_Sir Wm. Temple; His Collection; Correspondence; Museum Staff; Visit to
Brescello; Archduke Maximilian’s Visit to the Museum; Reports of
Heads of Departments; Correspondence; Mr Newton’s Expedition to
Budrum; Blacas Collection._
Panizzi was called upon, within a few months after his appointment, to
give practical proof of that energy which characterized him; indeed, it
appears that he lost no time in setting to work to reform the Museum as
regarded the want of space and the improvement of the position of his
subordinates. The Parliamentary papers of the day will show the amount
of correspondence, both private and official, through which he had to
wade. Though desirous of maintaining chronological order, we first take
up here for a moment what, at the time, was considered a valuable
bequest of Sir William Temple, brother of Lord Palmerston, who died in
London on the 24th of August, 1856, having for many years resided at
Naples as Minister Plenipotentiary.
It was understood, previous to Sir William’s death, that his collection
of antiquities would come to the British Museum. Although, perhaps, not
a collection of the first order, it was of considerable intrinsic value,
and looked upon by _connoisseurs_ as a small Museum in itself.
On the 11th of September, 1856, Panizzi received the following private
letter from Lord Palmerston:—
[Illustration]
“94, Piccadilly.
“My dear Panizzi,
My brother stated in his will, ‘I desire that my collection of
Antiquities be offered to the Trustees of the British Museum, to be
preserved therein for the use and benefit of the public, and if within
six calendar months after such offer shall have been made to the said
Trustees, they shall signify their acceptance thereof, for the purpose
aforesaid, then I give the said collection to them accordingly.’
Of course it will be understood by the Trustees that the Collection
should be placed separately and kept altogether, and be described as
my brother’s gift, and the Infant Bacchus should be added to the
collection of which it forms a part. As I cannot doubt that the
Trustees will accept this bequest, I would beg to suggest that some
proper person should be sent from the Museum to Naples, to pack up,
properly and safely, the things of which the Collection consists. This
would be more satisfactory than that the Collection should be packed
up by persons on the spot without any responsible superintendence.
Fagan is returning to Naples in the middle of next week, and will take
with him the list of articles, and the person sent to pack them up
might go out with Fagan.[A] There are many reasons why it is desirable
that no time should be lost in packing the Collection up. The way of
sending it home may be settled afterwards. It is possible that some
ship-of-war may be in the Bay of Naples which might bring the cases
home, if not too bulky, but otherwise the Museum will make proper
arrangements for their removal to England.
Yours sincerely,
PALMERSTON.
P.S.—On second thoughts, I send you the Catalogue, which you will
return to me before Wednesday. You had better have a copy made of this
Catalogue, and keep it in case any accident should happen to the
original.
P.”
Panizzi immediately afterwards sent for Mr. Oldfield, then an Assistant
in the Antiquity Department of the British Museum, and directed him to
proceed at once to Naples, in order to report on the Collection, and
superintend its departure. His instructions ran thus:—
“B. M., September 20th, 1856.
“Dear Sir,
After the full conversation which we have had on the subject
of the Sir William Temple’s legacy of his collection of antiquities to
the Trustees of the British Museum, it is unnecessary for me to say
more on that part of the subject, but I have accordingly to request
that you will take means for leaving this country to repair to Naples
without delay. There the collection, I understand, is still in the
house which Sir William inhabited at Naples, and the objects will be
delivered up to you by George Fagan, Esq. (Attaché to H. M’s
Legation), who is in possession of a full and descriptive catalogue of
the said collection, and who is to act for Viscount Palmerston, the
heir and sole executor of the Will of his late brother. You will, of
course, give an acknowledgment to Mr. Fagan of what you receive.
The collection being speedily and carefully packed up, you will make
it your duty, without loss of time, to enquire by what means it may be
best transmitted to England. Acting for our Trustees, I have applied
to the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, requesting them to order
any of Her Majesty’s ships that might be available, touching at Naples
on its way to England, to receive on board the packages containing the
said collection, the same being for public use and benefit, and should
you be successful in obtaining such means of conveyance, you are
requested to avail yourself of it in preference to any other, even if
the arrival of the collection were to be thereby delayed. This delay
would be of comparatively little importance; what is really essential
is that the collection should be carefully packed up and safely
removed on board without loss of time.
If no such conveyance can be obtained, you will then forward the
collection to England by the readiest and safest means available to
the best of your judgment, and after having consulted with the
gentleman in charge of Her Majesty’s Legation, or with Her Majesty’s
Consul General at Naples.
