MISCELLANY.

THE MIGRATIONS OF BIRDS.—Among all the migrants the swallow has,

perhaps, attracted most attention in all ages and countries. It arrives

in Sussex villages with remarkable punctuality; none of the migrants

perform their journeys more rapidly than the swallows and their

congeners. A swift with young ones, or during migration, covers from

1500 to 2000 miles a day. It begins business feeding its young about

three o’clock A.M., and continues it till nine P.M. At that season,

therefore, the swift spends nearly eighteen hours upon the wing, and

it has been computed that at the ordinary rate of travelling of this

very fast bird it would circumnavigate the globe in about fourteen

days. At a push, if it were making forced flights, the swift would

probably keep on the wing, with very brief intervals of rest, during

fourteen days. The speed of the whole tribe is marvellous, and seems

the more so when compared with that of the swiftest of animals that

depend for their progressive powers on legs, however many legs they

may be furnished with. The hare is swift, yet in Turner’s well-known

picture of rain, steam, and speed the hare’s fate is sealed; she will

be run over and crushed by the engine rushing in her wake. The swiftest

animals would soon break down at forty miles an hour, which the swallow

unconsciously accomplishes, merrily twittering all the while. All the

swallow tribe are found in every part of Great Britain, including

Shetland, except the swift, which is not found in those islands. Dr.

