[7]
As the age in which Shakspeare
wrote, had he not been in existence,
would still have been remarkable on
account of its dramatic writers, so the
Cinque Cento is equally distinguished
as the era of the arts. Yet has no very
satisfactory cause been assigned for
the direction of the human mind to
these particular pursuits at these precise
periods; for, simultaneously in
countries differing in climate, governments,
and manners, have the requisite
men of genius arisen.
It might be easier to account for the
depression than the rise of the noblest
arts. Of this we shall presently speak;
aware, at the same time, how ungracious
will be the words which
will admit of a decadence among ourselves.
When we boast of our "enlightened
age," it would not be amiss
that we stay for a moment our pride,
look back, and consider how much we
have absolutely lost; in how much we
are inferior. Every age seems destined
to do its own work, which it
does nearly to the perfection of its
given art or science. Succeeding ages
are destined rather to invent new than
to improve upon the old. What has
been done, becomes an accumulated
wealth that Time deposits ever, and
passes on to continual work to add
fresh materials, and stock the world
with the means of general improvement
and happiness. There is always
progression, but it is a progression of
invention; the destined works are too
vast, too infinite to allow a long delay
in the advancement of any one accomplishment.
It is rapidly completed; we
are scarcely allowed time to stand and
wonder; we must pass on to perform
something new. Yet, if such attained
thing shall be lost, or nearly so, the
power to create it again may be again
given; but it works de novo, adapting
itself to the new principle which has
rendered the reproduction advantageous,
if not necessary. Thus, for instance,
in the ages which we are
pleased to call dark, to what magnitude
and what exactness of beauty did
not architecture reach, and that in a
particularly inventive style—the Gothic—borrowing
not from what had
before been, and which had been
held perfect, a style upon which we
do not now even hope to improve,
but content ourselves with admiring
and copying. Thus it should seem
that where any thing like a practical
continuance of an art has been
permitted, the entirely new direction
it has taken would show that invention,
required for the age, was the
object, and that, too, bounded by a
limit. "For this purpose have I raised
thee up," would appear to be the text
upon which the histories of the arts,
as of every thing human, may be considered
the comment.
It is to the total loss of ancient art
that mankind are indebted for its revival,
its re-discovery, as it were; for
little or nothing was left from which, as
from an old stock, art was to begin.
The new Christian principle created
a new mind, to which there was little
consonant in what was known, however
imperfectly, of ancient works.
Hence what is termed revival might,
with more aptitude of expression, be
called the re-discovery.
Had art been uninterruptedly continued
from the days of Apelles, it
would probably have degenerated to
its lowest state. The destruction, the
altogether vanishing away of the former
glory, was essential to the rise of the
new. All was nearly obliterated. Of
the innumerable statues of which
Greece was plundered by the Romans,
but six were to be found—five of
marble, and one of brass—in the city
of Rome, at the beginning of the
fifteenth century; so that art may be
said to have been defunct. The decadence
of architecture seems also to
have been required for the originating
the Gothic, for the inventing altogether
a new style, which had no prototype.
It was necessary to the establishing
the Christian principle operatively,
that the mind should be wrested
powerfully from former and antagonistic
ideas. And this could scarcely
have been effected had any thing like
a continual, an important succession of
vigorous life in these arts been allowed.
It seems to have been the work of a
great guiding will, that the way should
be prepared for renovation, by the
almost entire loss or mutilation of the
greatest works of former periods, and
by the veil of ignorance which victorious
barbarism spread before all eyes,
that they should not distinguish
through that cloud the remnant of a
glory which was too great to be altogether
destroyed. The very language
which spoke of it was a buried charm,
that the oblivion might be more perfect.
And not until the now grown
Christian mind required the re-discovery
of art, was that tongue loosened.
The revival of ancient literature and
the birth of new art were simultaneous.
With the latter, at least, it was more
than a sleep from which it arose—it
was from a death, with all the marks
of its corruption.
We do not mean to assert that art
rose at once full-grown, as Pallas from
the head of Jove. It had undoubtedly
its progression; but it did not grow from
an old stock; and hence it did grow
and arose unimpeded and unchoked
by an unwholesome exuberance, to
the greatest splendour and glory.
Whether there can be again any new
principle which will require new inventions,
it would be almost presumptuous
to consider; but we do feel
assured that should it be so, there will
not be an adaptation of present means
to it, but that the wing of oblivion
must have to sweep over, overshadow,
and obliterate the present multifarious
form and body of art. The fine arts
are not like the exact sciences, always
progressing from accumulative knowledge
towards their final and sure
establishment of truth; on the contrary,
their great truths recede further
from view, as knowledge is accumulated,
and practice, deteriorates by example.
Science is truth to be dug out
of the earth, as it were; a precious
ore, not strictly ours, but by and for
our use. The fine arts are in a far
greater degree ours, for they are of the
mind's creation; they are the product
of a faculty given, indeed, but given
to create and not to gather, and dig
up ready-made for our purpose; they
are of that faculty which has given
the name to the poet, as altogether
the maker. They give that to the
world which it never could have received
by any accumulation of fact and
knowledge. Take away the individual
genius, the inventive, the creating
mind of the one man, the Homer, the
Dante, the Shakspeare, the Michael
Angelo, the Raffaelle, and the whole
product is annihilated; we cannot even
conceive of its existence, know of no
mine wherein to dig, no facts, no
knowledge out of which it can grow.
That creating power may, indeed,
turn all existing things to its use, all
facts and all knowledge; but it commands
and is not governed by them—is
a power in no degree dependant on
them, which would still be, though
they existed not—a power which, if it
exhausted worlds, would invent new for
its purpose. To whom, then, are such
powers given? for what purpose?—and
are they of a gift deteriorated in its
use and abuse? Alas! they are still
of the "corruptible," and cannot, in
our present state, "put on incorruption."
They are, however, of the mind,
which may be purified and strengthened,
or corrupted and degraded.
They effect in a great degree, and
suitably to the age's requirement,
their purpose. Corrupted from the
ardour and sincerity of their first
passion, and by the admission, little
by little, of what is vicious, and yet
which, we must confess, has its beauty;
their very aim becomes changed, less
large by subdivision, and less sure by
confusion and uncertainty of aim, until
all purpose be lost, in a low satisfaction
in mere dexterity and mindless
imitation. And what shall stay art
in such downward way of decadence?
Can a strong impulse be given to it—for
there is no strength but the mind's
strength? It is not patronage, but
purpose, which is wanted. What
shall revivify the passion that gave
it earnestness,—the sincerity, the trust
in itself, the confidence in its own
high-mindedness, the sense of the importance
of its objects, and the true
glory of their pursuit? We have our
fears that we are doing much to multiply
artists, and degrade art. We
distribute patronage in so many
streams, by our art-unions, that no
full fertilising current is visible. We
make a pauperism, and stamp it with
the disgrace of the beggarly contribution;
we, pauperise the mind too,
by the demand for mean productions,
and by circulating, as the choicest
specimens of British art, engravings
which tend utterly to the deterioration
of the public taste. Perhaps
there is nothing more frightfully injurious
in the present state of art, than
this ever putting before the public
eye things in themselves bad, and
mostly bad, where badness is more
surely fatal, in purpose. It is far
easier for good taste and for good art,
in practice, to arise out of a blank,
out of nothing, than out of an exuberance
of bad examples. These
things tend to vitiate the pure. The
great daily accumulation of inferior
works, low in character, and deficient
in artistic knowledge and skill, that
are ever thrust before the public eye,
are doing much mischief. They are
poisoning and vitiating the ground
from which taste should spring. We
are not educating in art, but against
art. We are teaching to admire
things which, were it possible to keep
what is bad from the public eye,
would disgust as soon as seen. And
even where the exhibition is in no
other respect vicious, it is too often
vicious from the total absence of any
high purpose. For lack of object, we
look to some mere mechanical prettinesses;
and by habit learn first to
look for, and then to work for, nothing
more. When the great men of other
days, whose names we have now so
constantly in our mouths, dedicated
themselves to art, they did it with all
their soul. They had the earnestness
of a passion; and what they did not,
as we should now say, well, technically
viewing some of their early
works, they did to express some
strong and some worthy feeling. And
as they advanced in technical skill,
still they ever thought a certain dignity
and importance were essential to
their works. The public mind had
not yet felt satiety. But in time the
progeny of art multiplied. The trading
multitude had to entice purchasers,
and to persuade them that their
novelties were at least more pleasing,
if the aim was not so high. The new
lamps were cried up above the old.
Thus they first created a bad taste,
and then pandered to it. Cold conventionalities
took the place of feeling;
even beauty was studied more
for low sense, than for its moral,
and intellectual expression. Art was
smothered by her own children. The
brood has been too numerous, and
the productions as variable as the
brood. They who would do great
things were they allowed, are not
allowed. The lower fascinations have
taken possession of the public mind.
Patronage runs to the little, and the
greatest encouragement is to those
who will provide the market with
the cheapest, if not the best wares.
Artists must live as well as other
people. They cannot, if they would,
sacrifice themselves to work out great
and noble ideas, for which there is
no demand; and for this state of
things they are themselves in no small
degree to blame. It is their own cry
for patronage that has raised these
art-unions: the patronage has been
raised, but who gets it? They (like
the national guard in Paris) have
been superseded by their own inferior
workmen. And what shall remedy
all this superfœtation? First, let pains
be taken properly to educate in art
the public eye, and the public mind.
We rejoice to know that, while we
are writing, a society is forming,
similar to the Cambden Society, for
the publication of all important works
on art, whether old or original, and
for having the finest productions of
art engraved, in whatever country
they are to be found. As good taste
is the object, so care will be taken
that nothing of a deteriorating character
will be admitted; and works
will be produced which, in the present
state of general feeling, private speculation
would scarcely venture upon.
The works will, we are given to
understand, chiefly be distributable
among the members of the society;
but some, thought to be particularly
well adapted to give a better direction
to the public taste, will be generally
purchasable.
This society is of great promise—if
it succeeds at all, it will succeed eminently,
and we believe it must succeed.
It will, we have some hope
drive the low, the meaningless things
of the day out of the field. We are,
as a nation, really ignorant of art.
We know it not, as it has been. We
want to see the public eye acquainted,
through good engravings, with the
numerous fine frescos that cannot be
generally known in any other way.
Whatever tends to the real advancement
of art will obtain the solicitous
attention of this society.
The Fine Arts Commission affords
another means of remedying the evils
that are besetting the profession, and
through them the public taste. We
do not like the Government competition
system. We go further—we do
not like the Government, we mean the
Commission, constituting themselves
judges and purveyors. This is not
the way to make great men. The
man of genius shrinks from the competition
system; nay, he fears or
doubts the judgment of his judges.
Perhaps he feels that he is himself
the best judge; and if he has a just
confidence in himself, he ought to feel
this. He will not like the check of
too much dictation as to subjects,
composition, or any of the detail.
We are persuaded that it would be far
wiser, both for the public and for art,
that the commissioners should studiously
select their man, without competition,
not for some one or more
pictures, but for a far wider range.
There will be still competition enough
for proper ambition in the number
still to be employed. Raffaelle had
the Vatican assigned to him, and that
at an early age; so would we gladly
see a large portion given to one man,
and let the whole be of his one mind,
and let him have his assistants if he
please. Let him be dominant, and if
he has within him a power, it will
come out; and it cannot be difficult
to find a few men of sense and vigour;
and even though they have not as yet
shown great powers, it does not follow
that they have them not—trust to
what they have, and more will grow.
But we have some even now capable
of performing beautiful works to do
honour to the nation. We should
rejoice to see their secretary released
from the clerkship of his office, and set
to work seriously with his hand and
his superintending mind. We would
impress this upon the consideration of
the commissioners as an indisputable
truth, that if they select a man of genius,
they select one superior to themselves—one
who is to teach, not to be
taught by them—and one with whose
arrangements, after their selection,
they should by no means interfere.