As to the expenses you may have to incur for packing, packing-cases,
transport of the objects from the Minister’s House to the ship, on
board of which they are to be placed, you are empowered to draw on me,
either at a month _after date_ or ten days _after sight_, for the
amount, advising me of having so drawn, and carefully preserving the
vouchers which justify the expense. Should you be obliged to remain at
Naples more than is now contemplated, and find the sum of £50, which I
have placed in your hands to meet your travelling and personal
expense, insufficient, you are authorized to draw for £50 more on the
same terms as above. On your return to England you will be so good as
to transmit to me a statement of your expenses, accompanied by such
vouchers as may be necessary, in order that they may be laid before
the Standing Committee.
Immediately after the Collection is embarked you will be pleased to
make the best of your way back to England. Having the greatest
reliance on your judgment, I concur with Mr. Hawkins in authorizing
you to purchase, on account of the Trustees, any object or objects
which you might think a very desirable addition for our Museum of
Antiquities, to an amount not exceeding altogether £100, drawing for
the same as above. Should any more important and peculiarly desirable
purchase offer itself, please to make forthwith a special report on
it, to be submitted to the Trustees, for their orders.
It may be superfluous to add that it will be desirable that, on your
return, you should lay before the Trustees a report on any point that
you may think of importance, respecting the public or private
Collections which may fall under your notice, and the regulations
under which the former are preserved, and made accessible to learned
men and artists, as well as the public at large.
Be so good as to write to me fully and frequently for the information
of the Trustees, and give me the earliest notice of the collection
being on board the vessel which is to bring it to England.
Mr. Fagan will assist you as far as in his power with his advice and
knowledge of men and things at Naples. I enclose, moreover, a letter
for Mr. Petre, now in charge of Her Majesty’s Mission, and another for
Mr. Craven, one of its members.
Believe me, &c., &c.,
A. PANIZZI.”
On the 3rd of October, Mr. Oldfield wrote from Naples giving his private
opinion of the collection, which he evidently did not consider of very
great value. “The glass and the bronzes,” he said, “are of considerable
beauty and interest, but the sculpture as a whole unworthy of
acceptance.”
A notable incident should be here inserted. When a certain R. Gargiulo
was preparing the Catalogue of the Collection, it was discovered that
four frescoes, of not much importance, had upon them the stamp of the
Museo Borbonico. They had, in fact, been purloined from that Museum by
an agent, or ally, of the individual from whom Sir William bought them.
Sir William resolved to return them to their lawful owners, but died
before carrying out his intention. Mr. Fagan, with Lord Palmerston’s
sanction, wrote to the Neapolitan authorities immediately afterwards,
informing them of the discovery; stating also, of course, how Sir
William had unwittingly purchased objects which he afterwards discovered
had been abstracted from Pompeii, and returning them in Lord
Palmerston’s name. After a few days, Signor d’Aloe called on Mr. Fagan,
and, stating that the matter had been reported to the King, Ferdinand
II., begged that Lord Palmerston would retain the frescoes. Consequent
upon this, and upon the letter which communicated the royal request, the
frescoes were accepted.
The collection consists altogether of 1,571 pieces; of these the most
interesting portions are the painted vases, the bronzes, and the
specimens of Greek and Roman glasses. Special mention should also be
made of a magnificent _Krater_, with a painting of the death of
Hippolytus; a very fine and rare globular vase, with an ornamental
cover, should be separately mentioned; and a _Lekythos_ representing the
judgment of Paris. Amongst the bronzes, a small but fine bust of a faun,
and specimens of Greek armour from Ruvo, comprising a breast and back
plate, and a very beautiful bronze statue of the youthful Bacchus,
deposited in the Museum by Sir William during his life-time.
In the spring of 1857, Panizzi gave his serious attention to the cause
of the staff of the Museum, and to the increase of their emoluments.
Hitherto the servants of the Trustees, as it has been already observed,
were not treated or paid in a commensurate manner by the Government, and
no superannuation allowance was granted; and it was properly remarked at
the time that, to carry out any effectual measure of reform, it would be
necessary to increase the value of the appointments—thus holding out an
inducement for good men to remain, and giving the service of the Museum
the tone of a _profession_.
It would relieve the Establishment from persons who were worn out or
nearly so, and raise the general standard of activity; and by clearing
off an _arrear_ of superannuation, would make room for the early
introduction of a considerable number of officers and attendants of a
superior class.
This step was ultimately carried out by Panizzi two years afterwards,
much to the satisfaction of the whole Museum staff, as the following
letter which they addressed to him testifies:—
“British Museum,
February 25th, 1861.
“Dear Sir,
We beg individually and collectively to offer to you in a more
explicit manner than we were able to do on Saturday, our most sincere
and grateful thanks for the highly gratifying intelligence which you
so kindly conveyed to us on that day. We feel assured that the very
important improvement in our position which you then announced to us,
has not been obtained without the most persevering and energetic
exertions on your part; and we earnestly hope, by our zealous
attention to the performance of our several duties, to merit the
continued approbation of the Trustees, and thereby to justify this
your crowning effort on our behalf.”
