There is preserved an account of a feast given by Archbishop Nevill at
his installation, 1466, in which are mentioned, among a great variety of
others, the following articles, viz. wheat 300 quarters, ale 300 tuns,
80 oxen, 6 wild bulls, 1000 sheep, 300 calves, 300 swine called porks,
2000 pigs, 200 kids, 4000 rabbits, upwards of 400 harts, bucks and roes,
3000 geese, 2300 capons, 2000 chickens, 4000 pigeons, 100 peacocks, 200
cranes, 4000 mallards and teals, 500 partridges, 400 woodcocks; 1500
hot, and 4000 cold venison pasties, 2000 hot custards, and 4000 cold
ones. On the tables at this feast it is mentioned there were 4 porpoises
and 8 seals.
There were 62 cooks and 515 servants to assist them, and not less than
3000 persons in all were at this feast.
At the above period there was not discovered in society, any pleasure
but that of crouding together in hunting and feasting. The delicate
pleasures of conversation, in communicating opinions, sentiments and
desires, were wholly unknown.
About the year 1512 the breakfast hour was eight, and at ten they sat
down to dinner; at three in the afternoon they had a drinking, and four
was the hour for supper. The gates of the Earl of Northumberland’s
castles were shut at nine in the evening throughout the year, “to the
intent that no servant shall come in at the said gate, that ought to be
within, who are out of the house at that hour.”
By a household establishment of Lord Fairfax’s, about 1650, it appears
that eleven had then become the hour of dining, and towards the end of
that century the hour was twelve, but from the beginning of the last
century it has gradually grown later to the present times, when seven
has become the fashionable hour in noblemen’s houses.
In the country, and in moderate families in the metropolis, one and two
are the more general hours for dining.
From the Percy household book it may be observed, that several dishes
were then in use which have been long banished from our tables; among
these may be reckoned cranes, herons, sea-gulls, bitterns and kirlews,
and at archbishop Nevill’s feast, porpoises and seals were served up.
After the accession of Henry the seventh to the throne, the nation began
to rest from the scenes of war and blood which for several years had
subsisted between the Houses of York and Lancaster, and in the next
reign the people turned their attention more to trade and the arts of
peace, so that we find the mode of living considerably changed, for
luxury being ever the attendant of extended commerce, this brought us
acquainted with the produce of foreign countries till then unknown in
England.
Previously to 1509 the principal vegetables used at the tables of the
great were imported from the Netherlands, so that when Catherine, queen
of Henry the eighth wanted a sallad, she was obliged to despatch a
messenger to Flanders. Asparagus and artichokes were introduced into
England about 1578, and cauliflowers somewhat later. Celery was not
introduced into England till after 1709, when Marshal Tallard being made
prisoner at the battle of Malplaquet, and brought into England, first
introduced this plant on the English tables.
There is an article in the Percy household book which says, “That from
henceforth there be no herbs bought, seeing that the cooks may have
herbs enough in my lord’s gardens.”
Since the introduction of tea into England at the close of the
seventeenth century the living of all classes of the people has
experienced a total change, but it was not till about 1740 that tea came
to be generally used in the country, for previously to that time those
who made use of it got it by stealth, each being afraid of being known
to be in possession of what was then termed a great luxury.
Waller has a poem addressed to the queen Maria d’Este, wife of James the
second in 1683, “On Tea commended by her Majesty,” whereby it seems it
was even then a new thing, though Mr. Hanway in his Essay on Tea says
that Lord Arlington and Lord Ossory introduced it into England in 1666,
and that it was then admired as a new thing. Their ladies introduced it
among the women of quality, and its price was then £3 per pound, and
continued the same till 1707. In 1715 green tea began to be used, and
the practice of drinking tea descended to the middling classes of the
people.
In the Tatler (No. 86, Oct. 27, 1709) the author mentions inviting his
friends, seemingly as though tea was common, to drink a dish of tea,
which they refused, saying they never drank tea in the morning.
The same author observes, that dinner had in his memory, crept by
degrees from twelve o’clock to three, and in the Spectator it is said
that coffee houses were frequented by shopkeepers from six in the
morning, and that the students at law made their appearance in them in
their night gowns about eight. A lady who sends her journal to the
Spectator represents herself as taking chocolate in bed, and sleeping
after it till ten, and drinking her Bohea from that hour till eleven.