And supposing the worst, that they
have actually made an unfortunate
choice—what then? They have made
an experiment at no very great cost,
and may obliterate whatever is a disgrace.
The works of other painters
were obliterated in the Sistine Chapel
to make room for Michael Angelo.
Nor was there any hesitation in destroying
the labours of previous artists,
and even the suspended operations
of his old master, Perugino, that the
whole space might be open to the
genius of the youth Raffaelle. It
is whole, entire responsibility that
makes great men. Throw upon the
persons you select the whole weight,
and thereby give them the benefit
of all the glory; and whatever
be their powers, you tax them to the
utmost. We would have them by no
means interfered with, any more than
we would cripple the commander of
our armies abroad with the petty
counsels and restrictions of bureau-manufacture.
Nor should they be
too strictly limited as to time, nor
subjected to the continual questionings
of an ungenerous impatience. Let
the trust be conferred upon them as
an honour which they are to wear and
enjoy, not as a notice of their servility,
but of their freedom. That trust
is less likely to be abused the more
generously it is given. To fulfil it
then, becomes an ambition; and the
daily habit of this higher feeling, by
making the given work the all in all
of life, renders the men more fit for
it. Let the nation, expecting liberality
from the "Liberal Arts," bestow
it—hold out high rewards, leave the
artists in all respects unshackled; and,
the intention of a work being approved
of, let not the time it is to occupy be
in the stipulation. And it would be
well to look to the promise of the
young as well as actual performances;
for the power to do will grow. Of
thirty-eight competitors convened at
Florence, Lorenzo Ghiberti, only
twenty-three years of age, was chosen
to execute the celebrated doors; the
work occupied forty years of his life.
The work is immortal, if human work
can be; and obtained this eulogium
from Michael Angelo, that "they
were worthy of being the gates of
Paradise." He conferred honour upon
his city, and received such as was
worthy the city to bestow. "His
labours were justly appreciated, and
ably rewarded by his fellow citizens,
who, besides granting him whatever
he demanded, assigned him a portion
of land, and elected him Gonfaloniere,
or chief magistrate of the state. His
bust was afterwards placed in the
baptistery." Was the confidence, the
full trust, in the power of the young
Raffaelle misplaced? What wonders
did he not perform in his too short life!
Had he lived longer, he would without
question have reached the highest
honours his country had to bestow.
One word more on this subject of
generosity—of national generosity.
We seem to think it a great thing to
bestow a knighthood upon an artist
of eminence here and there, yet
give not the means of keeping the
dignity from conspicuous shame, of
maintaining a decent hospitality
among his brethren artists, by which
much general improvement might
evidently arise. All our real substantial
honours are conferred upon soldiers
and lawyers. They have estates
publicly given, and are raised to the
peerage; yet it is doubtful if one man
of genius, in literature and the arts,
does not deserve better of his country,
and confer upon it more glory, than
any ten of the other more favoured
professions: and more than this, the
name of one such genius will be remembered,
perhaps with some sense
of the disgrace of neglect, when all
the others are forgotten. Let a
lawyer be but a short period of his
life upon the woolsack, he will find
means to raise to himself a fortune,
and retire back upon private life with
an annual pension of thousands; while
the man of genius in arts and literature
is too often left in old age uncheered by
any acknowledgment, and perhaps
weighed down to death by embarrassments,
from which a delighted, improved,
and at the same time an
ungrateful country will not relieve
him. A government should know that
it is for the crown to honour a profession,
and thereby to make it worthy
the honour. We live in a country
where distinctions do much, and
are worse than profitless without adequate
means to sustain them. It
would be well if sometimes selections
were made in other directions than the
law and army, and if our peerage
were not unfrequently radiated with the
glory of genius. Why should a barren
baronetcy have been conferred on
the author of Waverley? Had he been
a conqueror in fifty battles, could he
have conferred more benefit than he
has conferred upon his country? Why
is it that there is always in our government
a jealousy of literature and the
arts? There has not been a decent
honour bestowed on either since the
reign of the unfortunate Charles.
Poets, painters, and sculptors, it is
vulgarly thought, are scarcely "alendi,"
and certainly "non saginandi."
The arts might at least be given a
position in our universities. This, as
a first step, would do much,—it would
tend, too, mainly to raise the public
taste, which is daily sinking lower and
lower. We should be glad to see Mr
Eastlake made professor of painting
at Oxford, with an adequate establishment
there to enable him not only
to lecture, but to teach more practically
by design, in the very place of
all others in the kingdom where there
is most in feeling congenial with art.
We mention Mr Eastlake, not making
an invidious distinction, but because
his acquirements in literature, and his
valuable contributions to it, seem
most readily to point to him as a fit
occupant for the professor's chair.
We have repeatedly, in the pages of
Maga, insisted upon the importance
of establishing the fine arts in our
universities, and at one time entertained
a hope that the Taylor Legacy
would have taken this direction. We
are not, however, sorry altogether
that it did not do so, for it would
surely be more advantageous that such
a movement should begin with the
Government. It would remedy, too,
more evils than one; it would give an
occupation of mind, congenial with
their academic studies, to our youth,
and preserve them from a dangerous
extravagance both of purse and of
opinions. The hopes, however, of
any thing really advantageous to the
fine arts arising from our Government,
unless very strongly urged to it,
are small. They do not seem inclined
at all to favour the profession; they
would look upon it as solely addicted
to the labour of the hand with a view
to small profits—a portion of which
profits, too, upon some strange principles
of the political economists, they
would appropriate to the nation as a
fine, the penalty of genius. One would
imagine, from the proposition of the
Board of Trade to take 10 per cent
from subscriptions to art-unions for
the purchasing pictures for the National
Gallery, that they considered
the epithet "fine" so appropriated to
the arts as intended originally to suggest
a tax. They would not allow
the profession a free trade. Whatever
is obtained by exhibiting works
of artists, should be as much their
property as would the product of
any other manufacture be the property
of the respective adventurers, and the
art-union subscriptions are undoubtedly
a portion of these profits. What,
in common justice, have the public
to do with them? The proposed
scheme is a step towards communism,
and may have been borrowed from the
French provisional seizure of their
railroads. With equal justice might
they require that every butcher and
baker and tailor should give a portion
of his meat, his bread, and his
cloth to feed and clothe our army and
navy; and this not as of a common
taxation, but as an extra compliment
and advantage to these trades. There
is a great deal too much here of the
beggarly utilitarian view. We advocate
not the cause of art-unions—we
think them perfectly mischievous, and
would gladly see them suppressed;
but surely to invite and tempt the
poor artists to paint their twenty and
five-and-twenty pound pictures, and
coolly to take 10 per cent out of their
pockets to purchase to yourself a gallery
of art, is not very consonant to
our general ideas of what is due to the
liberal arts. The liberality is certainly
not reciprocal.
Nor, indeed, when we view the
state of our National Gallery, considering
the building as well as what
it contains, can we be induced to think
that the Government are very much in
earnest in their profession of a desire
to raise its importance. The National
Gallery has its committee, and there
is the Commission of Fine Arts. The
former like not a questioning Parliament,
and have not sufficient confidence
in themselves to disregard the
uncomplimentary animadversions of a
critical press; and so the National
Gallery advances not. The latter
appear to treat art too much as a taxable
commodity, and as having a right
to levy specimens, and take for the
public the profit of them, when they
are required to cater for any national
works. We do not, however, doubt
their sincere desire to promote the
arts; but we do doubt if they are perfectly
alive to the real importance of
the work they have to do, and fear
their efforts are rendered less useful by
the number and conflicting tastes of
the members. Divisions and subdivisions
of responsibility terminate
too frequently in many little things
which, put together, do not make one
great one.
However deficient, or however
faulty in our taste, there seems to be
at the present moment a more general
desire to become acquainted with art
and its productions in former ages.
Publications of historical and critical
importance are not wanting; but it is
singular that the prevailing patronage
is little influenced as yet by the knowledge
received. From whatever cause
it may arise, the fact is manifest that
we have not a distinct School of Art.
It might be quite correct to assert,
that there is no characteristic school,
not one founded on a principle—a
principle distinguished from former
influences—in any country of Europe.
We do not even except the German
schools; for able though the men be
and honoured, they show no symptom
of an inventive faculty, which can
alone make a school. They are as yet
in their imitative state—in that of revival.
They are in the trammels of
an artistic superstition. They have
no one great and new idea to realise.
They make their commencement from
art, not from mind—forgetful of this
truth, that art cannot grow out of
art: for, if good, it seduces the mind
into mere imitation, which soon becomes
effect; if bad, it incapacitates
from conceiving the beautiful. Art
cannot grow out of art; it may progress
from its inferior to its better
state, till the idea of its principle has
been completed. It must then begin
again from a new—from an idea not
yet embodied—or it will inevitably
decline, from the causes named, to
mediocrity.
It does not at all follow, in this rise
of new art—or, if we please, revival of
art—that there shall be at first a consciousness
of working upon a new
principle, or a positive purpose to deviate
(for such a purpose would be but
a vagary and extravagance, relying
on no principle:) there must be some
want of the day strongly felt, some
feeling to be embodied, some impress
of the times to be stamped and made
visible. Hence alone can arise a new
principle of art; and it is one that cannot
be preconceived, it must have its
birth without forethought, and possibly
without a knowledge that it exists;
it may be in the artist's mind,
an unconscious purpose working
through the conscious processes of art.
The age in which we live has a strong
desire to know all about art, as to advance
in knowledge of every kind; but
has it in itself one characteristic feeling,
one strong impulse, favourable to
art, such as will make genius start up,
as it were, from his slumber and his
dream, and do his real work? Nor
can this be prophesied of; for, if it
could, it would exist somewhere, at
least in the mind of the prophet. It
is like the statue existing in the block;
but it is the hand of time, under direction
that we wot not of, that must be
cutting it away. Nor is it fair, for
any lack in one power of mind, to underrate
the age in which we live. It
may be great in another power to do
a destined work; that work done, another
may be required, and another
power be developed, in which art may
be the required means to the more perfect
vivifying a new principle. The
genius of our day is too busy in the
world's doings, in striving to advance
utility, to have leisure, or to take an
interest in the ideal and poetical. A
great poetry it is indeed in itself, with
all its mighty engines, working with
iron arms more vast and powerful
than fable could imagine of Brontes
and Steropes, and all the huge manufacturers
of thunderbolts for an Ideal
Jove. Reality has outgrown fiction,—has
become the "major videri,"—is
doing a sublime work—one, too, in
which poetry of high cast is inherent,
through hands and means most unpoetical.
Mind is there, thought is
there, worthy of all the greatness of
man's reputation for sagacity or invention,
and gigantic energy; the
reaching to and grasping the large
powers of nature, and adding them to
his own body, thus becoming, unconscious
of the poetic analogy, a Titan
again. This age is, after all, doing a
great deed. Let the dreamer, the versifier,
the searcher after visible beauty,
the painter, the statuary, incapacitated
as they all generally are from the
knowledge of what we term the business
of life, consider coolly, without
prejudice for his art, and against what
more commonly meets him in some interrupting
and ungracious form, reality,
the machinery of governments,
the science of banking, the law of markets,
and the innumerable detail of
which he seldom thinks, but without
the establishment of which he would
not be allowed to think,—by which he
lives his daily life; let him trace any
one manufacture through all its successive
ingenuities to its great uses
and its great results. Let him travel
a few hundred miles on a railroad, and
note how all is ordered, with what
precision all arrangements are made
and conducted, and what a world it is
in itself, moving through space like a
world, and set in motion and stayed
by the hand of one of his own Saxon
blood; and then, in idea, transferring
himself from his own work, and his
pride of his own art, let him ask himself
if he sees not something beyond,
quite extraneous to himself, a great
thing effected, which he never could
have conceived nor have executed;
and then let him say if there be not even
in this our working world, a great and
living poetry, a magnificent thought
realised, a principle brought out,
worthy an age; and then let him be
content for a while that his own particular
capacity should for a time be
in abeyance, to great purposes inoperative,
unproductive of the world's
esteem. It may be that he will but
have to wait for his season. His time
may come again. Some new principle in
the world's action, with possibly a
secret and electric power, may reach
him, enter his own mind, and set at
large all his capacities, and make them
felt; for that principle, whatever it is
to be, will be electric, too, in the general
mind. It may arise naturally out
of the present state of things. Now,
our schoolless art, like what has once
been a mighty river, with all its tributary
streams, has wandered into
strange and lower lands, and been enticed
away through innumerable small
channels, still fertilising, in a more
homely and modest way, many
countries, but losing its own distinctive
character and name. The streams
will never flow back and unite again,
but some of them, in this earth's shifts
and changes, may again become rivers,
and bear a rich merchandise into the
large ocean, and so enrich the world.
