Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 ✓ https://archive.org/details/historyofcaricat00wrig_1 A HISTORY OP CARICATURE AND GROTESQUE Stt ILtterahire auif ^rt. OF CARICATURE & GROTESQUE |n litcratun nnb %xl By THOMAS WRIGHT, Esq., M.A., F.S.A., Hon. M.R.S,L., ,■ Correjpondmg Member of the Imperial Inf itute of France ( Academie dei Infcriptions et Belief Lcftres). WITH ILLUS'J'R/mONS FROM F^JRIOUS SOURCES, DRAWN AND ENGRAVED BY F. W. FAIRHOLT, Esa., F.S.A. 'ilonbon ; VIRTUE BROTHERS & CO., i, AMEN CORNER, PATEUNOSTER ROW. 1865. Kid pLixT]:i> m* JAMES s. viKTrn, CU'Y ROAD. PREFACE. I T HAVE felt feme difficulty in feledling a title for ! the contents of the following pages, in which it was, in fadl, my defign to give, as far as may be done within fuch moderate limits, and in as popular a manner as fuch information can eaffiy be imparted, a general view of the Hiftoryof Comic Literature and Art. Yet j the word comic feems to me hardly to exprefs all the j parts of the fubjedt which I have fought to bring j together in my book. Moreover, the field of this hiftory is very large, and, though I have only taken as my theme one part of it, it was necelfary to circum- feribe even that, in fome degree ; and my plan, there- fore, is to follow it chiefly through thofe branches which have contributed mofi; towards the formation of modern comic and fatiric literature and art in our own ifiand. Thus, VI Preface. I’hus, as the comic literature of the middle ages to a very great extent, and comic art in a confiderable degree alfo, were founded upon, or rather arofe out of, thofe of the Romans which had preceded them, it feemed defirable to give a comprehenfive hiftory of this branch of literature and art as it was cultivated among the peoples of antiquity. Literature and art in the middle ages prefented a certain unity of general charadler, arifing, probably, from the uniformity of the influence of the Roman element of fociety, modified only by its lower degree of intenfity at a greater diflance from the centre, and by fecondary caufes attendant upon it. To underhand the literature of any one country in Weftern Europe, efpecially during what we may term the feudal period — and the remark applies to art equally — it is neceffary to make ourfelves acquainted with the whole hifl:ory of literature in Weflern Europe during that time. The peculiarities in dif- ferent countries naturally became more marked in the progrefs of fociety, and more ftrongly individualifed ; but it was not till towards the clofe of the feudal period i that the literature of each of thefe different countries i was becoming more entirely its own. At that period the plan I have formed reflridls itfelf, according to the ! view ' Preface. Vll view ftated above. Thus, the fatirical literature of the Reformation and pidtorial caricature had their cradle in Germany, and, in the earlier half of the fixteenth century, carried their influence largely into France and England ; but from that time any influence of German literature on thefe two countries ceafes. Modern fatirical literature has its models in France during the fixteenth century, and the diredl influence of this literature in France upon Englifli literature continued during that and the fucceeding century, but no further. Political caricature rofe to importance in France in the fixteenth century, and was tranfplanted to Holland in the feventeenth century, and until the beginning of the eighteenth century England owed its caricature, indirectly or direCtly, to the French and the Dutch ; but after that time a purely Englifla fchool of cari- cature was formed, which was entirely independent of Continental caricaturifts. There are two fenfes in which the word hhtory may be taken in regard to literature and art. It has been ufually employed to fignify a chronological account of authors or artifts and their works, though this comes more properly under the title of biography and biblio- graphy. But there is another and a very different application viii Preface. application of the word, and this is the meaning which I attach to it in the prefent volume. During the middle ages, and for fome period after (in fpecial branches), literature — I mean poetry, fatire, and popular literature of all kinds — belonged to fociety, and not to the individual authors, who were but workmen who gained a living by fatisfying fociety ’s wants ; and its changes in form or charadler depended all upon the varying progrefs, and therefore changing neceffities, of fociety itfelf. This is the reafon why, efpecially in the earlier periods, nearly the whole mafs of the popular — I may, perhaps, be allowed to call it the focial literature of the middle ages, is anonymous ; and it was only at rare intervals that fome individual rofe and made himfelf a great name by the fuperiority of his talents. A certain number of writers of fabliaux put their names to their compofitions, probably becaufe they were names of writers who had gained the reputation of telling better or racier ftories than many of their fellows. In fome branches of literature — as in the fatirical literature of the fixteenth century — fociety flill exercifed this kind of influence over it ; and although its great monuments owe everything to the peculiar genius of their authors, they were produced under the preffure of focial cir- cumftances. Preface. IX cumftances. To trace all thefe variations in literature connected with fociety, to defcribe the influences of fociety upon literature and of literature upon fociety, during the progrefs of the latter, appears to me to be the true meaning of the word hiftory, and it is in this fenfe that I take it. This will explain why my hiftory of the different branches of popular literature and art ends at very different periods. The grotefque and fatirical fculpture, which adorned the eccleflaftical buildings, ceafed with the middle ages. The ftory-books, as a part of this focial literature, came down to the fixteenth century, and the hiftory of the jeft-books which arofe out of them cannot be confidered to extend further than the beginning of the feventeenth ; for, to give a lift of jeft- books fince that time would be to compile a catalogue of books made by bookfellers for fale, copied from one another, and, till recently, each more contemptible than its predeceffor. The fchool of fatirical literature in France, at all events as far as it had any influence in England, lafted no longer than the earlier part of the feventeenth century. England can hardly be faid to have had a fchool of fatirical literature, with the ex- ception of its comedy, which belongs properly to the ^ feventeenth feventeenth century; and its caricature belongs efpecially to the laft century and to the earlier part of the prefent, beyond which it is not a part of my plan to carry it. Thefe few remarks will perhaps ferve to explain what fome may confider to be defeats in my book ; and with them I venture to truft it to the indulgence of its readers. It is a fubjedl which will have fome novelty for the Englidi reader, for I am not aware that we have any previous book devoted to it. At all events, it is not a mere compilation from other people’s labours. In conclufion, I ought, perhaps, to ftate that the chapters on the Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque in Art were firft printed in the Art-Journal during the two paft years, but they only form a portion of the prefent volume, and they have been confiderably modified and enlarged. Thomas Wright. Sydney Street, Bromptnn, Dec. 1864. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. PAGE OUIGIN OF CAEICATTJIIE AJND GROTESQUE — SPIRIT OF CARICATURE IN EGYPT — monsters: PYTHON AND GORGON — GREECE THE DIO- NYSL4.0 CEREMONIES, AND ORIGIN OF THE DRAMA — THE OLD COMEDY — LOVE OF PARODY PARODIES ON SUBJECTS TAKEN FROM GRECIAN MYTHOLOGY: THE VISIT TO THE LOVER; APOLLO AT DELPHI— THE PARTLYLITY FOR PARODY CONTINUED AMONG THE ROMANS : THE FLIGHT OF ^NEAS 1 CHAPTER II. ORIGIN OF THE STAGE IN ROME — USES OF THE MASK AMONG THE ROMANS — SCENES FROM ROMAN COMEDY — THE SANNIO AND MIMUS THE ROMAN DRAMA THE ROMAN SATIRISTS CARICATURE — ANIMALS INTRODUCED IN THE CHARACTERS OF MEN — THE PIGMIES, AND THEIR INTRODUCTION INTO CARICATURE ; THE FARM-YARD ; THE painter’s STUDIO; THE PROCESSION POLITICAL CARICATURE IN POMPEII, THE GRAFFITI 23 CHAPTER HI. THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE MIDDLE AGES THE ROMAN MIMI CONTINUED TO EXIST THE TEUTONIC AFTER- DINNER ENTERTAINMENTS — CLERICAL SATIRES : ARCHBISHOP EE- RIGER AND THE DREAMER; THE SUPPER OF THE SAINTS — TRAN- SITION FROM ANCIENT TO MEDIA3VAL ART — TASTE FOR MONSTROUS ANIMALS, DRAGONS, ETC. ; CHURCH OF SAN FEDELE, AT COMO — ■ SPIRIT OF CARICATURE AND LOVE OF GROTESQUE AMONG THE ANGLO-SviXONS — GROTESQUE FIGURES OF DEMONS — NATURAL TEN- DENCY OF THE EARLY MEDIAEVAL ARTISTS TO DRAW IN CARI- CATURE — EXAMPLES FROM EARLY MANUSCRIPTS AND SCULPTURES . 