Saxby, author of “Birds of Shetland,” says that one day a poor fellow,

a cripple, who happened at the time to be exceedingly ill off and

in want of food, came to him with a swallow in his hand. The doctor

ordered the man some dinner. It seems he had opened his door, restless

and half famished, when in flew the swallow and brought him, so to

speak, a dinner. “After this,” said the poor fellow, “folk need na tell

me that the Lord does na answer prayer.” The swallow can hardly be

inelegant. When it walks, however, it does so with particularly short

steps, assisted by the wings, and in accomplishing any journey longer

than a few inches it spreads its wings and takes flight. It twitters

both on the wing and on the nest, and a more incessant, cheerful,

amiable, happy little song no other musician has ever executed. Much

has been said of that “inexplicable longing” and “incomprehensible

presentiment of coming events” which occasion birds to migrate from

certain districts before the food supplies begin to fail. Quails,

woodcocks, snipes, and many other birds, it is said, are in the finest

condition at the time of commencing their migration, while none of

them are emaciated at that season, so that the pinch of hunger, it is

argued, cannot have yet affected them. But it should be remembered

that fat as well as lean birds may feel that pinch, and that birds are

very fast-living creatures, full of life, movement, and alertness,

quick to observe, to feel, and to act. In the rapid digestion of their

food they are assisted by a special organ which grinds down such items

as grain, gravel, nails, or needles, swallowed in mistake or from

caprice or curiosity, with astonishing facility. They prefer feeding

nearly all day, and when fully crammed they sometimes become as plump

as ortolans, or as well-fed quails, whose skin bursts when they fall

to the gun. But when the appetite is urgent, obesity does not by any

means preclude hunger. Twelve hours’ fast and snow and a change of

wind are very urgent facts in the lives of these quick creatures in the

autumn of the year, and then begins that sudden migration which the

lighthouse-keepers have observed. It is impossible to imagine creatures

more practical and full of action and freer from “presentiments” than

birds, engaged as they are from day to day snatching their food at

Nature’s board. Perhaps we may compare them to the guests of Macbeth,

since all goes well so long as the ghost abstains from making his

appearance; but very suddenly sometimes, in the case of the northern

birds, the spectre of hunger puts them to flight. Fat or lean, they

must go on the instant, and that is why they arrive pell-mell upon our

coast; but, as the country to be cleared of its birds of summer is

extensive, and the distances of the journeys various, they naturally

arrive at intervals. The migrations of birds are world-wide. The birds

of North America make corresponding movements to those of Northern

Europe, travelling in a north-easterly and south-westerly direction

and at the same seasons. The countries of the Gulf of Mexico form the

chief retreat of the North American migrants, especially Mexico itself,

with its three zones and great variety of climate. But some of them

go as far as the West Indies and New Granada. A great number winter

in the Southern States. Their method of migration is the same as that

which has been described elsewhere. They follow the routes marked out

by nature. The kinds of birds are in many cases the same, or they

are at least American representatives of the same families that form

the migrants of the Old World. They travel southwards in the autumn

and return again in spring. The migrants of the southern hemisphere

are constrained by their situation to reverse the direction of their

periodic movements, flying northwards to escape the rigor of winter

and returning south in spring. From March to September some of the

most inhospitable regions of the south are quite deserted; even the

wingless penguins quit their native shores of Tierra del Fuego and the

Falkland Islands after the breeding season and swim to milder regions,

while many of the birds which have bred in Patagonia and Southern Chili

depart on the approach of winter. The same rules, according to Gould,

govern the movements of birds in Australia, where several species

migrate in summer to the southern portion of the Continent and to

Tasmania to breed.—_Edinburgh Review._

* * * * *

ORIENTAL FLOWER LORE.—During a residence of some years in the East,

I have had abundant opportunities of studying the folk lore of the

people inhabiting the vast empire of China, the Malay Peninsula,

and the adjoining lands, and I have found their lore to be of the

profoundest interest and importance. The facts which I shall now submit

to the reader have not been culled at second-hand from the writings of

travellers or stay-at-home translators, but were gleaned from the lips

and homes of the people themselves, or during my personal residence in

the East, where I had every opportunity of verifying the results of my

investigations. As being the most familiar to Europeans, we will begin

with the use of the Orange, a plant which, by reason of its bearing

fruits and flowers at the same time, and during the greater part of

the year, has been taken as the symbol of fertility andprosperity. In

China the word for a “generation” is _tai_; in Japan the same word

means both “generation” and “orange.” Now see the way in which the

language of flowers and fruits speaks out in the East. When the new

year arrives the Japanese adorn their houses with branches of orange,

plum, bamboo, and pine, each of which being placed over the entrance,

has a symbolic meaning. The orange, called _dai-dai_, represents the

idea of perpetuity, or the wish that there may be _dai-dai_—“generation

on generation”—to keep up the family name. The bamboo signifies

constancy, as it is a wood which never changes its color; the pine-tree

symbolises perpetual joy; while the plum-tree, blossoming in cold

weather, encourages man to rejoice in time of trouble, and hope for

better days. In China there are many kinds of oranges, one of which is

known in Canton as _kat_. Hundreds of years before Christ this name was

in use in China, as we know from its mention in the classic writings

of that land. In Fuchan this word takes the form of _kek_, and in

other parts of the empire it will be pronounced somewhat differently

still, but whether it be _kat_, or _kek_, or _kih_, the syllable has

a lucky meaning. Consequently, when the New Year arrives, the people

procure large quantities of these oranges, in order that they may be

able to express to their friends who call to see them their wish that

good luck may attend them during the coming year. This they do by

handing them an orange, and the lads who at this season pay a number

of visits to their relatives and friends come off well, as it would be

considered both mean and improper to send away a guest without such

a token of good-will. There is in bloom at this important season a

sweet little Daffodil (_Narcissus Tazetta_), which is a great favorite

with the people, and sells by thousands in Canton and other large

cities. It bears the name of _Shui sin fá_, or “water fairy-flower,”