If we think upon the distinct characteristics
of schools, we must be struck
with this, that before each one was
known, established, and confirmed in
public opinion, it could not have been
generally imagined and preconceived.
It is altogether the creation of gifted
genius. We acknowledge the setting
up a great truth, of which we had not
a glimpse until we see it worked out,
and standing before us manifest. It
is ours by natural adoption, not by a
universal instinctive invention. So
that it is a presumption of our weakness
to believe, as some do, that the
arena of art is limited, and every part
occupied; and that, for the future,
nothing is left but a kind of copying
and imitation. Who is to set limit to
the powers of mind? We can imagine
a dogmatist of this low kind, before
Shakspeare's day, in admiration of
the Greek drama, laying down the
laws of the unities as irrefragable,
and that the great volume of the
drama was closed with them. And
some such opinions have been set
forth by our Gallic neighbours, and
maintained with no little pertinacity.
We must have been Shakspeares
to have preconceived his drama.
How, for ages, was poetry limited!
the epic, as it were, closed! His age
knew nothing of Milton before Milton.
It was a new principle coming dimly
through troubadours and romances,
that shone forth at length Homerically,
but with a difference, in Marmion,
and indeed all Sir Walter Scott's
poetry, which, if it be linked to any
that has preceded it, must be referred
to the most remote, to that of Homer
himself; so that let no man say that
the world of fact and possibility is
shut against art. The great classic
idea, the deification, the worship of
beauty, was completed by the ancients.
There was a long rest, a sleep, without
a dream of a new principle; but it
came, and art awakened to its perception.
Giotto, Della Robbo, the old
Siennese school, Beato Angelico,
Pisani, Donatello, evolve the Christian
idea. Perugino, weak in faith,
turns art towards earth, and leads
Rafaelle to strive for a new beautiful;
and Michael Angelo for the powerful—the
former humanising the divine, the
latter, if not deifying, gigantising
humanity—not in the antique repose,
but incorporeal energy—the whole
dignity of man, as imagined in his
personal condition. This was the characteristic
of the Florentine school—as,
after Perugino, or commencing with
him, intellect, united with grace and
beauty, became the characteristic of
the Roman. But grace and beauty
are dangerously human. The religious
mind, in reverential contemplation,
felt awe above humanity, and feared
to invest divinity with corporeal charm.
Even in heathen art, the great Athenian
goddess affects not grace, but
stands in a severe repose, so unlike
rest, the beautiful emblem of weakness.
Grace and beauty became dangerous
qualities when applied to Christian
devotional art. The followers of
Perugino, who thought them essential,
were not at first aware to what degree
they were deteriorating the great
principle of their school, and how they
were rendering art too human for their
creed. Woman—by the gift of nature,
beauty personified—by more close and
accurate study of her perfections,
ceased to be an object of real worship,
as her fascinations were felt. Even
Raffaelle was under an unadoring influence.
His madonnas often detract
much from the idolatry which his
church laboured to confirm. We must
not wonder, then, if after him we find
humanity in woman even dethroned
from her higher and almost majestic
state of heavenly purity—though legitimatised
as an object of worship, the
"mother of God," in that higher
sanctity than it was possible to set up
man, in his most saintly apotheosis,
(for the boldest mind would necessarily
be shocked at the idea of bestowing
a divine paternity on man, even if his
religion forbade it not.) Woman, in
her real beauty, superseded the ideal;
and, from condescending to represent
inferior saints and conventual devotees,
reassumed at length her more
earthly empire, and threw around
fascinations which rather tended to
dissipate than to encourage religious
sentiment. The divinity of art, which
had deigned to shine with sacred
lustre beneath and through the natural
veil of modesty, indignantly withdrew,
when that veil was rudely cast aside
by the undevotional hands of her not
less skilful but more deteriorated professors.
The Venetian school, with a truly
congenial luxury of colour, evolved
the idea of civil polity, in all its connexions
with religion, with judicature,
with manners, commerce, societies, dignities,
triumphs; a large field, indeed,
but one in which the great civic idea
was the characteristic, running through
every subject. Even the nude, before
considered as most eligible in the display
of art, yielded to civic dress and
gorgeous ornament. What other ideas
remain to be evolved? The world
does not stand still—art may for a
time. We must wait till some genius
awaken us.
There is, we repeat, no modern
school among us; art is pursued to
an extent unprecedented, but without
any fixed serious purpose, in all its
multifarious forms, and with an ability
sufficient to show that some moving
cause is alone wanted. We progress
in skill, in precision and clearness; but
the hand is little directed by the mind.
Our exhibition walls abound with
talent, but are for the most part barren
of genius: and surely this must continue
to be the case, while the public
mind is in its unpoetic, its utilitarian
state, and shall look to art for its passing
charm only as a gentle recreation,
an idle amusement. If there is any
tendency to a school, it is unfortunately
to one which is most in opposition
to that pure school which found,
and cherished, and idealised the sanctity
of female beauty.
We know not if it should be considered
an escape or not; but certainly
there was, in the earlier period of
English art, one man of extraordinary
genius, who, vigorously striking out a
great moral idea, might have been the
founder of a new school. We mean
Hogarth. He was, however, too adventurously
new for the age, and left
no successor; nor is even now the
greatness of his genius generally
understood. He has been classed with
"painters of drolls;" yet was he the
most tragic painter this country—we
were about to say, any country—has
produced. We are not prepared to say
it is a school we should wish to have
been established; but we assert that the
genius of Hogarth incurred for us the
danger. His works stand unique in
art—that which can be said, perhaps,
of the works of no other painter that
ever existed, and obtained a name. We
had written so far, when we were willing
to see what a modern writer says of
this great man; and we are happy to find
his views in so great a degree coincide
with our own. We make the follow-extract
from Cleghorn's 2d volume of
Ancient and Modern Art; a work,
indeed, that, when we took up the pen,
it was our purpose to speak of more
largely, and to which we mean to devote
what further space may be
allowed for this paper:—
"To Hogarth, on the other hand,
M. Passavant awards that justice
which has been denied to him by his
countrymen. Hogarth is of all English
painters, and, perhaps, of all
others, the one who knew how to represent
the events of common life
with the most humour, and, at the
same time, with rare and profound
truth. This truth of character is, however,
visible not only in his conception
of a subject, but is varied throughout
in the form and colour of his figures
in a no less masterly manner." "Hogarth
[continues Mr Cleghorn] stands
alone as an artist, having had no predecessors,
rivals, nor successors. He
is the more interesting, too, as being
the first native English artist of celebrity.
Yet a tasteless public was
unable to appreciate his merits; and
he was driven to the necessity of
raffling his pictures for small sums,
which only partially succeeded. In
spite of the sneers of Horace Walpole
that he was "more a writer of comedy
with his pencil than a painter," and
the epigrammatic saying of Augustus
Von Schlegel, that 'he painted ugliness,
wrote on beauty, and was a
thorough bad painter,' he was a great
and original artist, both painter and
engraver, whose works, coming home to
every man's understanding and feelings,
and applicable to every age and
country, can never lose their relish
and interest. They are chiefly known
to the public by his etchings and
engravings, which, however, convey
a very imperfect idea of the beauty
and expression of the original paintings."
We only object to stress laid
upon his humour, which is not his, or
at least his only, characteristic. He was
a great dramatist of human life; humour
was the incidental gift, tragedy
the more essential. Who had more
humour, more wit than Shakspeare,
and who was ever so tragic, or so
employed his humour as to set it
beside his most tragic scenes, with an
effect that made the pathos deeper?
In such a sense was Hogarth "comic."
His "Marriage à la Mode" is the
deepest of tragedies.
We turn to Mr Cleghorn's two interesting
and very useful volumes.
They give a compendious, yet, for general
use and information, sufficiently
elaborate view of architecture, sculpture,
and painting, from their very
origin to their present condition.
We know of no work containing so
complete a view. If we are disposed
at all to quarrel with his plan, it is
that in every branch he comes down
to too late a time. And as it is always
the case with writers who find themselves
committed to the present age,
he evidently finds himself encumbered
with the detail which this part of his
plan has forced upon him. In matter
it will be often found that the present
age overpowers all preceding, when
even it is vastly inferior in importance.
Nor is it very easy to avoid a
bias in speaking of contemporaries;
nor can a writer safely depend upon
his own judgment when he looks too
nearly and intimately on men and their
works, and fears the giving offence
by omissions, or by too qualified
praise. His divisions into schools,
with general remarks on each at the
end, give a very clear view, when
taken together, of the history of these
arts; and we are rejoiced to see them—architecture,
sculpture, and painting—thus
in a manner linked in history,
as they were formerly in the minds and
genius of the greatest men. In this
he follows the good course led by
Vasari. In his account of the Flemish
and Dutch schools, there is a strange
omission of the early Flemish painters
preceding and subsequent to the Van
Eycks, to the time of Rubens; nor is
the influence which the brothers Van
Eyck had upon art sufficiently discussed.
We propose at some future
day to treat more at length on this
subject, and to make extracts from
Michiel's very interesting little volume,
his "Peintres Brugeois." Even in the
short account of Van Eyck's invention,
Mr Cleghorn is somewhat careless, in
the omission of one important little
word, sue, in his extract from Vasari,
who does not exactly describe the
invention as "the result of a mixture
or vehicle composed of linseed oil or
nut oil, boiled up with other mixtures,"
but "with other mixtures of his own."
Vasari says, "e aggiuntevi altre sue
misture fece la vernice," &c.
In the following remarks on Greek
sculpture we find something consonant
to the ideas we have ventured to
express:—
"A remarkable difference is observable
in the female ideal, the result of
that refined delicacy and purity of
taste evinced on all occasions by the
Greeks. They neither increased the
stature, nor heightened the contours
of their heroines and goddesses, convinced
that in so doing they must
have sensibly impaired the beauty,
modesty, and delicacy of the sex.
In this the Greek sculptors conformed
to the rule inculcated by Aristotle,
and uniformly observed in the Greek
tragedy, never to make woman overstep
the modesty of the female character.
The Medicean Venus is but a
woman, though perhaps more beautiful
than ever woman appeared on
earth. Another peculiarity is very
striking. While a great proportion
of the male statues, whether men,
heroes, or gods, were naked, or nearly
so, those of the other sex, with the
exception of the Venuses, Graces, and
Hours, were uniformly draped from
head to foot. Even the three Graces
by Socrates, described by Pausanias
as decorating the entrance to the
Acropolis, were clothed in imitation of
the more ancient Graces." As to this
exception of the Venuses and Graces,
Mr Cleghorn seems to have in some
degree misapprehended the passage
relating thereto in Pausanias, who
distinctly says that he knows not who
first sculptured or painted them naked,
but it was after the time of Socrates.