40 Contents xii CHAPTER IV. PAGE THE DIABOLICAl. IN CAIIICATTJIIE — JIEDIiEVAL LOVE OF THE LUDICROUS — CAUSES 'WHICH MADE IT INFLUENCE THE NOTIONS OF DEMONS — STORIES OF THE FIOUS PAINTER AND THE ERRING MONK — DARK- NESS AND UGLINESS CARICATURED — THE DEMONS IN THE illRACLE PLAYS — THE DEMON OF NOTRE D.YME 01 CHAPTER V. EMPLOYMENT OF ANIMALS IN MEDLEVAL SATIRE— POPULARITY OF FABLES ; ODO DE CIRINGTON — REY^NARD THE FOX — BURNELLUS AND FAUVEL — THE CHARIVARI — LE MONDE BESTORNE — ENCAUSTIC TILES — SHOEING THE GOOSE, ^VND FEEDING PIGS WITH ROSES — SATIRICAL signs; the MUSTARD MAICER 75 CHAPTER VE the MONKEY IN BURLESQUE ^YND CARICATURE — TOURNYVMENTS AND SINGLE COMBATS — MONSTROUS COMBINATIONS OF ..YXIM^YL FORMS — CARICATURES ON COSTUME — THE ILAT — THE HELMET — L^UJIES’ HEAD-DRESSES — THE GOWN, AND ITS LONG SLEEVES .... 95 CHAPTER VH. PRESERVATION OF THE CH^UIACTER OF THE MIMUS AFTER THE F.YLL OF THE EMPIRE — THE MINSTREL jlND JOGELOUR — HISTORY OF POPULAR STORIES — THE FABLIAUX — ACCOUNT OF THEM^ — THE CONTES DEVOTS 106 CHAPTER VIH. CARICATURES OF DOMESTIC LIFE — STATE OF DOMESTIC LIFE IN THE MIDDLE AGES — EXAMPLES OF DOMESTIC CARICATURE FROM THE CARVINGS OF THE MISERERES — laTCHEN SCENT:S — ^DOMESTIC BRAWLS — THE FIGHT FOR THE BREECHES — THE J'L'DICIAL DUEL BETWEEN MAN AND WIFE AMONG THE GERM^VNS — ^ALLUSIONS TO WITCH- CRAFT — SATIRES ON THE TRADES: THE BAKER, THE MILLER, THE WINE-PEDLAR AND TAVERN KEEPER, THE ALE-WIFE, ETC. . .118 CHAPTER IX. GROTESQUE FACES AND FIGURES — PREV^VLENCE OF THE TASTE FOE UGLY AND GROTESQUE FACES — SOME OF THE POPULAR FORMS DERIVED FROM ANTIQUITY : THE TONGUE LOLLING OUT, AND THE Contents. DISTORTED MODTH — HORRIBLE SUBJECTS : THE M.LN AXD THE SER- PENTS — ALLEGORICAL PIGURES : GLUTTONY AND LUXURY — OTHER REPRESENTATIONS OF CLERICAL GLUTTONY AND DRUNKENNESS- GROTESQUE PIGURES OP INDIVIDUALS, AND GROTESQUE GROUPS — • ORNAMENTS OP THE BORDERS OP BOOKS — UNINTENTION 2 AL CARI- CATURE; THE MOTE AND THE BEAM 144 CHAPTER X. SATIRICAL LITERATURE IN THE MIDDLE AGES — JOHN DE HAUTEVILLE AND AHySr DE LILLE — GOLIAS AND THE GOLIARDS — THE GOLIARDIC POETRY — TASTE POR PARODY — PARODIES ON RELIGIOUS SUBJECTS POLITICAL CARICATURE IN THE MIDDLE AGES — THE JEWS OP NOR- WICH — CARICATURE REPRESENTATIONS OP COUNTRIES — LOCAL SA- TIRE — POLITICAL SONGS AND POEMS 159 CHAPTER XI. MINSTRELSY A SUBJECT OP BURLESQUE AND CARICATURE — CHARACTER OP THE MINSTRELS — THEIR JOKES UPON THEMSELVES AND UPON ONE ANOTHER VARIOUS MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS REPRESENTED IN THE SCULPTURES OP THE MEDLEVAL ARTISTS — SIR MATTHEW GOURNAY AND THE KING OP PORTUGAL — DISCREDIT OP THE TaUIOR AND BAGPIPES — MERMAIDS 188 CHAPTER XII. THE COURT POOL — THE NORMANS AND THEIR GABS — EARLY HISTORY OP COURT POOLS — THEIR COSTUME-^CARVINGS IN THE CORNISH CHURCHES — THE BURLESQUE SOCIETIES OP THE MIDDLE AGES— THE PEASTS OF ASSES, AND OF POOLS — THEIR LICENCE — THE LEADEN MONEY OP THE POOLS — THE BISHOP’S BLESSING 200 CHAPTER XHJ. THE DANCE OP DEATH — THE PAINTINGS IN THE CHURCH OP LA CHAISE DIEU — THE REIGN OF POLLY — SEBASTIAN BRANDT ; THE SHIP OP FOOLS — DISTURBERS OF CHURCH SERVICE TROUBLESOME BEGGARS — GEILER’s SERMONS — BADIUS, AND HIS SHIP OP FOOLISH WOMEN — THE PLEASURES OF SMELL — ERASMUS; THE PRAISE OF FOLLY . 214 . xiv Contents. C FI AFTER XIV. PAGE POPtrLAE LITEliATIJEE AND ITS HEDGES; BROTHER RUSH, TYLL EULEXSPIEGEL, THE WISE MEN OF GOTIRAM: — STORIES AND JEST- BOOKS — SKELTON, SCOGIN, TARLTON, PEELE 228 CHAPTER XV. THE AGE OF THE REFORMATION — THOMAS MURNER ; HIS GENERjAL SATIRES — FRUITFULNESS OF FOLLY — HANS SACHS — THE TRAP FOR FOOLS — ATTACKS ON LUTHER — THE POPE AS ANTICHRIST — THE POPE-ASS AND THE MONK-CjALF — OTHER CARICATURES AGAINST THE POPE — THE GOOD AND B.AD SHEPHERDS 244 CHAPTER XVI. ORIGIN OF MEDIAEVAL F^ARCE AND MODERN COMEDY — HROTSYITHA — MEDREVAL notions of TERENCE — THE EARLY’ RELIGIOUS PLATES — MA'STERIES AND MIRACLE PLAY’S — THE FARCES — THE DRAMA IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY 2G4 CHAPTER XVII. DIABLERIE IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTLHiTT — EARLY TATES OF THE DIA- BOLICAL FORMS — ST. ANTHONY' — ST. GUTHLAC — REVIVAL OF THE TASTE FOE SUCH SUBJECTS IN THE BEGINNING OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY — THE FLEMISH SCHOOL OF BREUGHEL — THE FRENCH AND ITALIAN SCHOOLS — CALLOT, SALVATOR ROSA 288 CHAPTER XVIII. CALLOT AND HIS SCHOOL — CALLOT’S ROMANTIC HISTORY — HIS “ CA- PRICI,” AND OTHER BURLESQL'E 'WORKS — THE “ BALLI ” AND THE BEGGARS — IMITATORS OF CALLOT; DELLA BELLA — EXAMPLES OF DELLA BELLA — ROMAIN DE HOOGHE 300 CHAPTER XIX. THE SATIRICAL LITERATURE OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY — PASQUTL — MACARONIC POETRY’ — THE EPISTOL.E OBSCURORUM VIRORUM — R^YBEHUS — COURT OF THE QUEEN OF NAVARRE, AND ITS LITE- RARY circle; BONA venture DES PERIERS — HENRI ETIENNE — THE LIGUE, AND ITS SATIRE: THE “ SATYRE MENIPPEE ” . . . 312 Contents, XV CHAPTER XX. PAGE FOLITICAIi CARICATTJFE ITS ITTFAlSrCT — THE EEVEES DE JEE DES SEYSSES — CARICATEIIE ITT FRANCE — TKE THREE ORDERS — PERIOD OF THE LIGEE ; CARICATERES AGAINST HENRI III. — CARICATERES AGAINST THE LIGEE — CARICATERE IN FRANCE IN THE SEVEN- TEENTH CENTERY — GENERAL G.ALAS — THE QEARREL OF AMBAS- SADORS — CARICATERE AGAINST LOEIS XIV. ; WILLIAM OF FERS- TEMBERG 347 CHAPTER XXI. EARLY POLITICAL CARICATERE IN ENGLAND — THE SATIRICAL WRITINGS AND PICTERES OF THE COMMONWEALTH PERIOD — SATIRES AGAINST THE bishops; bishop WILLI^VMS CARICATERES ON THE CAVA- LIERS; SIR JOHN SECKLING THE ROARING BOYS; VIOLENCE OF THE ROYALIST SOLDIERS — CONTEST BETWEEN THE PRESBYTERIANS AND INDEPENDENTS — GRINDING THE KING’S NOSE PLAYING-CARDS ESED AS THE MEDIUM FOR CARICATURE ; HASELRIGGE AND LAM- BERT — SHROVETIDE 3G0 CHAPTER XXII. ENGLISH COMEDY — BEN JONSON — THE OTHER WRITERS OF HIS SCHOOL — INTERRUPTION OF DRAMATIC PERFORMANCES COMEDY AFTER THE RESTORATION THE HOWARDS BROTHERS : THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM; THE REHEARSAL — WRITERS OF COMEDY IN THE LATTER PART OF THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY INDECENCY OF THE STAGE — COLLEY CIBBER — ^FOOTE 375 CHAPTER XXIII. CARICATURE IN HOLLAND — DOMAIN DE HOOGHE — THE ENGLISH REVO- LUTION — CARICATURES ON LOUIS XIV. AND JAMES II. — DR. SACHE- VERELL CARICATURE BROUGHT FROM HOLLAND TO ENGLAND ORIGIN OF THE WORD “CARICATURE” — MISSISSIPPI AND THE SOUTH SEA ; THE YEAR OF BUBBLES 403 xvi Contents. CHAPTER XXIV. ENGLISH CAEICATTTLE IN THE AGE OF GEOEGE II. — ENGLISH PEINT- SELLEES — AETISTS EMPLOYED BY THEM — SIE EOBEET WALPOLe’S LONG MINISTEY — THE WAE M"ITH FEANCE — THE NEWCASTLE AD- MINISTEATION— OPEEA INTEIGTJES — ACCESSION OF GEOEGE III., AND LOED BUTE IN POWER CHAPTER XXV. HOGAETH — HIS E.4HLY HISTOEY — HIS SETS OF PICTUEES — ^THE HAELOT’S PEOGEESS — THE ExUCE’S PEOGEESS — THE MAEEIAGE A LA MODE — HIS OTHEE PEINTS — THE ANALYSIS OF BEAUTY, ..AND THE PEESECU- TION AEISING OUT OF IT — HIS PATEONAGE BY LOED BUTE — CAEICA- TUEE OF THE TIME.S — ATTACKS TO M^HICH HE WAS EXPOSED BY IT, AND WHICH HASTENED HIS DEATH CHAPTER XXVI. THE LESSEE CAEICATUEISTS OF THE EEIGN OF GEOEGE HI. — PAUL SANDBA' — COLLET: THE DISASTEE, AND FATHER PAUL IN HIS CUPS — JAMES SAYER: his caricatures IN SUTPOET OF PITT, AND HIS EEW^ARD — C.ARLO KHAN’s TRIUMPH — BUNBUEY’s: HIS CARICATURES ON HORSEMANSHIP — WOODWARD : GENER.AL COMPLAINT — EOWLAND- SON’s influence on the style of THOSE WHOSE DESIGNS HE ETCHED — JOHN KAY OF EDLNBUEGH : LOOKING A ROCK LN THE FACE CHAPTER XXVII. GILLEAY — HIS FIRST ATTEMPTS — HIS CARICATURES BEGIN WITH THE SHELBURNE MINISTEY — LMPEACHMENT OF WAEEEN HASTINGS — CARICATURES 0^< THE KING ; NEW WAY TO PAY THE NATIONAL DEBT — ALLEGED REASON FOR GILLEAY’S HOSTILITY TO THE KING —THE KING AND THE APPLE-DUMPLINGS — GILLRAY’S LATER LA- BOURS — HIS EDIOTCY AND DEATH CHAPTER XXVIII. GILLEAY’S CARICATURES ON SOCIAL LIFE — THOMAS ROWLANDSON — HIS EARLY LIFE — HE BECOMES A CARICATURIST — HIS STYLE AND WORKS — HIS DRAWINGS — THE CEUIKSHANKS PAGE 420 434 430 464 480 L OF CARICATURE AND GROTESQUE IN LITERATURE AND ART. CHAPTER I. ORIGIN OF CARICATURE AND GROTESQUE. SPIRIT OF CARICATURE IN EGYPT. monsters; PYTHON AND GORGON. GREECE. THE DIONY- SIAC CEREMONIES, AND ORIGIN OF THE DRAMA. THE OLD COMEDY. LOVE OF PARODY. PARODIES ON SUBJECTS TAKEN FROM GRECIAN MYTHOLOGY: THE VISIT TO THE LOVER : APOLLO AT DELPHI. THE PARTIALITY FOR PARODY CONTINUED AMONG THE ROMANS : THE FLIGHT OF .