and is cultivated in pots and stands of ornamental design filled with

pebbles and water. A list of fairy flowers, or such as are by name and

tradition in China associated with these “spirites of small folks.” The

tree pæony, or montan, and the chrysanthemum, the chimonanthess, and

other winter flowering plants, are also much sought after at this time,

and each has its meaning. The costliness of the former has led to its

being designated by the Cantonese as “the rich man’s flower,” while the

chrysanthemum is such a favorite in Japan as to give its name to one

of their great festivals. I must not here omit to mention the Citron,

famous for the curious fruit it bears. This fruit, the peel of which

is employed among ourselves in a candied form for flavoring certain

confectioneries at Christmas, grows in a very strange fashion. Though

it belongs to the orange and lemon family, yet one variety has fruits

of monstrous shapes, very nearly resembling in form the hand of Buddah,

with two of the fingers bent in a novel manner, as represented in the

paintings and figures of that divinity. On this account the fruits bear

the name of _Fu-shan_, or “Buddah’s hand.” This peculiarity, arising

from the carpels or divisions of the fruit being more or less separated

from each other and covered with a common rind, has led to the custom

of placing it in porcelain and other costly dishes before the household

gods, or on the altars in the temples at this particular season. It

should be noted that while some fruits are specially agreeable to the

gods, others are regarded as altogether unfit for their use. Sometimes

the fruit is tabooed because of its smell, while its color, time

and place of growth, shape and use, all have weight in coming to a

decision. In Penang, some years ago, I had the opportunity of attending

an important festival at the little shrine near the famous waterfall,

at the time of the new year, and I then observed that bananas and

cocoa-nuts were the most acceptable offerings, and as the devotees

came and presented them at the temple, the priest would cleave the

nut in two and divide the bunch of plantains, returning half to the

worshipper, and retaining half as the temple perquisite.—_Time._

* * * * *

WHAT’S IN A NAME?—When we are told that “a rose by any other name would

smell as sweet,” the fact appears to be self-evident. Yet there was

a time when there was something in a name. We have abundant evidence

from the history of the ancients, and from observations of savage

tribes, to show that they believed in some inseparable and mysterious

connection between a name and the object bearing it, which has given

rise to a remarkable series of superstitions, some of which have left

traces even amongst ourselves. The Jews believed that the name of a

child would have a great influence in shaping its career; and we have a

remarkable instance of this sort of superstition in quite a different

quarter of the world. Catlin, the historian of the Canadian Indians,

tells us that when he was among the Mohawks, an old chief, by way of

paying him a great compliment, insisted on conferring upon him his

own name, _Cayendorongue_. “He had been,” Catlin explains, “a noted

warrior; and told me that now I had a right to assume to myself all the

acts of valor he had performed, and that now my name would echo from

hill to hill over all the Five Nations.” A well-known writer points out

that the Indians of British Columbia have a strange prejudice against

telling their own names, and his observation is confirmed by travellers

all over the world. In many tribes, if the indiscreet question is asked

them, they will nudge their neighbor and get him to answer for them.

The mention of a name by the unwary has sometimes been followed by

unpleasant results. We are told, for instance, by Mr. Blackhouse, of a

native lady of Van Diemen’s Land who stoned an English gentleman for

having, in his ignorance of Tasmanian etiquette, casually mentioned the

name of one of her sons. Nothing will induce a Hindu woman to mention

the name of her husband; in alluding to him she uses a variety of

descriptive epithets, such as “the master,” etc., but avoids his name

with a scrupulous care. To such an extent is this superstition carried

among some savage tribes that the real names of children are concealed

from their birth upwards, and they are known by fictitious names until

their death. The fear of witchcraft probably is the explanation of

all those superstitions. If a name gets known to a sorcerer, he can

use it as a handle wherewith to work his spells upon the bearer. When

the Romans laid siege to a town, they set about at once to discover

the name of its tutelary deity, so that they might coax the god into

surrendering his charge. In order to prevent their receiving the same

treatment at the hands of their enemies, they carefully concealed

the name of the tutelary deity of Rome, and are said to have killed

Valerius Soranus for divulging it. Reluctance to mention names reaches

its height in the case of dangerous or mysterious agencies. In Borneo

the natives avoid naming the small-pox. In Germany the hare must

not be named, or the rye-crop will be destroyed; and to mention the

name of this innocent animal at sea, is, or was, reckoned by the

Aberdeenshire fishermen an act of impiety, the punishment of which

could be averted only by some mysterious charm. The Laplanders never

mention the name of the bear, but prefer to speak of him as “the old

man with the fur-coat.” The motive here appears to be a fear that by

naming the dreaded object his actual presence will be evoked; and this

idea is preserved in one of our commonest sayings. Even if the object

of terror does not actually appear, he will at least listen when he

hears his name; and if anything unpleasant is said of him he is likely

to resent it. Hence, in order to avoid even the semblance of reproach,

his very name is made flattering. This phenomenon, generally termed

euphemism, is of very common occurrence. The Greeks, for example,

called the Furies the “Well-disposed ones;” and the wicked fairy Puck

was christened “Robin Goodfellow,” by the English peasantry. The

modern Greeks euphemise the name of vinegar into “the sweet one.” Were

its real name to be mentioned, all the wine in the house would turn

sour. We have an example of the converse of the principle of euphemism

work in the case of mothers among the savage tribes of Tonquin giving

their children hideous names in order to frighten away evil spirits

from molesting them. It is, however, in the case of the most dreaded

and most mysterious of all our enemies—Death—that the superstition

becomes most apparent. “The very name of Death,” says Montaigne,

“strikes terror into people, and makes them cross themselves.” Even

the unsuperstitious have a vague reluctance to mentioning this dreaded

name. Rather than say, “If Mr. So-and-so should _die_,” we say, “If

anything should happen to Mr. So-and-so.” The Romans preferred the

expression “He has lived” to “He is dead.” “M. Thiers _a vécu_” was

the form in which that statesman’s death was announced; not “M. Thiers

_est mort_.” The same reluctance is noticeable in mentioning the names

of persons who are dead. A writer on the Shetland Isles tells us that

no persuasion will induce a widow to mention her dead husband’s name.