These Graces of Socrates, by the bye,
may be the φιλαι, of whom he speaks
in his dialogue with Theodota, who,
he says, will not let him rest day nor
night.
The number of nude Venuses would,
it may be suspected, scarcely justify
the elegant compliment in the epigram
in the Anthologia—
"Γυμνην ειδε Παρις με και Ανχισης και Αδωνις,
Τους τρεις οιδα μονους; Πραχιτελης δε ποθεν?"
Paris, Anchises, and Adonis—Three,
Three only, did me ever naked see:
But this Praxiteles—when, where did He?
Our author censures the school of
Bernini, we should have thought
justly, remembering much that has
been said on the subject of the unfitness
of the ponderous material to
represent light action, if we had not
seen the Xanthian marbles brought
to this country by Sir Charles Fellowes,
and now deposited in the British
Museum. The female statues
that stood in the Tomb Temple are
exquisite, and perhaps equal to any
Grecian art, yet are they represented
with flying drapery. It is difficult
to make a rule which some bold
genius shall not subvert.
Most authors on art think it necessary
to descant upon liberty, as most
favourable to its advancement. It is
difficult to define what liberty is, so that
every example may be disputed. If
we take the age of Pericles, when the
wonders of Phidias were achieved, we
must not forget that Phidias himself
was treated by the Athenians with
such indignity that he left them, and
deposited his finest work at Corinth.
The republic suspected him of thieving
the gold, and he had the precaution,
knowing his men, to weigh the metal,
and work it so as to be removable.
We must not forget that Pericles, who
fortunately in a manner governed
Athens, was obliged to plead on his
knees for the life of Aspasia, whose
offence was her superior endowments.
When Alexander subjugated Greece,
art still flourished. Nor was it crushed
even in the wars and revolts and subjugations
by Cassander, after the death
of Alexander. We should not say
that the Augustan age was exactly
the age of liberty, but it was the age
of literature. The easier solution may
be, "Sint Mæcenates, non deerunt
Marones." Munificent patronage will
often raise what that state which
passes under the name of liberty will
often destroy.
"In the most favoured periods of
the fine arts, we find patronage either
dispensed by the sovereign, the state,
or the priesthood; or, if a commonwealth,
by the rulers who had the
revenues at their command. Possessing
taste and knowledge themselves,
and appreciating the importance and
dignity of art, they selected the artists
whom they deemed best fitted for
the purpose. The artists, again, respected
and consulted their patrons,
between whom there reigned a mutual
enthusiasm, good understanding, and
respect. Such were Pericles, Alexander
the Great, Julius Cæsar, Augustus,
Hadrian, Francis I. of France,
Julius II., Lorenzo and Leo X. of the
Medici, the nobles and rulers of the
different Italian cities and commonwealths,
the Roman Catholic church
and clergy, Charles I. of England,
Louis XIV. of France—and in our
own times the late and present kings
of Prussia, the King of Bavaria, Louis
Philippe of France, and—it is gratifying
to add—Queen Victoria and
Prince Albert of Great Britain. But,
indispensable as national patronage
is, it can have no sure or permanent
foundation, unless it be likewise supported
by the aristocracy and wealthy
classes. Instead of emanating, as in
the continental states, from the sovereign
and government, patronage in
Great Britain may be said to have
originated with the middle ranks, and
to have forced its way up to the
higher classes, and even to the government
itself."
There are interesting yet short
chapters on mosaic, tapestry, and
painted glass; subjects now demanding
no little public attention, coming
again as we are to the taste for decoration.
The ladies of England will be
pleased to find their needle-work so
seriously considered. Happy will it
be if their idleness leads to a better
and employed industry. Due praise
is bestowed upon Miss Linwood,
whose works are ranked with the
Gobelin tapestry. We remember seeing
many years ago an invention that
promised great things—painting, if it
may be so called, in wool work. It
was the invention of Miss Thompson,
and was exhibited, and we believe
not quite fairly—much mischief having
been done to the pictures by pulling
out parts, either for wanton mutilation,
or to see the manner of the working.
Whether from disgust arising from this
circumstance, or at the little encouragement
shown to it, the invention
seems to have dropped. Yet was the
effect most powerful, more to the life
than any picture, in whatever material;
and from the size of the works produced
by the hands of one person, we
should judge that it is capable of rapid
execution. We have a vivid recollection
of a copy from a picture by Northcote,
figures size of life, and of the
head of Govartius, in the National Gallery.
We are not without hope that
this slight notice may recall a very
effective mode of copying, at least, if
not of producing, original works.
Of painted glass, it is remarked,—
"The earliest notice of its existence
is in the age of Pope Leo III., about
the year 800. It did not, however,
come into general use till the lapse of
some centuries. The earliest specimens
differ entirely from those of a
later date, being composed of small
pieces stained with colour during the
process of manufacture, and thus forming
a species of patchwork, or rude
mosaic, joined together with lead, after
being cut into the proper shapes." Mr
Cleghorn omits to say that this more
perfect invention of painting on one
piece various tints and colours, and regulating
gradations of burning, was effected
and brought to perfection by
the same extraordinary man to whom
the world is indebted for the invention
of oil painting, Van Eyck. From the
discoveries of this extraordinary man,
or rather these extraordinary brothers,
Van Eyck, must be dated the advance
in the arts, both on glass and in oil-colours,
which brought to both the
perfection of colouring.
The wonderful splendour added to
design upon glass, which was so eminently
practised at Venice, without
doubt supplied to the Venetian school
an aim which it could not have had
under the old tempera system, but
which the new oil invention of Van
Eyck sufficiently placed within its
reach.
Yet, in one view, we may hence
date the corruption of art. The severity
of fresco was superseded by
the new fascination, and somewhat of
dignity was lost as beauty was more
decidedly established. As very much
of the splendour of glass painting was
thus introduced in oil, the greater facility
of more correctly representing
nature, and embodying ideas by degrees
of opacity, so gave the preference
to oil-painting, that not only the
old tempera and fresco were soon
neglected, but painting on glass itself,
as if it had done its work, and transferred
its peculiar beauty, lost much
of its repute, and, in no very long time,
the processes to which it owed its former
glory.
Mr Cleghorn remarks—"Within a
few years it has been much cultivated
in Great Britain; and the intended
application to the decoration of the
Houses of Parliament will materially
conduce to its improvement and extension."
It is unquestionably an art
of the greatest importance in decoration.
It has a charm peculiarly its
own. It dignifies, it solemnises by its
own light, and is capable of affecting
the mind so as particularly to predispose
it to the purposes of architecture.
It encloses a sanctuary, excluding the
very atmosphere of the outer world.
There is the impression and the awe
of truth under the searching and embracing
light, that should make the
utterance of a falsehood the more mean,
even sacrilegious. The art that can
have this power, nor is this its only,
though its greater power, is surely to
be cultivated and encouraged extensively.
There is now more attention
paid to the architecture and decoration
of our churches, and a taste has sprung
up for monumental windows. We
cannot resist, therefore, the temptation
to offer a few remarks upon the subject,
now that so many mistaken views
are taken as to the proper application
of this beautiful art.
There seems to be a false idea
abroad that the painted window is to
be predominant, not assistant to the
general impression which the architecture
intends. In reality it loses, not
gains, power by setting up for itself.
And, even in colours, it is not to vie
with shop display of colours "by the
piece," nor to set forth all its powers
at once in a full glare and blaze, and
too often without other object and
meaning than to display flags of strong
unmixed colours. A painted window
should be a whole, and have no one
colour predominant, but be of infinite
depths and degrees of tint and tone
with one tendency. Nor should it
aim at picture-making, however it
may be adapted to the emblematical.
It should never affect the absolutely
real—the picture illusion: it is altogether
of a world of thought and imagination
belonging rather to the inner
mind of the spectator than to his ordinary
thought or vision. The very
difficulty of the early manufacture was
an advantage to it, for great brilliancy
has resulted from the crossings and
hatchings of the leaden fastenings;
and now that we are enabled to hang
up, as it were, flags of colour, the
effect of those subduing subdivisions
is gone.
There is such a thing, so to speak, as
the genius of a material. That genius,
in the case of glass-painting, is not for
picture. Surely Sir Joshua Reynolds
made a great mistake when, in his window
for New College, he designed, as
for canvass, a picture, and that for the
most part without colour, which the
genius of the material required. Nor by
the largeness of his figures, and of the
whole as a design, did he assist, or
indeed at all agree with, the character
of the architecture. In such instances
many and small parts should make
one whole, both for the advantage of
the real magnitude of the particular
work, and that the magnitude of the architecture
be not lessened—a method,
indeed, which the Gothic architecture
studiously followed, in which even
minute design and detail give largeness
to all the leading lines. Daylight
is never to be seen—an imaginary
light is the all in all. In this respect
it should be like a precious stone,
which is best seen in all its infinite
depths, in shade, out of all common
glare. In the best specimens of old
glass-painting the positive and strong
colours were few, and in small spaces,
and adjoining them was a frequent
aiming at those which were almost
opaque,—even black and greens,
browns and purples, bordering on
black. And if emblematic subjects
were represented, they were in many
compartments, as if the window were
a large history-book with its many
pages—a world of curious emblems,
no one obtrusive. It is bad taste to
fill up a whole window with even
Raffaelle's Transfiguration; either a
picture or a large design is out of
place, and dissonant to the genius of
the art. One of the worst specimens
of painted window is that in the
Temple, all self-glorifying, painted as
a savage would paint himself, in flags
of colour as crude as possible. The
genius of the art is for innumerable
subdivisions, none obtruding, lest
there be no whole. It should be of
the light of a brighter world subduing
itself, veiling its glory, and diffusing
itself in mystic communication with
the inner mind; and like that mind,
one in feeling with all its varied depths
of thought. Colour and transparency
are the means of this beautiful art;
but these, as they are very powerful
require great judgment and determination
of purpose in the use. The
interwoven gold in the old tapestries
was more effectually to separate the
character of the material from the too
close imitation of nature or the picture;
so on the transparent material of
glass, the crossing, and sometimes
quaintly formed lead lines, always
marked, answer the same purpose.
Mr Cleghorn is too sparing of remarks
and information on the art of painting
on glass, which we the less regret, as
we are shortly to have before the
public the carefully gathered knowledge
upon this subject from the pen
and research of Mrs Merrifield. His
chapter on tapestry is more full and
interesting. We have not seen the
specimens of a new kind invented by
Miss King. It will be a boon to the
public if, in its adoption, it supersedes,
with a better richness, the Berlin
work, at which ladies are now so
unceasingly and so tastelessly employed.
The Art-Union speaks highly
of the invention. It is curious that,
in modern times, a Raffaelle tapestry
should be destroyed to get at the
gold. The anecdote is characteristic
of the equally infidel French of 1798
and of the Jew—excepting that the Jew
was ignorant of its value. Mr Cleghorn
thus speaks of the celebrated
cartoon tapestries—"They were sent
to be woven at Arras, under the superintendence
of Barnard Van Orlay and
Michael Coxes, who had been some
years pupils of Raffaelle. Two sets of
these interesting tapestries were executed;
but the deaths of Raffaelle and
the pontiff, and the intestine troubles,
prevented them being applied to their
intended destination. They were
carried off by the Spaniards during
the sack of Rome in 1526-7, and
restored by the French general, Montmorency.
They were first exhibited
to the public by Paul IV. in front of
the Basilica of St Peter's, on the festival
of Corpus Domini, and again at
the Beatification: a custom that was
continued throughout part of the last
century, and has again been resumed.
The French took them in 1798, and
sold them to a Jew at Leghorn, who
burned one of them—Christ's Descent
into Limbus—to extract the gold with
which it was interwoven."