It will be remembered that in 1845, Panizzi, after having obtained
permission to visit his native town, was, when on the eve of reaching
it, stopped by the Duke of Modena. Things had somewhat changed, perhaps,
for the better; or at any rate the time was fast approaching when the
foreign yoke was about, once for all, to disappear from Italy, and
tyranny cease to exist in the land which had given birth to so many
eminent men. On the 15th of June, 1857, Panizzi wrote to Lord Clarendon
to obtain for him, through Count Apponyi, an Austrian passport; his
Lordship at once set to work, and on the 17th of June communicated to
Panizzi the welcome tidings that his Excellency, although he could not
grant him the desired passport because _he had never been an Austrian_,
still would not for an instant hesitate to affix his signature to his
English passport. Accordingly he started by the end of August for
Brescello, and actually reached that place without molestation. He thus
wrote to Mr. Haywood from Milan:—
“September 9th.
“My reception has been all I could wish on the part of the Government,
and beyond belief on that of my few remaining friends; for I find the
majority of them dead. But those who still live, and their families—I
had left many of them children, and I find them now married with
children of the same age that they themselves were when I left
Italy—have received me with a cordiality and warmth of affection that
has often and often moved me to tears. And then this country—and those
monuments—and this sky! Oh my dear Haywood, what poor things are all
those that are admired elsewhere! What nature has done and what the
old generations did for Italy is unique; but I shall be very glad to
be once more at the British Museum.”
Whilst at Brescello, the biographer, who had the satisfaction of
visiting that place in November, 1879, was told that Panizzi spent the
entire day going from house to house seeing and embracing his relations
and friends, making researches in the archives, and taking notes of all
he saw; but nothing can be more touching than a letter which he wrote on
the 22nd of October, 1857, to Dr. Minzi, and of which we place a
translation intact before our readers:—
“British Museum,
October 22nd, 1857 (evening).
“My dear Minzi,
How many things have happened during the past thirty-five
years! It was on this very day thirty-five years ago, that you
accompanied me, with Zatti and Montani, to embark for Viadana.
It was then that my travels began. What changes! What fortune! How
many sleepless nights! What follies! What ardent passion! What
sufferings! What risks! But no more of this.
You know that I have been at Brescello, but you cannot conceive how
dear such a visit was to me. Indeed it is impossible to describe my
feelings. I can only say that no town, temple, or theatre, or palace
afforded me such joy as I felt when I saw Brescello; the church of
Brescello! the theatre of Brescello! and the Municipal Hall of
Brescello! The very house where I was born, yours, Montani’s house,
and that of Francesco Panizzi. These sights almost brought tears to my
eyes.
You complain of my silence.... You must know that weeks have passed
without my being able to leave the house, and that I was reduced to
such a state as not even to get sleep; my head felt giddy, and my
heart beat so as to take away my breath; I had pains in my hands and
feet, and nervousness, accompanied by continual noise in the ears. I
went to Italy, and now I tell you what I achieved since we last
parted.
From Keeper of the Printed Books, perhaps the most important
Department in this Institution, I was appointed Director in Chief
(Principal Librarian) of the Museum, about two years ago. It is a very
high post, but when I came to take charge of the Museum, I found it so
badly governed, such was the need of many reforms, that it required an
iron resolution to replace order. I attempted it. Every one in the
service great and small (about 230) soon learnt that they had to deal
with one who was determined to make things go as they ought. I was
already known in my Department, which was a model to all others, and
every one knew the stuff I was made of. I found a collection of
220,000 printed books, and I left 530,000. I fought for years,
defeated a squadron of ignorant men and enemies, who opposed a plan
for a new Catalogue, which is now approaching completion, and which
will be the finest Catalogue ever compiled. I made a plan for a
Reading-Room to accommodate 300 readers, who are now more comfortably
seated than at their own homes, and of a Library which will contain
1,400,000 volumes. The plan was approved by our best architect; the
room is now finished and made use of. I am honoured by every one, and
my enemies have disappeared. All this has naturally added strength and
moral power to my new post. But, through hard work, I felt as if my
brain would give way, and so I decided to visit Italy. There I slept
very well, and the symptoms disappeared, but they returned slowly. My
mode of living is moderate; I take medicine, but the pain on my left
side has returned. How it will end I do not know, for work I must, and
work hard too; and now that I have reached the summit of the mountain
I feel as if I should like to descend, but I fear it is impossible. I
am treated by every one like a Benjamin, amply paid and much honoured,
and they will not listen to my retiring.
I have sent you a selfish letter, such a one as I should not have
written to any one else, but only to a friend like you.
Your affectionate friend,
A. PANIZZI.
To continue the thread of our narrative, a trifling but pleasant
incident occurred, two months before Panizzi left London for the
Continent, which we cannot do better than narrate in his own words:—
“B. M., June 30th, 1857.
