text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/140

132 Mr. Lang’s, which he has never reprinted; but having now seen it I willingly concede the claims of priority on Mr. Lang’s part with regard to this matter. I trust he will manage to make that article, which I venture to regard as an epoch-making one, in some form more accessible to students of folk-lore. We really cannot be expected to follow Mr. Lang through all the periodicals of the English-speaking world. At the same time, from the cordial tone in which Mr. Lang refers to Mr. Farrer’s independent researches, I am glad to observe he agrees with me in regretting the undeserved oblivion into which they have fallen.

For the rest there is little to add on my part to Mr. Lang’s interesting autobiography of his gradual conversion to the Transmission Theory of the resemblance in folk-tales. I am too delighted with the adherence of such a great authority to the position which I have for some time contended, to quarrel with the terms in which that adherence is expressed. I venture to think he has wasted a certain amount of indignation upon those of us who have been careless enough not to notice this gradual conversion. No doubt he was right to dissemble his love for the Transmission Theory, but why does he kick us downstairs? When Mr. Lang, e.g., writes in Custom and Myth (p. 24), “The slow filtration of tales is not absolutely out of the question”, we who hold that filtration of tales is almost the sole source of their resemblance, can surely be excused for regarding him rather as an opponent than an adherent of our views. Again, Mr. Lang writes in his admirable and remarkable Introduction to Mrs. Hunt’s translation of Grimm (p. xiv): “Allied to the theory of borrowing, but not manifestly absurd, is the theory of slow transmission.” I think MM. Bédier, Cosquin, Gaidoz, and Krohn were a little to be forgiven if, reading such a sentence as that, they did not hold Mr. Lang to be an advocate of the theory of slow transmission. But, as I pointed out before, it is not so much his obiter dicta on the subject which caused us to think of


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/141

Rh Mr. Lang as a casualist pure and simple. We judged him, I imagine, by his acts. Finding him, in his specific treatment of definite tales, paralleling each incident of the tale with a hodge-podge of more or less similar incidents torn from their context in other tales, we could not but regard him as explaining these incidents as he had in so many cases admirably explained isolated customs and myths. Even when, in the case of Puss in Boots, Mr. Lang, as he now informs us, suggested a definite origin for the tale in Arabia, we considered this as only his fun. I, for one, thought he was merely attempting to reduce the theory of transmission to an absurdity. Such are the rewards of writing wittily.

Nor am I sure that Mr. Lang is yet disabused as to the portée of his procedure. He says: “I do believe that many details of story have been, or may have been, independently invented.” Plots, he now allows, if similar, must have been transmitted, but details he still thinks may have been independently invented. Does he mean that similar details in similar plots have been independently invented? I cannot imagine Mr. Lang would hold such a curious position; for it is just the similarity of details which renders it almost impossible that Cinderella, e.g., can have been independently invented in two different places with the mutilated foot incident.

Such a remark, however, as that of Mr. Lang’s, shows clearly to my mind that he has not thought out the details of the problem of diffusion; he has not, as the Germans say, “made earnest with it”, and it was there that my opportunity came in. Non omnes omnia possumus. And Mr. Lang must be contented with having solved only two out of the three main problems of folk-lore research. And here, if the time had arrived when I could, like Mr. Lang, give an autobiography of my interest in the folk-tale, I should have to express my gratitude to Mr. Lang for having attracted me, as he has attracted almost all the readers of the English-speaking world, to an interest in this subject

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/142

 134 by his brilliant, erudite, and suggestive disquisitions upon it.

I pass now from Mr. Lang to Mr. Nutt, from my friendly opponent to my opposing friend. Here the discussion deals with some remarks of mine about Cinderella, but it gradually extended to much wider issues. Mr. Nutt couples me with Mr. Newell, somewhat in the same fashion as I had coupled Mr. Lang and Mr. Hartland, and I am fitly punished for having set the example, for I have not hitherto laid down any general theory as to the origin and diffusion of folk-tales, whereas Mr. Newell has committed himself to a somewhat peculiar position on this point. In dealing with us together Mr. Nutt could not well avoid confusing the persons and confounding the issues. It so happens that in one of the results of our discussion on Miss Cox’s volume, Mr. Newell and myself arrived at the same conclusion, but I fancy that it is by far different ways. Let me say at once that with regard to the origin of the unnatural incidents in folk-tales I am of the Anthropological School, a disciple of Dr. Tylor and Mr. Lang. That by itself differentiates me, I fancy, from the erudite Secretary of the American Folk-lore Society; but while I grant that when these unnatural incidents were first used they reflected the savage culture and beliefs of the narrator, I cannot allow that they imply the same culture and beliefs whenever they are adopted as a convention of folk-telling, or are transmitted to fresh fields.

Mr. Nutt draws absolutely opposite conclusions from the existence of conventions of the folk-tale. “What is a convention?” he asks, and answers that it is a custom, mode of speech, or a turn of narration that is in full accord with the beliefs of author and audience. Au contraire, I would hold that convention was a dead mechanical form, the meaning of which is entirely absent in the minds of those using it. I may perhaps make my meaning clearer if I refer shortly to the special convention to which I was referring in my article on “Cinderella in Britain”.


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/144

136 it must have been “contaminated” by the introduction of the series of incidents derived from the tale now represented by the Grimms’ “One eye, two eyes, and three eyes”; in other words, at the time this happened, “One eye, two eyes, and three eyes” had become a convention of the folk-tale.

I will grant at once that it is possible that when “One eye, two eyes, and three eyes” was composed there was still surviving a belief in animal ancestry, but I see no reason for holding, as Mr. Nutt seems to hold, that this belief survived along with the story so long as it was told, which would imply that it survives in Germany in the present century; and still less do I believe that the belief survives in those countries where the story was introduced, because it might well be thought the story became popular, not because of the familiarity of the ideas contained in it, but rather because of their strangeness. Mr. Nutt thinks that he has made a point against me by stating my position in the following terms: “Fairy tales are not really old, but are stuffed full of imitations of old fairy tales which have disappeared,” and he repeats the well-worn witticism about Shakespeare being written by another fellow of the same name, whereas a truer statement of my case would be that Shakespeare’s words existed before his time, but not his works. If, however, he would only kindly add to his statement, “or have been imported from other countries,” it would be a not infelicitous statement of part of my position; it does more, it leads up to another part of my views to which I would draw attention, I believe for the first time, and that is the theory of the “survival of the fittest” in folk-tales.

The rigid Anthropological School of folk-tale research have had the merit of drawing our attention to savage custom, as explaining the unnatural incidents of folk-tales. Mr. Farrer went somewhat further, and drew attention to savage fairy tales themselves. Since his time several sets of savage tales have been published, especially in


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/143

Rh Analysing the ten various versions of Cinderella which have been discovered in these Isles, I found that they could be divided up into three different sections of incidents. The first set contained the archaic incidents of the animal aid, in one case of the animal mother; but this series of incidents is almost a tale by itself, a tale resembling that known in the collection of the brothers Grimm as “One eye, two eyes, and three eyes.” Then come another series of incidents, the real Cinderella story with the menial heroine and the shoe recognition. Finally, in some of the Celtic variants, the tale was expanded by a number of incidents obviously derived from the Celtic story of the “Sea Maiden”; this, we could all agree, is a late and inartistic accretion.

Now I am of opinion that the first set of incidents was not originally a part of the tale of Cinderella, but was somewhat inartistically tacked on to it as a convention of the folk-tale; for it will be observed that in one of Chambers’s variants this set of incidents is altogether omitted, and that in the other it is replaced by an entirely different set taken from the Catskin type of story. Now, if these incidents can be so easily removed or replaced, it shows, I think, that they are not a necessary and integral part of the story. This statement does not disagree, as Mr. Nutt seems to think it does, with my view that the folk-tale is a definite combination of incidents. The definite combination in the case of Cinderella consists of the following sequel of incidents:—Menial Heroine; Fairy Aid; Magic Dresses; Meeting-Place; Flight; Lost Shoe; Shoe Marriage Test; Mutilated Foot; False Bride; Bird Witness; Happy Marriage.

These are the essence of Cinderella; and when I speak of Cinderella I mean that particular sequel of incidents. I contend that that sequel must have at one time been hit upon by one definite folk-artist, and from him has spread throughout the Indo-European world, wherever that sequel of incidents is found. But early in the history of its


title: User:Ashcyrus10


title: User:Annejavier456


title: User:Ahan456


title: User:Raghuv9246


title: User:Manikvedi0178


title: User:Paulmartin347


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/145

Rh by Professor Haddon, Mr. Abercromby, and Dr. Codrington. Those who have read these tales will agree with me, I think, that they are formless and void, and bear the same relation to good European fairy tales as the invertebrata do to the vertebrate kingdom in the animal world. Judging by them, at any rate, we should not be disposed to think that the majority of European folk-tales have descended unchanged from the time when the European world was savage. Yet when Europeans were savages they probably told fairy tales, and these were probably as amorphous as the fairy tales of Samoa or the Torres Straits.

One can therefore quite understand their disappearing when brought into competition with tales having a more definite backbone of plot. The human mind, and especially the uncultured mind, has limit to its capacity for remembering folk-tales. I am of opinion, from my own researches in folk-tale fauna of various districts of the British Isles, that one hundred tales is about as much as a peasant can remember. If, therefore, at a stage subsequent to the primitive one, a number of tales having a definite plot are introduced into the country, a struggle for existence among the folk-tales would occur which would result in the almost total disappearance of the primitive stock. As a matter of history, we can actually watch a similar process going on in these Isles, where the superior artistry of Perrault’s or Grimm’s tales have caused almost the total disappearance of the original stock of English folk-tales, as I have found by sad experience.

This is what I believe has occurred in Europe, and I am supported in my belief by the remarkable similarity between the story-store of the various European countries. From the theory of transmission which I hold, this similarity can only be due to the migration of these tales from one country to another. Where these common


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/146

 138 stories of Europe have widely-spread analogies in the Indian Peninsula, I am inclined to agree with M. Cosquin that they were introduced from India within historic times, and ousted the native stories by superior narrative force. By this means I am enabled to explain, on the anthropological method, the existence of unnatural incidents in these common stories; for almost all the savage ideas postulated by Mr. Lang to explain these incidents had existed in India throughout all time, up to and including the present day. At the same time, I should not deny that there may still be in existence a few primitive European stories which have escaped the struggle for existence with the Indian ones; nor should I deny the possibility that some of the common European stories have had their origin in Europe itself since primitive times. Cinderella appears to be one of these.

