In the preceding chapters we have dealt with the subject of reading in
general, and have mentioned many books of the olden world that must not
be ignored, besides some histories, with historical fiction side by
side, which may serve as stepping-stones down through the centuries to
the present day, or up through the centuries to the dawn of history,
whichever way you prefer to take your journey. As to whether you should
read history backwards or forwards, much depends on your present stock
of knowledge. If circumstances have unfortunately left you ignorant,
even of the history of your own country, you would be scarcely fitted
to begin a Greek history, but should choose, in the first place, an
English history, or historical primer, that you can understand.
The majority of girls who read this page will, however, possess a
fair knowledge of English history, and may at once begin their study
of ancient civilisations, which will help them in no small degree to
understand the present. Or they may, with advantage, consult Professor
Freeman’s _General Sketch of History_, with maps, published at 3s. 6d.
by Macmillan. The constant aim of this admirable little book is to show
the connection in history, and it is the best introductory book for the
general reader.
No cultivated person can live in an easy conviction that modern
civilisation is all that needs attention, and that “the old heathen” is
a suitable description of sages and philosophers of yore.
We must not omit to say that the advanced student in history will need
some good history of the Renaissance—Walter Pater’s or John Addington
Symonds’—to enlighten her as to the great awakening of the human
intellect in the fifteenth century.
Biography is an admirable channel for the learning of history.
Herodotus, the “Father of history,” showed us that history is really
only a series of stories about people, and if any reader can glance at
Rawlinson’s translation, she will become aware of this. Unfortunately
history is so long that these “stories” have, as a rule, to be
compressed, and so lose their living interest.
Perhaps the present generation cannot recall the charm of the _First
History of Rome_, and the _First History of Greece_, by the author
of _Amy Herbert_, used as school-books, in contrast to the ordinary
English history. The present writer used to wonder why Roman history
was so delightful, English history so dull, and why the former could
always be remembered—the latter, never! It was just because those
elementary manuals of Greek and Roman history—as to whose intrinsic
value we are expressing no opinion whatever—used the “story” method of
dealing with their subject.
Plutarch’s _Lives_ have already been mentioned. Dean Farrar’s _Seekers
after God_ should not be omitted. It tells the story of some of the
greatest men who lived just before and after the Christian era.
When we turn to English history we may learn much from the series of
_Twelve English Statesmen_, published at 2s. 6d. a volume by Macmillan.
An excellent specimen of these is Mrs. J. R. Green’s _Henry II._, a
delightful book from which the history of the twelfth century may be
better understood.
For the fifteenth century, read the _Life of Savonarola_, by Pasquale
Villari; an essay on _Joan of Arc_, by De Quincey. For the sixteenth
century consult “The Great Artists Series” for lives of Michael Angelo,
Raphael, Titian, and others, and read some Life of Martin Luther, or
Froude’s essay on Erasmus and Luther, in his _Short Studies_. Also
read Sidney Lee’s _Life of Shakespeare_.
For the seventeenth century Lord Macaulay’s essays on John Milton and
John Bunyan will be interesting. For the eighteenth century again
Lord Macaulay has an essay on Frederick the Great, which is valuable,
and Boswell’s _Life of Johnson_ is a delightful book for all times.
Lord Macaulay’s _Critical and Historical Essays_ from which the above
are selected are published at 2s. 6d. Sarah Tytler’s _Life of Marie
Antoinette_, published at 2s. 6d. (“New Plutarch Series”), may be
useful. Emerson’s book _Representative Men_ is published in many
editions from 6d. upwards. For the nineteenth century, there are
many biographies of interest; every great man has his life written
and published, and many men who are not great, so that it requires
discretion to choose among them. Read the _Life of Mazzini_, by E. A. V.,
whatever else you omit. The _Eulogy of Richard Jeffries_, by Walter
Besant, is a charming and suggestive book for lovers of nature, though
it has nothing to do with “history” so called.
The _Life of Michael Faraday_, by Professor Sylvanus Thompson, will
give you an insight into the progress of science, and how much it can
be aided by one single man. But it is vain to ramble on in this way.
You will probably have heroes or authors specially dear to you, and
will wish to know about them all that you can learn. Some of the most
fascinating biographies are those of authors: _e.g._, the _Life of
Charlotte Brontë_, by Mrs. Gaskell. You may also consult with advantage
the “Eminent Women Series,” published at 3s. 6d. each volume.
So much for indications—they are nothing else—to guide you in your
study of history and biography. This chapter is fated to dwell on what
is generally called “solid reading,” though some of the books we have
mentioned are as interesting as any novel.
Before we quit the regions of “solid reading” for those of poetry and
romance, which we hope to visit in the next chapter, a word may be said
for reading societies. Of these, undoubtedly the best is the National
Home Reading Union.
Amateur societies may be good, or may be extremely futile. The benefit
of the reading society is this: it helps people how to read, and
teaches them what to read; supplies lists of books for the different
sections, and criticisms on those books. A letter to the secretary,
Miss Mondy, Home Reading Union, Surrey House, Victoria Embankment,
London, W.C., will bring a reply with all details of the society, which
we commend to our readers.
There is much to be said as to the charming fields for exploration
that lie open to the reader of “essays.” The first writer in this vein
whom we should recommend to girls and women is Mr. Ruskin. Possibly
it may be a mistake on our part, but it seems to us that there is in
some quarters a tendency to detract from the fame of this illustrious
writer, who, perhaps more than any other, has helped to shape the
thought of his time. The prevailing taste for “restraint,” “literary
reserve,” and repression, is opposed to the freedom of his lofty
flights of eloquence and impassioned poetic prose. Yet this will be
only a temporary phase of opinion among a few; for as long as the
English language lasts, John Ruskin’s passages of nature-painting and
of artistic criticism, based as they are on truth, will endure. He is
also a teacher in the region of morality, and his advice is fitted in
no small degree for those about to enter upon life.
For a long time the advice to “read Ruskin” was rather tantalising,
as his books were so costly as to be beyond the reach of the ordinary
reader. But there is now an edition of many of them published at 5s.
the volume, by Mr. George Allen, Orpington, Kent. From this series you
might select _Ethics of the Dust_, _Sesame and Lilies_, and _A Crown
of Wild Olive_. _Modern Painters_ is a treasury of priceless value as
to its contents, and still costly; but _Frondes Agrestes_, containing
readings from it, is published at 3s.
What will Ruskin as a teacher do for you, provided, of course, you have
a mind open to receive and appreciate his teaching?
He will inculcate upon you the beauty of absolute truth, uprightness,
charity towards and care for your fellows.
He will teach you, with many a charming hint and allurement by the way,
the duty of storing, by the study of literature, your mind with the
very best that has been thought and said in the world.
He will open your eyes to the beauty that lies around you; for
instance, to the changing pageant of the skies, at morn, at sunset,
and at night—to the conformation of the tiny leaf, twig, or crystal as
well as to the majesty of the everlasting hills, and the might of the
torrent and the storm.
He will guide you into sound ways of thinking, with regard to painting
and architecture.
He will show you something of the capacity of the English language as a
vehicle of expression, and he cannot fail to add refinement and grace
to your mode of thought. He will make the world a more beautiful place
to you; and will make you more fit to live and work in the world.
So much for this great “Master,” as he is still called by those who
love and revere him.
Two indispensable authors in the field of essays and criticism, are the
Americans, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Oliver Wendell Holmes.
Emerson is a “prophet.” To many readers he puts into words what
they may have long thought or felt, and they start to see their own
unexpressed vague idea alive before them. “Trust thyself” is his
counsel.
The _Autocrat_, _Professor_, and _Poet of the Breakfast Table_, by
Oliver Wendell Holmes, are graceful and charming books which must
always be loved by the thoughtful reader. They can be obtained in the
“Camelot Series” at 1s. each.
Mazzini’s _Essays_, dealing chiefly with political and social
questions, should be read by thoughtful young men and women.
Thomas Carlyle has had much to do with the development of a feeling
of individual responsibility. The essays of Charles Lamb, and the
dialogues of Walter Savage Landor; the essays of Leigh Hunt, Augustine
Birrell, Mrs. Meynell, and many others, will charm in one way and
another, and repay reading.
There are certain writers whose province it seems to inspire and
stimulate. Such, to those on the threshold of life, are teachers of
priceless worth. Ruskin, Emerson, Mazzini, Carlyle, all belong to this
category.
They make us feel that life is worth living, ideals are worth toil and
aspiration; and recall the words of Matthew Arnold in _Rugby Chapel_:
“Ye alight in our van! at your voice,
Panic, despair, flee away.
Ye move through the ranks, recall
The stragglers, refresh the outworn,
Praise, re-inspire the brave!
Order, courage, return.
Eyes rekindling, and prayers,
Follow your steps as ye go.
Ye fill up the gaps in our files,
Strengthen the wavering line,
Stablish, continue our march,
On, to the bound of the waste,
On, to the City of God.”
LILY WATSON.
(_To be continued._)
THE NEW GAME OF CROQUET,
WITH A FEW HINTS TO BEGINNERS, BY ONE OF THEM.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.—GOOD FORM.]
Your editor, always with an eye to his readers’ pleasure and profit,
asked me to make a few drawings illustrative of the new way of playing
croquet, a game that has recently been revived with astonishing
success all over the country; and also to write a short description
of the game with a few general hints that may be of help to those
taking up croquet for the first time. I am old enough to remember the
introduction of the game, as played in the old way with wide hoops,
light mallets, and light balls. Croquet became the rage, and for a few
years monopolised the attention of lovers of outdoor recreation; then
lawn tennis came in, and croquet was allowed to well-nigh drop out of
existence. As played now it is certainly a far better game, and though
more difficult is correspondingly the more interesting. It might be
called lawn billiards, and with practice and some natural aptitude a
player can become as certain of his strokes as in billiards, provided,
of course, the lawn be a good one.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.—BAD FORM.]
The chief differences in the new game as compared with the old are
bigger and heavier mallets, heavier balls, narrower hoops placed much
further apart, and therefore more difficult to negotiate, no croqueting
with the foot, _i.e._, your own ball has to be placed against the ball
you have hit, and the player strikes his own ball according to the
distance and direction he wishes his own and the other ball to go,
instead of keeping his foot on his own ball while he hits it. Those who
have played the old game will realise what a difference this “loose”
instead of tight croqueting makes to the play. Another important point
in taking croquet is that if your own or the other ball is driven off
the boundary line, the player loses the remainder of his turn. This law
was introduced to prevent a player from running completely away from
his opponent, which was likely to happen when a good player was well
set.
The best game is that played between four players in partnership, as
matters become more equalised as the play proceeds than in single games
between two opponents, though where two players are fairly matched the
single game allows of a greater exhibition of skill. Games frequently
last a couple of hours and even longer in the four-handed game, and
from an hour to an hour and a half in singles, and it is important
that players should not feel “hung up” for time, for nothing is so
calculated to put a player off than the feeling that he must hurry to
catch a train. Good players proceed in a quiet determined fashion,
well on the alert, but never in a hurry. On the other hand, too much
calculation and deliberateness will often make a player fail to
get through a hoop or roquet. You must sight your ball and get the
direction, and then play boldly and with decision; hesitating play is
fatal to good strokes. Brisk play is undoubtedly the thing both for the
player and the others of the party, for if a game is dragged out it
becomes tedious. I confess that I am by no means a good player, but an
indifferent player can get a lot of enjoyment out of the game provided
he gets players of about his own calibre to play with and against
him. There is no doubt that to play well necessitates pretty constant
practice, for without that one cannot be sure of either the direction
and, what is of equal importance, the strength of his stroke. This
latter is one of the great difficulties of the game, for upon hitting
your ball the right distance depends your chance of a second stroke
either by getting through a hoop or when you roquet. The distance a
ball will travel will depend upon the nature of the lawn as well as
upon the strength of your stroke.
A good lawn well drained, of closely cropped turf in good condition
and true, will play faster than where the grass is poor and dampish.
Weeds, like plantains and daisies, will quite spoil a stroke if the
ball happens to slide upon them, and obviously holes or bare places are
still worse. An ordinary lawn can be improved by sifting over it sandy
road scrapings, and hollows filled in in this way early in the year and
well rolled will become turf later on as the grass will grow through
the soil. A poor lawn can be helped by sowing on this top dressing some
good lawn seed, which can be had at any good seedsman’s. Birds are
partial to it, and it is necessary to either net the lawn or stretch
across it black thread at intervals.
A lawn which is weedy can only be improved with trouble and labour.
Plantains, the worst pest, must be got up by their roots; there is
a lawn weeder sold for the purpose. Dandelions must be carefully
extracted or they will spring up again, as will docks. Daisies are a
nuisance, and can only be got rid of by weeding; the lawn sand will
do something to eradicate them. Constant rolling and cutting with a
good lawn mower, provided with a hood to collect the cut grass, is
necessary to preserve a lawn in good condition. An impoverished lawn
should be dressed with road sweepings and bone dust, and moss in a lawn
is a sure indication that this treatment is necessary. A lawn grown
from seed will take some two or three years to form a turf; to hasten
matters turfs should be put down, as if this be done in the autumn,
and the lawn thus formed be top-dressed with sifted road-scrapings in
the spring, it will be playable in the summer. If a lawn be damp there
is only one cure—drainage, which means having pipes laid some two feet
below the surface. A well drained lawn can be played on soon after a
shower of rain, whereas a badly drained lawn is nearly always boggy. I
give these few details about the lawn itself because, though many of us
have to put up with what we have, we might as well make the best of it,
and a little care and attention will do much to improve our turf, and
the game is so much more enjoyable if the lawn we play upon is fairly
good. Nothing is so annoying as having a good stroke spoilt because the
ball is given a wrong bias by a weed or hole.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.—SIGHTING THE BALL.]
It is not my purpose to give the rules of the game, as a capital
shilling handbook by Mr. J. Jeffery is published by Dean and Son,
Fleet Street, from which I take the three methods of arranging the
hoops, and to which I refer the reader; but a few general hints which
come to me through having played the game may not be _de trop_. It is
useless playing a much better player on equal terms, and here comes in
the question of handicapping. This can be done by giving the weaker
player the start of a hoop or two, or by “bisques,” or extra strokes
which can be taken at any period of the game. These extra strokes
should be given by an umpire, and where one is not available hoops
should be taken, though the weaker player can play to a certain hoop
while the stronger player has to go right round the course. This latter
arrangement is perhaps preferable. For single games a third ball called
a “Jack” can be used, each player having the right of using this extra
ball. The Jack can also be used by a player who elects to play two
others in partnership. Three players generally play enemies, and can
use a “Jack” or not as agreed upon. Where one player plays against two
others, he should be the better player, and should play first, as it
is an advantage for a weaker player to come after. In a four game the
last player is manifestly in a better position than the others, as he
has the three other balls to roquet. But there can be no question that
double games, _i.e._, with four players in partnership, is the ideal
game; the two stronger players should each take a weaker partner. In
the double game generalship is most important, the chief rule to be
observed being for the partners to play each other’s game, which means
coming to each other’s rescue quite irrespective of getting through
hoops. To make this clear, a player should go to the assistance of
his partner at all costs, for if partners do not play together their
chances of winning are much lessened. This may sound an arbitrary law,
but experience will convince anyone that it is founded upon a knowledge
of the game, as it is of the greatest help to have your partner’s
ball to roquet, and you not only help yourself, but you can often put
your partner’s through a hoop as well as your own. I have seen games
where two players will each play his own game irrespective of the
other, while their opponents play together, and as the game draws to
a conclusion the advantage of playing in partnership _in deed_ as
well as in name is most marked. It is sometimes worth the while of
a stronger player to become a “rover” when a game is well advanced,
especially if his partner is a weak player, as then the rover can give
more assistance to the partner than he could if he had to trouble about
points himself. Another tactic which must not be lost sight of is, when
you cannot come to your partner’s assistance, to make for the hoop your
partner will go for next, which will materially assist him, as he can
roquet your ball and “take two turns off.”
Six players can take part in a game, but it makes it long drawn out and
tedious.
There is another point to be observed, and that is to carry the war
into the enemies’ camp, especially if your two opponents are getting
much ahead. By croqueting them out of position instead of getting
through your own hoop you thwart them, thereby giving yourselves a
chance. Some players carry this too far, never troubling to make points
themselves, and as it is only by making points, that is, getting
through hoops, that wins the game, the chief concern should be to make
points, at the same time doing your best as occasion serves to prevent
your opponents getting ahead.
Always notice where the ball of the player following you is before you
make your final stroke, for it is certainly better to hit yourself out
of his way (and if possible, to where your partner’s ball is) even
at the loss of position than to give your opponent an easy roquet.
All these matters come under the head of generalship, and it is well
for partners to agree as to the course to be pursued, instead of each
asserting his or her _ego_, and so bringing about divided councils,
which can only end in disaster if your opponents play well together.
It is to be feared—that is, on this subject of tactics—so much bad
temper is shown, but that is not the fault of croquet, for there are
players at every game who lose their temper as play goes against them.
Play with all the keenness and persistence possible, never giving up
trying while the issue is still undecided, but the “rigour of the game”
certainly need not lead to ructions. There are days when one is “off”
play, and when the easiest strokes are muffed. This is aggravating, of
course, and if it annoys you much retire gracefully, but the old hand
knows that there are times when one’s play is better than usual, and
these occasions should make up for those other days when you are “off.”
All match-games and tournaments are apt to try one by inducing a state
of nervousness, which makes good play impossible. One knows that this
comes from over-desire to win, by playing up to one’s best form. Any
counsel is one of perfection on such a matter, but if one could only
realise that more is done by quiet steady play, hanging on to your
opponent’s heels and realising that the game is not lost until the last
point is scored, some of this feverish excitement might be allayed.
I must just say a few words with regard to strokes, and here the
illustrations, drawn from some photographs I took of a girl who is a
particularly good player, may be helpful.
There are two classes of players, those who score points and pay little
heed to the way they do this, and those who study “form,” that is, the
way they play: a good style comes partly by practice and partly by an
aptitude for the game. It is good form to hold your mallet somewhat
like a cricket bat as in Fig. 1, and hit your ball with freedom and
from the elbow, but beginners find it difficult to be certain of the
direction the ball will travel, and prefer to hold the mallet in
front of them as in Fig. 2, letting it swing like a pendulum. This
sort of stroke enables the player to gauge the direction with greater
certainty, but you can get no force into it, and the tyro should
cultivate the freer stroke, if she wish to become a strong instead of a
timid player.
In estimating direction, it is a good plan to look along the top of
your mallet across to the object you aim at, and your partner can be
of help here by looking from the object aimed at, on to your mallet,
as the girl is doing in Fig. 3, to see that the direction is the right
one. This I consider a very good hint, and one that I profited by
myself, and it is of great assistance to one to have your partner’s
criticism, especially when making a long shot. As regards strength of
stroke, practice alone can gauge this. The modern mallets have one
side faced with rubber for a particular class of strokes, where the
ball is not to travel far, and it is important for the player to learn
to use this side as well as the wooden one. Pushing or spooning is
rigorously barred, and a hit to count must be heard distinctly.
[Illustration: No. 1. EIGHT-HOOP SETTING.]
[Illustration: No. 2. SEVEN-HOOP SETTING.]
[Illustration: No. 3. SIX-HOOP SETTING.
_Used in Public Tournaments._]
Clips are used by some, as by attaching one to the hoop that has next
to be negotiated all discussion is avoided as to the play, as will
sometimes happen in the middle of a game, but many players do not
trouble to use them.
I give three diagrams as to the placing of the hoops marked with the
distances taken from the book published by Dean and Son before referred
to. A good game can be played on any fair-sized ground, but if too
small the strokes become too easy, and the game suffers. The proper
size is 40 yards long and 30 yards wide, and should not be less than 20
yards by 15 yards. The “dead boundary” should be marked all round with
whiting, as in lawn tennis.
These are the three chief settings with the distances measured on a
full-sized ground. Where the lawn is smaller the necessary allowances
must be made. The eight hoop setting is a good one for beginners, as
the distances to be negotiated are not so great as in the six hoop,
which is the most difficult of the three.
No. 1.—EIGHT HOOP.
Pegs 3 yards from boundary.
First and sixth hoops 4 yards from pegs.
Middle hoops midway and 4 yards from each other.
Corner hoops 5 yards from end of ground and 4 yards from side.
Starting spot opposite centre of same, and 2 feet in front.
No. 2.—SEVEN HOOP.
Pegs in centre line of ground, 7 yards from nearest boundary.
Hoops up centre of ground, 5 yards from peg, and 5¼ yards apart.
Corner hoops 7 yards from centre, and in a line with pegs.
Starting spot 1½ yards from first hoop in centre line.
No. 3.—SIX HOOP.
As in No. 2, except that the middle-line hoops are 7 yards apart, and 7
yards from peg.
Starting spot opposite centre of left-hand corner hoop, and 1 foot from
same. Corner hoops in a line with pegs.
SHEILA’S COUSIN EFFIE.
A STORY FOR GIRLS.
BY EVELYN EVERETT-GREEN, Author of “Greyfriars,” “Half-a-dozen
Sisters,” etc.