“My dear Haywood,
A week ago the Archduke Maximilian, who is going as Viceroy in
Lombardy, after his marriage with the Princess Charlotte of Belgium,
came to visit the Museum, and I received him. In the course of
conversation it came out that I was an Italian, and that I intended
going to Renaro at the beginning of August, returning in September.
The Archduke then began to urge me that I should on my return (for he
would not be there on my going) pay him a visit, that is, _to go and
stay with him_. Of course I said _Domine non sum dignus_, but he
pressed me repeatedly. I thought when he learnt who I was he would not
press me again, but on Saturday last I unexpectedly received a
despatch from the Austrian Minister here, Apponyi, sending me, in the
Archduke’s name, a very fine diamond ring with the Archduke’s
initials, and a reminder that he expects I will pay him a visit at
Milan. Now this is very embarrassing. If I go to Milan, and he is
there, I _must_ present myself, and be his guest if he insists; if I
do so all the Italians who do not know me, more especially in
Piedmont, will accuse me of treachery, of playing false to my country,
and what not; and, on the other hand, if I had the moral courage to
despise such an outcry I might do some little good—very little, if
any, I know.
Yours, &c., &c.,
A. PANIZZI.”
But to return to the Museum. The process of accumulation continued, and
the influx of works of art and other antiquities was filling the
National Institution to such an extent that it was deemed necessary to
decide whether the Natural History Departments should be retained at
Bloomsbury.
The various heads of Departments were invited to send in their reports
and opinions on the subject, and a few of their remarks may not appear
superfluous:—
Mr. Hawkins, the Keeper of Antiquities, reported that he could find no
room for the cases of Assyrian Sculptures which had arrived. Sir Charles
Fellows complained that Ionic Trophy Monuments and other works of art
found at Xanthus had been placed in an unbefitting position. Dr. Gray,
of the Natural History Department, conveyed the pleasing intelligence
that if the Zoological Collection in the basement were not speedily
removed to a dryer place it would be utterly destroyed. Mr. Brown
applied for additional room, as that occupied by the Botanical
Department in the basement was quite inadequate to its demands.
Professor Owen, in a report to the Trustees on the same subject,
January, 1857, approved of all the statements of Dr. Gray, who, eight
months later, came forward again with a demand for his gallery and
series of glass cases, and the enlargement of the Insect-Room; and two
months afterwards he laid before the Trustees a fuller statement. Many
more examples might be adduced, but the reader who desires to push his
investigations further should consult a lengthy Parliamentary paper on
the subject, ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, 1st of July,
1858.
Panizzi also wrote two reports, one dated the 10th of November, 1857,
and the other the 10th of June, 1858. In the first of these he fully
discussed the means suggested for relieving two Departments, namely,
those of Mineralogy and Geology, and then continued:—
“In the Department of Prints and Drawings the want of room, even to
lodge the portfolios containing the collection, is sufficiently shown
by the placing of presses in the narrow passage leading from the
landing into the Print-Room. The display of some of the best prints
and drawings has often been entertained by the Trustees, who felt how
important it was that this should be done, but who never could carry
their intention into effect for want of room. The Kouyunjik-Room, by
the side of the North-Western portion of the Egyptian Saloon, had been
built for the purpose of such an exhibition, when the influx of
Assyrian antiquities forced the Trustees to devote that room to their
display.”
It appears that the Natural History Department will soon be removed. As
there will, therefore, be more space for a smaller number of
collections, we may hope that it will now be found possible to make good
certain deficiencies which have long been fully recognised, especially
in regard to the Exhibition of Prints and Drawings. Glass and China too,
will form a most attractive feature in the new arrangements.
The author himself has had ample opportunities during the last dozen
years of visiting some of the most important Cabinets of Prints and
Drawings in Europe, and he has no hesitation in saying that no single
collection—not even a combination of two or three—could compare with
that of which our National Institution can boast. Through the good taste
of the present principal Librarian, Mr. Bond, in placing so many screens
in the King’s Library, a step has been taken in the right direction, and
no Englishman—nay, no Foreigner—visiting London should omit to inspect
this wonderful assemblage of works of art.
It was Panizzi’s own idea that, as well as rarities from the Library,
specimens of the handiwork of Raphael, Michael Angelo, Dürer,
Rembrandt—and, indeed, his own _$1_m>—should be framed and exhibited to
the public gaze.
Instruction, practicable and visible, is one of the leading features of
the age; and it is our duty to meet this increasing want by every means
in our power. It is not the feeling that in our hands are the keys of
knowledge which will impart instruction; it is the practical and sincere
wish to utilize the means within our grasp, to educate the masses, which
will alone work a result so eagerly sought for, and so materially
tending to the benefit of future generations.
