TOUJOURS, toujours, je te serai fidèle;
Disait Adolphe à chaque instant du jour;
Toujours, toujours je t'aimerai, ma belle,
Je veux le dire aux échos d'alentour;
Je graverai sur l'écorce d'un hètre,
Ce doux serment que le dieu des amours,
Vient me dieter, en me faisant connaître;
Que mon bonheur est de t'aimer toujours. _Bis_.
Toujours, toujours, lui répondit Adèle,
Tu régneras dans le fond de mon coeur;
Toujours, toujours, comme une tourterelle,
Je promets bien t'aimer avec ardeur;
Je pense à toi quand le soleil se lève,
J'y pense encore à la tin de son cours;
Dans le sommeil si quelquefois je reve,
C'est au bonheur de te chérir toujours.
He was a carver on wainscoat wood: and if I would give myself "la peine
d'entrer," he would shew me all sorts of curiosities. I secured a
favourable reception, by purchasing the little ornament upon which he was
at work--for a napoleon. I followed the nimble mechanic (ci-devant a
soldier in Bonaparte's campaigns, from whence he dated the loss of his
finger) through a variety of intricate passages below and up stairs; and
saw, above, several excellently well finished pieces of furniture, for
drawers or clothes-presses, in wainscoat wood:--the outsides of which were
carved sometimes with clustered roses, surrounding a pair of fond doves; or
with representations of Cupids, sheep, bows and arrows, and the various
_emblemata_ of the tender passion. They would have reminded you of the old
pieces of furniture which you found in your grandfather's mansion, upon
taking possession of your estate: and indeed are of themselves no
despicable ornaments in their way. I was asked from eight to twelve
napoleons for one of these pieces of massive and elaborately carved
furniture, some six or seven feet in height.
In all other respects, this is a town deserving of greater antiquarian
research than appears to have been bestowed upon it; and I cannot help
thinking that its ancient ecclesiastical history is more interesting than
is generally imagined. In former days the discipline and influence of its
See seem to have been felt and acknowledged throughout nearly the whole of
Normandy. Adieu. In imagination, the spires of COUTANCES CATHEDRAL begin to
peep in the horizon.
[141] [Mr. Cotman has an excellent engraving of it.]
[142] He has since established himself at Paris, near the Luxembourg
palace, as a _bookseller_; and it is scarcely three months since
I received a letter from him, in which he told me that he could no
longer resist the more powerful impulses of his heart--and that the
phials of physic were at length abandoned for the volumes of Verard
and of Gourmont. My friend, Mr. Dawson Turner, who knew him at Bayeux,
has purchased books of him at Paris. [The preceding in 1820.]
[143] Mr. Stothard, Jun. See page 221 ante. Mr. S's own account of the
tapestry may be seen in the XIXth volume of the Archæologia. It is
brief, perspicuous, and satisfactory. His fac-simile is one half the
size of the original; executed with great neatness and fidelity; but
probably the touches are a _little_ too artist-like or masterly.
[144] [The facsimile of that portion of the tapestry which is supposed to
be a portrait of Harold, and which Mr. Lewis, who travelled with me,
executed, is perhaps of its kind, one of the most perfect things
extant. In saying this, I only deliver the opinions of very many
competent judges. It must however be noticed, that the Society of
Antiquaries published the whole series of this exceedingly curious and
ancient Representation of the Conquest of our Country by William I. Of
this publication, the figures measure about four inches in height: but
there is also a complete, and exceedingly successful fac-simile of the
first two figures of this series--of the size of the originals
(William I. and the Messenger coming to announce to him the landing of
Harold in England) also published from the same quarter. The whole of
these Drawings were from the pencil of the late ingenious and justly
lamented THOS. STOTHARD, Esq. Draftsman to the Society of
Antiquaries.]
[145] A complete copy is of rarity in our own country, but not so abroad.
It is yet, however, an imperfect work.
[146] There have been bibliographers, and there are yet knowing
book-collectors, who covet this edition in preference to the Leipsic
impression of Sir T. More's Works of 1698; in folio. But this must
proceed from sheer obstinacy; or rather, perhaps, from ignorance that
the latter edition contains the _Utopia_--whereas in the former it is
unaccountably omitted to be reprinted--which it might have been, from
various previous editions.
[147] This figure is introduced with pursuivants and dogs: but great
liberties, as a nice eye will readily discern, have been taken by
Montfaucon, when compared with the original--of which the fac-simile,
in the previous edition of this work, may be pronounced to be PERFECT.
[148] Something similar may be seen round the border of the baptismal vase
of St. Louis, in Millin's _Antiquités Nationales_. A part of the
border in the Tapestry is a representation of subjects from Aesop's
Fables.
[149] Of a monument, which has been pronounced by one of our ablest
antiquaries to be "THE NOBLEST IN THE WORLD RELATING TO OUR OLD
ENGLISH HISTORY," (See _Stukely's Palæog. Britan._ Number XI.