When we do happen to allude to a deceased friend by name, we often add

some such expression as “Rest his soul!” by way of antidote to our

rashness; and this expression seems to have been used by the Romans in

the same way. As might be expected, we find this carried to a great

extreme among savages. In some tribes, when a man dies who bore the

name of some common object—“fire,” for instance—the name for fire

must be altered in consequence; and as proper names among savages are

almost invariably the names of common objects, the rapid change that

takes place in the language and the inconvenience resulting therefrom

may be imagined. Civilization has indeed made enormous progress from

this cumbersome superstition to our own philosophy, which can ask with

haughty indifference, “What’s in a name?”—_Chambers’s Journal._

* * * * *

HISTORIC FINANCE.—The first tithe on movables was granted, or enacted,

by papal authority, in 1188, for the Second Crusade. From 1334

subsidies of a fifteenth on goods in general, and a tenth from tenants

of the royal demesne, became the principal form of direct taxation.

Poll taxes (so-called), varying according to rank, were levied in 1377

and 1380, and on other occasions, the maximum being 60 groats, the

minimum 1 groat (4d.) for man and wife. Children under 16 were exempt;

and hence the outrage which gave the immediate occasion of Wat Tyler’s

insurrection. “A fifteenth and tenth,” however, speedily came to mean

a fixed sum of about £38,000, gradually sinking with the decay of

particular towns to £32,000, levied by a fixed assessment on each shire

and borough. A tax thus limited became, with the growth of national

wealth and needs, ridiculously inadequate. A new land tax of 5 per

cent. was granted in 1404, and a graduated income tax in 1435. But the

customs on wool and hides exported and 2s. per ton on wine imported,

with a general poundage of 6d. ad valorem on other exports and imports,

were the only permanent and regular revenue of the Crown, and during

the War of the Roses almost the sole addition to the yield of the royal

estates. This hereditary revenue, however, sufficed for the ordinary

expenses both of the State and the household. The great popularity of

Edward IV. with the citizens, especially of London, enabled him to

raise considerable benevolences, a practice which, forbidden by act of

Parliament on the accession of Richard III., was resumed and carried

to an often oppressive extent by Henry VIII. and his children. The

old fifteenths and tenths were still granted from time to time, but

under the Tudors were accompanied by subsidies in the nature of an

income tax of 4s. on the rental of lands and 2s. 8d. on the total

value of goods—yielding about £80,000. Each subsidy was accompanied

by a clerical grant of 6s. in the pound of annual value, worth about

£20,000. The last grant made to Elizabeth was of four subsidies and

eight fifteenths and tenths, amounting in all perhaps to £640,000.—_The

Saturday Review._

* * * * *

THE THREE UNITIES.—As we have said, the groundwork of “The Cid” is

wholly Spanish, but the beautiful poetry of many of the lines is

wholly Corneille’s. And had Corneille been allowed to follow his

own instincts, and write his play as his spirit moved him, it would

probably be free from many of its absurdities. He was bound to observe

the laws of “the three unities,” which the French pedants of those days

thought necessary to make incumbent upon every one who wrote for the

stage. These ignorantly learned men imagined that Aristotle on his own

authority had promulgated laws to be observed in the composition of a

dramatic poem, and that they should be always binding. The events in

every play were to be comprised within 24 hours, the scene could not

be changed, and in the play there should be only one interest or one

line of action. These laws were as the sword of Damocles held over the

heads of the French dramatists as they sat at their work. Richelieu

had lent his voice in favor of the edict, and they dreaded being found

guilty of insubordination. The authority of Aristotle was too high to

be questioned, and because the Greek writers had so written they must

be followed. The great Condé expressed himself as being terribly bored

by a tragedy by the Abbé d’Aubignac. A friend of the author tried to

excuse the play, saying that it was written exactly after the precepts

of Aristotle. Condé replied: “I am charmed that the Abbé d’Aubignac

should have followed Aristotle so carefully, but I cannot forgive

Aristotle for having made the Abbé d’Aubignac write such a detestable

tragedy!”—_All the Year Round._

* * * * *

A SUNDAY-SCHOOL SCHOLAR.—Here is the pith of a talented youngster’s

paper on the “Good Samaritan:” “A certing man went down from jerslam

to jeriker, and he fell among thieves and the thorns sprang up and

choaked him—whereupon he gave tuppins to the host, and praid take

care on him and put him hon his hone hass. And he past by on the other

side.” This and the following are not, as might be supposed, American

exaggerations, but authenticated instances of examiners’ experiences.