The enormous pile of building which has just been erected at South
Kensington may, in a sense, be said to owe its existence to the
persistent efforts of Panizzi, to secure more space for the collections
he loved so well. The two following letters on the subject are, we
consider, of great importance:—
“British Museum, October 8th, 1858.
“My dear Sir George,
As neither you nor Lord John will come up from Harpton Court
to attend the meeting of the Standing Committee at 12 o’clock
to-morrow, I think it fair to ask you both to give half-an-hour to the
British Museum where you are; and this might be even more useful than
if you were to attend the meeting.
The Government are determined, it seems, to adopt the principle of
dividing the Museum; and Professor Owen, in his address to the British
Association at Leeds, having read an article in the last _Quarterly
Review_, drops his objections to the separation, and is indifferent
about the _site_ of the Natural History Museum: he only demurs to
there being Trustees.
Mr. D’Israeli says that the Government have evidence enough as to what
is to be done, and that they want no more information. I believe he is
egregiously mistaken, and that the evidence hitherto collected is
sufficient to prove that things cannot remain in the present state,
and that something must be done; but there is no evidence or
suggestion as to what that _something_ must be (excepting only that
the Superintendent of the Natural History, in the service of the
Trustees, thinks that his present masters, or anything like them, are
not desirable.) Now I have a great dread of these indefinite
_somethings_. I fear that one or two members of the Government who
have once walked through the Museum, or may have assisted at a meeting
of Trustees, may think themselves quite competent to draw up a new
constitution for this and other Museums, which pompously and plausibly
proposed to the Houses of Parliament may be sanctioned, putting the
British Museum and all its collections in a worse position than they
are now, and rendering them less useful to the public. It seems,
therefore, to me that you and Lord John should consider well the
subject, and be prepared to advise the Government; and, if necessary,
resist any scheme that might be lightly or rashly introduced to
Parliament.
I apprehend that, whatever be thought of Trustees, it will not be so
easy to persuade the family Trustees of the Museum that they ought to
be extinguished.
I do not think that the Government have yet considered which are the
collections that ought not to be removed from the present British
Museum, and which are those that ought to be removed elsewhere. We may
agree as to removing the Natural History collections; but is it quite
clear we ought to keep ethnographical collections and works of
mediæval or christian art?
Has anyone thought how long it will be before what it may be decided
upon to remove, can be removed, what is to be done in the meantime,
and what alterations may be necessary in the present building to fit
the space left empty by the removal of some collections for the
reception of those which are to remain here?
It seems to be generally considered desirable, if not necessary, that
whenever the Museum or Museums are re-organised, lectures should be
delivered by its officers. I humbly consider this a great mistake. No
one can do more than one thing at a time well. A Keeper of collections
will neglect them to prepare his lectures, and a lecturer will hurry
through his lectures to attend to his collections; and if not more
inclined to one than to the other of his two trades, the same man may
be both a bad lecturer and bad Keeper of collections. As the ‘Jardin
des Plantes’ at Paris is so much talked of here, with its numerous
lectures, I trust some evidence will be taken of its condition and of
the working of its organisation before we adopt it here.
I should also think that before the extinction of the Museum Trust is
decided upon, it would be well to consider whether it is desirable to
allow Institutions like the Museum to be governed by learned and
scientific men. I will not go so far as to say that the system of
Trustees is the best that could be devised, but I am fully convinced,
and ready to prove from experience, that learned and scientific men
are unfit to govern places like the Museum. Who then is to govern
these establishments?
There is a variety of minor points which are worth considering,
besides those above mentioned. If you and Lord John were to agree to
some general principles, I dare say Mr. Gladstone would probably agree
with you on the whole; and then you three might induce, and, if
necessary, compel the Government to consent to adopting your views. I
think it, however, requisite that, in some way or other, evidence
should be taken from men whose opinion carries weight in these
matters; that the public and the Houses of Parliament should see that
whatever be ultimately done is done on good grounds and after mature
consideration. I think the information collected would be of great use
in coming to a right determination, and I do not see how it can be
possible to do so without.
The ‘Supply’ is coming home with a cargo of antiquities from Newton,
and will call at Carthage for some fifty cases of antiquities from
Davis. It was to be at Malta on the 25th of last month, and will
therefore soon be here. Where is all this enormous mass of things to
be placed?
Ever yours,
A. PANIZZI.”
“Harpton, Radnor,
October 12th, 1858.
“My dear Panizzi,
I received your letter before Lord John went on to Liverpool,
and had some conversation with him on the subject of it.
There are, as it seems to me, two questions respecting the enlargement
of the British Museum. The first may be called the legal question,
which is raised by Sir Philip Egerton and others—viz., whether Sir
Hans Sloane made it a question of his gift that all his collections
should be kept in one building, or whether, in dealing with these
collections, there is a ‘will of the founder,’ which the legislature
is bound to respect, and which is to be a law for all succeeding
generations, whatever additions the different branches of the Museum
may receive or require. If this view is to prevail, it is clear that
we are prevented from even entertaining any plan for the division of
the collections, whatever its intrinsic advantages may be. But if this
restriction upon the operations of the present generation is not
admitted to exist, then we come to the second question—whether it is
more expedient to enlarge the Museum by adding to the present
building, or by detaching some branches of it, and providing them with
a fit repository elsewhere.