®;NEAS. I T is not my intention in the following pages to dilciifs the queflion what conftitutes the comic or the laughable, or, in other words, to enter into the philofophy of the fubjedl; I delign only to trace the hittory of its outward development, the various forms it has alfumed, and its focial influence. Laughter appears to be almoft a neceflity of human nature, in all conditions of man’s exiftence, however rude or however cul- tivated ; and fome cf the greateft men of all ages, men of the moft refined intelledts, fuch as Cicero in the ages of antiquity, and Erafmus among the moderns, have been celebrated for their indulgence in it. The former was fometimes called by his opponents fcurra confularis, the “confular jefter and the latter, who has been fpoken of as the “mocking-bird,” is faid to have laughed fo immoderately over the well-known “Ep'ftolae Obfcurorum Virorum,” that he brought upon himfelf a ferious fit of illnefs. The greateft of comic writers, Ariftophanes, has always been looked upon as a model of literary peifedtion. An epigram in the Greek Antho- logy. B 2 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque logy, written by the divine Plato, tells us bow, when the Graces fought a temple which would not fall, they found the foul of Aritlophanes : — Ai \apiTtq rifitvoQ Ti Xapiiv omp ov\i nerrurai ZtjTOvaai, ^pyxi'iv tvpov 'Apiarocpdrovi;. On the other hand, the men who never laughed, the dytXaoroi, were looked upon as the leall refpeftable of mortals. A tendency to burlefque and caricature appears, indeed, to be a feeling deeply implanted in human nature, and it is one of the earliefl; talents difplayed by people in a rude dale of fociety. An appreciation of, and I'enhtivenefs to, ridicule, and a love of that which is humorous, are found even among favages, and enter largely into their relations with their fellow men. When, before people cultivated either literature or art, the chieftain fat in his rude hall furrounded by his warriors, they amufed themfelves by turning their enemies and opponents into mockery, by laughing at their weaknelfes, joking on their defedls, whether phyfical or mental, and giving them nicknames in accordance therewith, — in fadt, caricaturing them in words, cr by telling dories which were calculated to excite laughter. When the agricultural daves (for the tillers of the land were then daves) were indulged with a day' of relief from their labours, they fpent it in unredrained mirth. And when thefe fame people began to ered permanent buildings, and to ornament them, the favourite fub- jeds of their ornamentation were fuch as prefented ludicrous ideas. The warrior, too, who caricatured his enemy in his fpeeches over the fedive board, foon fought to give a more permanent form to his ridicule, which he endeavoured to do by' rude delineations on the bare rock, or on any other convenient furface which prefented itfelf to his hand. Thus originated caricature and the grotefque in art. In fad, art itfelf, in its earlied forms, is caricature ; for it is only' by' that exaggeration of features which belongs to caricature, that unlkilful draughtfmen could make themfelves underdood. Although we might, perhaps, dnd in different countries examples of thefe principles in different dates of development, we cannot in any one country trace the entire courfe of the development itfelf; for in all the highly civilifed in Literature and Art. 3 civilifed races of mankind, we firft become acquainted with their hiftory when they had already reached a confiderable degree of refinement j and even at that period of their progrefs, our knowledge is almotl: confined to their religious, and to their more feverely hilforical, monuments. Such is efpecially the cafe with Egypt, the hiftory of which country, as repre- fented by its monuments of art, carries us back to the remotefl ages of antiquity. Egyptian art generally prefents itfelf in a fombre and maffive charafter, with little of gaiety or joviality in its defigns or forms. Yet, as Sir Gardner Wilkinfon has remarked in his valuable work on the “Manners and Cufloms of the Ancient Egyptians,” the early Egyptian artifts cannot always conceal their natural tendency to the humorous, which creeps out in a variety of little incidents. Thus, in a feries of grave hiftorical pidtures on one of the great monuments at Thebes, we find a reprefentation of a wine party, where the company confifts of both fexes, and which evidently fhows that the ladies were not refiridted in the ufe of the juice of the grape in their entertainments; and, as he adds, “the painters, in illullrating this fadt, have fometimes facrificed their gallantry to a love of caricature.” Among the females, evidently of rank, repre- fented in this fcene, “fome call the fervants to fupport them as they fit, others with difficulty prevent themfelves from falling on thofe behind No. 1 . An Egyptian Lady at a Feaji, them, 4 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque them, and the faded tiower, which is ready to drop from their heated hands, is intended to be charafteriflic of their own fenfations.” One group, a lady whofe excefs has been carried too far, and her fervant who comes to her affiftance, is reprefented in our cut No. i. Sir Gardner obferves that “many fimilar inflances of a talent for caricature are obfervable in the compofitions of the Egyptian artilb, who executed the paintings of the tombs” at Thebes, which belong to a very early period of the Egyptian annals. Nor is the application of this talent rellrifted always to fecular fubjefts, but we fee it at times intruding into the molt facred myfteries of their religion. I give as a curious example, taken from one of Sir Gardner Wilkinfon’s engravings, a fcene in the reprefentation of a funeral proceffion eroding the Lake of the Dead (No. 2), that appears in one of thefe early paintings at Thebes, in which “the love of caricature common to the Egyptians is lliown to hav'e been indulged even in this ferious fubjedl ; and the retrograde movement of the large boat, which has grounded and is puflied off the bank, ftriking the fmaller one with its rudder, has overturned a large table loaded with cakes and other things, upon the rowers feated below, in fpite of all the efforts of the prowman, and the earneft vociferations of the alarmed fieerfman.” The accident which thus overthrows and fcatters the provilions intended tor the funeral feaft, and the confufion attendant upon it, form a ludicrous fcene in Literature and Art. 5 fcene in the midfl: of a folemn pifture, that would be worthy of the imagination of a Rowlandfon. Another cut (No. 3), taken from one of the fame feries of paintings, belongs to a clafs of caricatures which dates from a very remote period. One of the moft natural ideas among all people would be to compare men with the animals whofe particular qualities they poffelfed. Thus, one might be as bold as a lion, another as faithful as a dog, or as cunning as a fox, or as fwinith as a hog. The name of the animal would thus often be given as a nickname to the man, and in the fequel he would be reprefented pidtorially under the form of the animal. It was partly out of this kind of caricature, no doubt, that the fingular clafs of apologues which have been fince diftinguifhed by the name of fables arofe. Connefted with it was the belief in the metempfychofis, or tranfmiffion of the foul into the bodies of animals after death, which formed a part of feveral of the primitive religions. The earlieft examples of this clafs of caricature of mankind are found on the Egyptian monuments, as in the inftance juft referred to, which reprefents “ a foul condemned to return to earth under the form of a pig, having been weighed in the fcales before Ofiris and been found wanting. Being placed in a boat, and accompanied by two monkeys, it is dilfniffed the facred precindt.” The latter animals, it may be remarked, as they are here reprefented, are the cynocephali, or dog-headed monkeys (the Jimia inuus), which were facred animals among the Egyptians, and the peculiar charadteriftic ot which — the dog-lhaped head — is, as ufual, exaggerated by the artift. The reprefentation of this return of a condemned foul under the repulfive 6 Hijhry of Caricature and Grotefque repulfive form of a pig, is painted on the left fide wall of the long entrance-gallery to the tomb of King Ramefes V., in the valley of royal catacombs known as the Biban-el-Molook, at Thebes. Wilkinfon gives the date of the accellion of this monarch to the throne as 1185, b.c. In the original picture, Ofiris is feated on his throne at fome diftance from the ftern of the boat, and is difmiliing it from his prefence by a wave of the hand. This tomb was open in the time of the Romans, and termed by them the “ Tomb of Memnon it was greatly admired, and is covered with laudatory infcriptions by Greek and Roman vifitors. One of the moll interelling is placed beneath this pi6lure, recording the name of a dadiichus, or torch-bearer in the Eleufinian myfteries, who vifited this tomb in the reign of Conllantine. 