There is so much information in
these little volumes, that were we to
notice a small part of the passages
which we have marked with the pencil,
we should unduly lengthen this paper,
which we can by no means be allowed
to do. We here pause, intending,
however, shortly to resume the pen on
the subject of art, which now offers so
many points of interest.
[8]
It is always with fresh interest that
we address ourselves to the perusal of
books relating to Great Britain's
colonial possessions. The subject,
daily increasing in importance, has
the strongest claims upon our attention.
In presence of a rapidly augmenting
population, and of the prodigious
progress of steam and machinery,
the question naturally suggests
itself—and more so in England than
in any other country—how employment
and support shall be found for
the additional millions of human
beings with which a few years (judging
of the future from the past) will
throng the surface of a country already
densely and superabundantly populated?
The problem, often discussed,
has not yet been satisfactorily solved.
Without broaching the complicated
question of over-population and its
antidotes, without attempting to decide
when a country is to be deemed
over-populated, we may assert, without
fear of contradiction, that emigration
is the simplest and most direct
remedy for the state of plethora into
which a nation must sooner or later
be brought by a steady annual excess
of births over deaths. It is a remedy
to which more than one European
state will ultimately be compelled to
resort, however alleviation may previously
be sought by temporising and
theoretical nostrums, more palatable,
perhaps, to the patient, but inadequate,
if not wholly inefficacious and charlatanical.
And, after all, emigration is
no such insupportable prescription for
a very ugly malady. Doubtless much
may be said upon the cruelty of making
exile a condition of existence; but
sympathy on this score may also be
carried too far, and degenerate into
drivel. At first sight the decree
appears cruel and tyrannical, until we
investigate its source, and find it to
proceed from no earthly potentate,
but from that omniscient Being whose
intention it never was that men should
crowd together into nooks and corners,
when vast continents and fruitful
islands, untenanted save by beasts of
the field, or by scanty bands of barbarians,
woo to their shores the children
of labour and civilisation. Love
of country, admirable as an incentive
to many virtues, may be pushed beyond
reasonable limits. It is so, we
apprehend, when it prompts men to
pine in penury and idleness upon the
soil that gave them birth, rather than
seek new fields for their industry and
enterprise in uncultivated and vacant
lands. What choice of these is
afforded by England's vast and magnificent
colonies! The emigrant may
select almost his degree of latitude.
And where Britannia's banner waves,
and her laws are paramount, and the
honest, kindly Anglo-Saxon tongue is
the language of the land, there surely
needs no great effort of imagination
for a Briton to think himself still at
home, though a thousand leagues of
ocean roll between him and his native
isle.
Excepting that they all more or less
refer to the British possessions at the
Cape of Good Hope, it were difficult
to find three books more distinct from
each other in character than those
whose titles we have assembled at the
foot of last page. An ex-settler, an accomplished
lady, and a shrewd sailor,
have selected the same moment for
the publication of their African experiences.
As in gallantry bound, we
give the precedence to the lady. Mrs
Harriet Ward, wife of a captain of the
91st regiment of foot, is a keen-witted,
high-spirited person; and, like most
of her sex when they espouse a cause,
a warm partisan of the feelings and
opinions of those she loves and admires.
She is an uncompromising
assailant of the system pursued at the
Cape, especially as regards our
treaties with the Kaffirs, whom she
very justly denounces as perfidious,
bloody, and unclean savages, untameable,
she fully believes, and with
whom Whig officials and negotiators
have been ridiculously lenient and
confiding. Although some of her
views are rather sweeping and severe,
she is certainly right in the main.
And we honour her for her heartiness
in denouncing the nauseous humbug of
the pseudo-philanthropists, whose
manœuvres have had a most prejudicial
effect upon our South African possessions,
and have given to persons in
this country notions completely erroneous
concerning the rights and
wrongs of the Kaffir question. But
whilst blaming the administration of
the colony, she finds the country itself
fair and excellent and of great resource.
Herein she differs from her
contemporary, Mr George Nicholson,
junior. This gentleman, lately a settler
at the Cape, cannot be too highly
lauded for the volume with which he
has favoured the public. We are
not quite sure, however, that the
public will think as highly of it as we
do. Our admiration is founded on
the consistency of its tone; upon the
steady, well-sustained grumble kept
up throughout. The preface at once
prepossessed us in favour of what was
to follow. Intended, doubtless, as a
dram of bitters to assist in the digestion
of the subsequent sour repast, it
consists of general depreciation of
other works regarding the Cape, and
especially of one by "a Mr Chase"—of
sneers at "stay-at-home wiseacres"
and hollow theorists—and of a vague
accusation brought against certain
colonial residents of "fomenting the
warlike propensities of the neighbouring
barbarians, to secure their own
ends," grievously to the detriment and
prejudice of their fellow-colonists.
"The peculiar bent," says Mr Nicholson,
"of each author's mind has, in
general, been so far allowed to predominate
as to exclude the hope of
forming a correct estimate of the
capabilities of the soil, climate, and
other interesting features of this extensive
country, by a perusal of their
works." Could the author of "The
Cape and its Colonists" read his book
with somebody else's eyes, he would
discover that his own "peculiar bent
has been allowed to predominate,"
and that the consequences have been
of the most gloomy description. Mr
Nicholson is evidently a disappointed,
man. Either by his fault or misfortune,
by the force of circumstances or
his own bad management, his attempt
to establish himself thrivingly at the
Cape resulted unsatisfactorily; and
this sufficiently accounts for the general
tint of blue so conspicuous in his
retrospective sketch of the scene of
his mishaps. The particular spot
where these occurred was a considerable
tract of land (called a farm) in
the district of Graaf Reinet, to arrive
at which he steamed from Cape
Town, where he had landed from
England, to Port Elizabeth in Algoa
Bay. The dismal aspect of this bay
painfully affected him. He "had
read some of the glowing descriptions
given of this part of the country,
by persons whose interest it is to
entice over settlers by any means,
even the most dishonest, in order to
have the benefit of plucking them
afterwards. It is true that I had not
believed the El Dorado stories so current
of this and other colonies, but
my expectations had been raised sufficiently
high to make the disappointment
at the really desolate appearance
of the place, perfect." The
apparent desolation is accompanied
by substantial disadvantages, which
Mr Nicholson complacently enumerates.
Water is scarce and brackish;
there are no vegetables or fruit within
twenty miles; hardly forage for a
team of oxen; the town is built on
sand, of which unceasing clouds are
hurled by prevalent strong winds
in the face of all comers. No wonder
that the new settler, evidently indisposed
to be easily pleased, made his
escape as quickly as possible from so
dreary a neighbourhood. Shipping
himself, family, and chattels in an
ox-waggon, he joyfully quitted Port
Elizabeth on a splendid morning of
the African autumn—that is to say,
about the end of March or beginning
of April, and set out for his property,
over a road which he describes as a
fair sample of Cape causeways, "nothing
more than a series of parallel
tracks made by the passage of waggons,
from time to time, through the
sand and jungle." Finding little to
notice on his way, he takes the opportunity
of having a fling at the
missionaries, whom he describes as
doing much harm, although actuated,
as he is willing to believe, by the best
of intentions. The stations serve as
the headquarters of the idlest and
most vagabond portion of the coloured
population, who have only to affect a
Christian disposition to find ready
acceptance and refuge. "No sooner
is a Hottentot, or other coloured servant,
discontented or hopelessly lazy,
than off he flies to the nearest station,
where he can indulge in the greatest
luxury he knows of—that of sleeping
either in the sun or shade as his inclination
may lead him, with the
occasional variation of participating
in the singing and praying exercises
of the regular inhabitants of the
place." If the zealous propagators
of Christianity, who thus encourage
the natural idleness of the natives,
were successful in their attempts at
conversion, it might be accepted as
some compensation for the temporal
evils and inconvenience they aid to
inflict on a colony where servants are
scarce and bad. But this is far from
being the case. Mr Nicholson assures
us (and we readily believe him) that
it is very rare to find an individual
whose moral conduct has been improved
by a residence at a missionary
station, and that for his part he prefers
the downright heathen to the
imperfect convert. Few of these
coloured Christians have any distinct
idea of the creed they profess; when
able, which is seldom, to answer
questions concerning its first principles,
their replies are parrot-like and
unintelligent. Against the general
character of the missionaries nothing
can be said; but they are throwing
away time, and their employers are
wasting money which might be employed
to far greater advantage in
England, or in other countries whose
inhabitants, equally in want of religious
instruction, are more capable of
receiving and comprehending it than
are the stolid aborigines of the Cape
of Good Hope. Mr Nicholson does
not dwell upon the subject of missionary
labours in Africa, but compresses
at the close of a chapter his
opinions, which are sound and to the
purpose. Mrs Ward says nothing
on the matter, and we ourselves are
not disposed to dilate upon it, having
already often taken occasion
to expose the folly of the system
that sends preachers and biblemongers
to the remotest corners of
the earth when such scope for their
labours exists at home. Let us
return to George Nicholson, his trials
and tribulations.
These were manifold; and he makes
the most of them. No encouraging
signs or omens cheered his progress
through the land, bidding his heart beat
high with hope. At two days' journey
from Port Elizabeth he halted for the
night at a farm belonging to an Englishman
of independent property, who
received him hospitably, but assured
him that sheep-breeding was a hopeless
speculation, owing to the bad
pasturage, to the bushy tangled
nature of the country, and to the
hyenas, there called wolves, who are
most destructive. As he proceeded,
pasturage improved, but other plagues
were apparent. In some places water
was as scarce as in an Arabian desert,
and as much prized—collected in pits
and husbanded with the utmost care.
"The maps of the colony indicate
rivers of the most encouraging description
in this part of the country.
But the district itself presents only a
series of dry water-courses, leaving
evident traces of their capability of
containing water for some hours after
storms." These sandy and deceitful
gullies intersect "a frightful country,
which can only be described as a succession
of low undulations, covered
with large shingles, between which the
most debauched-looking stunted tufts
of the poisonous and prickly euphorbia,
with here and there a magnificent
scarlet-headed aloe, forced their way."
We are at a loss to know what the
ex-colonist here means by the epithet
"debauched-looking," unless he intends
some obscure allusion to the
thirsty and disreputable aspect of the
brambles, remote as they were from
the vicinity of any water except one
spring of "Harrowgate, which, to
judge from the nasty effluvium it produced,
must have been possessed of
rare healing qualities." The severe
droughts are the destruction of the
settlers, entailing terrible losses and
often total ruin, and their pernicious
effects are aggravated by flights of
locusts. These the farmers do what
they can to keep off by smoky fires
and other means, sometimes with success;
but even when the insect cloud
pass over a field without ravaging it,
they leave a memento of their transit
in the shape of innumerable eggs. In
due time the young generation come
forth, and being wingless cannot be
driven away, but hop about and
ravage every thing till their wings
grow, and a gale of wind takes them
off to fresh pasturage. Mrs Ward's
description of a flight of locusts is
remarkably striking, and given with
a vigour of phrase not often found
in the productions of a female pen.
"The first two years of our sojourn
here, the locusts devastated the land.
The prophet Joel describes this dreadful
visitation as 'like the noise of chariots on
the tops of mountains,' 'like the noise of
a flame of fire that devoureth the stubble,'
as 'a strong people set in battle array;'
and any one who has ridden through a
cloud of locusts must admit the description
to be as true as it is sublime. On
one occasion, at Fort Peddie, the cloud,
flickering between us and the missionary
station, half a mile distant, dazzled our
eyes, and veiled the buildings from our
sight; at last it rose, presenting its effects
in some acres of barren stubble, which
the sun had lit up in all the beauty of
bright green a few hours before. Verily,
the heavens seemed to tremble, and the
sky was darkened by this 'great army,'
which passed on, 'every one on his way,'
neither 'breaking their ranks nor thrusting
one another.' So they swept on,
occupying a certain space between the
heavens and the earth, and neither
swerving from the path, extending the
mighty phalanx, nor pausing in the
course: the noise of their wings realising
the idea of a 'flaming blast,' and their
whole appearance typifying God's terrible
threat of a 'besom of destruction.'