I do not pretend to have mastered the subject sufficiently to have
formed a confident opinion upon it; but so far as I am at present
informed, the inclination of my mind is to believe that the Natural
History branches would be provided for in a separate building, and to
a certain extent under a separate management.
At the same time, if the scientific men are to take up the question as
one of personal feeling and party struggle, and if the cause of
stuffed beasts is to be argued against that of antiques, as if it was
Whig against Tory, or Catholic against Protestant, I am not prepared
to say what are the advantages, if separation are worth the strife and
animosity, which its accomplishment would create.
A private gentleman, in arranging his expenditure, may say—I allot so
much for my kitchen, so much for my cellar, so much for the education
of my children, so much for my garden, so much for my shooting,
hunting, &c., &c., and each of his servants must be satisfied with
what they get. But what sort of life would he lead, and how long would
he remain out of the Queen’s Bench, if his gardeners wrote letters in
the _Times_ to complain that he starved his garden, and that his
hot-houses were in a disgraceful state; if his governess persuaded
Roebuck to bring the state of his daughters’ education before the
House, and if his huntsman inserted articles in the _Sporting
Magazine_ in the style of Junius, displaying the scandalous defects in
the management of his stables. Yet, with regard to luxuries, such as
science and art, the Nation is practically in the same condition as a
private individual. It must measure its expenditure by its means, and
not, as in the case of the army and navy, consider its necessities
first and its means afterwards. Yet the representative of each
Department of Science and Art insists on having the largest possible
building, in the best possible site, and each Department finds
successively supporters and champions in Parliament.
I have no wish to volunteer advice where it is not asked; if the
Government think they can settle the question themselves, I have no
wish to interfere. My only fear is that they may find it more
difficult, on coming to close quarters, than it appears at a distance.
If the Government refer it to the Trustees for their opinion, I shall
be quite ready to take part in any Committee which may be appointed to
consider and investigate the subject. At present I don’t think the
facts are well ascertained, nor do we know what are the precise
objects which we should seek to obtain. I see, for example, a great
difference between keeping a great exhibition of stuffed animals, &c.,
for all the nursery-maids and children to look at, and keeping a
collection of Natural History for the use of men of science—like the
Anatomical Collection at Surgeons’ Hall in Lincoln’s Inn Fields. I
think that Lord John concurs generally in the view that I have
expressed, as to the removal of the Natural History Collections.
There is much to be said in favour of the constitution of a governing
body like the Museum Trustees. A body of scientific men might expect
and demand too much; they would violate Talleyrand’s caution about
excess of zeal. On the other hand, it is desirable to relieve the
executive Government from direct responsibility in such a matter.
Query—what is the oldest bilingual glossary of the Latin language?
What is the earliest vocabulary in which Latin is explained by some
other tongue? Is the earliest a Latin and Greek (not Greek and Latin)
glossary, or a Latin and Gothic glossary, or a vocabulary in which
Latin is rendered into the Lingua volgare? If so, what is the date of
the latter? I hope you will not think this an unfair question to
address to so distinguished a _bibliotecario_ as yourself.
Yours, &c., &c.,
G. C. LEWIS.”
That Panizzi was equally interested in other Departments of the Museum
Mr. Newton could testify, if need were, for that of the antiquities, and
the writer for his own.
Between Mr. Charles Thomas Newton, C.B., and Panizzi, there subsisted
something more than an intimate friendship; a more proper term would be
a warm attachment. We need no greater proof of Mr. Newton’s devotion to
his friend than the fact that when in 1867 the latter was ill, and his
life despaired of, the former devoted all his time to the care of his
sometime colleague. The great number of letters before us, from the hand
of Mr. Newton, would indeed fill a volume of most interesting matter,
relating to his discoveries and travels in the Levant; for he was in the
habit of communicating to his friend, it appears, all his adventures,
whether at Rhodes, Mytilene, Budrum, or Rome. These letters make us
wonder, by their freshness, how time and inclination could have been
found to write them, and are certainly deserving of publication at some
future time. So much important matter, from such a pen, would prove a
treasure to future antiquarians and travellers.
Now Mr. Newton, who had been in the Museum since May, 1840, was, in
February, 1852, appointed by Lord Granville to the Vice-Consulship of
Mytilene.
Whilst there, he carried on various researches and excavations, sending
home from time to time to the British Museum the fruit of his labours.