The series of incidents to which I have previously referred, as forming the true Cinderella, seem to me to have arisen in Europe during the feudal times, for the essence of the story involves monogamy, both in the choice of the hero and in the conception of the heroine as a step-daughter. The fact of the test implies this also, and the shoe involves a state of culture in which there was nothing like leather. The choice of a menial heroine by the high-placed prince involves also the conception of a social status quite alien to savage ideas. And here I must protest against the curious procedure on the part of Mr. Lang, who, in discussing this part of my argument, ventured not only to traverse my position, but also to correct my English. I had said that I doubted whether there was much “variation” of social position amongst savages, meaning, of course, that there was rarely, if ever, exogamy between the various sections or castes into which savage tribes are almost invariably divided. Mr. Lang calmly suggests that I had meant to say “variety” instead of “variation”, and assumes me to deny the existence of sections or castes at all. I venture to think that this is a


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/147

 Rh method of controversy which should not be generally adopted, and I hasten at once to add that I feel sure that Mr. Lang would not have adopted it if he had understood my expression.

I return, however, to the introductory portion, which is now so frequently tacked on to the pure Cinderella. This, as I have said before, not only traces back its origin to primitive times, or, at least, primitive conceptions, but it must have been tacked on, I contend, when those conceptions had become conventional; nor does it at all follow that this part was tacked on to Cinderella in the place where that convention had originally grown up. For conventions may be transmitted as well as handed down, and therefore I say, that, where we find these conventions, we have no surety that the conceptions once existed out of which the convention has grown. Hence I still remain of my heresy, at which Mr. Nutt was so surprised, the archæological value of such traits is much reduced—and not enhanced—by such conventions.

Permit me to develop this position a little further, for it points to a fatal flaw in the anthropological method of folklore; it applies not alone to fairy tales, but to almost all branches of the subject. In saying this I do not speak as an opponent of that method, for, as a matter of fact, I have approached the whole subject from the anthropological side. I contributed to the Journal of the Anthropological Institute before ever I joined the Folk-lore Society. My contributions to the Journal were much more solid and elaborate in character than any I can ever hope to make to the pages of. But when I came to the study of folk-lore, under the guidance of our past and present Presidents, I found, underlying all their work, an assumption which did not seem to be justified by the evidence they adduced or at our disposal. The doctrine of “survivals” implies that they survive from a period of culture akin to that of the savage of to-day; but it seems to be implied that what has survived is not alone the


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/148

140 but the state of culture. Thus the distaste for horseflesh in England is said to be a survival of the worship of Odin, to whom the horse was sacred, or even of an earlier stage when the horse was a totem. Hence there is a tendency to use such a survival as a proof of former existence in this country, either of the worship of Odin, or of the existence of a totemistic stage of society. But this leaves out of account the possibility—nay, the probability—that this and other survivals have been introduced into this country when they had already arrived at the stage of survivals. For surely it is of the essence of folk-lore custom that it is handed on without a consciousness of the original belief which gave rise to the custom. Thus, I throw salt over my left-shoulder if I am unlucky enough to spill it, without being in the slightest degree able to give a reason for my so doing; indeed, it is because I cannot give a reason that I do it, in so far as I am superstitious. Now that custom I have taken from my mother and my nurse, or my uncle, or my aunt, or from some foreigner with whom I have become intimate. What criterion have we to distinguish between what I would call vertical, in contradistinction to lateral, tradition? An Englishman of the Middle Ages sees his father and relatives performing this salt-throwing because they have seen their fathers do it: that is vertical tradition. But as we find this salt-throwing a custom throughout Europe, it must also at one time or another have been passed from one country to another, or from one district to another, by one or more persons in each case. When this was first adopted in any one district, not from parents or relatives, but from strangers who may have become relatives, that will be a case of lateral tradition. Now what criterion has been discovered to distinguish between vertical and lateral tradition? I can see none: and until some such criterion has been discovered I cannot see how we can use tradition for ethnological purposes. Thus I correlate my heresy with regard to the anthropological evidence to be derived from folk-tales,


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/149

Rh with the same heresy applied to folk-custom, and I cannot therefore agree with Mr. Nutt, that either the survivals found in folk-tales or those found in custom can be used as evidence of the former existence of the beliefs on which those survivals are founded in the actual place where either tale or custom is now to be met with. Man has struggled upward from savagery, but by the struggle for existence among the survivals of savagery many of them have disappeared, to be replaced by others from alien sources: who shall say at this time of day which are native, which alien?

At this stage of the argument Mr. Nutt would “fain for the moment glance at universal history from the sole standpoint of our studies”. However interesting this may be, I fear I cannot follow him in his excursus. Mr. Nutt has a passion for tracing things back to what the Germans call the “Cosmic Gas”, the primeval chaos out of which the Universe has sprung. I admire his courage, but will not attempt to imitate it. I know that “Cosmic Gas” well: he comes from Berlin, and somewhat bores me. I prefer to keep with my foot on the solid ground of facts which I can control. Mr. Nutt illustrates this fundamental difference between our methods by a very pertinent example. In dealing with the existence of the legend of the “Pied Piper” in the Isle of Wight, as found in the work of Abraham Elder, written in 1870, Mr. Nutt complains that I do not go back further than Abraham Elder himself, or Verstigan, the source which he quotes. I do not go back further, because I have nothing further to go back upon. Mr. Nutt desires to see a little further through the brick wall, and he indulges in a number of hypotheses of why Abraham Elder quoted Verstegan, and whether he would have done so if he had not some germ of legend actually before him in oral tradition in the Isle of Wight. I prefer to stick to my Verstegan until we know something more about some traces of the tradition in the Isle of Wight itself. The proper scientific course would be to make


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/150

142 investigations in loco, and I remember asking Mr. Nutt to do so when he was in the Isle of Wight a couple of years ago, “instead of which”, as the judge said, he prefers to give “a glance at universal history from the standpoint of our studies.”

I am not concerned even with the universal history of the folk-tale in general. I desire to ascertain the history of certain specific folk-tales, especially of those which are common to several European countries, and I am glad to see that Mr. Abercromby, in the recently issued number of, recognises that this is the real issue; and in studying it I am willing to receive light from all sides. I am an eclectic, and so, it seems, manage to displease all sides. But the facts are complex, and are not likely to be explained by any one theory. Thus, when M. Cosquin proves that certain European tales, folk-tales, have come from India, I am ready to accept his position for those particular folk-tales, and for this, I see, I am called an Indiamaniac by Mr. Hartland, with more force than elegance. At any rate, I am not an India monomaniac, and I only believe in an Indian original for that third or half of a country’s story-store which is common to the rest of Europe, and only when a story out of that fraction can be shown to be widely spread or to be very ancient in India. So my withers are quite unwrung when Mr. Hartland or Mr. Nutt paint to any particular story, and ask for my proof that this comes from India. Hitherto we have been confining our attention too much to the similar stories of Europe; it is the dissimilar and unique stories that have no parallels as stories which should attract our attention, especially if we are on the search for survivals. I have myself treated of one such unique story in the case of Childe Rowland and showed there, I hope, that I was no foe to the method of Survivals on appropriate occasions.

And now I think I have answered in principle most of the points in dispute between my opponents and myself, and may perhaps prevent further dispute as to my meaning


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/151

 Rh if I sum up in the form of theses the conclusions I have arrived at as the result of some five years’ study of the folk-tale.

(1) The “unnatural incidents” in folk-tales often represent survivals of savage culture (Lang, Farrer).

(2) But unnatural incidents can become conventional, and used and imported without reference to their savage origin.

(3) Resemblance between folk-tales, extending beyond three or four linkages of incident, is due to transmission, not casual coincidence, however far distant the places of collection.

(4) When such resemblances exist between European folk-tales and those found widely spread, or anciently collected, in the Indian Peninsula, the probability of origin rests with India (Benfey, Cosquin). Such tales are rarely more than a third of the story-store of any one country, probably not a tenth of the whole of European folk-tales.

(5) Tales having foreign parallels to all or most of their incidents in the same plot, cannot be used as anthropological evidence, except for the country of their origin.

(6) Tales with definite plot, of complicated yet artistic form, are not primitive in origin.

(7) Tales of complicated plot, and more than three or four incidents, must have been thought out in the first instance by a definite folk-artist.

(8) Tales struggle for existence in the folk-mind, and the more artistic oust the less and survive.

These seem to be the inductions to which we are led by a survey of the actual contents of the folk-tales of the Indo-European world, without prejudice to any theories as to what lies behind those facts derived from any universal history of mankind.

Lastly I come, for a particular reason, to our President’s


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/152

144 reference to my fairy-tale books in his Annual Address He first brings against me the charge of having “maimed, altered, and distorted” my originals, a charge which, I observe, is reiterated by Mr. Hartland in the not overkindly review of my latest book in the number of just issued. I am glad to find that my critics read my prefaces with such reverent attention, for they cannot have derived their impression from any direct comparison of the tales which appear in my book with their originals. I have gone into the matter with my two volumes of English tales, and find that one-third of them are absolutely unchanged, verbatim et literatim with my originals, and this applies in nearly every case to the few I have collected from friends or correspondents, whose MSS. have gone untouched to the printers. Half of the stories have merely been altered in language, mostly by turning the Latinisms of the collectors into the simpler Saxon of the folk. Only in the case of some sixth of the stories have there been any considerable alterations, all of which are mentioned in the notes. So that there has been not so much “maiming and distorting” after all, and for what there is I can quote the great authority of the Grimms. Mr. Hartland challenges me, I see, to quote my authority for this, which shows that, however diligently he may read my prefaces, he does not remember them, for I gave the passage to which I refer in the original German in a note to the preface of my first volume. I may repeat it here in an English version. “It will of course be understood”, say the brothers Grimm in the preface to their tales, “that the language and the details have been for the most part supplied by us.” Why does not Mr. Gomme protest against the distortion and maiming as practised by the Grimms?