The last specimen is in answer to the question, “Who was Moses?” “He

lived in a hark maid of bullrushes, and he kept a golden calf and

worshipt braizen snakes, and he het nothin but qwhales and manner for

forty years. He was kart by the air while riding under a bow of a tree

and he was killed by his son Abslon as he was hanging from the bow. His

end was peace.”—_Chambers’s Journal._

* * * * *

A MAHDI OF THE LAST CENTURY.—It is interesting to look back a hundred

years and trace the career of a former Mahdi, the Prophet Mansour,

the Sheikh Oghan-Oolō, who burst on the Eastern world in 1785 as

the Apostle of Mahomet, and went forth conquering and to conquer

till Constantinople sought his alliance, and Russia armed herself

_cap-à-pied_ to resist his advance. It was early in March, at the

commencement of the Ramadan, that a solitary horseman rode into Amadie,

a town of Kourdistan, wearing the green turban which marked him as a

descendant of Mahomet, a white woollen garment girt about the hips with

a leathern girdle, and a pair of yellow sandals. His imposing stature,

dignified manners, flashing yet melancholy eyes, vast forehead, and

magnificent black beard showed him to be a king among men; and the

rigor of his fast, combined with the fervor of his perpetual prayers

in the mosque which he never quitted, proved him in the eyes of the

faithful to be a saint of the finest water. When Ramadan was over

the new Prophet assumed the post of authority in the mosque which

had witnessed his prayers and vigils, and proclaimed the twenty-four

articles of a reformed creed. The majority of them were drawn from the

Koran, others from the Mosaic statutes, some few were of Pagan origin,

and the final item was the Christian maxim, “Thou shalt love the Lord

with all thine heart, and thy neighbor as thyself.” This evangel was

not, however, accepted with as much readiness as might have been

anticipated. It was necessary to make a bold stroke and secure the

wavering allegiance of the people of Amadie, so the Prophet declared

that Mahomet, in his inscrutable wisdom, had chosen them to carry the

new law to the Gentiles, and that to them would belong the exclusive

right to punish impenitent sinners with the weapons he was about to

send them. A few days later four men arrived from Sinope escorting a

quantity of arms and ammunition of European manufacture. These worthies

were all of different nationalities, one being Tabet Habib, a Persian

merchant and money-lender of Scutari, another a Frenchman named Cléophe

Thévenot, a third Camillo Rutigliano, a Neapolitan, and the fourth a

German, or probably a Jew, called Samuel Goldemberg. The arms were at

once distributed among the most enthusiastic converts, who, however,

numbered less than a hundred. On April 20 the little band marched from

Amadie to Taku, where the Prophet summoned the inhabitants, explained

his mission, and read the new code of regulations. Those who gave in

their allegiance were enrolled and armed, while the recalcitrants were

put to the sword. The Prophet now found himself at the head of several

thousand troops, undisciplined it is true, but amenable to the orders

of such a ruling spirit as himself. They were approaching Bitlis, a

fortified city containing about twenty thousand souls, defended by

a fortress perched on an inaccessible rock, and garrisoned by five

hundred Turkish troops. The Pasha in charge determined to show fight,

so he summoned the citizens to the ramparts and confided the fortress

to the soldiers. It was all in vain, for the invading army took Bitlis

by assault, and the Prophet, by way of example, impaled the poor Pasha,

his officers, and the chief men of the place, and delivered the city

over to the tender mercies of his soldiers for three days and three

nights. The army next marched to Mush, where the terrified Aga opened

his gates, and the Prophet assured the inhabitants that no harm should

befall them if they supplied his troops with fresh provisions, and

all the young men between twenty and thirty enrolled themselves under

his banners. The Prophet had a keen eye as a military tactician, for

Erzeroum is the centre from which the caravan routes to Van, Trebizond,

Tiflis, and Siwas, diverge. The conqueror turned northwards, taking

possession of half a dozen towns as he went along, and at length sat

down before the fortress of Akhalzik, which was then pretty much as

it is now, a strongly fortified city on the Turco-Russian frontier,

containing about 30,000 inhabitants and a Turkish garrison 5,000

strong. The Pasha and his troops defended themselves bravely, but after

spending ten days in trenches before the walls, the Prophet ordered an

assault, and Akhalzik fell as Bitlis had done at the outset. The Pasha

and his officers were impaled, those who submitted were allowed to

swell the conquering hosts, the impenitent and stubborn was massacred,

and the city burned and sacked. As the troops stood shouting over the

smoking ruins, they hailed their chief as “Mansour,” or the Victor, and

by that name he is principally known to history. Recruits began to come

in apace from all the neighboring provinces, and Mansour saw himself

at the head of 40,000 men, poorly armed but ready for anything; so he

marched straight on Erzeroum, the gates of which were open to him. The

booty he always reserved for himself on entering a city was the right

to choose all the most beautiful women as slaves; but he did it only

to save them from the horrors that would otherwise have awaited them,

and the shame of exposure in the bazaar. He neither loved nor trusted

women, and had flung all passions save ambition behind him. If the

Prophet Mansour had chosen at this moment to turn his arms against

Constantinople, there is no doubt that he would have succeeded, and

if he had become master of the Porte, it is probable that the “sick

man” would never have troubled the councils of Europe. But instead of

invading Turkey, he became its ally against Russia, apparently on the

understanding that he was to be recognised as undisputed sovereign of

all the countries he could rescue from the grasp of the Northern Bear.

Kars fell into his hands after a bombardment of six hours. This secured

his line of retreat, and he led his men over the mountains to Tiflis,

where Heraclius, King of Georgia, awaited him on the marshy plain

of Kours with an army of 50,000, 10,000 of whom were tried Russian

troops, sent to his aid by Catherine. The opposing hosts were equal as

to numbers; the tide of battle rose and fell for three long days, and

Heraclius was totally defeated. Twenty-two thousand of his men were

slain, and 10,000 taken prisoners and sold as slaves at Constantinople.

Mansour took possession of the royal palace, abandoning the city of

Tiflis to his soldiers, and in a letter written from thence he for the

first time used the signature of Sheikh Oghan-Oolō. Turkey now began to

see that her ally might very easily become her master, and endeavored

to undermine his influence. He was perfectly aware of all her little

intrigues, and when a courteous ambassador was sent to him, reproached

him with the treason and perfidy of the Porte, and thundered forth a

threat to go himself to Constantinople for an answer to the charge. In

less than a month all preparations were made, and, assembling his large

army, Mansour read to them a proclamation from Mahomet, commanding

him to annihilate the Osmanlis and place a faithful prince on the

throne of Constantinople. As the Prophet was quite aware that if he

took Constantinople he would have to deal with the united strength

of France, Austria, and Russia, he thereupon concluded an offensive

and defensive alliance with the Sheikh-ul-Islam, and promised to turn

his arms against Russia. From that moment fortune forsook Mansour.

He returned to the Caucasus, and endeavored to raise the Lesghiens

Tartars, and had a victorious engagement with the Russian general

Apraxin, who had to retreat to Kashgar. Gradually the tribes and

nations fell away from him, and gave in their allegiance to Catherine,

and at last Mansour was closely besieged by General Gadowitz in Anapa,

on the Black Sea. He refused to capitulate, and the Russian troops

carried the town and fortress by assault. At the head of the long line

of prisoners who defiled past the conqueror walked the Prophet, a noble

and dignified figure even in his fall. Gadowitz himself presented

Mansour to the Empress, who treated him with the respect due to a brave

and gallant foe. She received him with every mark of honor, gave him

an annual pension of about £4,000, and assigned to him a residence

in the little town of Solowetz, on the Black Sea. There he entered a

convent of Armenian monks, wrote his memoirs, and corresponded with

his family until his death in 1798. This eighteenth century Mahdi thus

ended his days in obscurity, and when but little past his prime. He

no doubt died of _ennui_ and disappointment, for adventure had been

as the bread of life to his soul from babyhood. The most curious part

of his story remains to be told. He was neither Sheikh nor Prophet,

not even a Mussulman, and least of all an Oriental. His name was Jean

Baptiste Boetti, and he was the son of an Italian notary, destined for

the medical profession, which did not please him, and he ultimately

became a Dominican monk. Little or nothing of all this would have been

known had not Boetti, when figuring as the Prophet Mansour, been weak

enough to write his own autobiography piecemeal at dead of night. He

kept the manuscript in his jewel casket, but one day his chancellor,

one of the three Europeans who were in his confidence, eloped with a

lovely Georgian girl _and_ the casket. On reaching Constantinople,

this individual sold the papers to the representative of the King of

Sardinia, and they were recently discovered by Professor Ottino, of

Turin, among the archives of Piedmont.—_Time._

* * * * *

Eclectic Magazine of Foreign Literature, Science, and Art, June 1885 · 第 47 / 48 题