'I’he praftice having been once introduced of reprefenting men under the charafter of animals, was foon developed into other applications of the fame Idea — fuch as that of figuring animals employed in the various occupations of mankind, and that of reverfing the pofition of man and the inferior animals, and reprefenting the latter as treating their human in Literature and Art. 7 human tyrant in the lame manner as they are ufually treated by him. The latter idea became a very favourite one at a later period, but the other is met with not unfrequently among the works of art which have been faved from the wrecks of antiquity. Among the treafures of the Britiih Mufeum, there is a long Egyptian pidture on papyrus, originally forming a roll, conlilling of reprefentations of this defcription, from which I give three curious examples. The firft (fee cut No. 4) reprefents a cat in charge of a drove of geefe. It will be obferved that the cat holds in her hand the fame fort of rod, with a hook at the end, with which the monkeys are furnilhed in the preceding pitlure. The fecond (No. 5) reprefents a fox carrying a balket by means of a pole Supported on his llioulder (a method of carrying burthens frequently reprefented on the monuments of ancient art), and playing on the well-known double flute, or pipe. The fox foon became a favourite perfonage in this clafs of caricatures, and we know what a prominent part he afterwards played in mediaeval fatire. Perhaps, however, the moll popular of all animals in this clafs of drolleries was the monkey, which appears natural enough when 8 Hi/lory cf Caricature and Grotefque when we conlider its fingiilar aptitude to mimic the a6tions of man. The ancient naturalitls tell us fome curious, though not very credible, dories of the manner in which this charaiteriflic of the monkey tribes was taken advantage of to entrap them, and Pliny (Hid. Nat., lib. viii. c. 8o) quotes an older writer, who ad'erted that they had even been taught to play at draughts. Our third fubjedt from the Egyptian papyrus of the Britilh Mufeum (No. 6) reprefents a fcene in which the game of draughts —or, more properly fpeaking, the game which the Romans called the Indus latrunculorum, and which is believed to have refembled our draughts — is played by two animals well known to modem heraldry, the lion and the unicorn. The lion has evidently gained the victory, and is fingering the money 5 and his bold air of fwaggering fuperiority, as well as the look of furprife and difappointment of his vanquifiied opponent, are by no means ill piftured. This feries of caricatures, though Egyptian, belongs to the Roman period. The mondrous is clofely allied to the grotefque, and both come within the province of caricature, when we take this term in its wided fenfe. The in Ijiterature and Art. 9 I’he Greeks, efpecially, were partial to reprefentations of monfters, and monftrons forms are continually met with among their ornaments and works of art. The type of the Egyptian monfler is reprefented in the accompany- ing cut (No. 7), taken from the work of Sir Gardner Wilkinfon before quoted, and is faid to be the figure of the god Typhon. It occurs frequently on Egyptian monuments, with fome variation in its forms, but always No. 7 , Typhon. charafterifed by the broad, coarfe, and frightful face, and by the large tongue lolling out. It is interelling to us, becaufe it is the apparent origin of a long feries of faces, or malks, of this form and chara 61 er, which are continually recurring in the grotefque ornamentation, not only of the Greeks and Romans, but of the middle ages. It appears to have been fometimes given by the Romans to the reprefentations of people whom they hated or defpifed ; and Pliny, in a curious patlage of his “ Natural c Hiftory,” Hijiory oj Caricatiu'e and Grotefque I o Ilirtory,”* informs ns that at one time, among the pidtures exhibited in the Forum at Rome, there was one in which a Gaul was reprefented, “ thruding out his tongue in a very unbecoming manner.” The Egyptian Typhous had their exadt reprefentations in ancient Greece in a figure of frequent occurrence, to which antiquaries have, 1 know not why, given the name of Gorgon. The example in our cut No. 8, is a figure in terra- cotta, now in the colledfion of the Royal Mul’eum at Berlin. 1 Ko„ 8 . Golgmi, In Greece, however, the fpirit of caricature and burlefque repre- fentation had afllimed a more regular form than in other countries, for it was inherent in the fpirit of Grecian fociety. Among the population of Greece, the worthip of Dionyfus, or Bacchus, had taken deep root from * Plin. Hist. Nat., lib. xxxv. c. 8. t Panofka, Terracotten des Museums Berlin, pi Ixi. p 1 14 in Literature and Art. I I a very early period — earlier than we can trace back — and it formed the nucleus of the popular religion and fuperlVitions, the cradle of poetry and the drama. The mod popular celebrations of the people of Greece, were the Dionyfiac felhvals, and the phallic rites and proceffions which accom- panied them, in which the chief aftors alfnmed the difguife of fatyrs and tawns, covering thenrl'elves with goat-lkins, and disfiguring their faces by rubbing them over with the lees of wine. Thus, in the guile of noify bacchanals, they dilplayed an unreftrained licentioufnefs of gefiure and language, uttering indecent jefis and ahufive fpeeches, in which they I'pared nobody. This portion of the ceremony was the efpecial attribute ot a part of the performers, who accompanied the proceflion in waggons, and adted fomethiug like dramatic performances, in which they uttered an abundance of loole extempore fatire on thole who palfed or who accom- panied the proceflion, a little in the flyle of the modern carnivals. It be- came thus the occafion for an unrefirained publication of coarfe pafquinades. In the time of Pififiratus, thefe performances are afiumed to have been reduced lo a little more order by an individual named Thefpis, who is laid to have invented malks as a better dilguife than dirty faces, and is looked upon as the father of the Grecian drama. There can be no doubt, indeed, that the drama arofe out of thefe popular ceremonies, and it long bore the unmifiakable marks of its origin. Even the name of tragedy has nothing tragic in its derivation, for it is formed from the Greek word iragos {rpayog), a goat, in the Ikins ot which animal the fatyrs clothed themfelves, and hence the name was given alfo to thole who perfonated the fatyrs in the proceffions. A tragodus (rpay^^og) was the linger, whofe words accompanied the movements ot a chorus ot fatyrs, and the term tragodia was applied to his performance. In the fame manner, a comodus {KfpfXbiCog) was one who accompanied fimilarly, with chants of an abulive or fatirical charadler, a comus {Kwpog), or band of revellers, in the more riotous and licentious portion ot the performances in the Bacchic feflivals. The Greek drama always betrayed its origin by the circumllauce that the performances took place annually, only at the yearly feflivals in honour of Bacchus, of which in fa6t they conflituted a part. Moreover, as the Greek drama became perfedted, it flill retained from Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque 1 2 from its origin a triple divifion, into tragedy, comedy, and the fatiric drama ; and, being Hill performed at the Dionyfiac feflival in Athens, each dramatic author was expefted to produce \\ hat was called a trilogy, that is, a tragedy, a fatirical play, and a comedy. So completely was all this identified in the popular mind with the worlhip of Bacchus, that, long afterwards, when even a tragedy did not pleafe the audience by its fubjeft, the common form of difapproval was, -/ rav-a irpoc roy Aioyvirov — “ ^\'hat has this to do with Bacchus?” and, ovcey irpoc roy Aioyvrrov — “ This has nothing to do with Bacchus.” W'e have no perfefl; remains