is a famous method
of fishing. I have been with parties when we have completely cleared the
beck. We went to "Carmony" in the spring of 1825, and caught an immense
quantity by fishing with the hand and pod. This brings to my
recollection an amusing circumstance, which I intend troubling you with,
though you may think it unworthy of notice. It was reported in that year
that there was a large quantity of trouts in the beck; and I went at the
recommendation of those who had seen a particularly large one (when
passing by) "basking" in the streams. I was referred to a _certain_
"_lum_," and thither I went one afternoon with two friends, to try if we
could have an opportunity of seeing him. We had scarcely reached the
spot when we perceived him lying at the mouth of his "_hold_," a fine
grassy bank at the side of which grew a small bush; and I employed my
friends to watch the trout should he escape me. I crossed the brook (my
friends remaining on the opposite side), pulled off my coat and
waistcoat, and tucked up my shirt ready for action. He was still lying
very quietly, and as I knew I had no chance with him then, I touched him
gently with a twig and he moved into his habitation. I then leaned over
the bank, thrust in my arm, touched his back, I felt his size, and was
all caution. So first I began to secure him by building a piece of wall
before the bank to prevent his going out; but I had no sooner laid the
first stone than out he bounced, and darted down the river about twenty
yards, (we running after him all the while) then up again, and so on for
about a quarter of an hour, till at length he became tired and waddled
into his dwelling. I now thought all secure, and once more put in my
hand, when he jumped at least three or four yards out of the water. I
must confess, I was a little confused with my friends' dictation, who
feared I should lose him. Again housed, I made a kind of fort at one end
of the hold, and this done, I again thrust in my arm, when he was as
soon out again, and on getting up I found my hand covered with blood.
Still he came back to his favourite place, and I tried again, after
giving my friends caution to be on the look out. This time I was
successful, I put my hand gently under his belly, and by a tickle,
secured the rascal, by thrusting the fore-finger and thumb of my right
hand in his gills. I got him on to land, my friends ran about in
exstacy, and I think I never saw a finer trout than he proved to
be--real Eden. We gave a shout of triumph, after which we cut him on the
nose to kill him. From tail to snout he measured one foot four inches;
but he was beautifully plump and thick-made. We now began to wonder what
caused the blood on my hand, when on examination, we found a large night
hook in his side, which no doubt I had touched, and had thus given him
pain, and made him restless. I will not prolong the story, but tell you
he weighed about two pounds and a half, and was acknowledged to be the
plumpest trout ever caught in that county by the hand.[5] Shortly
afterwards I caught the partner to it in the same place, but it was not
so fine a trout, and I had not so much effort in catching it. The
largest trout ever caught in this county weighed four pounds and a half,
but that was taken with the net. I have no other recommendation for this
paper but its originality. I have enjoyed the sport, and can only half
convey a description of it upon paper.