But I am more concerned with the reason our President gives for his protest; it is because these wicked practices of the Grimms and myself will prevent the folk-tale from receiving “all the credit it really deserves as an element


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/153

Rh of the anthropology of civilised races”. Ay, there’s the rub. Our President is interested in the folk-tale because of the information he can extract from it as to man’s primitive customs, institutions, and beliefs. Similarly, Mr. Hartland, in his Chairman’s Address at the Congress, confessed that his chief interest in folk-lore in general, and folk-tales in particular, was on account of the information they contained as to the beliefs of our ancestors. Exactly so. These gentlemen, as I have put it previously, are fortune-hunters, who seek to get as much anthropological wealth out of the folk-tale as they can; I and a few others love her for herself alone. And out of this love springs my protest against their use as corpora vilia for the anthropologist, and generally I protest against the practice of regarding folk-lore as solely so much material for anthropology, so much contribution to the study of institutions and their evolution.

What has attracted some of us to the study of folk-lore has been of a two-fold character. In the first place, it is the last corner of knowledge which still remains comparatively unexplored, and so offers most promise of prizes to the successful investigator. There has been the hope that by going back to our nurse’s or our mother’s knee we may find the secret of human destinies. But above and beyond this folk-lore appeals to all that which goes to make romance: the myth, the saga, the legend, combine with the mysterious lore of the unseen which lies at the root of what we term superstition. This is the part of folk-lore which attracts me, and, I fancy, the majority of the members of the Folk-lore Society. The institutional side of the study leaves us cold, and we cannot get up much enthusiasm for those primitive county councils known as folk-moots.

I claim to be an anthropologist also. But my anthropology includes likewise the study of the evolution of man’s artistic nature. I would study Man the poet and the dreamer, as well as the man of the flint chip or the


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/154

146 folk-moot. The corroboree and the mumming-play have grown into the dramas of Æschylus and of Shakespeare; the nursery-rhyme and the folk-song have developed into the lyrics of Sappho and of Shelley; the folk-tale and the droll have given rise to Walter Scott and Charles Dickens. The early stages of these processes in the evolution of man are no less part of anthropology, they are more part of folk-lore, than the study of the evolution of the folk-moot into the County Council, or of the totem-clan into the State.

[Apart from secondary questions, there are but two main points of difference between Mr. Jacobs and myself, one general and one special. The general one involves the question of, to use Mr. Jacobs’ very happy phrase, lateral versus vertical influence in the transmission and diffusion of folk-lore. I do not think the difference is very great, but difference there is. I am inclined to lay more stress upon vertical influence, although I do not in the slightest degree deny the fact of lateral influence. It is upon the latter that Mr. Jacobs lays most stress, indeed, one might gather from his words that he minimises vertical influence more than I believe he really does—it is the misfortune of polemical exposition that it commonly leads to over-accentuation of particular aspects of truth. But I try and justify my belief in the importance of vertical influence by an appeal to the only available evidence, that of history, a proceeding which, to my wonder, excites the merriment of the philosophic student of history Mr. Jacobs’ friends know him to be. Where can a criterion be found? he despairingly cries; and when I humbly try to furnish one he would fain laugh it out of court.

Doubtless some imperfection in the presentment of my argument obscured its real import for him. Let me briefly restate it. The folk-culture of modern Europe is, so far as I can read the facts of history, uninterruptedly connected


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography. Sup. Vol II (1901).djvu/401

Papers, Dom. 1671-2, p. 254). He married, secondly, Catherine, daughter of Edward Russell, and sister of Edward, earl of Orford.

By his first wife he had three daughters, viz., Margaret, married Robert King, second baron Kingston [q. v.] ; Mary, married Sir Edward Ayscough of South Kelsey, Lincolnshire ; Grace, married Thomas Hatcher of Kirby, Lincolnshire. Letitia, his daughter by his second wife, married Sir Rowland Winn of Nostell Priory, Yorkshire.

Harbord's younger brother Charles, who was knighted by Charles II, was first lieutenant of the Royal James, and fell in the battle of Southwold, 28 May 1672, refusing to desert his commander, Lord Sandwich. A monument to him is in Westminster Abbey (, Diary, ed. Wheatley, v. 124, viii. 164, 312;, Westmonasterium, ii. 112).

[Baker's History of Northamptonshire, ii. 172; other authorities given in the article.]  HARDINGE, ARTHUR EDWARD (1828–1892), general, born 2 March 1828, was second son of Henry Hardinge, first viscount Hardinge [q. v.], by Lady Emily Jane, seventh daughter of Robert Stewart, first marquis of Londonderry [q. v.], and widow of John James. Charles Stewart, second viscount Hardinge [q. v. Suppl.], was his elder brother. Arthur was educated at Eton, and commissioned as ensign in the 41st foot on 7 June 1844. He exchanged to the 53rd foot on 28 June, and in July went to India as aide-de-camp to his father, appointed governor-general. He served in the first Sikh war, and was present at the battles of Moodkee, Ferozeshah (where his horse was shot), and Sobraon. He was twice mentioned in despatches (London Gazette, 23 Feb. and 1 April 1846), and received the medal with two clasps. He obtained a lieutenancy in the 80th foot on 22 Dec. 1845, and a company in the 16th foot on 1 June 1849. On 22 June he exchanged to the Coldstream guards as lieutenant and captain. He passed through the senior department at Sandhurst, and obtained a certificate.

He served on the quartermaster-general's staff in the Crimean war from 8 March 1854 to 25 June 1856. He was present at the Alma with the first division, and was mentioned in despatches (London Gazette, 10 Oct. 1854). He was also at Balaclava and Inkerman and the fall of Sebastopol. He was given a brevet majority on 12 Dec. 1854, and became captain and lieutenant-colonel in his regiment on 20 Feb. 1855. He received the medal with four clasps, the legion of honour (5th class), Medjidie (5th class), and the Turkish medal, and was made C.B. on 2 Jan. 1857. On 25 May 1858 he became brevet colonel.

He was assistant quartermaster-general at Shorncliffe and Dublin from 1 Oct. 1856 to 29 July 1858, when he was appointed equerry to Prince Albert, on whose death in 1861 he became equerry to the queen. He was promoted major in the Coldstream guards on 16 March 1867, and lieutenant-colonel on 2 Sept. 1868. He went on halfpay on 4 Jan. 1871, and was promoted major-general on 9 April. He commanded a division in Bengal from 22 Oct. 1873 to 27 Oct. 1878, and on his return to England he gave a lecture at the United Service Institution on the 'Results of Field-firing in India' (Journal, xxiii. 402). He became lieutenant-general on 1 Oct. 1877, and general on 1 April 1883. He commanded the Bombay army from 30 March 1881 to 11 Dec. 1885, and was governor of Gibraltar from 1 Nov. 1886 till 25 Sept. 1890. He was made K.C.B. on 9 Jan. 1886, and C.I.E. on the 22nd of the same month. The colonelcy of the royal Inniskilling fusiliers had been given to him on 20 Nov. 1881, and on 13 March 1886 he was transferred to the king's royal rifles as a colonel-commandant.colonel-commandant. He was made colonel of the Coldstream Guards on 25 Feb. 1890. [sic]

He died on 15 July 1892 from injuries he had received in a carriage accident at Weymouth nine days before. He was buried at Fordcombe church, near Penshurst, Kent. On 30 Dec. 1858 he married Mary Georgiana Frances, eldest daughter of Lieutenant-colonel Augustus Frederick Ellis, second son of the first Lord Seaford. They had, with three daughters, an only son, Sir Arthur Henry Hardinge, K.C.M.G., who was appointed British minister at Teheran in 1900.

[Times, 16 and 21 July 1892; Army Lists; Lodge's Peerage.]  HARDINGE, CHARLES STEWART, second Viscount Hardinge (1822–1894) of Lahore and King's Newton, eldest son of Sir Henry Hardinge, first viscount [q. v.], and elder brother of Sir Arthur Edward Hardinge [q.v. Suppl.], was born in London on 12 Sept. 1822. He was educated at Eton and destined for the army, but while a boy met with a severe accident which compelled him to use an artificial leg for the rest of his life. In 1840 he matriculated at Christ Church, Oxford, and graduated B.A. in 1844. Within a month after taking his degree he accompanied his father to India as private secretary, and was with him during all the period of his governor-generalship. From 8 Aug. 1851 to 1856 he


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/155

Rh with the folk-culture and the higher culture of ancient Europe; the general culture of the former differs from that of the latter, chiefly owing to the intrusion of an alien, non-European element, Christianity, which was from the outset and has, persistently, been hostile to the beliefs and conceptions of that culture, but which, as manifestly exhibited by unimpeachable evidence, was compelled to compromise with it in many and far-reaching ways. The ancient European, whether priest or peasant, had certain beliefs manifested in certain rites; the modern European priest has entirely different beliefs and rites, but the modern European peasant has beliefs and rites which are patently affiliated to those of antiquity. Vertical influence I would urge. Again, the ancient European poet and peasant had a common store of mythic and heroic fancies upon which they drew for recreation and edification; the modern European culture-poet seeks, for the most part, other sources of inspiration, or, if he apply to antique legend, he does so in an entirely different spirit from that of antiquity, but the peasant poet still deals in material much of which is manifestly affiliated to that of pre-Christian Europe. Vertical influence I would urge. I assert nothing, the subject does not lend itself to dogmatic assertion, but I hold it at once more consonant with scientific method and with common-sense to look in the first place to development for an explanation of the phenomena of European folk-lore. In this connection I gladly hail Mr. Jacobs’ doctrine of the survival of the fittest in the domain of folkfancy, but it leads me to other conclusions than those to which, apparently, it leads him. Marking the fact that, with the single exception of some of the Jewish chroniclers, all the greatest story-tellers of the world have been men of European birth, I think it as likely that the many tales found chiefly in Europe, and the origin of which is in dispute, should have been evolved in situ, as that they should be imported from the outside. I admit fully that each case (and this applies to the items of custom as well


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/156

148 as those of folk-fancy) requires separate investigation, but I do not start with a prejudice against European origin. I will not assert that Mr. Jacobs really has any such prejudice, but he sometimes writes as if he had—a matter of loyalty, I fancy, to allies who, in this respect, are more dogmatic and less scientific than he is.

The bearing of recent speculation respecting the original home of the Aryans upon this question seems hardly to have been duly appreciated. When M. Cosquin, arguing against the Aryan mythology detritus theory of folk-tales, asked if the Aryans had brought sets of the Bibliothèque bleue with them from the slopes of the Hindoo Koosh, the gibe was a shrewd one, and it told; but it loses point if the Aryans have always been in Europe. The burden of proof is now thrown upon the advocates of external influence.

I will now turn from the general to the special ground of difference between Mr. Jacobs and myself, from the origin and development of European folk-lore at large to the origin and development of the Cinderella story group in particular. To come at once to close quarters, I will, for argument’s sake, accept Mr. Jacobs’s summary of the ur-Cinderella, contenting myself with italicising the incident—fairy aid. To my mind the inclusion of this incident gives away his entire case. Two theories are in presence: the one, let us call it the upward-evolution theory, urges that the rude archaic form of the supernatural aid given to the heroine—dead mother reincarnated in an animal—put off its primitive rudeness and assumed the, comparatively, more civilised form of the fairy godmother; the other, the downward-evolution theory, claims that within the last two centuries the fairy godmother has been turned into an animal mother, owing to the intrusion of another story type according to Mr. Jacobs, or to the archaicising instinct of the folk according to Prof Newell. The probability of the first theory is, I should have said, as one hundred to one. Out of


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 5, 1894.djvu/157

Rh to Mr. Jacobs and Professor Newell I will put the ratio as fifty to one, but I fear that in so doing I am allowing private considerations to unwarrantably influence my scientific judgment.

In the Journal of American Folk-lore for January-March Professor Newell has sketched the development of the story group in accordance with the theory previously adumbrated by him. For him Cinderella starts with Basile in the middle of the seventeenth century. It is well to have the theory stated so definitely and so boldly. I can only repeat that although it undoubtedly solves some of the perplexing elements in the Cinderella problem (supra, IV, p. 140, note), the theory is, as a whole, utterly incredible to me.—A. N.]


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography. Sup. Vol II (1901).djvu/402

 was M.P. for Downpatrick in the conservative interest, and after his succession to the peerage (in 1856) he was under-secretary for war in Lord Derby's second administration (March 1858 to March 1859). He never held office again, but always remained a supporter of the conservative party. In 1868 he was appointed a trustee of the National Portrait Gallery, and in 1876 chairman of the trustees, an office which he actively filled till his death. Owing to his father's friendship with Sir (1803-1878) [q. v.] and Sir [q. v.], he was brought up among artistic associations, and was himself no mean painter in water-colours. In 1847 his friends in England published a folio volume entitled 'Recollections of India,' consisting of twenty lithographs from his drawings made in India. The most interesting of these are portraits of Sikh chieftains and views of scenery in Kashmir, then an almost unknown country, which he visited in company with John Nicholson (1821-1857) [q. v.], afterwards the hero of Delhi. The originals hang among the military trophies of his father on the walls of South Park, near Penshurst. In 1891 he contributed a brief memoir of his father to the 'Rulers of India' series (Oxford, Clarendon Press).

Hardinge died at South Park on 28 July 1894, and was buried in the churchyard of Fordcombe, Kent. He married, on 10 April 1856, Lavinia, third daughter of Sir, third earl of Lucan [q. v. Suppl.], by whom he had a family of five sons and three daughters; she died on 15 Sept. 1864.

HARDY, MARY ANNE, (1825?–1891), novelist and traveller, was the only child of Charles MacDowell and Eliza, his second wife. She was born in Fitzroy Square. London, about 1825. Her father had died five months before, and she was entirely educated at home under her mother's superintendence. She became the second wife of Sir Thomas Duffus Hardy [q. v.] In recognition of her husband's services—he died in 1878—Lady Hardy received on 19 June 1879 a pension of 100l. a year from the civil list; it was augmented by 55l. on 5 February 1881.

Although Lady Hardy had always been fond of writing, she did not turn seriously to literature until after her marriage. Her first important novel, 'Paul Wynter's Sacrifice,' was published in 1869. It had a success, and was translated into French. A new edition came out in 1881. Her next novel, 'Daisy Nicholl' (1870), achieved a great success in America. In 1880 and 1881, respectively, Lady Hardy travelled in the United States. The tour brought forth two books, 'Through Cities and Prairie Lands: Sketches of an American Tour,' 1881, and 'Down South,' 1883. Lady Hardy wrote articles on social subjects and short stories for various journals and magazines. She died on 19 May 1891 at 124 Portsdown Road, London, and was buried at Willesden. A portrait, painted during her early married life, is in the possession of her daughter, Miss Iza Duffus Hardy. Other works are:
 * 1) 'War Notes from the Crimea,' 1855.
 * 2) 'The Artist's Family: an Historical Romance,' 1857.
 * 3) 'A Casual Acquaintance: a Novel founded on Fact,' 1866, 2 vols.
 * 4) 'A Hero's Work,' 1868, 3 vols.
 * 5) 'A Woman's Triumph,' 1872, 3 vols.
 * 6) 'Lizzie,' 1875, 3 vols.
 * 7) 'Madge,' 1898, 3 vols.
 * 8) 'Beryl Fortescue,' 1881, 3 vols.
 * 9) 'In Sight of Land,' 1885, 3 vols.
 * 10) 'A Dangerous Experiment,' 1888, 3 vols.
 * 11) 'A Buried Sin,' 1894, 3 vols.

HARE, THOMAS (1806–1891), political reformer, born on 28 March 1806, was the only son of A Hare of Leigh, Dorset. On 14 Nov. 1828 he was admitted a student of the Inner Temple, and was called to the bar on 22 Nov. 1833. He practised in the chancery courts and from 1841 reported in Vice-chancellor Wigram's court. With Henry Iltid Nicholl and John Monson Carrow he edited the first two volumes (1840 and 1843) of 'Cases relating to Railways and Canals in the Courts of Law and Equity, 1835-1840.' His reports of cases adjudged by Wigram were published in eleven volumes (1843-1858), and rank as high authorities. He published in 1836 'A Treatise on Discovery of Evidence by Bill and Answer in Equity.' A second edition, 'adapted to the supreme court of judicature acts and rules 1873 and 1875,' was published by his eldest son, Sherlock Hare, in 1876. In 1872 he was elected a bencher of his inn. Hare was appointed inspector of charities on 22 Oct. 1853, and on 7 Dec. 1872 was created assistant commissioner with a seat at the board. On 21 Dec. 1887 he retired from official life. During these years he was engaged in reporting on the charities of the kingdom, those on London filling in a collected form the third volume of the reports of the Royal City Charities Commission. He was conspicuous for great industry, wide interest in life, and clearness of intellectual vision. He belonged to the Athenæum and Political


text: Index:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 4, 1893.djvu


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Bale, John


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Bale, Robert (fl.1461)


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 4, 1893.djvu/5

 A QUARTERLY REVIEW

OF

MYTH, TRADITION, INSTITUTION, & CUSTOM.

VOL. IV.—1893.

Fleuron at title page of Folklore journal.png

LONDON:

DAVID NUTT, 270, STRAND.

1893.


text:
Dictionary of National Biography, 1901 supplement/Harbord, William

| article =Harbord, William |page=305}}


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1901 supplement/Hardinge, Arthur Edward


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1901 supplement/Hardinge, Charles Stewart


text:
User:Anna Lincoln

wikipedia:User:Anna Lincoln

title: User:Anna Lincoln


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/106

72 woods all around resounded to the songs of the birds he so loved; many animals (deer, elk, moose, bears, wolves, foxes, and smaller quadrupeds) were kept in enclosures—never in cages—mostly about a quarter of a mile distant from the river, near the little building known as the "painting house." What joyous memories are those of the rush out of doors, lessons being over, to the little brook, following which one gathered the early blossoms in their season, or in the autumn cleared out leaves, that its waters might flow unimpeded, and in winter found icicles of wondrous shape and beauty; and just beyond its source stood the painting house, where every child was always welcome, where the wild flowers from hot little hands were painted in the pictures of what we called "the animals," to the everlasting pride and glory of their finder. It was hoped that only shorter trips would now be taken, and a visit to Canada as far as Quebec was made in August and September of 1842. But even in this home after his own tastes, where hospitality and simplicity ruled, Audubon could not stay, for his heart had always been set on going farther west, and though both family and friends thought him growing too old for such a journey, he started in March, 1843, for St. Louis, and thence up the Missouri on the steamboat "Omega" of the American Fur Company, which left on its annual trip April 25, 1843, taking up supplies of all sorts, and returning with thousands of skins and furs. Here again Audubon speaks for himself, and I shall not now anticipate his account with words of mine, as the Missouri journal follows in full. He was accompanied on this trip by Mr. Edward Harris, his faithful friend of many years, John G. Bell as taxidermist, Isaac Sprague

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/106


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/107

Rh as artist, and Lewis Squires as secretary and general assistant. With the exception of Mr. Harris, all were engaged by Audubon, who felt his time was short, his duties many, while the man of seventy (?) had no longer the strength of youth. November of 1843 saw him once more at Minniesland, and the long journeys were forever over; but work on the "Quadrupeds" was continued with the usual energy. The next few years were those of great happiness. His valued friend Dr. Thomas M. Brewer, of Boston, visited him in 1846. Writing of him Dr. Brewer says: "The patriarch had greatly changed since I had last seen him. He wore his hair longer, and it now hung down in locks of snowy whiteness on his shoulders. His once piercing gray eyes, though still bright, had already begun to fail him. He could no longer paint with his wonted accuracy, and had at last, most reluctantly, been forced to surrender to his sons the task of completing the illustrations to the "Quadrupeds of North America." Surrounded by his large family, including his devoted wife, his two sons with their wives, and quite a troop of grandchildren, his enjoyments of life seemed to leave him little to desire. … A pleasanter scene, or a more interesting household it has never been the writer's good fortune to witness."

Of this period one of his daughters-in-law speaks in her journal as follows: "Mr. Audubon was of a most kindly nature; he never passed a workman or a stranger of either sex without a salutation, such as, 'Good-day, friend,' 'Well, my good man, how do you do?' If a boy, it was, 'Well, my little man,' or a little girl, 'Good morning, lassie, how are you to-day?' All were noticed,

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/107


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Enstatite

title: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Enstatite


text:
Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 4, 1893.djvu/7

 CONTENTS.


text:
Author:Richmal Mangnall

Works

 * Mangnall's Questions

title: Author:Richmal Mangnall


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/113

 if he thought proper; but as the enemy was strongly posted, he deemed it safer to wait till next morning. By morning the Sikhs had disappeared, and it is doubtful whether they had any other object in their attack than that of gaining time for a retreat. Gough expressed his ‘warm approval’ of Thackwell's conduct, but there are some signs of dissatisfaction in his despatch of 5 Dec. An officer of fifty years' service is apt to be over-cautious. This was not the case with Gough himself, but Chilianwala, six weeks afterwards, went far to justify Thackwell. He was in command of the cavalry at Chilianwala, but actually directed only the left brigade. At Gujrat he was also on the left, and kept in check the enemy's cavalry when it tried to turn that flank. After the battle was won he led a vigorous pursuit till nightfall. In his despatch of 26 Feb. 1849 Gough said: ‘I am also greatly indebted to this tried and gallant officer for his valuable assistance and untiring exertions throughout the present and previous operations as second in command with this force.’ He received the thanks of parliament for the third time, and the G.C.B. (5 June 1849). In November 1849 he was given the colonelcy of the 16th lancers. In 1854 he was appointed inspecting-general of cavalry, and on 20 June lieutenant-general. He died on 8 April 1859 at Aghada Hall, co. Cork. He married, on 29 July 1825, Maria Andriah, eldest daughter of Francis Roche of Rochemount, co. Cork; he had four sons and three daughters.

His third son, (1837–1858), was lieutenant in the 15th Bengal native infantry when that regiment mutinied at Nasirabad on 28 May 1857. He had been commissioned as ensign on 25 June 1855, and became lieutenant on 23 Nov. 1856. He was appointed interpreter to the 83rd foot, was in several engagements with the mutineers, and distinguished himself in the defence of Nimach. He was present at the siege of Lucknow, and, while walking in the streets after its capture, he was killed in the street by some of the sepoys on 20 March 1858.

 THANE, JOHN (1748–1818), printseller and engraver, born in 1748, carried on business for many years in Soho, London, and became famous for his expert knowledge of pictures, coins, and every species of vertu. He was a friend of the antiquary Joseph Strutt, who at one period resided in his family. He collected the works of Thomas Snelling [q. v.], the medallic antiquary, and published them with an excellent portrait drawn and engraved by himself. On Dr. John Fothergill's death in 1780 his fine collection of engraved portraits were sold to Thane, who cut up the volumes and disposed of the contents to the principal collectors of British portraits at that time. Thane was the projector and editor of ‘British Autography: a Collection of Facsimiles of the Handwriting of Royal and Illustrious Personages, with their Authentic Portraits,’ London (1793 &c.), 3 vols. 4to. A supplement to this work was published by Edward Daniell, London [1854], 4to, with a fine portrait of Thane prefixed, engraved by John Ogborne, from a portrait by William Redmore Bigg. Thane died in 1818. His portraits were sold in May 1819.

 THANET,. [See, ninth earl, 1767-1825.]

THAUN, PHILIP (fl. 1120), Anglo-Norman writer. [See .]

THAYRE, THOMAS (fl. 1603–1625), medical writer, describes himself as a ‘chirurgian’ in July 1603; but as his name does not occur among the members of the Barber-Surgeons' Company, and as he uses no such description in 1625, he was probably one of the numerous irregular practitioners of the period, and no sworn surgeon. He published in London in 1603 a ‘Treatise of the Pestilence,’ dedicated to Sir Robert Lee, lord mayor 1602–3. The cause of the disease, the regimen, drugs and diet proper for its treatment are discussed. Ten diagnostic symptoms are described, and some theology is intermixed. The general plan differs little from that of Thomas Phaer's ‘Treatise on the Plague,’ and identical sentences occur in several places [see ]. These passages have suggested the untenable view (Catalogue of the Library of the Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society of London, ii. 439) that the works are identical, and Thayre a misprint for Phayre. A similar resemblance of passages is to be


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/91

Rh from his winter's work. With this, and the greater part of the savings of his wife, which she had hoarded to forward this journey, so long the goal of their hopes, another farewell was taken, the many valued drawings packed up, and on April 26, 1826, the vessel with the naturalist and his precious freight left New Orleans for England.

The journals from this date, until May 1, 1829, are kept with the usual regularity, and fortunately have escaped the destruction which has befallen earlier volumes. They tell of one of the most interesting periods of Audubon's life, and are given beyond,—not entire, yet so fully that I pass on at once to the last date they contain, which marks Audubon's return to America, May 5, 1829. His time abroad had seen the publication of the "Birds of America" Of the great folios, parts i.-v., containing plates 1-25, were originally published at successive dates (not ascertained) in 1827; parts vi.-x., plates 26-50, appeared in the course of 1828, all in London. The whole work was completed in 1838; it is supposed to have been issued in 87 parts of 5 plates each, making the actual total of 435 plates, giving 1065 figures of birds. On the completion of the series, the plates were to be bound in 4 vols. Vol. i., pll. 1-100, 1827-30; vol. ii., pll. 101-200, 1831-34; vol. iii., pll. 201-300, 1834-35; vol. iv., pll. 301-435, 1835-38 (completed June 30). These folios had no text except the title-leaf of each volume. The original price was two guineas a part; a complete copy is now worth $1,500 to $2,000, according to condition of binding, etc., and is scarce at any price. The text to the plates appeared under the different title of "Ornithological Biography," in 5 large 8vo volumes, Edinburgh, 1831-39; vol. i., 1831 ; vol. ii., 1834; vol. iii., 1835; vol. iv., 1838; vol. v., 1839. In 1840-44, the work reappeared in octavo, text and plates together, under the original title of "Birds of America;" the text somewhat modified by the omission of the " Delineations of American Scenery and Manners," the addition of some new matter acquired after 1839, and change in the names of many species to agree with the nomenclature of Audubon's Synopsis of 1839; the plates reduced by the camera lucida, rearranged and renumbered, making 500 in all. The two original works, thus put together and modified, became the first octavo edition called " Birds of America," issued in 100 parts, to be bound in 7 volumes, 1840-44. There have been various subsequent issues, partial or complete, upon which I cannot here enlarge. For full bibliographical data see Dr. Coues' "Birds of the Colorado Valley," Appendix, 1878, pp. 612, 618, 625, 629, 644, 661, 666, 669 and 686.—E. C. successfully begun, had procured him

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/91


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/92

60 enough to warrant his continuing the vast undertaking, and had given him many friends. His object now was to make drawings of birds which he had not yet figured for the completion of his work, and then to take his wife, and possibly his sons with him to England. During these years Mrs. Audubon was latterly alone, as John had taken a position with Victor and was in Louisville. Victor, meantime, had worked steadily and faithfully, and had earned for himself a position and a salary far beyond that of most young men of his age. Both parents relied on him to an extent that is proof in itself of his unusual ability; these words in a letter from his father, dated London, Dec. 23, 1828, "Victor's letters to me are highly interesting, full of candor, sentiment, and sound judgment, and I am very proud of him," are certainly testimony worth having. As the years went on both sons assisted their father in every way, and to an extent that the world has never recognized.

Great as was Audubon's wish to proceed without delay to Louisiana, he felt it due to his subscribers to get to work at once, and wrote to his wife under date of New York, May 10, 1829: "I have landed here from on board the packet ship Columbia after an agreeable passage of thirty-five days from Portsmouth. I have come to America to remain as long as consistent with the safety of the continuation of my publication in London without my personal presence. According to future circumstances I shall return to England on the 1st of October next, or, if possible, not until April, 1830. I wish to employ and devote every moment of my sojourn in America to drawing such birds and plants as I think necessary to enable me to give my publication throughout the degree of perfection that I am told exists in that portion already published. I have left my business going on quite well; my

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/92


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/121

 to practical benevolence, in the exercise of which he was as humble as he was liberal. He died at Maida Hill, London, 26 May 1879.

His writings comprise:
 * 1) 'Illustrations of the Tragedies of Æschylus and Sophocles, from the Greek, Latin, and English Poets,' 1844.
 * 2) 'English Repetitions, in Prose and Verse, with introductory remarks on the cultivation of taste in the young,' 1849.
 * 3) 'Life and Books, a Record of Thought and Reading,' 1859.
 * 4) 'Lacon in Council,' 1865. The two latter works remind one very much in their style and texture of 'Guesses at Truth,' by the brothers Hare.

 BOYLE, CHARLES, fourth in Ireland, and first, of Marston in Somersetshire (1676–1731), grandson of , first earl of Orrery [q. v.], was born at Chelsea in 1676, and succeeded his brother as Earl of Orrery in 1703. Educated at Christ Church, he joined the wits engaged in a struggle with Bentley, who represented the scholarship of the Cambridge whigs. Sir W. Temple had made some rash statements as to the antiquity of Phalaris in a treatise on ancient and modern learning, and this was the subject of attack by Wotton, a protégé of Bentley's, in his 'Reflections on Ancient and Modern Learning,' published in 1694. By way of covering Temple's defeat, the Christ Church scholars determined to publish a new edition of the epistles of Phalaris. This was entrusted to Boyle, who, without asserting the epistles to be genuine, as Temple had done, attacked Bentley for his rudeness in having withdrawn too abruptly a manuscript belonging to the King's Library, which Boyle had borrowed. Bentley now added to a new edition of Wotton's 'Reflections' a 'Dissertation' upon the epistles, from his own pen [see ]. Boyle was aided by Atterbury and Smalridge in preparing a defence, published in 1698, entitled 'Dr. Bentley's Dissertations … examined.' Bentley returned to the charge and overwhelmed his opponents by the wealth of his scholarship. The dispute led to Swift's 'Battle of the Books.' Before succeeding to the peerage Boyle was elected M.P. for Huntingdon, but his return was disputed, and the violence of the discussion which took place led to his being engaged in a duel with his colleague, Francis Wortley, in which he was wounded. He subsequently entered the army, and was present at the battle of Malplaquet, and in 1709 became major-general. In 1706 he had married Lady Elizabeth Cecil, daughter of the Earl of Exeter. We find him afterwards in London, as the centre of Christ Church men there, a strong adherent of the party of Harley, and a member of 'the club' established by Swift. As envoy in Flanders he took part in the negotiations that preceded the treaty of Utrecht, and was afterwards made a privy councillor and created Baron Marston. He was made a lord of the bedchamber on the accession of George I, but resigned this post on being deprived of his military command in 1716. Swift, in the 'Four Last Years of the Queen,' adduces Orrery's support of the tory ministry as a proof that no Jacobite designs were entertained by them; but it is curious that in 1721 Orrery was thrown into the Tower for six months as being implicated in Layer's plot, and was released on bail only in consequence of Dr. Mead's certifying that continued imprisonment was dangerous to his life. He was subsequently discharged, and died on 28 Aug. 1731. Besides the works above named, he wrote a comedy called 'As you find it.' The astronomical instrument, invented by Graham, received from his patronage of the inventor the name of an 'Orrery.'

 BOYLE, DAVID, (1772–1853), president of the Scottish court of session, fourth son of the Hon. Patrick Boyle of Shewalton, near Irvine, the third son of John, second Earl of Glasgow, was born at Irvine on 26 July 1772; was called to the Scottish bar on 14 Dec. 1793; was gazetted (9 May 1807), under the Duke of Portland's administration, solicitor-general for Scotland; and in the general election of the following month was returned to the House of Commons by Ayrshire, which he continued to represent until his appointment, on 23 Feb. 1811, as a lord of session and of justiciary. He was appointed lord justice clerk on 15 Oct. 1811. He was sworn on 11 April 1820 a member of the privy council of George IV, at whose coronation, on 19 July 1821, he is recorded by Sir Walter Scott to have shown to great advantage in his robes.

After acting as lord justice clerk for nearly thirty years, Boyle was appointed lord justice-general and president of the court of session, on the resignation of Charles Hope, lord Granton. Boyle resigned office in May 1852, declining the baronetcy which was offered to


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/122

 him, and retired to his estate at Shewalton, to which he had succeeded on the death of a brother in 1837. He died on 30 Jan. 1853.

Boyle was always distinguished for his noble personal appearance. Sir J. W. Gordon painted full-length portraits of him for the Faculty of Advocates and for the Society of Writers to the Signet. Mr. Patrick Park also made a bust of him for the hall of the Society of Solicitors before the Supreme Courts in Edinburgh.

Boyle was twice married: first, on 24 Dec. 1804, to Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Alexander Montgomerie of Annick, brother of the twelfth Earl of Eglintoun, who died on 14 April 1822; he had nine children by her, the eldest of whom, Patrick Boyle, succeeded to his estates; and secondly, on 17 July 1827, to Camilla Catherine, eldest daughter of David Smythe of Methven, lord Methven, a lord of session and of justiciary, who died on 25 Dec. 1880, leaving four children.

 BOYLE, HENRY, (d. 1725), politician, was the third and youngest son of Charles, lord Clifford, of Lanesborough, by Jane, youngest daughter of William, duke of Somerset, and grandson of  [q. v.] He sat in parliament for Tamworth from 1689 to 1690, for Cambridge University—after a contest in which Sir Isaac Newton supported his opponent—from 1692 to 1705, and for Westminster from 1705 to 1710. Although he was at the head of the poll at Cambridge in 1701, he did not venture to try his fortune in 1705. From 1699 to 1701 he was a lord of the treasury, and in the latter year he became the chancellor of the exchequer; from 1704 to 1710 he was lord treasurer of Ireland, and in 1708 he was made a principal secretary of state in the room of Harley. Two years later he was displaced for St. John, and the act formed one of those bold steps on the part of the tory ministry which 'almost shocked' Swift. Boyle is generally said to have been the messenger who found [q. v.] in his mean lodging, and by his blandishments, and a definite promise of preferment and the prospect of still greater advancement, secured the poet's pen to celebrate the victory of Blenheim and its hero. In return, it is said, for his good offices on this occasion, the third volume of the ‘Spectator’ was dedicated to Boyle, with the eulogy that among politicians no one had 'made himself more friends and fewer enemies.' Southerne, the dramatist, was another of the men of letters whom he befriended. Boyle was engaged as one of the managers of the trial of Sacheverell. On 20 Oct. 1714 he was raised to the peerage as Baron Carleton of Carleton, Yorkshire, and from 1721 to 1725 was lord president of the council in Walpole's administration. He died a bachelor at his house in Pall Mall on 14 March 1725. He left this house, known as Carlton House, to the Prince of Wales, and it was long notorious as the abode of the prince regent: the name is still perpetuated in Carlton House Terrace. The winning manners and the tact of Lord Carleton have been highly praised. He was never guilty, so it was said by his panegyrists, of an imprudent speech or of any acts to injure the success of the whig cause. Swift, however, accuses him of avarice.

 BOYLE, HENRY, (1682–1764), born at Castlemartyr, county Cork, in 1682, was second son of Lieutenant-colonel Henry Boyle, second son of  [q. v.] Henry Boyle's mother was Lady Mary O'Brien, daughter of Murragh O'Brien, first earl of Inchiquin, and president of Munster. Henry Boyle's father died in Flanders in 1693, and on the death of his eldest son, Roger, in 1705, Henry Boyle, as second son, succeeded to the family estates at Castlemartyr, which had been much neglected. In 1715 he was elected knight of the shire for Cork, and married Catherine, daughter of Chidley Coote. After her death he married, in 1726, Henrietta Boyle, youngest daughter of his relative, Charles, earl of Burlington and Cork. That nobleman entrusted the management of his estates in Ireland to Henry Boyle, who much enhanced their value, and carried out and promoted extensive improvements in his district. In 1729 Boyle distinguished himself in parliament at Dublin in resisting successfully the attempt of the government to obtain a vote for a continuation of supplies to the crown for twenty-one years. Sir Robert Walpole is stated to have entertained a high opinion of the penetration, sagacity, and energy of Boyle, and to have styled him 'the King of the Irish Commons.' Boyle, in 1733, was


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/93

Rh engraver has in his hands all the drawings wanted to complete this present year, and those necessary to form the first number of next year. I have finished the two first years of publication, the two most difficult years to be encountered." To Victor he writes from Camden, N. J., July 10, 1829: "I shall this year have issued ten numbers, each containing five plates, making in all fifty. I cannot publish more than five numbers annually, because it would make too heavy an expense to my subscribers, and indeed require more workmen than I could find in London. The work when finished will contain eighty numbers, therefore I have seventy to issue, which will take fourteen years more. It is a long time to look forward to, but it cannot be helped. I think I am doing well; I have now one hundred and forty-four subscribers."

All this summer and early fall, until October l0th, Audubon spent in the neighborhood of New Jersey and Pennsylvania, working as few can work, four hours continuing to be his allowance for sleep. Six weeks in September and October were spent in the Great Pine Swamp, or Forest, as he called it, his permanent lodgings being at Camden, N. J. Here he writes, October 11, 1829: "I am at work and have done much, but I wish I had eight pairs of hands, and another body to shoot the specimens; still I am delighted at what I have accumulated

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/93


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/108

74 and his pleasant smile was so cordial that all the villagers and work-people far and near, knew and liked him. He painted a little after his return from the Yellowstone River, but as he looked at his son John's animals, he said: 'Ah, Johnny, no need for the old man to paint any more when you can do work like that.' He was most affectionate in his disposition, very fond of his grandchildren, and it was a pleasant sight to see him sit with one on his knee, and others about him, singing French songs in his lively way. It was sweet too, to see him with his wife; he was always her lover, and invariably used the pronouns 'thee' and 'thou' in his speech to her. Often have I heard him say, 'Well, sweetheart! always busy; come sit thee down a few minutes and rest.'" My mother has told me that when the picture of the Cougars came from Texas, where my father had painted it, my grandfather's delight knew no bounds. He was beside himself with joy that "his boy Johnny" could paint a picture he considered so fine; he looked at it from every point, and could not keep quiet, but walked up and down filled with delight. Of these years much might be said, but much has already been written of them, so I will not repeat. Many characteristics Audubon kept to the last; his enthusiasm, freshness, and keenness of enjoyment and pain were never blunted. His ease and grace of speech and movement were as noticeable in the aged man as they had been in the happy youth of Mill Grove. His courteous manners to all, high and low, were always the same; his chivalry, generosity, and honor were never dimmed, and his great personal beauty never failed to attract attention; always he was handsome. His stepmother writes from Nantes to her husband in Virginia: "He is the handsomest boy in Nantes, but perhaps not the most studious." At Mill

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/108


text: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/109

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/109


text: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/110

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/110


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 06.djvu/123

 made a member of the privy council, chancellor of the exchequer, and commissioner of revenue in Ireland. He was also in the same year elected speaker of the House of Commons there. Through his connections, Boyle exercised extensive political influence, and was parliamentary leader of the whig party in Ireland. In 1753 Boyle acquired high popularity by opposing the government proposal for appropriating a surplus in the Irish exchequer. In commemoration of the parliamentary movements in this affair, medals were struck containing portraits of Boyle as speaker of the House of Commons. For having opposed the government, Boyle and some of his associates were dismissed from offices which they held under the crown. After negotiations with government, Boyle, in 1756, resigned the speakership, and was granted an annual pension of two thousand pounds for thirty-one years, with the titles of Baron of Castlemartyr, Viscount Boyle of Bandon, and Earl of Shannon. He sat for many years in the House of Peers in Ireland, and frequently acted as lord justice of that kingdom. Boyle died at Dublin of gout in his head, on 27 Sept. 1764, in the 82nd year of his age. Portraits of Henry Boyle were engraved in mezzotinto by John Brooks.