of the Greek I'atiric drama, which was, perhaps, of a temporary charafter, and let's frequently prelerved ; but the early Greek comedy is preferved in a certain number of the plays of Arirtophanes, in which we can contemplate it in all its freedom ot charadter. It reprefented the waggon-jefting, of the age of Thefpis, in its full development. In its form it was burlefque to a wanton degree of extravagance, and its etl'ence was perfonal vilification, as well as general fatire. Individuals were not only attacked by the application to them of abutive epithets, but they were reprefented perfonally on the flage as performing ever}" kind of contemptible adtion, and as fufFering all torts of ludicrous and difgraceful treatment. The drama thus bore marks of its origin in its extraordinary licentioufnefs of language and coftume, and in the contlant ufe of the maik. One of its moft favourite inftruments of fatire was parody, which was employed unfparingly on everything which fociety in its folemn moments refpedled — againft everything that the faliritt confidered worthy of being held up to public derifion or fcorn. Religion itfelf, philol'ophy, focial manners and inftitutions — even poetr)- — were all parodied in their turn. The comedies of Ariftophanes are full of parodies on the poetry of the tragic and other wTiters of his age. He is efpeclally happy in parodying the poetry of the tragic dramatifi Euripides. The old comedy of Greece has thus been corredlly deferibed as the comedy of caricature; and the fpirit, and even the feenes, of this comedy, being transferred to pidtorial reprefentations, became entirely identical with that branch of art to hich we give the name of caricature in modern times. Linder the cover of bacchanalian buffooner}", a ferious purpole. in Literature and Art. 13 purpofe, it is true, was aimed at ; but the general latire was chiefly implied in the violent perfonal attacks on individuals, and this became lb oftenfive that when Inch perfons obtained greater power in Athens than the populace the old comedy was aboliflied. Ariftophanes was the greateft and mofl perfetd poet of the Old Comedy, and his remaining comedies are as flrongly marked reprefenta- tions of the hoftility of political and focial parties in his time, as the caricatures of Gillray are of party in the reign of our George III., and, we may add, even more minute. They range through the memorable period of the Peloponnefian war, and the earlier ones give us the regular annual feries of thefe performances, as far as Ariftophanes contributed them, during feveral years. Thefirftof them, “The Acharnians,” was performed at the Lenaean feafl of Bacchus in the fixth year of the Peloponnefian war, the year 425 b.c., when it gained the firfl prize. It is a bold attack on the faflious prolongation of the war through the influence of the Athenian demagogues. The next, “The Knights,” brought out in b.c. 424, is a direft attack upon Cleon, the chief of thefe demagogues, although he is not mentioned by name j and it is recorded that, finding nobody who had courage enough to make a malk reprefenting Cleon, or to play the cha- rafiler, Ariftophanes was obliged to perform it himfelf, and that he fmeared his face with lees of wine, in order to reprefent the flulhed and bloated countenance of the great demagogue, thus returning to the original mode of adling of the predeceflbrs of Thefpis. This, too, was the firfl of the comedies of Ariftophanes which he publiflied in his own name. “I'he Clouds,” publilhed in 423, is aimed at Socrates and the philofophers. The fourth, “ The Wafps,” publilhed in b.c. 422, prefents a fatire on the litigious fpirit of the Athenians. The fifth, entitled “ Peace ” C'Eiprjv?;), appeared in the year following, at the time of the peace of Nicias, and is another fatire on the bellicofe fpirit of the Athenian democracy. The next in the lift of extant plays comes after an interval of feveral years, having been publiflied in b.c. 414, the firfl; year of the Sicilian war, and relates to an irreligious movement in Athens, which had caufed a great fenfation. Two Athenians are reprefented as leaving Athens, in difguft at the vices and follies of their fellow citizens, and feeking the kingdom of 14 Hfjiory of Caricature and Grotefque of the birds, wh^re they form a new ftate, by which the communication between the mortals and the immortals is cut off, and is only opened again by an arrangement between all the parties. In the “ Lyfiftrata," believed to have been brought out in 41 1, when the war was ftill at its height, the women of Athens are reprefented as engaging in a cunning and fuccefsful plot, by which they gain poffellion of the government of (he date, and compel their hulbands to make peace. “The Thefmo- phoriazufae,” appears to have been publiflied in b.c. 410; it is a fatire upon Euripides, whofe writings were remarkable for their bitter attacks on the charadter of the female fex, who, in this comedy, confpire againll him to fecurc his punilbment. The comedy of “The Frogs” was brought out in the year 403 b.c., and is a fatire on the literature of the day ; it is aimed efpecially at Euripides, and was perhaps written foon after his death, its real fubjedt being the decline of the tragic drama, which Eurij)ides was accufed of having promoted. It is perhaps the mod witty of the plays of Ariltophanes which have been preferved. “The Ecclefiazufae,” publillied in 392, is a burlefque upon the theories of republican govern- ment, which were then darted among the philofophers, fome of which did'ered little from our modern communifm. The ladies again, by a clever confpiracy, gain the madery in the edate, and they decree a community of goods and women, with fome laws very peculiar to that date of things, dhe humour of the piece, which is extremely broad, turns upon the difputes and embarrall'ments refulting from this date of things. The lad of his comedies extant, “ Plutus,” appears to be a work of the concluding years of the adlive life of Aridophanes ; it is the lead driking of them all, and is rather a moral than a political fatire. In a comedy brought out in 426, the year before “The Archarnians,” under the title of “ The Babylonians,” Aridophanes appears to have given great odence to the democratic party, a circumdance to which he alludes more than once in the former play. However, his talents and popularity feem to have carried him over the danger, and certainly nothing can have exceeded the bitternefs of fatire employed in his fubfequent comedies. Thofe who followed him were lefs fortunate. One ot the lated writers of the Old Comedy was Anaximandrides, who in Literature and Art. ^5 who caft a reflexion on the ftate of Athens in parodying a line of Euripides. This poet had faid, — r) (pV(U^ IjSovXtO' 7] 7'6fltx)V ohSlV (Nature has commanded, which cares nothing for the laws); w'hich Anaximandrides changed to — ri TToXiQ iPovXtO' if pofiujt' oliStv i^iXti (The state has commanded, which cares nothing for the laws). Nowhere is opprelhon exercifed with greater harflinefs than under demo- cratic governments ; and Anaximandrides was profecuted for this joke as a crime againlf the ftate, and condemned to death. As maybe fuppofed, liberty of fpeech ceafed to exift in Atliens. We are well acquainted with the charafter of the Old Comedy, in its greateft freedom, through the writings of Ariftophanes. What was called the Middle Comedy, in which political fatire was prohibited, lafted from this time until the age ot Philip of Macedon, when the old liberty of Greece was ftnally crulhed. The laft form of Greek comedy followed, which is known as the New Comedy, and was reprefented by fuch names as Epicharmus and Menander. In the New Comedy all caricature and parody, and all perfonal allufions, were entirely profcribed ; it was changed entirely into a comedy of manners and domeftic life, a pibture of contemporary fociety under conventional names and chara6ters. From this New Comedy was taken the Roman comedy, fuch as we now have it in the plays of Plautus and Terence, who were profetfed imitators of Menander and the other writers of the new comedy of the Greeks. Piftorial caricature was, of courfe, rarely to be feen on the public monuments of Greece or Rome, but muft have been configned to objebts of a more popular charafter and to articles of common ufe ; and, accord- ingly, modern antiquarian refearch has brought it to light fomewhat abundantly on the pottery of Greece and Etruria, and on the wall-paint- ings of domeftic buildings in Herculaneum and Pompeii. The former contains comic fcenes, efpecially parodies, which are evidently transferred to them from the ftage, and which preferve the malks and other attributes — fome of which I have neceflarily omitted — proving the model from which I 6 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque which they were taken. The Greeks, as we know from many fources, were extremely fond of parodies of every defcription, whether literary or pittorial. The fabjett of our cut No. 9 is a good example of the parodies found on the Greek pottery; it is taken from a fine Etrufcan vafe,* and has been fuppofed to be a parody on the vifit of Jupiter to Alcmena. I’his appears rather doubtful, but there can be no doubt that it is a burlefque reprefeutation of the vifit of a lover to the objedt of his afpira- tions. The lover, in the comic malt and coftume, mounts by a ladder to the window at wdiich the lady prefents herfelf, who, it muft be confeffed, prefents the appearance of giving her admirer a very cold reception. He tries to conciliate her by a prefent of what feem to be apples, intlead of gold, Given in Panofka, “ Antiques du Cabinet Pourtales,” pi. x. in Literature and Art, 17 gold, but without much efted. He is attended by his fervant with a torch, to give him light on the way, which Ihows that it is a night adventure. Both mailer and fervant have wreaths round their heads, and the latter carries a third in his hand, which, with the contents of his baiket, are alfo probably intended as prefents to the lady. A more unmiftakable burlefque on the vilit of Jupiter to Alcmena is publillied by Winckelmann from a vafe, formerly in the library of the Vatican, and now at St. Peterlburg. The treatment of the fubjed is not unlike the pidure jufl. defcribed. Alcmena appears juft in the fame pollure at her chamber window, and Jupiter is carrying his ladder to mount up to her, but has not yet placed it againfl the wall. His companion is identified with Mercury by the well-known caduceus he carries in his left hand, while with his right hand he holds a lamp up to the window, in order to enable Jupiter to fee the objed of his amour. It is allonilhing with how much boldnefs the Greeks parodied and ridiculed facred fubjedts. The Chrillian father, Arnobius, in writing againfl: his heathen opponents, reproached them with this circumflance. The laws, he fays, were made to proted the charaders of men from Hander and libel, but there was no fuch protedion for the charaders of the gods, which were treated with the greatefl difrefped.* This was efpecially the cafe in their pidorial reprefentations. Pliny informs us that Ctefilochus, a pupil of the celebrated Apelles, painted a burlefque pidure of Jupiter giving birth to Bacchus, in which the god was reprefented in a very ridiculous poflure.f Ancient writers intimate that fimilar examples were not uncommon, and mention the names of feveral confic painters, whole works of this clafs were in repute. Some of thefe were bitter perfonal caricatures, like a celebrated work of a painter * Arnobius {contra Gentes),\\h. iv. p. 150. Carmen malum conscribere, quo fama alterius coinquinatur et vita, decemviralibus scitis evadere noluistis impune : ac ne vestras aures convitio aliquis petulantiore pulsaret, de atrocibus formulas const! - tuistis injuriis. Soli dii sunt apud vos super! inhonorati, contemtibiles, vilcs : in quos jus est vobis datum quas quisque voluerit dicere turpitudinem, jacere quas libido confinxerit atque excogitaverit formas, t Pliny, Hist. Nat., lib. xxxv, c. 40. D Hifiory of Caricature and Grotefque i8 painter named Cteficles, defcribed alfo by Pliny. It appears that Stra- tonice, the queen of Scleucus Nicator, had received this painter ill when he vilited her court, and in revenge he executed a pifture in which the was reprefented, according to a current fcandal, as engaged in an amour with a common filherman, which he exhibited in the harbour of Ephefus, and then made his efcape on flrip-board. Pliny adds that the queen admired the beauty and accuracy of the painting more than llie felt the infult, and that flie forbade the removal of the pidture.* The fubjeft of our fecond example of the Greek caricature is better known. It is taken from an oxybaphon which was brought from the Continent to England, where it palfed into the colledtion of INIr. William Hope.t The oxi/l-aphon {6iv[ia(f)ov) , or, as it was called by the Romans, acetabulum, was a large vell'el for holding vinegar, which formed one of the important ornaments of the table, and was therefore very fufceptible of pidtorial embellilhment of this defcription. It is one of the moft remark- able Greek caricatures of this kind yet known, and reprefents a parody on one of the mod interefling dories of the Grecian mythology, that of the arrival of Apollo at Delphi. The artid, in his love of burlefque, has fpared none of the perfonages who belonged to tlie dory. The Hyper- borean Apollo himfelf appears in the charadter of a quack dodtor, on his temporary dage, covered by a fort of roof, and approached by wooden deps. On the dage lies Apollo’s luggage, confiding of a bag, a bow, and his Scythian cap. Chiron (XIPQN) is reprefented as labouring under the ed'edts of age and blindnefs, and fupporting himfelf by the aid of a crooked dad, as he repairs to the Delphian quack-dodtor for relief. The figure of the centaur is made to afcend by the aid of a companion, both being furnidied with the malks and other attributes of the comic per- formers. Above are the mountains, and on them the nymphs of Par- nad'us (NYiJI^'.\I), who, like all the other adfors in the fcene, are difguifed with malks, and thofe of a very grotefque charadter. On the right-hand fide * Pliny, Hist. Nat., lib. xxxv. c. 40. + Engraved by Ch. Lenormant et J. de Witt, “Elite des Monuments Ceramo- grapliiques,” pi. xciv. m Literature and Art. 19 fide ftaiids a figure which is confidered as reprefenting the epoptes, the inl'pedtor or overfeer of the performance, who alone wears no malt. Even a pun is employed to heighten the drollery of the fcene, for infiead of IIY0IAS, the Pythian, placed over the head of the burlefque Apollo, it feems evident that the artift had written HEIGIAS, the confoler, in allufion, perhaps, to the confolation which the quack-dodfor is adminifier- ing to his blind and aged vifitor. The Greek fpirit of parody, applied even to the mofl; facred fubjefls. however it may have declined in Greece, was revived at Rome, and we find examples of it on the walls of Pompeii and Herculaneum. They fliow the fame readinefs to turn into burlefque the mofl; facred and popular legends of the Roman mythology. The example given (cut No. ii), from one of the wall-paintings, is peculiarly interefting, both from circuinftances in the drawing itfelf, and becaufe it is a parody on one of the favourite national legends of the Roman people, who prided them- felves 20 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque felves on tlieir defcent from yEneas. Virgil has told, with great eftedt, the ftory of Ins hero’s efcape from the deftruCtion of Troy — or rather has put the llory into Ids hero’s mouth. When the devoted city was already iii€llllHHl!llll lllllllHII)lllllli.ll.l!lill,i|i|l IIIIIH ’llllli ll'li Ul l'i|l|IIMldMiiil|l:|ii|:l| No. 1 1 . Tkc Fiighl of JEr.Cui from Troy. in flames, vEneas took his father, Anchifes, on his Ihoulder, and his boy, lulus, or, as he was otherwife called, Afcanius, by the hand, and thus fled from his home, followed by his wife — Ergo age, care pater, eer-vici imponere noflra ,■ Ipje fubibo humeris, nec me labor ifle gravabit. Sbuo res cumque cadent, unum et commune pcriclum, Una falus ambobus er:t. ATtki parvus lulus Sit comes, et longe Jer-vat vefigia conjux. — Virg. 2En., lib. ii. 1. 707. Thus in Literature and Art. 21 Thus they hurried on, the child holding by his father’s right hand, and dragging after with “ unequal Heps,” — dextra je parvus lulus Implicu'it jequiturque patrem non pitjjlbus aqu'is , — Virg. iEn., lib. ii. 1. 723. And thus ^Eneas bore away both father and fon, and the penates, or houfehold gods, of his family, which were to be transferred to another country, and become the future guardians of Rome — yjjcamum, yinchijcmque fatrem, Tencrojque penates . — rb., 1. 747. In this cafe we know that the detign is intended to be a parody, or burlef(]ue, upon a pibture which appears to have been celebrated at the time, and of which at leafl: two different copies are found upon ancient intaglios. It is the only cafe I know in which both the original and 22 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque and the parody have been preferred from this remote period, and this is fo carious a circumftance, that I give in the cut on the preceding page a copy of one of the intaglios.