In April, 1856, Mr. Newton received directions from the Foreign Office
to proceed to Rome, to value the Campana collection then offered to the
British Government. On his return from Rome to London he took this
opportunity to submit his views as to further operations at Budrum;
these he naturally explained to Panizzi, and, through him, it was
arranged that the two should one day go to Brocket Hall, Lord
Palmerston’s country seat, and there meet Lord Clarendon, to talk over
the matter. Lord Palmerston, who was then Premier, with his usual
_savoir-faire_, at once suggested that the Principal Librarian being
present, and the two Ministers being both _ex-officio_ Trustees of the
British Museum, the meeting of this triad might be considered a quorum,
for the settlement of a matter of so much consequence to the National
Institution. It was then agreed that Mr. Newton should at once proceed
to Budrum on special mission. Those were days when operations of this
kind could be carried out with that secrecy and despatch which are
necessary to insure success. In this particular case, there was the more
reason for prompt action, because Ludwig Ross, a distinguished German
explorer, had already visited Budrum, and noticed in his travels the
Lions from the Mausoleum, then built into the walls of the Castle at
Budrum.
Mr. Newton’s demands were surely not exorbitant; he suggested that a
firman authorizing the removal of the Lions should be obtained from the
Porte, declaring that the sum of £2,000, and the services of a
ship-of-war, for at least six months, would be necessary to insure the
success of the expedition. These suggestions were, without loss of time,
acted upon, and H.M.’s ship “Gorgon,” commanded by Captain Towsey, was
chartered, and she arrived at Budrum in the month of November, 1856.
It is unnecessary now to say that the finding of the ever famous tomb of
Mausolus at Halicarnassus (Budrum) was an event of the first importance
to Classical Archæology, or, what is better, that the recovery of part
of the slabs of the frieze of this monument, along with other
sculptures, was for the history of Greek sculpture in the age of
Praxiteles and Scopas, of the same importance, as the marbles of the
Parthenon for the history of sculpture in the time of Pheidias. Several
of the slabs of the frieze from the Mausoleum had been obtained for the
British Museum, through the late Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, some years
previous to Mr. Newton’s expedition; but a comparison of them with the
newly-recovered fragments at once shows how admirably the skill of the
artist, lost and obliterated in the older slabs, had been preserved in
Mr. Newton’s. It was not from the circumstances, perhaps, possible to
affirm that this or that portion of the Sculptures was the work of
Praxiteles, or of Scopas; but this at any rate could be said, that the
Sculptures must be taken as works executed under the eyes of these
artists, and, doubtless, greatly influenced by them. Here is what Mr.
Newton says of them:—
“Budrum, 26th April, 1857.
“My dear Panizzi,
Since I last wrote, we have made some brilliant discoveries.
On the Eastern Side of the Mausoleum I have found a beautiful piece of
frieze, three figures, an Amazon attacking a prostrate Greek, and a
mounted figure.
This piece of frieze ranges with that now in the British Museum. It is
in much finer condition, and is a most exquisite specimen of high
relief. Being found in the Eastern Side, I think we may venture to
consider it the work of Scopas, because a block of that size could not
have been transported far without greater injury. On the North Side,
digging on beyond the apparent boundary of the _temenos_, we came to a
beautiful Hellenic wall about three feet behind the line cut out of
the rock, which marks the boundaries of the quadrangle.
This wall, built of isodomous masonry, is evidently the boundary of
the precinct (Pliny’s _circuitus_) on this side. Digging beyond it to
the North, I came to a magnificent colossal female head lying in the
ground. The hair is arranged in regular curls on the forehead, and
bound with a coif behind, like the head-dress on the contemporary
silver coins of Syracuse. This head is one of the most interesting
discoveries we have made. It is in fine condition; the nose and mouth
have suffered a little. Following the wall Eastward from this point,
we came to a mass of ruins lying as they had originally fallen. Near
the surface was a Lion of the same size as those in the Castle, nearly
entire and in magnificent condition. We have the two forelegs, and
hope to find the paws. The face quite perfect, the inside of the mouth
coloured red, the very roughness of the tongue rendered. This Lion,
though perhaps inferior to the rest in style, and not finished
throughout, is a most noble beast. I think the British public will
admire him, because there is so little for the imagination to supply.
While we were getting him out, we discovered a male (?) head in three
pieces, but capable of being united without much loss. I think, an
Apollo, exceedingly fine, on a smaller scale than the other; also part
of a horse’s head, on an enormous scale, bigger, I think, than the
equestrian statue I first found. After getting these out, we came upon
a most beautiful draped female figure in very fine condition, but
headless; it is in two pieces, the first from the neck to the knees,
the second from the knees to the feet. The drapery of this figure
seems to me equal to any in the Elgin-Room. The statue must have been
about ten feet long. As we were getting it out, we discovered another
colossal figure lying a little to the North of it. This we had not
time to get out yesterday, and to-day is Sunday, so it must remain
till to-morrow. I forgot to mention that on the piece of the horse’s
head a portion of bronze bridle, with a circular ornament, was still
fixed, but another piece of horse, with another piece of bronze
bridle, was found close to it. You see that these discoveries promise
well. My impression is that we are now, for the first time, exploring
a part of the site where the ruins have not been disturbed since the
building fell. Hence the completeness and fine condition of the
sculpture....
