_A short discourse.--The Shuttlecock.--The solution of two problems
connected with its flight.--The Windmill.--The Smoke-jack.--A
toy constructed on the same principle.--The Bow and
Arrow.--Archery.--The arrival of Isabella Villers._
Mr. Twaddleton, on his arrival at the lodge, on the following morning,
was informed that Miss Villers was expected at Overton in the evening.
“Your account of that young lady,” observed the vicar, “has greatly
prepossessed me in her favour; I only hope that she is not too _blue_.”
“I care not how blue the stockings of a lady may be,” said Mr. Seymour,
“‘provided her petticoats be long enough to hide them;’ and from my
knowledge of Miss Villers, I can assure you, exalted as are her
attainments, they are so veiled by feminine delicacy and reserve, that
they may insidiously win, but will never extort our homage.”
“Ay, ay,” exclaimed the vicar; “I perfectly agree with you in your idea
of feminine perfection--short tongues and long petticoats, Mr.
Seymour.--But where are my little playmates?”
“I left Tom and Fanny on the terrace, a short time since,” replied Mr.
Seymour, “very busily engaged in the game of shuttlecock and
battledoor.”
“The shuttlecock is an ancient sport,” observed Mr. Twaddleton. “It is
represented in a manuscript as far back as the fourteenth century: and
it became a fashionable game amongst grown persons in the reign of
James the First.”
“It is a very healthy pastime,” said Mr. Seymour, “and, in my opinion,
is admirably calculated for females; for, it expands the chest, while
it creates a graceful pliancy of the limbs.”
“I entirely agree with you; it is the only game with which I am
acquainted, in which muscular exercise is gained without compromising
gracefulness. But see, here come the two young rogues.”
“Papa,” exclaimed Tom, “I have been considering whether there is any
philosophy in the game of shuttlecock.”
“There are two circumstances connected with its flight,” replied his
father, “which certainly will admit of explanation upon scientific
principles; and I should much like to hear whether you can apply them
for that purpose. The first is its spinning motion in the air; the
second, the regularity with which its base of cork always presents
itself to the battledoor; so that, after you have struck it, it turns
round, and arrives at your sister’s battledoor in a position to be
again struck by her, and sent back to you.”
“I perfectly understand what you mean; but I really am not able to
explain the motions to which you allude,” said Tom.
“The revolution of the shuttlecock, about its axis, entirely depends
upon the impulse of the wind on the oblique surfaces of its feathers;
so that it is often necessary to trim the feathers of a new
shuttlecock, before it will spin.”
“I understand you, papa; the force of the wind, by striking the oblique
feathers, is resolved into a perpendicular and parallel force, as you
explained to us, when we considered the action of the wind upon the
kite.”
“Exactly; every oblique direction of a motion is the diagonal of a
parallelogram, whose perpendicular and parallel directions are the two
sides. Having settled this point, let us consider the second; viz. how
it happens that the cork of the shuttlecock always presents itself to
the battledoor.”
“I should think,” said Tom, “that the cork points to the battledoor for
the same reason that the weathercock always points to the wind.”
“Admirably illustrated!” exclaimed his father; “the cork will always go
foremost; because the air must exert a greater force over the lighter
feathers, and therefore retard their progress. While we are upon this
subject, I will introduce to your notice some contrivances which are
indebted to this same principle for their operation. In the first
place, there is the arrow; can you tell me, Louisa, the use of the
feathers which are placed round its extremity?”
“To make its head proceed foremost in the air, by rendering its other
end lighter, and therefore more sensible to the resistance of the air,”
replied Louisa.
“Very well answered; that is, unquestionably, one of the objects of the
wings of an arrow; but there is also another, that of _rifling_ it, or
steadying its progressive motion, by causing it to revolve around its
axis. If you will look at this arrow, you will perceive that the
feathers are placed nearly, but not quite, in planes passing through
it; if the feathers were exactly in this plane, the air could not
strike against their surfaces when the arrow is in motion: but, since
they are not perfectly straight, but always a little aslant, the air
necessarily strikes them, as the arrow moves forward; by which force
the feathers are turned round, and with them the arrow or reed; so that
a motion is generated about its axis; and its velocity will increase
with the obliquity of the feathers. You will therefore observe that, in
order to enable the feathers to offer a necessary resistance to the
air, they must possess a certain degree of stiffness or inflexibility.