Her dinner hour was from three to four, and she did not sit up later at
a card party than twelve. A citizen out of trade, in the same work,
describes himself as rising at eight, dining at two, and going to bed at
ten if not kept up at the club he frequented.
The history of Taverns in this country may be traced back to the time of
king Henry the fourth, for so ancient is that of the Boar’s Head in East
Cheap, London, the rendezvous of prince Henry and his riotous
companions. Of little less antiquity is the White Hart without
Bishopsgate, which now bears in the front of it, the date of its
erection, 1480.
SIR RICHARD CLOUGH.
Sir Richard Clough was a man of distinguished character, who raised
himself by his merit, from a poor boy at Denbigh to be one of the
greatest merchants of his time. He was first a chorister at Chester,
then had the good fortune to become apprentice to the famous Sir Thomas
Gresham, and afterwards his partner, with whom he may be considered as
joint founder of the Royal Exchange, having contributed several thousand
pounds towards that noble design. His residence was chiefly at Antwerp,
where after his death his body was interred; his heart at Whitchurch, in
the vicinity of Denbigh. He is said to have made a pilgrimage to
Jerusalem, and to have been a knight of the holy sepulchre; and he
accordingly assumed the five crosses, the badge of that order, for his
arms. His wealth was so great, that his name became proverbial, and the
Welsh have a saying, on any person’s attaining great riches, that he _is
become a CLOUGH_. Sir Richard left two daughters, but it is probable
that they enjoyed but an inconsiderable part of his wealth, which is
said to have gone to Sir Thomas Gresham, according to an agreement in
case of survivorship. Sir Richard died first, but the time is unknown.
Sir Thomas survived till the year 1579.
The original hint of the Royal Exchange was given to Sir Thomas Gresham
by Sir Richard Clough, who in the year 1561, had been advanced by the
former, to be his correspondent and agent in the then emporium of the
world, Antwerp. Clough wrote to his master, to blame the citizens of
London for neglecting so necessary a thing; bluntly saying that “they
studied nothing else but their own private profit; that they were
content to walk about in the rain, more like pedlars than merchants, and
that there was no kind of people but had their place to transact
business in, in other countries.” Thus stimulated, Sir Thomas, in 1566,
laid the foundation, and the next year completed what was then called
the _Bourse_, which three years after on being visited by queen
Elizabeth, was dignified by her with the title of _Royal Exchange_.
An original picture of Sir Richard Clough is preserved at Llanywern, the
seat of Sir Thomas Salusbury, Bart. It is a half length extremely well
painted on board, his hair is very short, and of a dark brown. He is
dressed in a short close jacket, black, striped with white, and great
white breeches. In his right hand a glove; his left on his sword; on his
right side is a dagger. The arms of the holy sepulchre, which he had
assumed, are on one side of the picture. It was probably painted at
Antwerp, which at this period abounded with artists of the first merit.
ROYAL CLEMENCY.
Lewis the thirteenth of France being desirous to sit as judge at the
trial of the Duke de la Vallette, assembled, in his cabinet, some
members of the Parliament, together with some counsellors of state, to
consult on the propriety of such a step. Upon their being compelled by
the king to give their opinions concerning the decree for his arrest,
the president, De Believre, said, “That he found it very strange that a
prince should pass sentence upon one of his subjects; that kings had
reserved to themselves the power of pardoning, and left that of
condemning to their officers; that his majesty wanted to see before him
at the bar, a person, who by his decision was to be hurried away in an
hour’s time into another world. That this is what a prince’s
countenance, from whence favours flow, should never bear; that his
presence alone removed ecclesiastical censures; and that subjects ought
not to go away dissatisfied from their prince.” When sentence was
passed, the same president said, “This is an unprecedented judgment, and
contrary to the example of past ages, to see a king of France, in the
quality of a judge, condemning a gentleman to death.”—It may be proper
to add, that the sentence was afterwards revoked.