"'They shall walk every one in his
path!' Nothing turns them from it.
And if the traveller endeavours to force
his way through them with unwonted
rapidity, he is sure to suffer. I have
ridden for miles at a sharp gallop through
their legions, endeavouring to beat them
of with my whip, but all to no purpose!
Nothing turns them aside, and the poor
horses bend down their heads as against
an advancing storm, and make their way
as best they can, snorting and writhing
under the infliction of sharp blows on the
face and eyes, which their riders endeavour
to evade with as little success. You
draw a long breath after escaping from a
charge of locusts; and looking around
you, you exclaim with the prophet, 'The
land is as the Garden of Eden before
them, and behind them a desolate wilderness;
yea, and nothing shall escape
them!'"[9]
Mr Nicholson's location included a
tolerable house with mud floors and
reed ceilings, and thirty-five thousand
acres of mountain and plain, having
the reputation of one of the best farms
in the district. The cost of this was
about £2000; and the property was
calculated to maintain five or six
thousand sheep, four hundred oxen,
besides horses. There were four
small springs, allowing the cultivation
of about sixteen acres of good
soil. Mr Nicholson, not wishing to
overburden the land, bought only
three thousand sheep, with cattle in
proportion, and began the life (described
by him as most discouraging
and unprofitable) of a Cape of Good
Hope sheep-farmer. Melancholy indeed
is the account he gives of the
profits and losses of that occupation.
In the first place, high wages and
good keep are scarcely sufficient inducement
to the lazy Hottentots to
take service; and when they are prevailed
upon, they are scarce worth
having. They are sent to the hills
with the flocks, which they have to
protect from beasts of prey, always
on the look-out for a bit of straggling
mutton. They themselves, however,
are conspicuous for their rapacity,
and by no means remarkable for
honesty; and doubtless many a stray
sheep is debited to the hyenas, of
whose disappearance the Hottentots
could give a very good account. The
wild animals, however—panthers,
jackals, hyenas, and, in some districts,
lions—are amongst the settler's
worst foes. These prowling carnivora
preclude the possibility of leaving
sheep out of doors after dark; and,
even when penned, the fleecy family
can hardly be considered safe. "In
stormy weather," saith Nicholson,
"my walled pens, although well
bushed at top, and above six feet
high, did not sufficiently protect me
from great losses by the hyenas,
which, on such occasions, would often
jump over and kill sheep, and often
carry one off in their mouths." This
latter feat is rather astounding; but
no matter, let us pass on to the next
grievances of the unfortunate settler
and sheep-farmer, grievances not peculiar
to himself, but shared by all
whose evil star guides them to the land
of locusts and hyena. The diseases of
sheep are numerous and fatal—scab,
consumptive wasting, inflammation
of the lungs, violent inflammatory epidemics,
poisonous bushes and hailstones,
drought and thunderbolts. "I
recollect one of my neighbours losing
upwards of three hundred valuable
sheep in a few minutes from the effects
of a hailstorm. Another farmer, living
at no great distance from me, lost
fifteen hundred sheep in one season
from drought; and on my own farm,
shortly before I became possessed of
it, four hundred sheep were destroyed
by lightning in a moment." Doubtless
such mishaps as these do occur,
but there is something particularly
painful in Mr Nicholson's lugubrious
style of piling them up, without intermixture
of the smallest crumb of
comfort for any unhappy individuals
planning emigration to the Cape.
Did he but vaunt the tender haunches
and juicy saddles, the fine and profitable
wool yielded by the remnant of
these afflicted flocks! But touching
the mutton he is mute; and as regards
the produce of the fleeces, he pledges
himself that, under the most favourable
circumstances, they never yield
more than four per cent on the value
of the flock—a small enough remuneration,
as it appears to us, unlearned,
we confess, in ways of woollen. But
we have not yet got to the worst
of the story. Supposing a farmer
fortunate, and that his flocks escape
the multifarious evils above enumerated—that
they are spared by the
lightning's blast, the big hailstones,
the inflammatory epidemic, and all
the rest of it. Not upon that account
may he rub his hands in jubilation,
and reckon upon a good clip and high
prices. He gets up one morning and
finds his sheep converted into goats,
or something little better. "Woolled
sheep have a natural tendency to
deterioration in this climate; and in a
few generations, notwithstanding the
greatest care, the wool begins to
show a tendency to assimilate itself
to the hairy nature of the coat, which,
is the natural covering of the indigenous
animal." So that, upon the
whole, Mr Nicholson inclines to prefer
goats to sheep, as stock, if properly
attended to, and the utmost possible
numbers kept. The profit is made
out of the skin, fat, and flesh, and
"those carcasses not required for food,
might be boiled down for tallow." He
perhaps overlooks, in this calculation,
"the scarcity and bad quality of the
fuel, composed of the dung dug out of
the sheep pens, and stacked for the
purpose." The present system, however,
evidently does not answer, judging
from his statement that there is
not "one sheep-farmer in the Eastern
Province (depending on the profits of
his farm) who is either contented with
the results of his farming, or is not
grievously indebted to his storekeeper,
except among the old-established and
primitive Dutch families, who spend
no money in manufactures, and have
but little to spend, had they the habit."
Is it unfair to argue, from this paragraph,
the absence, on the part of the
English colonists, of that frugal simplicity
of living essential in a new
country? A man settling in a country
like the Cape, should be prepared to
resign not only luxuries, but many
things which in Europe are deemed
positive necessaries of life, but which,
in the forest and prairie, may well be
dispensed with. We infer, from certain
passages in Mr Nicholson's book,
that he and his fellow-colonists were
rather above their position, too addicted
to the comforts of England to
submit to the privations of Africa, and
that they augmented their expenses
by procuring alleviations which their
primitive Dutch neighbours cheerfully
dispensed with. The Dutchmen, Mr
Nicholson tells us, spend no money in
manufactures. Then the English settlers'
wives were evidently quite out
of their element in the bush, or as occupants
of houses mud-floored and
roofed with reeds. "I have never,"
says Mr Nicholson, "seen an English
woman in the colony, at all raised
above the very poorest, who did not
complain bitterly of the inconvenience
she endured when living on a farm;
and I really know nothing more affecting
than the sight of the often elegant-minded
and well-educated sheep-farmer's
wife struggling with the
drudgery of her situation, and repining
fruitlessly at the deceptive accounts
which had induced her husband to
seek his fortune in South Africa."
Here we, perhaps, have a clue to one
cause of the jaundiced view the ex-settler
takes of things at the Cape.
The impossibility of obtaining the requisite
domestic servants drove Mrs
Nicholson from the sheep-farm in
Graaf Reinet to the more agreeable
residence of Cape Town, at a distance
of eight hundred miles; and thenceforward
her husband divided his time,
as best he could, between domestic
and farming duties. This seems an
uncomfortable state of things. The
want of the master's eye must have
been sadly felt at the farm during his
visits to Cape Town, and he must
have lost much time and some patience
in weary eight-hundred-mile
journeys, performed, for the most
part, on horseback.
The Kaffir war is, of course, a prominent
subject in the three books
before us. We find least of it in that
of Lieutenant Barnard, whose narrative
is chiefly of things at sea, and
most in Mrs Ward's volumes, which
consist principally of details of that
unsatisfactory contest. Mrs Ward
and Mr Nicholson concur in attributing
to Whig mal-administration,
and to the unwise treaties of Sir
Andries Stockenstrom, the numerous
disasters that of late years have
afflicted the Cape, and the bloody
and inglorious struggle that has cost
this country upwards of three millions
sterling. Here, again, is to be traced
the hand and mischief-making tongue
of the pseudo-philanthropists. By
those tender-hearted gentry was the
original impulse given to the series of
changes which have done so much
towards the ruin of a prosperous
colony. First came a scream about
the ill-treated Hottentots. These
were certainly often ill-used by their
Dutch masters, but that was surely
no reason for emancipating them, by
one summary ordinance, from every
species of restraint. This, however,
was the course adopted; and forthwith
the Hottentot, by nature one of the
most indolent of animals, spurned
work, and took to idleness and dram-drinking.
Since that fatal day, the
race has degenerated and dwindled,
and no doubt it will ultimately become
extinct. Having thus, greatly
to the detriment and inconvenience of
the colonists, procured the Hottentots
liberty, or rather license, the sympathisers
extended their charitable exertions
to Kaffirland. What pretext
existed for this new crusade does not
exactly appear, but its result was
even more mischievous than their interference
with the Hottentots. The
Kaffirs were told of grievances they
previously never had dreamed of, they
were rendered unsettled and dissatisfied,
(greedy and rapacious they
already were,) and at last they poured
into the colony, sweeping off the flocks
and herds, murdering the peaceable
settler, and setting the flaming brand
to his roof-tree. This incursion, the
ruin of thousands, at an end, the colonists
set to work to repair damages,
hoping for peace and a return of prosperity,
when a new calamity came
upon them. Mrs Ward shall describe it.
"Suddenly there was a voice, which
went through all the countries of the
known earth, crying aloud, 'Let the slave
be free!' Societies sent forth their ragged
regiments, with banners on which the
negro was depicted as an interesting child
of nature, chained and emaciated, whilst
a ruffian beside him held the lash over
his head. 'The people' really imagined
that the sugar plantations were worked
by lanky negroes, handcuffed one to another.
Elderly ladies, who abused their
neighbours over their bohea, rejoiced in
the prospect of 'emancipation and cheap
sugar,' and the people, the dear 'people,'
expected to get it for nothing. The Dutch
were quite ready to listen to the voice
that cried 'shame' at the idea of seizing
our fellow-creatures, packing them like
herrings in slave-ships, and bartering them
in the market. But how to set about the
remedy should have been considered. The
chain was broken, and the people of England
hurraed to their hearts' content.
Meanwhile, what became of the slave?
If he was young and vicious, away he
went—he was his own master. He was
free—he had the world before him where
to choose. Whether true or false, he was
persuaded he had been ill used. So,
whilst his portrait, with a broken chain,
sleek limbs, eyes uplifted to heaven, and
hands clasped in speechless gratitude, was
carried about the streets of our manufacturing
towns in England, (where there
was more starvation in one street than
among the whole of the South African
slave population,) the original of the picture
was squatted beside the Kaffir's fire,
thinking his meal of parched corn but
poor stuff after the palatable dishes he
had been permitted to cook for himself
in the boer's or tradesman's kitchen."[10]
And the frugal, hard-working
Dutchmen, an excellent ingredient in
the population of a young country,
finding themselves deprived of their
slaves, insufficiently compensated, and
in fifty ways prejudiced and inconvenienced
by the clumsy and injudicious
manner in which the emancipation
had been carried out, brooded over the
injustice done them, and began to
migrate across various branches of
Orange river towards the north-east
corner of the colony, and finally beyond
its boundary, preferring constant
warfare with the Kaffirs, entailed
upon them by the change, to
submission to the new and vexatious
ordinances, and to the enactments of
the Stockenstrom treaties. These
were in the highest degree absurd,
although their framer was rewarded
by a pension and title, as if he had
done the state some service, instead
of having actually been the main cause
of the last Kaffir war. A ridiculous
report got abroad, credited largely by
stay-at-home philanthropists, and
heartily laughed at by all who had
any real knowledge of the subject,
that the Kaffirs were a mild, peaceable,
and ill-used people—in Exeter-Hall
phrase, "a pastoral and patriarchal
race." "It was imagined," says Mr
Nicholson, "that they possessed a
strong sense of honour and probity,
and only desired to be guaranteed
from the tyranny of the colonists,
(poor lambs!); and a determination
was accordingly come to, to make
treaties with the chiefs, the performance
of which could only be secured
by their honourable observance of
what was detrimental to the interests
of themselves and their people, as they
understood it." Now the truth of the
matter is, that a more vicious and
treacherous race than the Kaffirs would
be sought in vain upon the face of the
inhabited earth. They unite every
evil quality. "The stalwart Kaffir,"
says Mrs Ward, "with his powerful
form and air of calm dignity, beneath
which are concealed the deepest cunning
and the meanest principles.
Some call the Kaffir brave. He is a
thief, a liar, and a beggar, ready only
to fight in ambush; and although, to
use the common expression, he 'dies
game,' his calmness is the result of
sullenness." Cunning is the most
prominent characteristic of this pleasing
savage. "It makes them," says
Lieutenant Barnard, "fully aware of
the humanity of the English character,
which prevents us from killing
an unarmed man; so, when they
find themselves taken unawares, they
throw their arms into the bush, pretend
to be friendly Kaffirs, and, in all
probability, fire on our troops when
they get to a convenient distance."
It also taught them, during the former
war, that they had no chance against
Europeans unless they could procure
firearms; to have time to get these,
they joyfully concluded a treaty, and
would have done so on far less favourable
terms, never intending to abide
by them. But those made were not
sufficiently stringent to keep even
civilised borderers in check. Some
were laughed at, others evaded, whilst
a third class defeated their own object.
Here is the twenty-fourth article, as
a sample of the last-named sort:—"If
any person being in pursuit of criminals
or depredators, or property stolen
by them, shall not overtake or recover
the same before he shall reach the
said line, (colonial boundary;) and
provided he can make oath that he
traced the said criminals, &c., across
a particular spot on said line; that
the property, when stolen, was properly
guarded by an armed herdsman;
that the pursuit was commenced immediately
after such property was
stolen; that, if the robbery was committed
in the night, the property had
been (when stolen) properly secured
in kraals, (folds,) stables, or the like;
and that the pursuit, in such case, was
commenced (at latest) early next
morning, such person shall be at
liberty to proceed direct to the pakati,
(Kaffir police!") and (we abridge the
verbiage) to make his affidavit and
continue his pursuit, "provided he do
not go armed, or accompanied by armed
British subjects." Was there ever
any thing more absurd than the
formalities here prescribed for the recovery
of property from a set of cattle-lifters,
in comparison with whom a
Scottish borderer of the olden time
was a man of truth and conscience,
and a respecter of neighbours' rights?
It explains, if it does not quite justify,
the fierce personal attack made by
Nicholson the sheep-farmer upon the
negotiator of such foolish treaties,
whom he designates pretty plainly,
without positively naming him. Mrs
Ward, too lady-like and well-bred
to descend to personalities—save in
the case of Kaffirs, whom at times she
does most lustily vituperate—contents
herself with blaming acts without
attacking individuals. The wily
Kaffirs, with whom theft is a virtue,
were not slow to discover the facilities
afforded them, and stole cattle to a
greater extent than ever. Persuaded,
moreover, that such regulations could
be prompted only by the weakness of
the framers, they looked forward with
glee to overrunning the entire colony
at their leisure. They only waited
till they should have sufficient muskets
and cartridges. These they easily
obtained; there was no lack of unpatriotic
white traders ready and
willing to supply them. This done,
the warwhoop was raised, and hostilities
recommenced,—the Kaffirs confident
of victory. There had been so
much parleying and lawyers'-work
with them, threats had so often been
uttered and so seldom carried out,
that the savages had formed an immense
idea of their own consequence
and power. Whilst the hollow peace
lasted, their constant and imperious
cry was "Bassila!" Give!—when
the mask of friendship was thrown
aside, they burst into the colony, desolating
in their progress as a swarm
of locusts; and if assailed by the
scanty forces that could at first be
brought against them, they plunged
into the tangled bush, and, with
levelled gun and assegai, shouted
"Izapa!" Come on! From the evidence
of Mrs Ward's own pages, we
think she hardly does them justice
in classing them with poltroons.
They appear to have made good fight
on many occasions. And if the white
feather be so conspicuous an ornament
in their savage head-dress, on what
ground can she claim such great credit
for the troops that overcame them,
and talk of the war as one "not so
noble in its details as those of the days
of Napoleon, but far more glorious in
its results." Here she evidently
writes from the heat and impulse of
the moment, as she does in some other
parts of her book. To this we do not
object, but rather prefer it to the cautious
and circumspect manner in which
most writers, especially male ones,
would have extolled the deeds of the
South African army, whose sole opportunities
of distinction were in petty
skirmishes with undisciplined and
naked barbarians. Not that the
Kaffirs could be considered as foes of
the most contemptible class. With a
monkey-like faculty of imitation, they
caught up smatterings of European
tactics. "Day by day," we quote
Mr Barnard, "they get more expert
in the use of fire-arms, and are observant
of our least movements, that I
have heard officers describe their
throwing out skirmishers as quite
equal to our own manœuvres." They
also attempt stratagems, often with
success. It is a common trick with
them to ensnare small parties of the
enemy by leaving a few cattle grazing
at the edge of a thicket, in which they
conceal themselves, and when their
opponents approach, issue forth and
assail them. In this manner were
entrapped Captain Gibson and Dr
Howell, of the Rifles, and the Honourable
Mr Chetwynd, who, as new-comers
to the colony, were not up to
the hackneyed decoy. The Kaffirs, on
the other hand, are too cunning to be
often taken unawares, although we
read of a few successful surprises in
Mrs Ward's chronicle of the campaign.
Colonel Somerset, the gallant commander
of the Cape mounted Rifles, is
the hero of one of these, upon which
Mrs Ward dwells with peculiar complacency.
A small division of troops
had halted to bivouac, when an officer's
horse ran away, and carried him over
a hill, past a "clump of Kaffirs" six
hundred strong. Reining in with
great difficulty, he dashed back and
made his report. What ensued is
described in appropriate style by our
martial and dashing authoress.
"Colonel Somerset lifted his cap from
his head, gave three hearty cheers and
shouted, 'Major Gibsone, (7th Dragoon
Guards,) return carbines, draw swords,
charge!' 'Hurrah!' was echoed back;
and on they dashed, dragoons, Cape corps,
burghers, Hottentots, and Fingos. They
found the enemy up and in position. Such
a mêlée! The cavalry dashed through
the phalanx of Kaffirs, and for want of
more cavalry to support them, dashed
back again! A Hottentot soldier, one of
the sturdy Cape corps, having two horses
given him to take care of, charged unarmed,
save his sword, and with a horse
in each hand. There was great slaughter
amongst the enemy.... Such
Kaffirs as could not escape fell down exhausted
and cried for mercy: there was a
great deal of cunning in this,—they would
have stabbed any one who approached
near enough to them to offer a kind word.
They had all had enough, however, of
meeting a combined force of dragoons and
Cape corps, and no doubt the latter tried
to surpass themselves. Those gallant
little Totties are an untiring and determined
band. How little do we know in
England of the courage and smartness of
the Hottentot!"
A very wholesome lesson for the
Kaffirs, two hundred of whom were
killed, and a good many more wounded,
but rather an inglorious victory for
regular cavalry—so, at least, it strikes
us, when we contemplate, in one of
Mrs Ward's illustrations, a parcel of
naked monsters, more like Mexican
apes than men, howling and capering,
and hurling javelins at an advancing
party of infantry. Any "phalanx"
formed by these uncouth barbarians,
would be, we should think, of a very
loose description, and not likely to
oppose much resistance to the charge
of her Majesty's 7th Dragoon Guards,
backed by the mounted Rifles, who in
spite of black skin, diminutive stature,
and cucumber shanks, are admitted on
all hands to be very efficient light
cavalry—the best, probably, for warfare
against savages. It were well,
perhaps, to increase their numbers; or
at any rate, if cavalry must be sent
out from England, it were surely advisable
to select it of the lightest description.
Dragoon guards are excellent
in their place, first-rate fellows to
oppose to helmeted Frenchmen or
Germans; but the Cape is by no
means their place, and Kaffirs are not
cuirassiers. It is like hunting weasels
with wolf-hounds; the very size and
power of the dogs impede them in the
pursuit of their noxious and contemptible
prey. There is one point of difference,
however, and by no means in
favour of the dragoons; weasels do
not carry loaded muskets, which Kaffirs
habitually do, firing them off
whenever occasion offers, from behind
bushes, out of wolf-holes, or from any
other sequestered and sheltered position,
where it is impossible for the
heavy six-foot-long dragoon guardsmen
to get at them. Red jackets,
glittering accoutrements, and tall
figures make up a capital mark for
the bullet of a lurking foe; and the
unfortunate warriors go perspiring
through the bush, with the thermometer
at 120° in the shade, cursing
the Kaffirs, but rarely catching them,
their clattering scabbards betraying
their approach, and their lofty helmets
visible, leagues off, to the keen-eyed
savage. Local corps—the native article—are
unquestionably the proper thing
at the Cape; the patient Hottentot
and plucky Fingo bear heat, hunger, and
fatigue far better than the beef-fed
Englishman. "The Hottentot will
smile quietly when there is neither
food nor water, and draw his girdle
of famine[11] tighter round his waist,
and travel on under the sun uncomplainingly."
The Fingos, when hard
run for rations, sometimes eat the
bullock-hide shields that form part
of their defensive equipment. These
Fingos, by the way, are rather remarkable
fellows. The word Fingo
means slave, and for a long period
the tribe that bore the name were in
worse than Egyptian bondage. They
were the serfs of the pitiless Kaffirs,
until Sir Benjamin de Urban rescued
them. "On the 7th May," says Sir
James Alexander, in his sketches of
Western Africa, "I witnessed a most
interesting sight, and one which causes
this day to be of immense importance
in the annals of South Africa. It was
no less than the flight of the Fingo
nation, seventeen thousand in number,
from Amakose bondage, guarded by
British troops, and on their way across
the Kei, to find a new country under
British protection." Although an indolent
race, fond of basking in the
sun, and who will not even hunt until
driven to it by hunger, they fought
bravely during the last war, proving
themselves, in many engagements,
better men than their former taskmasters,
who to this day never speak
of them but as their "dogs." Fingo
costume, as described by Mrs Ward,
is rather original than civilised. They
ornament their heads with jackals' tails,
ostrich plumes, beads, wolves' teeth,
&c. Across their shoulders is the skin
of a beast, around their waist a kilt
of monkey tails, and they bear enormous
shields, on which they sometimes
beat time as on a drum. "They
will lie down on the watch for hours,
and imitate the cries of animals to
attract the attention of the Kaffirs,
who find themselves encountered by
creatures of their own mould, instead
of the wolf or the jackal, as they expected.
Sometimes, on the other
hand, the Kaffirs will encircle the
Fingos, and dance round them, yelling
frightfully—now roaring like a lion,
now hissing like a serpent; but it is
seldom the Kaffirs conquer the Fingos,
unless the latter are inferior in numbers."
Notwithstanding their monkified
manœuvres, the Fingos have been
found very useful. Nay, the very
Bushmen, (the real aborigines of
South Africa,) of which diminutive
and miserable race specimens were
recently exhibited in England, were
availed of as allies during the war—a
detachment of them, armed with
poisoned arrows, accompanying the
British forces. This may appear rather
derogatory to British humanity, but
all is fair when Kaffirs are the foe. The
cruelties of these savages exceed belief.
Mrs Ward regales us with a few of
their barbarous exploits, and details
the tortures inflicted on the unhappy
wretches who fell into their hands. A
soldier of the 91st regiment, caught
straggling, was flayed alive, the little
children being permitted, by way of
a treat, to assist in tormenting him.