1746, 4to. p. 2-3) it may be expected that some archæological
discussion should be here subjoined. Yet I am free to confess that,
after the essays of Messrs. Gurney, Stothard, and Amyot, (and more
especially that of the latter gentleman) the matter--as to the period
of its execution--may be considered as well nigh, if not wholly, at
rest. These essays appear in the XVIIIth and XIXth volumes of the
Archæologia. The Abbé de la Rue contended that this Tapestry was
worked in the time of the second Matilda, or the Empress Maud, which
would bring it to the earlier part of the XIIth century. The
antiquaries above mentioned contend, with greater probability, that it
is a performance of the period which it professes to commemorate;
namely, of the defeat of Harold at the battle of Hastings, and
consequently of the acquiring of the Crown of England, by conquest, on
the part of William. This latter therefore brings it to the period of
about 1066, to 1088--so that, after all, the difference of opinion is
only whether this Tapestry be fifty years older or younger, than the
respective advocates contend.
But the most copious, particular, and in my humble judgment the most
satisfactory, disquisition upon the date of this singular historical
monument, is entitled, "_A Defence of the early Antiquity of the
Bayeux Tapestry_," by Thomas Amyot, Esq. immediately following Mr.
Stothard's communication, in the work just referred to. It is at
direct issue with all the hypotheses of the Abbé de la Rue, and in my
opinion the results are triumphantly established. Whether the
_Normans_ or the _English_ worked it, is perfectly a secondary
consideration. The chief objections, taken by the Abbé, against its
being a production of the XIth century, consist in, first, its not
being mentioned among the treasures possessed by the Conqueror at his
decease:--secondly, that, if the Tapestry were deposited in the
church, it must have suffered, if not have been annihilated, at the
storming of Bayeux and the destruction of the Cathedral by fire in the
reign of Henry I., A.D. 1106:--thirdly, the silence of _Wace_ upon the
subject,--who wrote his metrical histories nearly a century after the
Tapestry is supposed to have been executed." The latter is chiefly
insisted upon by the learned Abbé; who, which ever champion come off
victorious in this archæological warfare, must at any rate receive the
best thanks of the antiquary for the methodical and erudite manner in
which he has conducted his attacks.
At the first blush it cannot fail to strike us that the Abbé de la
Rue's positions are all of a _negative_ character; and that,
according to the strict rules of logic, it must not be admitted, that
because such and such writers have _not_ noticed a circumstance,
therefore that circumstance or event cannot have taken place. The
first two grounds of objection have, I think, been fairly set aside by
Mr. Amyot. As to the third objection, Mr. A. remarks--"But it seems
that Wace has not only _not_ quoted the tapestry, but has varied
from it in a manner which proves that he had never seen it. The
instances given of this variation are, however, a little unfortunate.
The first of them is very unimportant, for the difference merely
consists in placing a figure at the _stern_ instead of the
_prow_ of a ship, and in giving him a bow instead of a trumpet.
From an authority quoted by the Abbé himself, it appears that, with
regard to this latter fact, the Tapestry was right, and Wace was
wrong; and thus an argument is unintentionally furnished in favour of
the superior antiquity of the Tapestry. The second instance of
variation, namely, that relating to Taillefer's sword, may be easily
dismissed; since, after all, it now appears, from Mr. Stothard's
examination, that neither Taillefer nor his sword is to be found in
the Tapestry," &c. But it is chiefly from the names of ÆLFGYVA and
WADARD, inscribed over some of the figures, that I apprehend the
conclusion in favour of the Tapestry's being nearly a contemporaneous
production, may be safely drawn.
It is quite clear that these names belong to persons living when the
work was in progress, or within the recollection of the workers, and
that they were attached to persons of some particular note or
celebrity, or rather perhaps of _local_ importance. An
eyewitness, or a contemporary only would have introduced them. They
would not have lived in the memory of a person, whether mechanic or
historian, who lived a _century_ after the event. No antiquary
has yet fairly appropriated these names, and more especially the
second. It follows therefore that they would not have been introduced
had they not been in existence at the time; and in confirmation of
that of WADARD, it seems that Mr. Henry Ellis (Secretary of the
Society of Antiquaries) "confirmed Mr. Amyot's conjecture on that
subject, by the references with which he furnished him to _Domesday
Book_, where his name occurs in no less than six counties, as
holding lands of large extent under _Odo_, Bishop of Bayeux, the
tenant in capite of those properties from the crown. That he was not a
_guard_ or _centinel,_ as the Abbé de la Rue supposes, but
that he held an _office of rank_ in the household of either
William or Odo, seems now decided beyond a doubt." Mr. Amyot thus
spiritedly concludes:--alluding to the successful completion of Mr.
Stothard's copy of the entire original roll.--"Yet if the BAYEUX
TAPESTRY be not history of the first class, it is perhaps something
better. It exhibits general traits, elsewhere sought in vain, of the
costume and manners of that age, which, of all others, if we except
the period of the Reformation, ought to be the most interesting to
us;--that age, which gave us a new race of monarchs, bringing with
them new landholders, new laws, and almost a new language."
Mr. Amyot has subjoined a specimen of his own poetical powers in
describing "the Minstrel TAILLEFER'S achievements," in the battle of
Hastings, from the old Norman lays of GAIMAR and WACE. I can only find
room for the first few verses. The poem is entitled,