It has always been urged against king James the second, as a proof of
the inveterate cruelty of his disposition, that he should have ordered
the Duke of Monmouth into his presence, and not pardoned him. Welwood,
in his Memoirs, says, that James, in this instance, made an exception to
a general rule observed inviolably by kings, “never to allow a criminal,
under sentence of death, the sight of his prince’s face, without a
design to pardon him.”
The custom of pardoning criminals, by admitting them into the presence
of the sovereign, is of very ancient date. When Agag, king of the
Amalekites, had been taken prisoner by Saul (1 Sam., xv. 20-33) and his
life spared by that monarch, contrary to the divine command, and was
afterwards brought into the presence of Samuel, he exclaimed “Surely the
bitterness of death is past,” evidently in allusion to this custom. But
Samuel executed the command of GOD, by putting Agag to death, which
ought to have been done by Saul, on taking him prisoner.
LOTTERIES.
As a source of revenue, this is only a modern invention; and it is
evident, were it not for the monopoly of this species of gambling, which
the government insists on enjoying, that it could not possibly prove of
any material advantage; for individuals would soon set up private
lotteries, could afford to carry them on with less profit, and would
soon draw all the benefit of such speculations to themselves.
The Romans had lotteries, particularly whilst they were under the
government of the emperors. The tickets were distributed gratis among
those guests who attended their entertainments, and all of them gained
some prize. Heliogabalus took pleasure in making the prizes of very
disproportionate value. Some of the prizes were ten camels, others ten
flies, some ten pounds of gold, ten eggs, and the like. The plays which
Nero gave, were concluded by lotteries, consisting of prizes of wheat,
wine, stuffs, gold, silver, slaves, ships, houses, and lands.
In England, lotteries certainly took place in the reign of queen
Elizabeth. According to Raynal, the two American companies in her reign,
were favoured with the first lottery that ever was drawn in her
dominions. The first however, of which we have any regular account was
drawn in the year 1569. It consisted of 400,000 lots, at ten shillings
each; the prizes were plate, and the profits were to go towards
repairing the havens of this kingdom. It was drawn at the west door of
St. Paul’s Cathedral. The drawing began on the 11th of January, 1569,
and continued incessantly, day and night, until the sixth of May,
following. There were then only three lottery offices in London. It was
at first intended to have been drawn at the house of Mr. Derricke, the
queen’s jeweller, but was afterwards drawn as above mentioned.
The proposals for this lottery were published in the years 1567 and
1568. Dr. Rawlinson shewed the Society of Antiquaries in 1748, “A
proposal for a very rich lottery, general, without any blanks,
containing a great number of good prizes, as well of ready money as of
plate and certain sorts of merchandizes, having been valued and prized
by the commandment of the queen’s most excellent majesty’s order, to the
intent that such commodities as may chance to arise thereof, after the
charges borne, may be converted towards the reparations of the havens,
and strength of the realm, and towards such other public good works. The
number of lots shall be 400,000 and no more, and every lot shall be the
sum of ten shillings sterling and no more. To be filled by the feast of
St. Bartholomew. The shew of prizes are to be seen in Cheapside, at the
sign of the Queen’s Arms, the house of Mr. Derricke, goldsmith, servant
to the queen.”
In the year 1612, king James in special favour for the plantation of
English colonies in Virginia, granted a lottery to be held at the west
end of St. Paul’s, whereof one Thomas Sharplys, a tailor of London, had
the chief prize, which was 4000 crowns in plate.
Lotteries were revived in the reign of William the third, and as all our
evils were then attributed to Dutch counsels, the blame of lotteries,
those banes of industry, frugality, and virtue, was ascribed to an
imitation of the example of Holland, and a wish in the natives of that
country to ruin our morals, as well as to cramp our trade.
In the reign of queen Anne it was thought necessary to suppress
lotteries as nuisances to the public. They have, however, been revived
of late years, and are now carried forward in a more extensive manner
than at any former period.
HERCULANEUM MANUSCRIPTS.
The following account of the ancient rolls of Papyrus, discovered at
Herculaneum, and the method employed to unroll them, is extracted from a
letter written in 1802, by the Hon. Henry Grey Bennett, addressed to the
late Rev. Samuel Henley, D. D.
“The _papyrus_ of the Greeks and Romans was the inside coating of a
plant of the same name; which was formerly common in various parts of
Sicily; a small river now choaked up near Palermo was called the
_Papyrus_, probably from the number of that species of plant which grew
in its bed; the same name was also given to various rivulets in the
island. It is however most common in the neighbourhood of Syracuse,
where a Sicilian a few years ago established a manufactory of that
article, more indeed to gratify the wishes of the curious, than to reap
any immediate profit. The texture is not so fine as in the Egyptian or
eastern manuscripts, which exist in the libraries of Paris. This may be
owing probably to the method of preparation, and not to any difference
in the plant.
“The _papyri_ are joined together, and form one roll, on each sheet of
which, the characters are painted, standing out in a species of _bas
relief_, and singly to be read with the greatest ease. As there are no
stops, a difficulty is found in joining the letters, in making out the
words, and in discovering the sense of the phrase. The manuscripts were
found in a chamber of an excavated house, in the ancient Herculaneum, to
the number of about 1800, a considerable part of which were in a state
to be unrolled. That city was buried for the most part under a shower of
hot ashes, and the manuscripts were reduced by the heat to a state of
tinder, or to speak more properly, resembled paper which has been burnt.
Where the baking has not been complete, and where any part of the
vegetable juice has remained it is almost impossible to unroll them, the
sheets towards the centre, being so closely united. In the others as you
approach to the centre, or conclusion, the manuscripts become smoother,
and the work proceeds with greater rapidity. A manuscript, by Epicurus,
was unrolled in March, 1802, twenty seven sheets of which were taken
off, not indeed so well as could have been hoped, but a great part
sufficiently intelligible, to judge of the style of the author, and the
nature of its contents. It unfortunately fell to the lot of a young
beginner, who in his hurry to conclude, spoiled much more than he saved.
“The _papyri_ are very rough on the outside, and in some there are great
holes. All the inequalities are made smooth, previous to unrolling them,
with facility; in consequence much must inevitably be lost. Great care,
however, is taken to preserve all the pieces, and when broken off, they
are placed in the same sheet, preserving their original position.
“When first Mr. Hayter began this process, there was one man tolerably
expert, and three only who had ever seen the manner of it; consequently,
all were to be taught. This may serve as a reason why, as yet, so little
has been done. One Latin manuscript was found, but it was in too bad a
state to promise any chance of success. They are of different sizes,
some containing only a few sheets, as a single play, others some
hundreds, and a few, perhaps, two thousand. We may hope from the first,
Menander, and from the others, the histories of Livy and Diodorus
Siculus, perhaps the Doric poetry of the Sicilian muse, or the
philosophy of the schools of Agrigentum and of Syracuse. We are led from
the nature of the manuscripts to trust, that the indefatigable labours,
the attention, and industry of Mr. Hayter will not be thrown away, and
that the assistance to be derived from the English minister, Mr.
Drummond, as well on account of his classical knowledge, and his love of
literature, as the advantages arising from his situation, may command
ultimate success, and secure to those who are engaged in this business,
the protection of the Neapolitan government, and the thanks of the
literary world.”
WOLVES IN ENGLAND.
King Edward the first commissioned Peter Corbet to destroy the wolves in
the counties of Gloucester, Worcester, Hereford, Salop, and Stafford,
and ordered John Gilford to hunt them in all the forests of England.
The forest of Chiltern was infested by wolves and wild bulls in the time
of Edward the Confessor. William the Conqueror granted the lordship of
Riddesdale, in Northumberland, to Robert de Umfraville, on condition of
defending that part of the country against enemies and wolves. King John
gave a premium of ten shillings for catching two wolves.
In the reign of king Henry the third Vitalis de Engaine held the manors
of Laxton and Pitchley, in the county of Northampton, by the service of
hunting the wolf, whenever the king should command him. In the reign of
Edward the first, it was found by inquisition that John de Engaine, held
the manor of Great Gidding in the county of Huntingdon by the service of
hunting the hare, fox, wild cat, and wolf, within the counties of
Huntingdon, Northampton, Buckingham, Oxford, and Rutland. In the reign
of Edward the third, Thomas de Engaine, held certain manors by the
service of finding at his own proper cost, certain dogs for the
destruction of wolves, foxes, martins, and wild cats, in the counties of
Northampton, Rutland, Oxford, Essex, and Buckingham.