Yours very sincerely,
C. T. NEWTON.”
On the 8th of June, of the same year, again Mr. Newton wrote to
Panizzi;—
“You will rejoice to hear that along the Eastern Side of the Mausoleum
I found two more very fine slabs of frieze, one nearly six feet long,
with an Amazon on horseback, sitting with her face to the tail,
shooting at a foe behind her, after the Parthian fashion—a most bold
and vigorous design; the other, a combat on foot. It is remarkable
that these four slabs of frieze have been found in a line on the
Eastern Side. This makes me think they are all from the hand of
Scopas. Together they make up about 16 feet, which, with the slabs now
in the British Museum, will make up a total length of about 80 feet. I
hope you have secured the Genoa slab at any price.
On the North Side, I have found the other half of the head of the
great horse. The bronze bit, in perfect preservation, was still in his
mouth! The nostrils are distended, much in the manner of those in the
horse’s head from the Car of Night in the Elgin-Room, so that these
two heads, the works of successive schools, will be an interesting
subject of comparison. Besides this, I have found a face broken off
from a colossal male head. I think this belongs to the figure in the
chariot. It seems to be an ideal portrait, not unlike that of
Alexander the Great on the coins of Lysimachus. It represents a man,
perhaps Mausolus himself, in the prime of life, slightly bearded. It
is in very fine condition, and is, altogether, the finest head I have
ever seen, particularly interesting, because it seems to form the
connecting link between the schools of Scopas and that of Lysippus. I
have still got a good deal of ground to dig on the North Side, but the
proprietors are very obstinate.
Yours ever sincerely,
C. T. NEWTON.”
On the 17th of January, 1861, Mr. Newton was appointed Keeper of Greek
and Roman Antiquities, then organized as a separate Department of the
Museum. From that time to now he has been constantly occupied, with a
success so well known that it is unnecessary to refer to it. In the
enlargement and enriching of his Department, partly by the direction of
excavations on classical soil—memorably those at Ephesus, which resulted
in the discovery of the Temple of Diana—and partly by the purchase of
celebrated collections of antiquities. Chief among his transactions of
the latter kind was the purchase of the collection of the Duke de Blacas
in 1866, which, as public opinion testified at the time, was a most
important gain to the National Museum. The acquisition was not effected
without difficulties, as may be seen from the following letter:—
“Hôtel des Deux Mondes, Paris,
November 25th, 1866.
“My dear Panizzi,
Jones tells me that after the meeting of the Trustees on
Friday, Mr. D’Israeli had an interview with you about the Blacas
purchase. I write, therefore, to thank you for having backed my
recommendation, which I am quite sure you must have done strongly, or
otherwise the Government would not have come to a decision so rapidly.
I never was more astonished than when I received authority to treat on
Sunday morning last. While we were signing the contract poor DeWitte
was at the Grand’Messe. ‘If I had only known,’ he said to me
afterwards, ‘two hours sooner what you were about, I would have
telegraphed to the Emperor at Compiègne.’ The French are greatly
disgusted. From all I can learn, they meant to offer about £40,000,
and keep the matter dragging on till they had found out our last
offer. I am very much pleased at the result, because I know how
greatly the value of our Museum, as a whole, will be increased by this
purchase, which supplies exactly what we were most deficient in.
There will, I have no doubt, be a great outcry in England about the
largeness of the sum; but I am perfectly ready to bear the brunt of
all that. The public will find out in time what a prize they have got.
I hear that Mérimée was very anxious that it should be secured for the
Louvre. He was on the Commission, but was obliged to go South. Perhaps
you may be writing to him; I should like very much to hear what he has
to say about the purchase. There is no one who has done more to defend
my purchases than he has, up to this date, so I hope he will now. I am
going to see the collection of M. Thiers to-morrow morning, and shall
be curious to hear what he says.
Yours ever sincerely,
C. T. NEWTON.”
We trust that we shall not be held to have failed in our endeavour to do
justice to the services rendered by Mr. Newton to the National Museum.
Apart from the high attainments to which testimony should be offered,
this gentleman was so intimately connected with the subject of the
memoir, that the omission of such a record would have been a serious
fault, considering the constant intercommunion which existed between the
two, and the mutual assistance they rendered each other.
As a conclusion to our present chapter, it must be noted that on the 6th
of July, 1859, Panizzi was admitted to the Honorary Degree of D.C.L. at
the University of Oxford.
[Illustration]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration]