disfigured Jews, is a great reredos from the high altar of the
cathedral of Ciudad Rodrigo. It was painted about twelve years before
the discovery of America, it is believed, by Fernando Gallegos,
greatest Spanish painter of that century, and three assistants. This
picture also has traces of disfigurement which have their story to
tell. It is owned by Mr. J. C. Robinson, to whose explorations of Spain
and enthusiasm for antiquarian art this fine exhibition is mainly due.
Mr. Robinson’s account of this picture shows that its injuries came by
English guns, in 1811, during the Peninsular War. The cathedral stands
near the fortress of Ciudad Rodrigo, and the English shot traversed it
from end to end. The grand reredos was so injured that a new one was
erected. Twenty-nine of the panels, though in some cases perforated,
were preserved separately in a corridor of the chapter-house. In 1879
they were sold to a local dealer, who forwarded them to Madrid, whence
they were brought to this country. In some of the panels the faces
and costumes are Moorish. It is still a magnificent work, and must
originally have been over fifty feet high, by twenty-five in width.
Its panels, beginning with Chaos and the Creation of Eve, pass at once
to the life and Passion of Christ. It is likely that this monument of
so many eras, thus curiously brought to the country which marred it,
will not be followed by many similar treasures. The Spaniards have
lately learned the value of such things. The Spanish collection made
at South Kensington by Mr. Robinson, for a long time superintendent of
the art-collections, chiefly led to the formation of the Archæological
Museum at Madrid. When Mr. Robinson began his visits to Spain (about
1862) things were in a fair condition for foreign collectors. “At the
period in question,” he says, “railways had scarcely yet made their
appearance in the Peninsula, photography was almost unknown, and
the country was not overrun by the professional dealers, native and
foreign, who have since ransacked every nook and corner of the land.
On the other hand, in these comparatively early days of the collecting
furore, facilities for the discovery and purchase of specimens were
few, and the work of acquisition slow and difficult. A few brokers
and silversmiths alone occupied themselves casually in the commerce
of antiquities in Madrid, Lisbon, and one or two other of the chief
cities. Neglect and destruction were still the rule. Ancient things,
once out of use, if their materials had any intrinsic value, were
forthwith demolished and utilized. The fine enamelled jewels of the
sixteenth century were often broken up for the stones and the gold.
The most admirable works in silver were currently consigned to the
smelting-pot; the splendid iron ‘rejas’ were converted into mules’
and asses’ shoes; and the gorgeous carved and gilded wood-work of
dismantled churches and convents burnt for the sake of the bullion
to be derived from the rich gilding on its surface.” This is now
all changed, and the Peninsula boasts its band of dealers as well
organized as any in Europe; nor is it behindhand in their shadows--the
fabricators of fraudulent specimens of the kinds most in request.
The visitor to South Kensington should bear in mind that there may
be Loan Exhibitions in some of the adjacent buildings of a highly
important character. As I write there is a collection on exhibition
which will well repay a visitor for the exploration required to reach
it, for it has had to find rooms on the west side of the Gardens: this
is the anthropological collection gathered by General Pitt Rivers,
who, before he became heir of the late Lord Rivers, had made the
name of Lane Fox so noble in the scientific world that one almost
regrets that his good-fortune, in which all rejoice, involved a change
of name. In this collection the evolution of savage and barbarian
weapons, ornaments, utensils, and the like may be studied. General
Pitt Rivers has arranged boomerangs in series, so that the completest
form may be traced back to the first slightly curved stick found to
carry some increase of force. The development of a shield from a mere
stick grasped in the hand, next with a protection for the hand, may
be traced. There is a series of paddles upon which may be followed a
human form, degraded from one surface to another, until a grotesque
conventional figure appears on the last without a trace of human
semblance. The ornamental marks on the bodies of pots are found in
some instances to have been suggested by the net-work print left by
their corded holders. These are but a few instances of the way in which
objects are made by a man of science to tell their own history. Among
the articles which have received the attention of General Pitt Rivers
are the caps worn by the women of Brittany, and a few supplementary
cases of these have been added to his wonderful collection. An
examination of these caps--which are considered of so much importance
that a woman is not allowed to enter church without one, nor with one
of a pattern belonging to another parish--shows good reason for the
supposition that their sanctity is derived from their having been all
developed from the head-dress of the nun. Such is the opinion that
General Pitt Rivers expressed when he conducted me through his rooms.
He showed me that each cap has parts which correspond to parts of the
normal cap of the nun. These parts have grown small in some cases; in
others they are pinned up; but in the latter case they are let down on
important occasions--funerals and weddings--and the wearers are then
all nun-like.
These little French things, however, are hardly to be included in this
great collection--perhaps the most important private collection of
objects illustrative of anthropology in the world. Nor is there any
book more useful to the student of anthropology than the illustrated
and explanatory catalogue of 1847 of these objects prepared by General
Pitt Rivers, and published by the Science and Art Department.[C]
[Illustration: PASTORAL STAVES--IVORY AND ENAMEL. FOURTEENTH CENTURY.]
Various public men sent their treasures to the museum in its earlier
days, when they were more needed than now; but it has been found
necessary to select fastidiously from the too numerous articles
offered every year as loans. Many families owning valuable collections
find it difficult to keep them in perfect safety, and more begin to
realize that such articles should not be of private advantage. Some
collections, originally received as loans, it is pretty certain will
never be removed; and I am assured by the director that the museum has
been notified of being remembered in many wills. This gentleman, Sir
Philip Cunliffe Owen, and his predecessor, Sir Henry Cole, said to me,
in conversation about the prospect of building museums in the American
cities, that they had no doubt such institutions, if good and safe
buildings were erected, would there as well as here find themselves
centres of gravitation for the art treasures and curiosities owned by
the community around them. This museum, though hardly out of its teens,
has received seven great collections, worth collectively more than two
million dollars; thirteen bequests, worth over half a million dollars;
and a large number of donations whose aggregate money value is very
great, though not yet estimated. Among the more important donations
sixteen have been from the Queen, nineteen from the late Prince
Consort, three from Napoleon III. (very valuable too--Raphael’s “Holy
Family,” in Gobelin tapestry; four pieces of Beauvais tapestry, and a
collection of 4854 engravings from the Louvre), three from the Emperor
of Russia, and thirty Egyptian musical instruments from the Khedive.
Thirty-one donations, including, of course, a much larger number of
objects, have been received from twenty-eight governments. In this list
Japan (two), Würtemberg (two), and the United States (three) are the
only governments which appear more than once; but I am sorry to say the
presents of the American Republic are limited to department reports,
the last being one from the War Department on gunshot wounds. Twenty
European museums have sent valuable gifts to this youngest member of
their family. Among private individuals, other than the donors of
collections, Sir Henry Cole, K.C.B., father of the museum, and his
family, are represented by twenty-eight valuable gifts--gifts, however,
which are little compared with the enthusiasm and intelligence they
lavished on the institution they saw planted as a seed, and may now
from their windows behold grown to its present large proportions.
Among the numerous gifts and bequests which the museum has received
during the past twenty years the following are the most important:
In 1857. By John Sheepshanks, Esq., 233 oil paintings, 289
water-color paintings, etchings, and other drawings. (Gift.) Mr.
Sheepshanks died in 1863.
In 1860 and in 1873. By Mrs. Elizabeth Ellison, 100 water-color
drawings. (Acting in the spirit of the intention of her late
husband, Richard Ellison, Esq., of Sudbrook House, Lincolnshire.)
For the purpose of forming a National Collection of Watercolor
Drawings. (Gift.)
In 1864. By Rev. R. Brooke, 396 objects, consisting of textiles,
watches, rings, etc., and 718 volumes of books. (Gift.)
In 1867. By Mrs. Wollaston, 270 drawings of mosaics. (Gift.)
In 1867. By W. Minshull Bigg, Esq., 3 works in marble by Lough:
“Puck,” “The Melancholy Jaques,” “Titania.” (Bequest.)
In 1867 and 1868. By Sir Charles Wentworth Dilke, Bart., M.P.,
297 volumes, 862 pamphlets, and 155 prints illustrating the Great
Exhibition, 1851. (Gift.) Died in 1869.
In 1868. By Mrs. Louisa Plumley, 43 enamel paintings by Essex,
Bone, etc. (Bequest.)
In 1868. By Professor Ella, 329 volumes of music, printed and in
MS.; 6 busts, 1 oil painting (a portrait of Rossini). From the
Library of the Musical Union Institute. (Gift.)
In 1868. By Rev. Chauncy Hare Townshend, 211 objects, chiefly
jewels, 189 oil paintings, 174 water-color paintings, 4218 Swiss
coins, 831 volumes, 390 drawings, 1815 prints. (Bequest.)
In 1869. By Rev. Alexander Dyce, 80 pictures, 63 miniatures, 802
drawings. 1511 prints, 74 rings, 27 art objects, 13,596 books.
(Bequest.)
In 1870. By William Gibbs, Esq., Roman and Anglo-Saxon ornaments
and other antiquities, chiefly found in Kent. (Bequest.)
In 1870. By Alfred Davis, Esq., a collection of coral. (Bequest.)
In 1870. By John Meeson Parsons, Esq., a collection of 92 oil and
47 water-color paintings. (Bequest.)
In 1871. By C. T. Maud, Esq., 6 oil paintings of the English
School. (Gift.)
In 1871. By W. S. Louch, Esq., 2 oil paintings, 2 water-colors,
etc. (Bequest.)
In 1871. By W. Smith, Esq., 86 early English water-color drawings.
(Gift.)
In 1872. By Thomas Millard, Esq., 197 gold and silver coins,
chiefly English. (Bequest.)
In 1872. By Mr. Tatlock, 15 drawings and paintings by De Wint, and
by Hilton. (Gift.)
In 1872. By Lady Walmsley, 13 oil paintings. (Gift.)
In 1873. By C. T. Maud. Esq., 11 water-color-drawings. (Gift.)
In 1874. By Alexander Barker, Esq., Venetian furniture of a
boudoir. (Bequest.)
In 1875. By Assimon, Delavigne, et Cie, a collection of French
lace. (Gift.)
In 1875. By Mrs. A. Nadporojsky, a collection of Russian lace.
(Gift.)
In 1876. By John Forster, Esq., 48 oil paintings, 74 frames of
water-color paintings and drawings, collections of drawings,
sketches, and engravings; collection of manuscripts and
autographs, library of printed and illustrated books.
In 1876. By Sir M. Digby and Lady Wyatt, 148 fans. (Gift.)
In 1876. By William Smith, Esq., 136 water-color drawings, and
also 700 volumes.
In 1882. By John Jones, Esq., pictures and virtu amounting to
£240,000. (Bequest.)
For the purpose of industrial and art education, the museum has
found the perfect casts and reproductions that can now be made not
inferior in value to original works. In this respect the international
convention, to which reference has already been made, has been of
immense advantage. As one of the signs of better times, to be set
against standing armies, the agreement deserves insertion in any
account of this museum. It was entered into during the Paris Exposition
of 1867, and in the following year communicated by the Prince of Wales
to the Lord President of the Council:
CONVENTION FOR PROMOTING UNIVERSAL REPRODUCTIONS OF WORKS OF
ART FOR THE BENEFIT OF MUSEUMS OF ALL COUNTRIES.
Throughout the world every country possesses fine historical
monuments of art of its own, which can easily be reproduced by
casts, electrotypes, photographs, and other processes, without the
slightest damage to the originals.
(_a_). The knowledge of such monuments is necessary to the
progress of art, and the reproductions of them would be of a high
value to all museums for public instruction.
(_b_). The commencement of a system of reproducing works of art
has been made by the South Kensington Museum, and illustrations
of it are now exhibited in the British section of the Paris
Exhibition, where may be seen specimens of French, Italian,
Spanish, Portuguese, German, Swiss, Russian, Hindoo, Celtic, and
English art.
(_c_). The following outline of operations is suggested:
I. Each country to form its own commission, according to its own
views, for obtaining such reproductions as it may desire for its
own museums.
II. The commissions of each country to correspond with one
another, and send information of what reproductions each causes to
be made, so that every country, if disposed, may take advantage of
the labors of other countries at a moderate cost.
III. Each country to arrange for making exchanges for objects
which it desires.
IV. In order to promote the formation of the proposed commissions
in each country, and facilitate the making of reproductions, the
undersigned members of the reigning families throughout Europe,
meeting at the Paris Exhibition of 1867, have signified their
approval of the plan, and their desire to promote the realization
of it.
The following Princes have already signed this convention:
Great Britain and Ireland { Albert Edward, Prince of Wales.
{ Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh.
Prussia Frederick William, Crown Prince of Prussia.
Hesse Louis, Prince of Hesse.
Saxony Albert, Prince Royal of Saxony.
France Prince Napoleon (Jerome).
Belgium Philippe, Comte de Flandre.
Russia The Czarowitz.
” Nicolas, Duc de Leuchtenberg.
Sweden and Norway Oscar, Prince of Sweden and Norway.
Italy Humbert, Prince Royal of Italy.
” Amadeus, Duke of Aosta.
Austria { Charles Louis, Archduke of Austria.
{ Rainer, Archduke of Austria.
Denmark Frederick, Crown Prince of Denmark.
PARIS, 1867.
[Illustration: ELKINGTON’S MARK.]
[Illustration: FRANCHI AND SON’S MARK.]
Cincinnati is already sharing these reproductions; and the signers of
the above document would gladly have the Governors of the American
States which possess museums add to it their names, and transatlantic
museums avail themselves of its advantages. These advantages are
very great, as, after one cast has been made, the cost of the rest
amounts to little more than that of material and transportation. This
kind of work is now done in such perfection that it were easy for an
untrained eye to doubt which is original and which reproduction. The
firms officially connected with the Science and Art Department always
use marks which have a money value in Europe. For three or four pounds
any museum or private collector may obtain perfect copies of ancient
shields, salt-cellars, tankards, tazzas, fire-dogs, knockers, whether
chased or _repoussé_. Old specimens of this kind are rare and costly.
A beautiful pair of bronze fire-dogs --pedestals surrounded by Cupids,
and supporting respectively Venus and Adonis--made in Venice about
1570, are rather costly, the work being intricate and the figures four
feet high; but Franchi’s copper-bronze copies at £30 are nearly as good
as the originals, which were considered cheap at the £300 paid by the
museum. A wonderful old Italian bronze knocker (1560), fourteen and
a half inches in height and thirteen inches wide, which cost £80, is
reproduced by the same firm for £4.
It is, however, the large casts of Oriental objects and ancient German
shrines that will probably be of paramount interest to an American.
It is here shown that the most notable and interesting objects in the
world can be copied with the utmost exactness, and in their actual
size, and brought within reach of the people of any country. Even
Trajan’s Column is here; and, though in this case it has had to be
set up in two columns instead of one, many others have confirmed my
experience of the impossibility in tracing out at Rome the figures
which cover it so satisfactorily as they can be made out at South
Kensington.
The 17th of May, 1880, is an historic day in the annals of the museum.
On that day was thrown open to the public its Indian section. A small
collection of Indian curiosities has long been wandering from one place
to another in London, and had finally been shelved at the very top of
the India Office. So, at any rate, it was stated, and most persons
were willing to accept the statement on faith by the time they reached
the third story of that edifice. However, the collection steadily
increased up there, and it was at length removed to some rooms at South
Kensington. But there it attracted little attention from the public,
though much from scholars, and it was publicly announced that it would
be closed because it did not pay expenses. The authorities ultimately
followed better counsels: they gave it up to the Direction of the South
Kensington Museum. The Queen loaned it the magnificent collection of
Oriental armor from Windsor Castle; Indian treasures hitherto dispersed
through the other courts of the museum were gathered together in the
new section; Dr. Leitner’s collection of Græco-Buddhist sculptures was
added; the walls adorned with Carpenter’s water-colors illustrative of
Indian scenery and life; and lo! London awaked one morning to find that
it had a new and splendid institution, which the Queen and her family
had visited the day before with “the greatest satisfaction.”
It is indeed a noble section; and if any one has read about India,
is at all interested in its pantheon, its mythology, or its relation
to the evolution of humanity, he may pass many fruitful days or even
weeks in these wonderful rooms. There is no university in the world
where one can learn so much about India, especially if he should
study these objects in connection with Fergusson’s _History of Indian
and Eastern Architecture_. Immediately on entering, one passes those
strange remains brought by Dr. Leitner from Peshawar, which exhibit the
influence of Greek art upon India at the time when Buddhism was there
in its zenith of power. Next we pass beneath the model of the great
Sanchi Tope Gate. The Buddhist Tope is a sort of mound or barrow, only
built of earth and stone with great care; it is shaped like a regular
dome, surrounded by a double railing, and is reached through four
large gates of the finest and most elaborate carvings. This hill-like
dome, wherever found, appears to have no other use than to contain
some tiny relic--one of Buddha’s hairs, say, or his toe-nail. In the
_Mahawanso_, the Buddhist history of Ceylon, it is said: “The chief of
the Devos, Sumano, supplicated of the deity worthy of offerings for an
offering. The Vanquisher, passing his hand over his head, bestowed on
him a handful of his pure blue locks from the growing hair of his head.
Receiving and depositing it in a superb golden casket, on the spot
where the divine teacher had stood, he enshrined the lock in an emerald
dagoba, and bowed down in worship.” The thorax-bone of Buddha is a
great relic; but most sacred of all is his left canine tooth, whose
shrine probably originated the famous Car of Juggernaut. Among the
treasures in this section is a drum-shaped reliquary of pure gold; it
is about three inches high by two in diameter, and panelled with saints
in relief. It was found in one of these huge topes; inside it were
wrappings within wrappings, and last of all some hardly distinguishable
speck representing an unknown saint.
The model of the great gate is probably the largest achievement of the
copying art ever known. In 1869 the party set out with twenty-eight
tons of materials, chiefly plaster-of-Paris; these were drawn by
bullocks one hundred and eighty miles; and in a year’s time three
full-sized casts of the magnificent structure were completed without
a flaw--which is marvellous, considering the extremely fine and
complicated character of the carvings. This structure, erected in the
first century of our era, is thirty-three feet in height. There are two
high pillars--every inch of whose surfaces is covered with symbolical
carvings--supporting capitals made of elephant-heads--the elephant
being the animal in whose shape Buddha descended for his incarnation.
Above the elephants three cross-beams are stretched, upholding
pinnacles bearing the phallic Trisul, the Wheel, the Lion. There are
winged lions that remind us of Assyrian influence; there are sieges
and wars (no doubt about the relics); scenes relating to the princely
and amorous years of Siddharta, but nothing of his asceticism or his
lowliness; everywhere symbolical forms, especially the serpent, which
is always intertwined with the emblems of early Buddhism, indicating
that his first converts were the serpent-worshippers called Nagas. The
intricacy and fineness of all this work, constituting, as Fergusson has
said, the “picture Bible of Buddhism,” are indescribable.
Throughout this Indian section there are large photographs
of the temples and palaces representing the eras of Indian
architecture--Buddhist, Dravidian, Jain, Moslem--and near many of
them actual specimens or casts of their ornamentation. Some of these
specimens of sculptured ornamentation fill one with amazement at the
degree of art-culture they imply, and by their refined beauty. Here the
capital of a pillar is fringed round with small elephant-heads; there
a pedestal is adorned with mounted horsemen in relief, so regularly
dispersed that at first they might hardly be noticed. There are some
architraves from Rajpootna, of the eleventh century, made up of gods,
goddesses, and symbolic forms, the tracery of which is so refined and
the execution so delicate that it would be impossible to find any
European work of like antiquity to equal it. These arts are still
kept up. There are some screens from Mirzapore and from Agra, made of
perforated sandstone or marble, which are meant for ventilation and
also to admit a little light: they are so delicate, and the figures so
fine-edged, as to induce one to touch them and make sure they are not
made of paper or wax.
Dr. Birdwood has prepared in two small volumes a fair hand-book of
this section, which, however, contains no direct references to the
objects. Useful as it is, a student will find that it is too apt to
take the conventional view of things, as, for example, when it speaks
of Hindoos throwing themselves beneath the Car of Juggernaut--an error
which Dr. Hunter exploded long ago. There is no doubt that the real
way to understand these objects, and to derive high benefit from this
unique collection, is to study them in connection with Dr. Fergusson’s
great work on Eastern architecture--certainly one of the greatest
archæological and descriptive books ever written.
The throne of Akbar was set in the air at the convergence of bridges,
so that no man might approach him without being inspected from the
surrounding windows, and any arms he might have about him observed.
Before removal to the new section it stood in all its grandeur, but
it has been considered sufficient to preserve the central column and
the large capital which supported the famous throne. It is wonderful,
indeed, that it should be left to this age and to England to appreciate
the romance of the East, and to revise, correct, and estimate the
traditions of the Oriental world concerning its own monarchs. Akbar,
for instance, bears the reputation in the East of having been an
archtyrant and a blasphemer, and the care he took in preparing this
curious building, with his throne suspended, as it were, in mid-air
for safety, is regarded as confirming the Oriental view. But the fact
is now known that the hostility excited by Akbar was through his
liberality in entering upon a comparative study of all religions,
arousing thereby the enmity of all their priesthoods. From being a
saint, to whom the people brought their sick that his breath might heal
them, the Emperor became in popular regard a demon. He instituted at
Delhi (<small>A.D.</small> 1542-1605) discussions on every Thursday
evening, to which he invited the most learned representatives of all
religions, allowing each his statement with strict impartiality; he had
as many as he could of the sacred books of each religion translated
for his library, though neither his threats nor bribes could extort
from the Brahmans their Vedas, which now are open to every English
reader through the labors of Max Müller. He tried in turns worshipping
Vishnu, Allah, the Sun, and Christ. Badáoní writes that “when the
strong embankment of our clear [Mussulman] law and our excellent faith
had once been broken through, his Majesty grew colder and colder.” This
sad result (in the view of Badáoní) being proved by the fact that “not
a trace of Mussulman feeling was left in his heart,” and “there grew
gradually, as the outline on a stone, the conviction in his heart that
there were sensible men of all religions.”
He had three wives representing these religious--Mehal (Hindoo), Roumi
(Moslem), Miriam (Christian). A great deal of Akbar’s toleration and
independence may be ascribed to the influence of his favorite sultana,
Mehal. She was a faithful, wise, and educated lady, who always held
the Emperor to his high standard. There is a miniature of her in this
museum, showing her in a rich gauze, or dress, diaphanous above the
waist; she is not burdened with jewels, as was the case with some of
her wealthy subjects, but wears the ornaments of a lowly and quiet
spirit.