BOYLE, JOHN, fifth, fifth and second  (1707–1762), was born on 2 Jan. 1707, and was the only son of , fourth earl of Orrery [q. v.], whom he succeeded as fifth earl in 1731. Like his father, he was educated at Christ Church. He took some part in parliamentary debates, chiefly in opposition to Walpole. On the death, in 1753, of his kinsman,, the Earl of Cork and Burlington [q. v.], he succeeded him as fifth earl of Cork, thus uniting the Orrery peerage to the older Cork peerage. His father, from some grudge, left his library to Christ Church, specially assigning as his reason his son's want of taste for literature. According to Johnson, the real reason was that the son would not allow his wife to associate with the father's mistress. The passage in the will seems to have stimulated the son to endeavour to disprove the charge, and he has succeeded in making his name remembered as the friend first of Swift and Pope, and afterwards of Johnson. His 'Remarks on Swift,' published in November 1751, attracted much attention as the first attempt at an account of Swift, and 7,500 copies appear to have been sold within a month. But neither Lord Orrery's ability, nor his acquaintance with Swift, was such as to give much value to his 'Remarks.' The acquaintance had begun about 1731 (apparently from an application by Swift on behalf of Mrs. Barber for leave to dedicate her poems to Orrery, although Swift had previously seen a good deal of his father), when Swift was already sixty-four years old, and their meetings, during the few succeeding years before Swift became decrepit, were not very frequent. If we are to judge, however, from the expressions used by Swift, both in his letters to Orrery and in correspondence with others, the friendship seems to have been cordial so far as it went. In one of the earliest letters he hopes Orrery will be 'a great example, restorer, and patron of virtue, learning, and wit;' and he writes to Pope that, next to Pope himself, he loves 'no man so well.' Pope, too, writes of Orrery to Swift as one 'whose praises are that precious ointment Solomon speaks of.' A bond of sympathy existed between Swift and Orrery in a common hatred of Walpole's government. It was to Orrery's hand that Swift entrusted the manuscript of his 'Four Last Years of the Queen' for delivery to Dr. King of Oxford; and Orrery was the go-between employed by Pope to get his letters from Swift. In his will Swift leaves to Orrery a portrait and some silver plate. On the other hand, there are traditional stories of contemptuous expressions used by Swift of Orrery, and these, if repeated to him, may have inspired in Orrery that dislike which made his 'Remarks' so full of rancour and grudging criticism. The 'Remarks on the Life and Writings of Jonathan Swift,' published in 1751, are given in a series of letters to his son and successor, Hamilton Boyle (1730-1764), then an undergraduate at Christ Church, and are written in a stilted and affected style. The malice which he showed made the book the subject of a bitter attack (1754) by Dr. [q. v.], who did something to clear Swift from the aspersions cast on him by Orrery. But the grudging praise and feeble estimate of Swift's genius shown in the 'Remarks' are mainly due to the poverty of Orrery's own mind. He was filled with literary aspirations, and, as Berkeley said of him, 'would have been a man of genius had he known how to set about it.' But he had no real capacity for apprehending either the range of Swift's intellect or the meaning of his humour. Orrery was afterwards one of those who attempted to patronise


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/111

Rh Grove Mr. David Pawling wrote in January, 1805: "To-day I saw the swiftest skater I ever beheld; backwards and forwards he went like the wind, even leaping over large air-holes fifteen or more feet across, and continuing to skate without an instant's delay. I was told he was a young Frenchman, and this evening I met him at a ball, where I found his dancing exceeded his skating; all the ladies wished him as partner; moreover, a handsomer man I never saw, his eyes alone command attention; his name, Audubon, is strange to me." Abroad it was the same; Mr. Rathbone speaks of "his beautiful expressive face," as did Christopher North, and so on until the beauty of youth and manhood passed into the "magnificent gray-haired man." But "the gay young Frenchman who danced with all the girls," was an old man now, not so much as the years go, but in the intensity of his life. He had never done anything by halves; he had played and worked, enjoyed and sorrowed, been depressed and elated, each and all with his highly strung nature at fever heat, and the end was not far. He had seen the accomplishment of his hopes in the "Birds," and the "Quadrupeds" he was content to leave largely to other hands; and surely no man ever had better helpers. From first to last his wife had worked, in more ways than one, to further the aim of his life; Victor had done the weary mechanical business work; John had hunted, and preserved specimens, taken long journeys—notably to Texas and California—and been his father's travelling companion on more than one occasion. Now the time had come when he no longer led; Victor had full charge of the publication of the "Quadrupeds," besides putting in many of the backgrounds, and John painted a large proportion of the animals. But I think that none of them regarded their work as individual,—it was always ours, for father and sons were comrades and friends; and with Dr. Bachman's

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/111


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/112

76 invaluable aid this last work was finished, but not during Audubon's life. He travelled more or less in the interests of his publications during these years, largely in New England and in the Middle States. In 1847 the brilliant intellect began to be dimmed; at first it was only the difficulty of finding the right word to express an idea, the gradual lessening of interest, and this increased till in May, 1848, Dr. Bachman tells the pathetic close of the enthusiastic and active life: "Alas, my poor friend Audubon! The outlines of his beautiful face and form are there, but his noble mind is all in ruins. It is indescribably sad." Through these last years the devotion of the entire household was his. He still loved to wander in the woods, he liked to hear his wife read to him, and music was ever a delight. To the very last his daughter-in-law, Mrs. Victor G. Audubon, sang a little Spanish song to him every evening, rarely permitting anything to interfere with what gave him so much pleasure, and evening by evening he listened to the Buenas Noches, which was so soon to be his in reality. His grandchildren, also, were a constant source of enjoyment to him, and he to them, for children always found a friend in him; and thus quietly did he pass through that valley which had no shadows for him. I wish to wholly correct the statement that Audubon became blind. His sight became impaired by old age, as is usually the case; he abhorred spectacles or glasses of any kind, would not wear them except occasionally, and therefore did not get the right focus for objects near by; but his far-sight was hardly impaired. That wonderful vision which surprised even the keen-eyed Indian never failed him. Well do I remember the tall figure with snow-white hair, wandering peacefully along the banks of the beautiful Hudson. Already he was resting in that border land

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/112


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/114

 detected in English books of the sixteenth century on other medical subjects, and is usually to be traced to several writers independently adopting and slightly altering some admired passage in a common source. Thayre published a second edition in 1625, dedicated to John Gore, lord mayor 1624–5. The work shows little medical knowledge, but preserves some interesting particulars of domestic life, and, though inferior in style to the writings of Christopher Langton [q. v.] and even of William Clowes (1540–1604) [q. v.], contains a few well-put and idiomatic expressions.

[Works.]

THEAKSTON, JOSEPH (1772–1842), sculptor, born in 1772 at York, was the son of respectable parents. In sculpture he was a pupil of John Bacon (1740–1799) [q. v.], and formed himself on his style. He also studied several years under John Flaxman [q. v.] and with Edward Hodges Baily [q. v.], but for the last twenty-four years of his life he was employed by Sir Francis Legatt Chantrey [q. v.] to carve the draperies and other accessories of that artist's statues and groups. Theakston was the ablest ornamental carver of his time. Although he appeared to work slowly, he was so accurate that he seldom needed to retouch his figures. Besides aiding Chantry, he produced some busts and monumental work of his own, and exhibited occasionally at the Royal Academy from 1817 to 1837. He died at Belgrave Place on 14 April 1842, and was buried by the side of his wife at Kensal Green.

[Times, 25 April 1842; Gent. Mag. 1842, i. 672; Redgrave's Dict. of Artists, 1878.]

THEED, WILLIAM (1804–1891), sculptor, son of William Theed, was born at Trentham, Staffordshire, in 1804.

, the father (1764–1817), was born in 1764, and entered the schools of the Royal Academy in 1786. He began life as a painter of classical subjects and portraits, and exhibited first at the Royal Academy in 1789. He then went to Rome, where he became acquainted with John Flaxman and Henry Howard. In 1794 he returned through France to England. In 1797 he exhibited a picture of ‘Venus and Cupids,’ in 1799 ‘Nessus and Deianeira,’ and in 1800 ‘Cephalus and Aurora.’ He then began to design and model pottery for Messrs. Wedgwood, and continued in their employ until about 1803, when he transferred his services to Messrs. Rundell & Bridge, whose gold and silver plate he designed for fourteen years. During this time he continued to exhibit occasionally at the Royal Academy, of which he was elected an associate in 1811 and an academician in 1813, when he presented as his diploma work a ‘Bacchanalian Group’ in bronze. In 1812 he exhibited a life-sized group in bronze of ‘Thetis returning from Vulcan with Arms for Achilles,’ now in the possession of the queen, and in 1813 a statue of ‘Mercury.’ His latest exhibited works were of a monumental character. He died in 1817. He married a French lady named Rougeot at Naples about 1794 (, Dict. of Artists;, Hist. of the Royal Academy, 1862, i. 382; Royal Academy Exhib. Catalogues, 1789–1817).

William Theed the younger, after receiving a general education at Ealing and some instruction in art from his father, entered the studio of Edward Hodges Baily [q. v.], the sculptor, and was also for some time a student in the Royal Academy. In 1824 and 1825 he sent busts to the exhibition of the Royal Academy, and in 1826 went to Rome, where he studied under Thorvaldsen, Gibson, Wyatt, and Tenerani. He sent over several busts to exhibitions of the Royal Academy, but his works did not attract much attention until, in 1844, the prince consort requested John Gibson to send designs by English sculptors in Rome for marble statues for the decoration of Osborne House. Among those selected were Theed's ‘Narcissus at the Fountain’ and ‘Psyche lamenting the loss of Cupid.’

In 1847 he sent to the Royal Academy a marble group of ‘The Prodigal Son.’ He returned to London in 1848, when commissions began to flow in upon him. In 1850 he exhibited at the Royal Academy a marble statue of ‘Rebekah’ and another group of ‘The Prodigal Son,’ and in 1851 a marble heroic statue of ‘Prometheus.’ These works were followed in 1853 by a statue in marble of Humphrey Chetham for Manchester Cathedral; in 1857 by ‘The Bard,’ for the Egyptian Hall of the Mansion House, London; in 1861 by a statue of Sir William Peel, for Greenwich Hospital; in 1866 by ‘Musidora,’ now at Marlborough House; and in 1868 by the group of the queen and the prince consort in early Saxon costume, which is now at Windsor Castle. His other works of importance include the bronze statue of Sir Isaac Newton which is at Grantham, the colossal statue of Sir William Peel at Calcutta, the statues of the prince consort for Balmoral Castle and Coburg, that of the Duchess of Kent at Frogmore, of the Earl of Derby at Liverpool, of Sir Robert Peel at Huddersfield, of William Ewart Gladstone in the town-hall, Manchester, of Henry


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/113

The reverse of the base bears the inscription— Erected to the Memory of

JOHN JAMES AUDUBON

In the year 1893, by subscriptions raised by the

New York Academy of Science.

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/113


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/115

 Hallam in St. Paul's Cathedral, and that of Edmund Burke in St. Stephen's Hall in the houses of parliament. He executed also a series of twelve alto-relievos in bronze of subjects from English history for the decoration of the Prince's Chamber in the House of Lords.

The most important and best known, however, of Theed's works is the colossal group representing ‘Africa’ which adorns the north-east angle of the pedestal of the Albert Memorial in Hyde Park. Among his busts may be mentioned those of the queen and the prince consort, of John Gibson, Lord Lawrence, the Earls of Derby and Dartmouth, Sir Henry Holland, bart., Sir William Tite, General Lord Sandhurst, John Bright, William Ewart Gladstone, Sir Francis Goldsmid, bart., Sir James Mackintosh in Westminster Abbey, and that of the Marquis of Salisbury, his last exhibited work. His ‘Prodigal Son,’ ‘Sappho,’ ‘Ruth,’ and ‘Africa’ were engraved in the ‘Art Journal.’

Theed died at Campden Lodge, Kensington, on 9 Sept. 1891.

[Times, 11 Sept. 1891; Athenæum, 1891, ii. 393; Art Journal, 1891, p. 352; Royal Academy Exhibition Catalogues, 1824–85.]

THEINRED (fl. 1371), musical theorist, at an early age entered the Benedictine order. He was afterwards made precentor of the monastery at Dover, where he died and was buried. In 1371 he wrote a treatise ‘De legitimis ordinibus Pentachordorum et Tetrachordorum,’ which he addressed to Alured of Canterbury. The name Alured has been repeatedly transferred to Theinred himself, and Moreri has further corrupted his name into David Theinred. The treatise is an exhaustive disquisition in three books upon scales and intervals; it employs the ancient letter-notation instead of the usual musical signs, which do not occur throughout. The copy in the Bodleian Library is the only one known to be extant. Boston of Bury gave the title as ‘De Musica et de legitimis ordinibus Pentacordorum et Tetracordorum lib. 3;’ Bale, probably misled by this statement, described two separate treatises, and was followed by Pits. Both writers bestowed the highest encomiums on Theinred's learning, Bale calling him ‘Musicorum sui temporis Phœnix,’ which Pits extended into ‘Vir morum probitate, multiplicique doctrina conspicuus,’ although both apparently made these assertions only on the ground that the precentor of a monastery must have had such qualifications. Bale adds that Theinred was the reputed author of several other works whose titles he had not seen. Burney spoke slightingly of Theinred's treatise, but Chappell shows that Burney had but cursorily examined it, and does not even correctly quote the opening words ‘Quoniam Musicorum de his cantibus frequens est dissensio.’ It was announced for publication in the fourth volume of Coussemaker's ‘Scriptores de Musica medii ævi,’ but did not appear.

[Bodleian MS. 842; Boston of Bury, in Tanner's Bibl. Brit.-Hib., introd. p. xxxix; Bale's Script. p. 479; Pitseus, Script. p. 510; Burney's General Hist. of Music, ii. 396; Chappell's Hist. of Music, introd. p. xiii; Ouseley's contributions to Naumann's Illustrirte Geschichte der Musik, English edit. p. 562; Nagel's Geschichte der Musik in England, p. 64; Weale's Cat. of the Historical Music Loan Exhibition, 1885, p. 123.]

THELLUSSON, PETER (1737–1797), merchant, born in Paris on 27 June 1737, was the third son of Isaac de Thellusson (1690–1770), resident envoy of Geneva at the court of France, by his wife Sarah, daughter of Abraham le Boullen. The family of Thellusson was of French origin, but took refuge at Geneva after the massacre of St. Bartholomew in 1572. Isaac's second son, George, founded a banking house in Paris, in which Necker, the financier, commenced his career as a clerk, and in which he afterwards became junior partner. Peter Thellusson came to England in 1762, was naturalised by act of parliament in the same year, and established his head office in Philpot Lane, London. Originally he acted as agent for Messrs. Vandenyver et Cie, of Amsterdam and Paris, and other great commercial houses of Paris. Afterwards engaging in business on his own account, he traded chiefly with the West Indies, where he acquired large estates. He eventually amassed a considerable fortune, and, among other landed property, purchased the estate of Brodsworth in Yorkshire. He died on 21 July 1797 at his seat at Plaistow, near Bromley in Kent. On 6 Jan. 1761 he married Ann, second daughter of Matthew Woodford of Southampton, by whom he had three sons and three daughters. His eldest son, Peter Isaac Thellusson (1761–1808), was on 1 Feb. 1806 created Baron Rendlesham in the Irish peerage.

By his will, dated 2 April 1796, Thellusson left 100,000l. to his wife and children. The remainder of his fortune, valued at 600,000l. or 800,000l., he assigned to trustees to accumulate during the lives of his sons and sons' sons, and of their issue existing at the time of his death. On the death of the last survivor the estate was to be


text:
Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/115

Rh which none can fathom, and it could not have been far to go, no long and weary journey, when, after a few days of increasing feebleness, for there was no illness, just as sunset was flooding the pure, snow-covered landscape with golden light, at five o'clock on Monday, January 27, 1851, the "pard-like spirit, beautiful and swift, … outsoared the shadow of our night."

In a quiet spot in Trinity Church Cemetery, not far from the home where Audubon spent his last years, the remains of the naturalist were laid with all honor and respect, on the Thursday following his death. Time brought changes which demanded the removal of the first burial-place, and a second one was chosen in the same cemetery, which is now marked by the beautiful monument erected by the New York Academy of Sciences.

Now wife and sons have joined him; together they rest undisturbed by winter storms or summer heat; the river they loved so well flows past their silent home as in days long gone when its beauties won their hearts. Truly the place where they dwelt shall know them no more, but "while the melody of the mocking-bird is heard in the cypress forests of Louisiana, and the squirrel leaps from its leafy curtain like a thing of beauty, the name of Audubon will live in the hearts of coming generations."

title: Page:Audubon and His Journals.djvu/115


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 56.djvu/116

 divided equally among the ‘eldest male lineal descendants of his three sons then living.’ If there were no heir, the property was to go to the extinction of the national debt. At the time of Thellusson's death he had no great-grandchildren, and in consequence the trust was limited to the life of two generations. The will was generally stigmatised as absurd, and the family endeavoured to get it set aside. On 20 April 1799 the lord chancellor, Alexander Wedderburn, lord Loughborough [q. v.], pronounced the will valid, and his decision was confirmed by the House of Lords on 25 June 1805. As it was calculated that the accumulation might reach 140,000,000l., the will was regarded by some as a peril to the country, and an act was passed in 1800 prohibiting similar schemes of bequest. A second lawsuit as to the actual heirs arose in 1856, when Charles Thellusson, the last grandson, died at Brighton on 25 Feb. It was decided in the House of Lords on 9 June 1859. As George Woodford, Peter's second son, had no issue, the estate was divided between Frederick William Brook Thellusson, lord Rendlesham, and Charles Sabine Augustus Thellusson, grandson of Charles Thellusson, the third son of Peter. In consequence of mismanagement and the costs of litigation, they succeeded to only a comparatively moderate fortune.

[Agnew's Protestant Exiles from France, 1886, ii. 381; Gent. Mag. 1797 ii. 624, 708, 747, 1798, ii. 1082, 1832 ii. 176; Annual Register 1797, Chron. p. 148, 1859 Chron. p. 333; Hunter's Deanery of Doncaster, i. 317; Lodge's Genealogy of Peerage and Baronage, 1859, p. 452; G. E. C[okayne]'s Peerage, vi. 337; Burke's Peerage, s. v. ‘Rendlesham;’ De Lolme's General Observations occasioned by the last Will of Peter Thellusson, 1798; Notes and Queries, 8th ser. xii. 183, 253, 489; Law Times, 1859, Reports, pp. 379–83; Observations upon the Will of Peter Thellusson; Vesey's Case upon the Will of Peter Thellusson, 1800; Hargrave's Treatise upon the Thellusson Act, 1842.]

THELWALL, EUBULE (1562–1630), principal of Jesus College, Oxford, fifth son of John Thelwall of Bathafarn, near Ruthin, and Jane, his wife, was born in 1562. He was educated in Westminster school, whence he was elected to Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1572 (, Alumni Westmon. p. 50), graduating B.A. in 1576–7. On 14 July 1579 he was incorporated at Oxford, where he graduated M.A. on 13 June 1580. He was admitted student at Gray's Inn on 20 July 1590 (, Reg. Gray's Inn, p. 75); he was called to the bar in 1599, and became treasurer of the inn in 1625. He was appointed a master in chancery in 1617, was knighted on 29 June 1619, and represented the county of Denbigh in the parliaments of 1624–5, 1626, and 1628–9. In 1621 he was elected principal of Jesus College, Oxford, an office he held until his death. So ample were his benefactions to the college that he has been styled its second founder; he spent upon the hall, the decoration of the chapel, and other buildings a sum of 5,000l. He also obtained a new charter for the college from James I in 1622. In 1624 the king employed him to assist in framing statutes for Pembroke College, Oxford (, Hist. Pembroke Coll. 1897, pp. 183–5). He died unmarried on 8 Oct. 1630, and was buried in the college chapel, where there is a monument to him, erected by his brother Sir Bevis Thelwall. He gave to his nephew John the house he had built himself at Plas Coch in the parish of Llanychan, Denbighshire. There is a portrait of him as a child, in Jesus College.

[Foster's Alumni Oxon. 1500–1714; Enwogion Cymru, Liverpool, 1870; Chalmers's History of the Colleges of Oxford, 1810; Clark's Colleges of Oxford; Dugdale's Orig. Jurid. and Chronica Series; Pennant's Tours.]

THELWALL, JOHN (1764–1834), reformer and lecturer on elocution, son of Joseph Thelwall (1731–1772), a silk mercer, and grandson of Walter Thelwall, a naval surgeon, was born at Chandos Street, Covent Garden, on 27 July 1764. On his father's death in 1772 his mother decided to continue the business, but it was not until 1777 that John was removed from school at Highgate and put behind the counter. His duties were distasteful to him, and he devoted most of his time to indiscriminate reading, which he varied by making copies of engravings. Discord prevailed in the family, his eldest brother being addicted to heavy drinking, while the mother was constantly reproaching and castigating John for his fondness for books. To end this state of things he consented to be apprenticed to a tailor, but here again exception was taken to his studious habits. Having parted from his master by mutual consent, he began studying divinity until his brother-in-law, who held a position at the chancery bar, caused him to be articled in 1782 to John Impey [q. v.], attorney, of Inner Temple Lane. Here, again, his independent views precluded the pursuit of professional success. He studied the poets and philosophers in preference to his law-books, avowed his distaste for copying ‘the trash of an office,’ and refused to certify documents he had not read. His moral exaltation was