* It reprefented literally Virgil’s account of the flory, and the only dili’erence between the defign on the intaglios and the one given in our firll cut is, that in the latter the perfonages are repre- fented under the forms of monkeys. iEneas, perfonilied by the ftrong and vigorous animal, carrying the old monkey, Anchifes, on his left Ihoulder, hurries forward, and at the fame time looks back on the burning city. With his right hand he drags along the boy lulus, or Afcanius, who is evidently proceeding non pnJJUus cerjuis, and with difficulty keeps up with his father’s pace. The boy wears a Phrygian bonnet, and holds in his right hand the inffiument of play which we lliould now call a “bandy" — the pedun. Anchifes has charge of the box, which contains the facred penates. It is a curious circumftance that the monkeys in this pidlure are the fame dog-headed animals, or cynocephali, which are found on the Egyptian monuments. * These intaglios are engraved in the Museum Florentinum of Gorius, vol. ii. pi. 30. On one of them the figures are reversed. When this chapter was already given for press, I first became acquainted with an interesting paper, by Panotka, on the “ Parodieen und Karikaturen auf Werken der Klassischen Kunst,” in the “ Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin,” for the year 1854, and I can only now refer my readers to it. in Literature and Art. 23 CHAPTER II. ORIGIN OF THE STAGE IN ROME. USES OF THE MASK AMONG THE ROMANS. SCENES FROM ROMAN COMEDY. THE SANNIO AND MIMUS. - — THE ROMAN DRAMA. THE ROMAN SATIRISTS. CARICATURE. — ANIMALS INTRODUCED IN THE CHARACTERS OF MEN. THE PIGMIES, AND THEIR INTRODUCTION INTO CARICATURE; THE FARM-YARD; THE painter’s STUDIO; THE PROCESSION. POLITICAL CARICATURE IN POMPEII ; THE GRAFFITI. T he Romans appear to have never had any real talle for the regular drama, which they merely copied from the Greeks, and from the earlieli period of their hiftory we find them borrowing all their arts of this defcription from their neighbours. In Italy, as in Greece, the lirll germs of comic literature may be traced in the religious feflivals, which prefented a mixture of religious worlhip and riotous feflivity, where the feaflers danced and fung, and, as they became excited with wine and enthu- fiafm, indulged in mutual reproaches and abufe. The oldeft poetry of the Romans, which was compofed in irregular meafure, was reprefented by the verfus faturnini, faid to have been fo called from their antiquity (for things of remote antiquity were believed to belong to the age of Saturn). Naeviu.s, one of the oldeft of Latin poets, is faid to have written in this verfe. Next in order of time came the Fefcennine verfes, which appear to have been diftinguilhed chiefly by their licenfe, and received their name becaufe they were brought from Fefcennia, in Etruria, where they were employed originally in the feftivals of Ceres and Bacchus. In the year 391 of Rome, or 361 b.c., the city was vifited by a dreadful plague, and the citizens hit upon what will appear to us the rather ftrange expedient of fending for performers (ludiones) from Etruria, hoping, by employing them, to appeafe the anger of the gods. Any performer of this kind appears to have been fo little known to the Romans before this, that there 24 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque there was not even a name for him in the language, and they were obliged to adopt the Tufcan word, and call him a hijlrio, becaufe hijier in that language meant a player or pantomimill. This word, we know', remained in the Latin language. Thefe Itrft Etrurian performers appear indeed to have been mere pantomimills, who accompanied the flute with all forts of mountebank tricks, geftures, dances, gefticulations, and the like, mi.Ked with fatirical longs, and fometimes w'ith the performance of coarfe farces. The Romans had alfo a clafs of performances rather more dramatic in character, conlilting of ftories which were named Falulcc Atdlance, becaufe thefe performers were brought from Atella, a city of the Ofci. A confiderable advance w'as made in dramatic Art in Rome about the middle of the third century before Chrift. It is afcribed to a freedman named Livius Andronicus, a Greek by birth, who is faid to have brought out, in the year 240 b.c., the firft regular comedy ever performed in Rome. Thus we trace not only the Roman comedy, but the very rudi- ments of dramatic art in Rome, either diredt to the Greeks, or to the Grecian colonies in Italy. With the Romans, as well as with the Greeks, the theatre was a popular inflitution, open to the public, and the ftate or a wealthy individual paid for the performance j and therefore the building itfelf was necefl'arily of very great e.xtent, and, in both countries open to the Iky, except that the Romans provided for throwing an awning over it. As the Roman comedy w'as copied from the new' comedy of the Greeks, and therefore did not admit of the introdudlion of caricature and burlefque on the flage, thefe were left efpecially to the province of the pantomime and farce, which the Romans, as juft ftated, had received from a ftill earlier period. ^\llether the Romans borrowed the raalk from the Greeks, or not, is rather uncertain, but it was ufed as generally in the Roman theatres, whether in comedy or tragedy, as among the Greeks. The Greek adors performed upon ftilts, in order to magnify their figures, as the area of the theatre was very large and uncovered, and w'ithout this help they were not fo w'ell feen at a diftance j and one objeft of utility aimed at by the malk is faid to have been to make the head appear proportionate in fize to in Literature and Art. 25 to the artificial height of the body. It may be remarked that the malk feems generally to have been made to cover the whole head, reprefenting the hair as well as the face, fo that the charabler of age or complexion might be given complete. Among the Romans the Hilts were certainly not in general ufe, but Hill the malk, belides its comic or tragic charabter, is fuppofed to have ferved ufeful purpofes. The firll improvement upon its original Hruffure is laid to have been the making it of brafs, or fome other fonorous metal,or at leaH lining the mouth with it,fo as to reverberate, and give force to the voice, and alfo to the mouth of the malk fomething of the charadter of a fpeaking-trumpet.* All thefe acceflbries could not fail to detradt much from the efieft of the adting, which muH in general have been very meafured and formal, and have received moH ot its importance from the excellence of the poetry, and the declamatory talents ot the adlors. We have pidtures in which fcenes from the Roman Hage are accurately * It is said to have received its Latin name from this circumstance, perjona, a perjonando. See Aulus Gellius, Noct Alt., lib, v. C. 7. E 26 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque accurately reprefeiited. Several rather early manulcripts of Terence have been prefervecl, illuftrated with drawings of the fcenes as reprefeiited on the llage, and thefe, though belonging to a period long fubfequent to the age in \shich the Roman ftage exifted in its original charadter, are, no doubt, copied from drawings ot an earlier date. A German antiquary of the lall century, Henry Berger, publilhed in a quarto volume a feries of fuch illuftrations from a manufcript of Terence in the library of the \’atican at Rome, from which two examples are leledted, as fliowing the ufual Ilvle of Roman comic a6ling, and the ufe of the malk. The firft (Xo. 13) is the opening fcene in the Andria. On the right, two fenants have brought provifions, and on the left appear Simo, the mailer of the houfehold, and his freedman, Sofia, who feems to be entrufted with the charge of his domeftic affairs. Simo tells his fervants to go away wdth the provilions, while he beckons Sofia to confer with him in private ; — Si. 51 ifiac intro auferte ; akite. Sojia, yiucjdutn ; faucis tc •voh. So. DiBum fata Nemf.c ut curcr.tur rcBe htxc. SL Itno aliud. Terent. Andr., Actus i., Scena 1. When in Literature and Art 27 When we compare thefe words with the plfture, we cannot but feel that in the latter there is an unnecelfary degree of energy put into the pnfe of the figures; which is perhaps lefs the cafe in the other (No. 14), an illullration of the fixth fcene of the fifth adt of the Adelphi of Terence. It reprefents