PROFESSOR PORSON.
This eminent scholar and acute critic was born at East Ruston, in the
county of Norfolk, on the 25th of December, 1759. At a very early period
he displayed talents which gave promise of future excellence, and some
gentlemen who admired his acquirements in learning, sent him to Eton,
from whence he was afterwards entered of Trinity College, Cambridge. The
following account of Mr. Porson, when an Eton boy, is extracted from the
evidence of Dr. Goodall, the present Provost of Eton, given before the
Education Committee of the House of Commons.
Dr. Goodall being asked if he was acquainted with what happened to the
late Professor Porson to prevent his election to King’s College, replied
as follows:—
“Every account that I have read about him, in relation to that
circumstance is incorrect. When he came to the school he was placed
rather higher by the reputation of his abilities, than perhaps he
ought to have been, in consequence of his actual attainments; and I
can only say that many of the statements in the life of Porson are
not founded in truth. With respect to prosody, he knew but little,
and as to Greek he had made comparatively but little progress when
he came to Eton. The very ingenious and learned editor of one
account of him, has been misinformed in most particulars; and many
of the incidents which he relates, I can venture from my own
knowledge to assert, are distorted or exaggerated. Even Person’s
compositions, at an early period, though eminently correct, fell far
short of excellence; still we all looked up to him in consequence of
his great abilities and variety of information, though much of that
information was confined to the knowledge of his schoolfellows, and
could not easily fall under the notice of his instructors. He always
undervalued school exercises, and generally wrote his exercises fair
at once, without study. I should be sorry to detract from the merit
of an individual whom I loved, esteemed, and admired; but I speak of
him when he had only given the promise of his future excellence; and
in point of school exercises, I think he was very inferior to more
than one of his contemporaries; I would name the present Marquis
Wellesley as infinitely superior to him in composition.
“On being asked whether he wrote the same beautiful hand as he did
afterwards, Dr. Goodall replied he did, nor was there any doubt of
his general scholarship.
“To a question whether he made great progress during the time he was
at Eton, or after he left? Dr. Goodall said he was advanced as far
as he could be with propriety, but there were certainly some there
who would not have been afraid to challenge Porson as a school-boy,
though they would have shunned all idea of competition with him at
Cambridge. The first book that Porson ever studied, as he often told
me, was Chambers’s Cyclopædia; he read the whole of that dictionary
through, and in a great degree made himself master of the algebraic
part of that work entirely by the force of his understanding.
“Dr. Goodall was then asked if he considered there was any ground
for complaint on the part of Porson, in not having been sent to
Cambridge, to which he answered no; he was placed as high in the
school as he well could be; as a proof however of his merits, when
he left Eton, contributions were readily supplied by Etonians in aid
of Sir George Baker’s proposal, to secure the funds for his
maintenance at the university.”
In the year 1793, Mr. Porson was elected professor of Greek in the
University of Cambridge, that office being then vacant by the death of
professor Cooke. The following letter relating to this election from Mr.
Porson to the Rev. Dr. Postlethwayte, master of Trinity College, is now
first printed:—
“_Essex Court, Temple, 6th October, 1792._
“Sir,—When I first received the favour of your letter I must own
that I felt rather vexation and chagrin than hope and satisfaction.
I had looked upon myself so completely in the light of an outcast
from Alma Mater, that I had made up my mind to have no farther
connection with the place. The prospect you held out to me gave me
more uneasiness than pleasure. When I was younger than I now am, and
my disposition more sanguine than it is at present, I was in daily
expectation of Mr. Cooke’s resignation, and I flattered myself with
the hope of succeeding to the honour he was going to quit. As hope
and ambition are great castle-builders, I had laid a scheme, partly
as I was willing to think, for the joint credit, partly for the
mutual advantage, of myself and the university. I had projected a
plan of reading lectures, and I persuaded myself that I should
easily obtain a grace, permitting me to exact a certain sum from
every person who attended. But seven years’ waiting will tire out
the most patient temper, and all my ambition of this sort was long
ago laid asleep. The sudden news of the vacant professorship put me
in mind of poor Jacob, who having served seven years in hopes of
being rewarded with Rachel, awoke, and behold it was Leah.