Another was burned to death. We
find no account of quarter ever being
given. And Kaffir impudence equals
Kaffir cruelty. When they found
themselves getting the worst of the
fight, after sustaining a reverse of unusual
severity, they would coolly send
ambassadors to the British to know
"why war was made upon them,"
and to request permission to "plant
their corn" in peace.
"After the affair at Fort Peddie, Stock,
a T'Slambie chief, sent messengers to
complain of our attacks upon him, when he,
too, was 'sitting still,' and only wished to
be allowed to 'watch his father Eno's
grave!' Very pathetic indeed! This
would sound most pastoral and poetical
in Exeter Hall. Stock was, no doubt,
'sitting still' beside 'his father's grave,'
but his people were at work, plundering,
burning, murdering, torturing, and mutilating
the troops and colonists, whilst he
'sat still' and approved. He should have
protected that sacred spot, and kept the
neighbourhood of Fort Peddie clear of
marauders."[12]
Mrs Ward writes like a man. We
mean this in no uncomplimentary
sense; on the contrary. Her clear,
natural, and lively style has a masculine
vigour and concision; her opinions
are bold and decided. To those she
emits upon the subject of the colony
and its prospects, we are inclined to
attach considerable weight. Women
are keen observers, and Mrs Ward is
evidently no ordinary woman, but a
person of great energy and penetration.
We more willingly rely on the observations
made during her marches and
countermarches, in her equestrian
rambles and at outquarters, than on the
croaking experiences of our friend the
sheep-farmer. A soldier's daughter
and wife—a life of change, hardship,
and danger, has quickened her perceptions
and ripened her judgment.
"When I read the miserable account
from Ireland of its past year's woe, and
the wretched prospect for the next, I long
to hear of ships making their way to
Algoa Bay, with emigrants from that
country. Some have arrived within the
last few weeks, and employment and provision
have been met with at once. Under
another system, affording protection to the
settler, this country will afford a refuge to
the starving population of Ireland. Well
might Sir Henry Pottinger be struck with
the capabilities and resources of this fine
colony, as he travelled through it. Here
is a vast and fertile space, comparatively
free, at this moment, from the murderous
heathen.... An industrious population,
located in sections, would be the
best protection for the country; and a
well-organised militia, or police force,
might be formed from those who are likely
to die of cold and famine at home. Until
such locations can be established, more
troops will be required; the country we
have added to our possessions must be
held by might, and to do this, a living
wall, bristling with arms, is necessary.
"The village of Bathurst, in the district
of Lower Albany, may be said to defend
itself to its best ability. This pretty
settlement has risen and flourished under
the patient labour of emigrants, sent
thither in 1820, chiefly through the instrumentality
of the Duke of Newcastle.
The labourer, the mechanic, the unthriving
tradesman, the servant without work,
may not only find employment, but are
absolutely wanted here. The former may
plant his three, and sometimes four crops
of potatoes in the year, to say nothing of
other produce, and manifold resources of
gain and comfort. It is singular that,
whilst our fellow creatures in Great
Britain, in 1847, were suffering from the
failure of their crops, the gardens of corn,
pumpkin, &c., in Kaffirland, were more
than usually productive.
"The miserable mechanics from our
crowded manufacturing districts may here
earn six shillings a-day with ease; the
ruined tradesman of England, with a jail
staring him in the face, will meet a welcome
here, where opposition in trade is
required, to promote industry, honesty, and
civility; and the youths of Ireland, instead
of arming themselves for rebellious purposes,
may, in this colony, serve their
Queen honourably, by protecting their
fellow creatures from the aggressions of
the savage."[13]
Favourable and encouraging accounts,
contrasting strongly with Mr
Nicholson's melancholy reports! That
gentleman's book, if read and credited,
is of itself enough to stop emigration
to the country whither Mrs Ward
thus strongly advocates it. And we
must bear in mind, moreover, that the
colonial districts of the Cape include
the least fertile and valuable portion
of South Africa. The finest pastures
and most healthy tracts are held
by Hottentots, Kaffirs, and Fingos.
Savages, experience teaches us, recede
and dwindle on the advance of the
white man. Increase the population
of the Cape Colony, and in due time
the colonists will push their way.
But Mr Nicholson strongly objects to
such increase, and holds it unwise and
impracticable. We cannot repeat,
even in a compressed form, all the
gloomy statements of his eighth chapter,
but will just glance at one or two
of its points. In the first place, in
the country which, as Mrs Ward
maintains, would receive "the starving
population of Ireland," and be the
better for their arrival, so long as they
were willing to work, Mr Nicholson
can only make room for one thousand
of the humbler classes of emigrants.
This, he opines, "would be the greatest
number who could obtain employment
suited to the capacities and habits of
decent labouring people." They are
to be principally female house-servants,
cooks, housemaids, and nurses;
and with respect to the few out-door
labourers he is disposed to admit,
those, he tells us, "would succeed
best who, without having previously
followed any particular occupation so
closely as to be almost unfitted for any
other, can, as the term is, 'turn their
hands to any thing.'" Married men,
in his opinion, should not go out at
all. These are certainly singular
doctrines, rather contrary to received
notions concerning emigration, as well
as to Mrs Ward's opinions. As to
persons of a superior class going out
to take farms, expecting to live upon
their produce, Mr Nicholson treats the
idea as utterly visionary and chimerical.
Such persons must possess an
independent income, in addition to
what it may be necessary to invest in
a farm. The question then is, how do
the Dutch manage? since the "late
resident" admits the superior success
and contentedness found amongst the
Boërs, and which were far more evident
before the wealthiest and most
intelligent of them had left the colony,
to seek at Port Natal refuge from
foolish legislation, and from the slave-emancipating
absurdities of the philanthropists.
May not an answer be
found in the following extract?—"It
must be admitted that a British population
is of more intrinsic value than
a colonial Dutch one; but then the
latter has, by long experience, been
taught to moderate hopes and necessities
within a compass little in accordance
with the go-a-head notions of the
present race of Englishmen of all
classes of society." Of course if "fast
men" go out to settle at the Cape,
with Captain Harris's book of South
African sports and a case of rifles and
fowling-pieces for chief baggage, and
with expectations of finding in the
bush grand-pianos for their wives,
and rocking-horses for their first-born,
they are likely to be exceedingly discontented
on discovering hard work
and many privations to be the necessary
conditions of life in a new country.
But Mr Nicholson is evidently
not one of those easily-pleased persons,
who put up with present disagreeables
in hopes of a more prosperous future.
To be sure, he denies the possibility
of any amount of energy, knowledge,
and industry procuring the emigrant
a settled and comfortable position.
"When all this energy must be expended
in an often vain effort to prevent
loss, or to overcome difficulties,
the control of which will only have a
conservative, and not a progressive
effect on the settler's circumstances,
its constant exercise soon sickens,
and the consequences will be despair
and misery." We should put more
faith in these deplorable accounts, were
they supported by the evidence of
other writers on the subject; but we
know of none who partake Mr Nicholson's
dismal views, at least to any
thing like the same extent. And his
whole book breathes a spirit of discontent
and depreciation that makes
us regard it with distrust, as the
splenetic effusion of a man soured by
ill success. With him, from Dan to
Beersheba, all is barren; or, if exceptional
fertility here and there prevails,
it is neutralised by an accumulation
of evils.
"The farmer is, in this country, always
checkmated, as it were, by the
natural order of things: luxuriant-looking
pasturage is of poisonous quality, and
the more wholesome kinds scanty in
quantity, and liable to be fatally diminished
by dry seasons. Crops of corn
and all kinds of vegetables grow most
abundantly, and are cultivated at but
little expense, in most parts of Albany;
frequent and heavy losses in wheat crops,
however, may be expected from the
'rust,' and less frequent and more partial
destruction from the attacks of locusts.
When a large general yield of grain
occurs, it must be sold at a very low
figure, as there is great difficulty in preserving
it for better prices, for want of
granaries and barns, which would be too
expensive to erect, and would, after all,
but ineffectually guarantee it from the
attacks of the numerous animals and
insects which swarm in this climate. If
sold for a good price in such a season, to
persons inhabiting other districts where
the crops may have failed, the expenses
of transport would form a serious item
of deduction from the general profit."[14]
May we be a breakfast for hippopotami,
if there is a possibility of
pleasing George Nicholson, junior,
Esq.! Here is a catalogue of calamities!
How he baffles the unfortunate
settler at every turn with some fresh
and inevitable disaster! When grass
abounds, it is poisonous, and, when
wholesome, there is none of it! The
rust and the locust conspire to destroy
the wheat: when it escapes both, it
must be sold for next to nothing, because
it is not worth while building
barns to store it. And if a Cape
farmer were extravagant enough to
build a granary, insects and animals
would empty it for him! Insects,
animals, and reptiles certainly are the
curse of the country—certain descriptions
of them, at least. Snakes are
very abundant, and nearly all deadly
in their bite. In the fertile district of
Zwellendam they abound, and frequently
occasion severe loss by biting
the sheep. Amongst the beasts of
prey, lions are getting thinned by the
guns of Boërs, settlers, and English
officers; the jackals and hyenas are
cowardly creatures, and fly from man,
but play the mischief with the flocks.
The rhinoceros is an ugly customer
when provoked, but far less so than
he would be were his sight better,
and his difficulty in turning his stiff
carcass less. The lumbering hippopotamus
abounds in most of the
rivers, and is shot from the banks by
huntsmen hidden amongst the bushes;
he is sometimes also taken in pitfalls,
with a sharp stake at the bottom,
which impales any unfortunate animal
chancing to fall in. His teeth are
more valuable than elephant ivory,
and his flesh—especially the fat,
which, when salted, eats like bacon—is
greatly esteemed by both colonists
and natives. The plains are in some
places infested by colonies of small
animals, rather larger than the squirrel,
and obnoxious to the horseman,
"who form a kind of warren in the
softer and more sandy portions of the
plain, which break in with the horse,
and bury him up to his shoulders in
the dust and rubbish, amongst which
the rider is pretty sure of finding himself
on his back." But if dangerous
beasts and troublesome vermin are
too plentiful in the colony, this annoyance
is compensated by an extraordinary
abundance of useful and
profitable animals. Numerous varieties
of the stag and antelope overrun
the plains. Mr Nicholson, whom we
suspect of a more decided predilection
for the sportsman's double-barrel than
for the crook and tar-barrel of the
sheep-farmer, speaks in the highest
terms of field-sports at the Cape, although,
faithful to his system of flying
off from a subject almost as soon as he
touches upon it, he gives few details,
hinting diffidence in approaching that
subject after Harris's famous book.
The little he does say impresses us
with the idea of a glorious supply of
venison and other choice meats. We
read of twenty thousand antelopes in
sight at one time; of a column of
spring-bucks (a variety of the same
family) fifteen miles in length, and so
closely packed, that nine fell at one
discharge from a large gun. The
extensive forest of the Zitikama,
which supplies the colony with timber,
abounds in buffalo, boar, and
antelope, in pheasants, partridges,
and guinea-fowl. The keen sportsman,
not wedded to the pleasures of
a city, will find abundant pastime
and recreation in so gamy a land as
this; and, when wearied by the monotonous
occupations of his farm, may,
almost without losing sight of browsing
herds and drowsy Hottentots,
pleasantly beguile an hour by stalking
a "blesbok" or circling a bustard—the
latter process consisting in riding
round the birds in large but decreasing
circles, which evolution, if skilfully
performed, causes them to lie close
till the horse walks them up. Such
is the manœuvre advocated and practised
by Mr Nicholson, who, having
at last left off grumbling, and begun
to be amusing, prematurely closes his
very brief volume, as if afraid of
writing himself into good humour on
his favourite subject of sporting, and
of retracting some portion of his previous
depreciation of a colony which,
with due deference for his opinion
and verdict, we persist in considering
a land of great promise to frugal,
hardy, and industrious emigrants.