It was on this account that Roger Ascham,[46] and other skilful artists
in the days of archery, preferred the feathers of a goose of two or
three years old, especially such as drop of themselves, for pluming the
arrow; and the importance, as well as the theory of this choice, is
confirmed by a curious observation of Gervase Markham,[47] who says
that ‘the peacock feather was sometimes used at the short butt; yet,
seldom or ever, _did it keep the shaft either right or level_!’”(43)
“That is intelligible enough,” said Tom, “the feather of the peacock
must have been so flexible as to have yielded to the slightest breath
of air; and now, as we are upon the subject of the arrow, do explain to
us the action of the bow.”
“I shall readily comply with your request, before we part; but I am
desirous, at present, of following up the subject before us, and of
taking into consideration some other instruments which owe their
motions to the action of the air upon oblique surfaces.”
“Suppose,” said the vicar, “you explain to them the action of the wind
upon the sails of the mill.”
“I should like to hear something about the windmill,” observed Tom;
“and, perhaps, Mr. Twaddleton can tell us who invented the machine.”
“The invention is not of very remote date,” replied the vicar.
“According to some authors, windmills were first used in France in the
sixth century; while others maintain that they were brought to Europe
in the time of the crusades, and that they had long been employed in
the East, where the scarcity of water precluded the application of that
powerful agent to machinery.”
“I had intended,” said Mr. Seymour, “to have entered very fully upon
the subject of the windmill; for, although it is a very common machine,
its construction is much more ingenious than is generally imagined; it
must also be allowed to have a degree of perfection, to which few of
the popular engines have yet arrived: but to do ample justice to my
subject, I should require several models which are not yet in
readiness; besides, Tom’s holidays have nearly passed away; I must
therefore postpone the examination of the mill to some future
opportunity, and content myself, at present, with an explanation of its
sails.”
“And let me tell you,” observed the vicar, “that if you succeed in this
one object, you will accomplish a task which has occupied years of
mechanical research. The angle which the surface of the sails ought to
make with their axis, in order that the wind may have the greatest
effect, or the degree of _weathering_, as the millwrights call it, is a
matter of nice enquiry, and has much engaged the thoughts of the
mathematicians.”
“My remarks upon that subject will be very general,” said Mr. Seymour;
“I shall explain the principle, without entering into the minutiæ of
its applications. The vertical windmill, which is the kind in most
common use, consists, as you well know, of an axis, or shaft, placed in
the direction of the wind, and usually inclining a little upwards from
the horizontal line. At one end of this, four long arms, or yards, are
fixed perpendicular to the axis, and across each other at right angles;
these afford a surface, on which a cloth can be spread to receive the
action of the wind. To conceive why these sails should revolve by the
force of the wind, we must have recourse to the theory of compound
motion. It is very evident that, if a mill exposed directly to the wind
should have its four sails perpendicular to the common axis in which
they are fitted, they would receive the wind perpendicularly, an
impulse which could only tend to overturn them; there is a necessity,
therefore, to have them oblique to the common axis, that they may
receive the wind obliquely, when their effort to recede from it causes
them to tarn round with the axis; and the four sails being all made
oblique in the same direction, thus unite their efforts for the common
object.”
“You have not yet told us what degree of obliquity the sail ought to
make with the wind,” said the vicar.
“The same as the kite ought to make, _fifty-four_ degrees and
_forty-four_ minutes,” replied Mr. Seymour.
“Do you not remember, papa, when we were last in London, you pointed
out to us a curious mill on the banks of the river, which went without
any sails?”
“You allude to the horizontal mill at Battersea.”
“I remember it was at Battersea,” observed Louisa; “and I dare say,
papa, that you recollect the strange story which the waterman, who
rowed us down the river, told Tom and myself. He said ‘that, when the
Emperor of Russia was in London, he took a fancy to the neat little
church at Battersea, and determined to carry it off to Russia; and that
for this purpose he had sent a large packing-case; but, as the
inhabitants refused to let the church be carried away, the case
remained on the spot where it was deposited.’”
“It is not a bad story,” said her father; “for the mill certainly, both
in size and figure, may be imagined to resemble a gigantic
packing-case. The mill, of which you are speaking, has been taken down,
in consequence of its use having been superseded by the introduction of
steam. It was erected by Captain Hooper, who also built a similar one
at Margate. It consisted of a circular wheel, having large boards or
vanes fixed parallel to its axis, and arranged at equal distances from
each other. Upon these vanes the wind could act, so as to blow the
wheel round; but had it acted upon the vane at both sides of the wheel,
at once, it is evident that it could not have had any tendency to turn
it round; hence, one side of the wheel was sheltered, while the other
was submitted to the full action of the wind. For this purpose it was
enclosed within a large cylindrical framework, furnished with doors or
shutters, on all sides, to open at pleasure and admit the wind, or to
shut and stop it. If all the shutters on one side were open, whilst all
those on the opposite side were closed, the wind, acting with
undiminished force on the vanes at one side, whilst the opposite vanes
were under shelter, turned the mill round; but whenever the wind
changed, the disposition of the blinds was altered, to admit the wind
to strike upon the vanes of the wheel in the direction of a tangent to
the circle in which they moved.”
“Well; have you any other machine to explain to your scholars?” asked
the vicar; “for,” continued he, “I am anxious to present them with a
bow and arrow which I have provided for their amusement.”
“I will, if you please, first describe to them the mechanism of the
smoke-jack; and I am desirous of doing so, as I have a very pleasing
experiment to exhibit, which is founded upon the same principle.”
Mr. Seymour then described the more common form of this machine. It
consisted, he said, of a number of vanes, of thin sheet-iron, arranged
in a circle, as here represented, but all set obliquely at a proper
angle of inclination. Its action was explained in the following
manner:--When a fire is kindled in the chimney, the air which, by its
rarefaction, immediately tends to ascend, strikes on the surfaces of
the inclined vanes, and by a resolution of forces, similar to that
already explained, causes the spindle, to which they are affixed, to
turn round, and consequently communicates the same motion to the spit.
The brisker the fire becomes, the quicker will the machine move,
because in that case, the air ascends with greater rapidity.
[Illustration: Smoke-jack.]
“I will now exhibit to you a mechanical amusement which is founded on
the same principle,” said Mr. Seymour. “Fetch me the piece of
pasteboard which lies on the library table.”
[Illustration: Simple spiral shape.]
The pasteboard was produced, and Mr. Seymour described upon it a
spiral, similar to that which is represented in the annexed figure. The
spiral was cut out, and extended, by raising the centre above the first
revolution. It was then suspended upon a small spit of iron, which had
been previously prepared; by applying the centre or summit of its
spiral to its point. The whole was now placed on the top of a warm
stove, (the application of a lamp would have answered the same
purpose,) and the machine, to the great delight and astonishment of the
children, soon put itself in motion, and turned without the assistance
of any apparent agent. The agent, however, in this case, was the air,
which being rarefied by the contact of a warm body, ascended, and thus
produced a current. The accompanying sketch may render this experiment
more intelligible to the reader.
[Illustration: “Mechanical amusement” described above.]
The vicar observed that, to him, the experiment was perfectly novel;
although he remembered having seen what he now supposed must have been
a similar contrivance, but which, until that moment, he had always
considered as the effect of clockwork.
“And what might that have been?” asked Mr. Seymour.
“The revolution of a serpent, which I noticed in several windows in
London, during a late illumination.”
“Undoubtedly; it was nothing more than a spiral, so painted as to
resemble that reptile, and which owed its motion to the action of air
heated by a lamp placed beneath it.”
“Now, then,” exclaimed the vicar, “let us direct our attention to the
bow and arrow; see the present I have provided for you, Tom!”
So saying, the worthy clergyman produced a bow and a number of arrows,
together with a target; which, at his desire, had been sent from London.
“I think,” observed Mr. Seymour, “that you should accompany your gift
with some account of archery, or the art and exercise of shooting with
the bow and arrow.”
“That will I readily do,” replied Mr. Twaddleton; who accordingly
proceeded as follows:--
“The bow is the most ancient and universal of all weapons, and has been
found to obtain amongst the most barbarous and remote nations. In the
days of David the practice of the bow would appear to have been so
general, that it was not unfrequently made use of as a figure of
speech. Israel, when blessing his sons, says of Joseph, ‘the _archers_
have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him; but his _bow_
abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong, by the
hands of the mighty God of Jacob.’”
“Its earliest application was probably for the purpose of obtaining
food,” observed Mr. Seymour.
“Your conjecture has the weight of testimony,” replied the vicar; “when
Isaac sent Esau to the forest, he said, ‘Take, I pray thee, thy
weapons, thy quiver, and thy bow, and go out to the field, and take me
some venison:’[48] and it is even a question, whether the _Saxon_ bow
was ever used by the Anglo-Saxons and Danes for any other purpose than
that of procuring food, or pastime; for the representation of this bow,
in an ancient manuscript[49] of the tenth century, shows it to have
been very differently constructed from what one might expect in a
military weapon; in size, too, it was a mere toy, compared with the bow
of succeeding ages.”
“There can be no doubt that the bow and arrow were employed for the
purpose of killing animals for food from the earliest times; but its
principal interest is derived from its military applications; will you,
therefore, give us a sketch of its history, and confine yourself to its
practice as a warlike instrument in England?”
“And may I also beg of you, my dear sir,” added Mrs. Seymour, “to
explain the different terms which are employed to denote its parts and
applications; such information will be, just now, highly acceptable to
me, as I am reading some romances, in which those terms are constantly
occurring.”
“You shall be obeyed, madam,” replied the vicar, with a courteous smile.
“We are, probably, indebted to the Norman conquest for the introduction
of the bow and arrow as a hostile weapon; but, before I enter upon that
subject, it is necessary to state, that the bows in use in England,
have been of two kinds, the common or _long_ bow, and the _cross_ bow.
The former does not require any description from me, the latter, or
_Arbalet_, as it was called, (from _Arbalesta_, i. e. _arcu-balista_, a
bow with a sling,) consists of a steel bow, fastened upon a stock, and
is discharged by means of a catch, or _trigger_, which probably gave
rise to the lock upon the modern musket.”
“Excuse the interruption,” said Mrs. Seymour, “but do allow me to ask
whether _Arquebusade_ does not derive its name from its having been
formerly applied to wounds inflicted by the cross-bow or _Arbalet_?”
“I thank you, madam; that etymology is entirely new to me, and will
explain the medical name, _Aqua vulneraria_, which has been applied to
that spirit.”
The vicar now proceeded without further interruption.
“The invention of cross-bows is said by ancient writers to have come
from the Sicilians. They were first used in England by the Normans at
the battle of Hastings; and a _quarrel_ or _bar-bolt_ (which is
synonymous with the arrow of the long-bow) was the immediate cause of
Harold’s death. In the reign of Stephen, in 1139, the second council of
Lateran prohibited their use; and some historians assert, that they
were not again used in this country till the reign of Richard I., whose
death, occasioned by one at Chaluz, was considered as a judgment on his
impiety. From the death of Richard till the splendid victories of
Edward III., we hear little of the cross-bow as a military weapon. Its
use appears to have been principally confined to the sieges of
fortified places, and to sea-fights. In 1346, at the battle of Cressy,
a large body of Genoese soldiers, who were particularly expert in its
management, were in the service of the French; but at the commencement
of the action, a sudden shower wetted the strings, and prevented the
archers from doing their usual execution, while the English were still
capable of annoying their enemies by the long-bow with complete
success: both this victory and that of Poictiers, ten years afterwards,
were chiefly ascribed by the English to their archers. In 1403, at the
battle of Shrewsbury, where Hotspur was slain, the archers on both
sides did terrible execution; and the victory of Agincourt, in 1417,
was entirely owing to their skill. Under Edward IV. an ordinance was
made, that every Englishman and Irishman, dwelling in England, should
have a bow of his own height, to be made of yew, wych, hazel, ash, or
any other seasonable tree, according to their power. By Henry VII. and
his son Henry VIII. the use of the cross-bow was entirely forbidden;
and a penalty of ten pounds was to be inflicted on every man in whose
house one might be found. From this time they seem to have been chiefly
used for killing deer.[50] Henry VIII. compelled every father to
provide a long-bow and two arrows for his son at seven years old.
Edward VI., Elizabeth, and James, all encouraged archery: John Lyon,
who founded Harrow school in 1590, two years before his death, drew up
rules for its direction, whereby the amusements of the scholars were
confined to ‘driving a top, tossing a hand-ball, running, and
shooting.’ The last mentioned diversion is in a manner insisted on by
the founder, who requires all parents to furnish their children with
bow-strings, shafts, and tresters, to exercise shooting. A silver arrow
used some years ago to be shot for by the young gentlemen of that
school.”
The vicar concluded, and received the thanks of the party for the
interesting information he had afforded them.
“There is one circumstance connected with the military history of the
long-bow,” said Mrs. Seymour, “which has somewhat surprised me; and
that is, why it should so long have continued in estimation after the
use of gunpowder.”
“That circumstance,” replied her husband, “will cease to astonish you,
when you remember that, until the last century, muskets were very
unwieldy instruments; they were never used without a rest; had no
bayonets, and could not be so frequently discharged as they are at
present.”
“Come,” said the vicar, “I perceive that the children are impatient to
try their skill with their new instrument; let us walk out, and I will
play the Scythian[51] upon this occasion.”
“Now, Tom,” cried Mr. Twaddleton; “we must have an object. Let me see.
Shall it be the ‘_but_,’ ‘_pricke_,’ or ‘_roaver_?’[52] Come, try
whether you can hit yonder gate-post. Take your bow, and here is an
arrow.”
Tom took the bow, and placing the arrow on the string, was about to
draw the latter, when the vicar exclaimed, “Stop--stop--you must pull
back your hand to your right ear, in order to shoot the arrow; whereas
you have placed the bow directly before you, and are about to return
your hand to the right breast.”
“I thought,” said Tom, “that was the proper position; for I remember
reading of the Amazonian women, who are said to have parted with their
right breasts, lest they should prove an impediment to their using the
bow.”
“I do not mean to assert,” replied the vicar, “that there is not ample
classical authority for your proceeding. The Amazons undoubtedly shot
their arrows in such a position; and so, in truth, did the primitive
Grecians; although the ancient Persians drew the arrow to the ear,
according to the fashion of later ages, and which I greatly prefer for
its superior convenience. You may also recollect, as you have been
lately reading ‘The Tales of a Grandfather,’ that the superiority of
the English archers was ascribed to this mode of using their bows; the
words of Sir W. Scott, if I rightly recollect, are these, ‘The archers
of England were taught to draw the bow-string to their right ear, while
other European nations only drew it to the breast.’ Now,” continued the
vicar, “if you try the difference of these postures, you will find that
a much longer arrow can be drawn to the ear than to the breast, because
the right arm has more room.”
The party now amused themselves for some time; each shooting in his
turn at the mark which was chosen for the trial; and with a success
which, considering it was their first attempt, the vicar declared to be
“quite marvellous.”
At the conclusion of the sport, Mr. Twaddleton informed his friends,
that parochial duties required his attendance at the vestry, but Mr.
Seymour told him that he should expect his company in the evening.
It was just six o’clock, when the sound of the porter’s bell, and the
rolling of carriage-wheels, announced the approach of some important
stranger to the lodge. It was Miss Villers. Were this a romance rather
than an instructive history, we should, at once, charge our pencil with
the glowing hues of the rainbow, and proceed to colour the outline
which the imagination of the reader must have already sketched: but the
character of the present composition fortunately renders such a task
unnecessary; we say “fortunately,” for the magazines of romance have
actually become insolvent from the numerous and heavy drafts of the
novel-writer; the regions of fancy have been so despoiled of their
blossoms, that scarcely a flower can be culled by him who would entwine
a garland for the brow of his heroine; and such even as may have
escaped the grasp of this voracious horde, will be found to have faded
under the withering influence of those insects of literature, which,
fluttering or creeping about their petals, have rendered their
fragrance pestilential, and turned their honey into bitterness. Where
can be found the emblem of that damask lip which, arched like the bow
of Cupid, shot an unerring dart, whenever a smile relaxed its tension?
We might describe the perfect symmetry of her form, but what language
could convey to the mind’s eye the witcheries with which the graces had
surrounded it? We might depict the features of her countenance, but how
could we catch and fix the varying expressions which lighted it up with
the magic glow of intelligence? We must, therefore, exercise the
judgment of Timanthes, and leave the reader to the sway of his own
imagination.
-----
Footnote 46:
Toxoph. ed. 1571. folio 166.
Footnote 47:
Markham’s Art of Archerie, 1634.
Footnote 48:
Gen. xlix. 23, 24.
Footnote 49:
MS. Cott. Claud. B. IV.
Footnote 50:
See Shakspeare’s Henry VI.
Footnote 51:
The ancient nobility of Greece were instructed by the Scythians in
the use of the bow, which in those days passed for a most princely
education. _Potter, Arch. Græc._ tom. ii. 1. iii. cap. 4. _Aquin.
Lex. Milit._ ii. 260.
Footnote 52:
The ‘_but_’ was a level mark; the ‘_pricke_,’ a mark of compass, but
certain in its distance; the ‘_roaver_,’ was a mark of uncertain
length.
------------------------------------------------------------------------