the meeting of Geta, a rather talkative and conceited fervant, and Demea, a countryfied and churliflt old man, his acquaintance, and of courfe fuperior. To Geta’s falutation, Demea alks churlilhly, as not at hrd knowing him, “Who are you?” but when he finds that it is Geta, he changes fuddenly to an almotl fawning tone : — G- Sed eccum Demeam. SjI’Vus fies. D. 0/iy qui njocare ? G-. Geta^ D. Geta^ hominem maxhni Pretii eJJ'e te Jtodie judica'vi ammo mei, Tliat thefe reprelentations are truthful, the fcenes in the wall-paintings of Pompeii leave us no room to doubt. One of thefe is produced in our cut No. 15, which is no doubt taken from a comedy now loll, and we are ignorant whom the charadfers are intended to reprefent. The pofe given to the two comic figures, compared with the example given from Berger, 28 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque Berger, would lead us to fuppofe that this over-energetic adtion was conlidered as part of the charadter of comic adting. The fubjedt of the Roman malks is the more interefting, becaufe they were probably the origin of many of the grotefque faces fo often met with in mediaeval fculpture. The comic malk was, indeed, a very popular objedt among the Romans, and appears to have been taken as fymbolical of everything that was droll and burlefque. From the comic fcenes of the theatre, to which it was firft appropriated, it palled to the popular fellivals of a public charadter, fuch as the Lupercalia, with which, no doubt, it was carried into the carnival of the middle ages, and to our mafquerades. Among the Romans, alfo, the ufe of the malk foon palfcd from the public fellivals to private fupper parties. Its ufe M as fo common that it became a plaything among children, and was fomctimes ufed as a bugbear to frighten them. Our cut No. i6, taken from a painting at Relina, reprefents two cupids playing with a malk, and ufing it for this latter purpofe, that is, to frighten one another ; and it is curious that the mediaeval glofs of Ugutio explains larva, a malk, as being an image, “Mhich was put over the face to frighten children.”* The malk thus became a favourite ornament, efpecially on lamps, and on the antefixa and * “ Simulacrum quod opponitur faciei ad terrendos parvos.” (Ugutio, ap. Ducange, v. Majca.) hi Literature and Art. 29 and gargoyls of Roman buildings, to which were often given the form of grotefque malks, monftrous faces, with great mouths wide open, and other figures, like thofe of the gargo}ds of the mediaeval architedts. While the comic matk was ufed generally in the burlefque entertain- ments, it alfo became dillindive of particular charaders. One of thefe was the fannio, or buffoon, whole name was derived from the Greek word rrdiu'oe, “a fool,” and who was employed in performing burlefque dances, making grimaces, and in other ads calculated to excite the mirth of the fpeblator. A reprefentation of the fannio is given in our cut No. 17, copied from one of the engravings in the “Dilfertatio de Larvis Scenicis,” by the Italian antiquary Ficoroni, who took it from an engraved gem. The fannio holds in his hand what isfuppofed to be a brafs rod, and he has probably 30 Hi/lory of Caricature aiid Grotefque probably another in the other hand, fo that he could ftrike them together. Me wears the foccus, or low llioe peculiar to the comic aMors. This hurtoon was a favourite charadter among the Romans, who introduced him conflantly into their fealis and lupper parties. The manducus was another charadter of this defcription, reprefented with a grotefque malk, prefenting a wide mouth and tongue lolling out, and faid to have been peculiar to the Atellane plays. A charadter in Plautus (Rud., ii. 6, 51) talks of hiring himfelf as a manducus in the plays. fi aliquo ad ludos me fro manduco loccm f " The mediaeval gloifes interpret vianducus hy joculator, “a jogelor,” and adtl that the charadterillic from which he took his name was the pradtice of making grimaces like a man gobbling up his food in a vulgar and gluttonous manner. Ficoroni gives, from an engraved onyx, a figure of another burlefque performer, copied in our cut No. 18, and which he compares to the Catanian dancer of his time (his book w^as publilhed in 1754), who was called a giangurgolo. This is confidered to reprefent the Roman mimus, a clafs of performers who told wdth mimicry and adtion fcenes taken from common hi Literature and Art. 31 common life, and more efpecially fcandalous and indecent anecdotes, like the jogelors and performers of farces in the middle ages. The Romans were very much attached to thefe performances, fo much fo, that they even had them at their funeral procedions and at their funeral feafls. In our figure, the mimus is reprefented naked, malTed (with an exaggerated nofe), and wearing what is perhaps intended as a caricature of the Phrygian bonnet. In his right hand he holds a bag, or purfe, full of objedts which rattle and make a noife when lhaken, while the other holds the crotalum, or caflanets, an inflrument in common ufe among the ancients. One of the flatues in the Barberini Palace reprefents a youth in a Phrygian cap playing on the crotalum. We learn, from an early authority, that it was an inftrument efpecially ufed in the fatirical and burlefque dances which were fo popular among the Romans. As I have remarked before, the Romans had no tafle for the regular drama, but they retained to the lall their love for the performances of the popular mimi, or comcedi (as they were often called), the players of farces, and the dancers. Thefe performed on the fiage, in the public feffivals, in the flreets, and were ufually introduced at private parties.* Suetonius tells us that on one occafion, the emperor Caligula ordered a poet who compofed the Atellanes {AtManoe poetam) to be burnt in the middle of the amphitheatre, for a pun. A more regular comedy, however, did fiourifli, to a certain degree, at the fame time with thefe more popular compoiitions. Of the works of the earliefl: of the Roman comic writers, Livius Andronicus and Naevius, we know only one or two titles, and a few fragments quoted in the works of the later Roman writers. They were followed by Plautus, who died b.c. 184, and nineteen of whofe comedies are preferved and well known ; by feveral other writers, whofe names are alrnoft forgotten, and whofe comedies are all loft; and by Terence, fix of whofe comedies are preferved. Terence died about the year 159 b.c. About the fame time with Terence lived Lucius * See, for allusions to the private employment of these performances, Pliny, Epist. i. 1 5, and ix. 36. 32 HiJIory of Caricature and Grotefque Lucius Afranius and Quinftius Atta, who appear to clofe the lift of the Roman writers of comedy. But another branch of comic literature had fprung out of the fatire of the religious feftivities. A year after Livius Andronicus produced the firll drama at Rome, in the year 239 b.c., the poet Ennius was born at Rudiae, in IVIagna Graecia. The fatirical verfe, whether Saturnine or Fefcennine, had been gradually improving in its form, although ftill very rude, but Ennius is faid to have given at leaft a new polilh, and perhaps a new metrical lhape, to it. The verfe was ftill irregular, but it appears to have been no longer intended for recitation, accompanied by the riute. The Romans looked upon Ennius not only as their earlieft epic poet, but as the father of fatire, a dais of literary compolition which appears to have originated with them, and which they claimed as their own.* Ennius had an imitator iti M. Terentius Varro. The fatires ot thefe firft writers are faid to have been very irregular compofitions, mixing prole with verfe, and fometimes even Greek \\ith Latin; and to have been rather general in their aim than perfonal. But fcon after this period, and rather more than a century before Thrift, came Caius Lucilius, who railed Roman fatirical literature to its perfedion. Lucilius, we are told, was the firft who wrote fatires in heroic verfe, or hexameters, mixing ^\■ith them now and then, though rarely, an iambic or trochaic line. He was more refined, more pointed, and more perfonal, than his predecellbrs, and he had refcued fatire from the ftreet performer to make it a clafs of literature which was to be read by the educated, and not merely liftened to by the vulgar. Lucilius is faid to have written thirty books of fatires, of which, unfortunately, only fome fcattered lines remain. Lucilius had imitators, the very names of moft of w'hom are now for- gotten, but about forty years after his death, and lixty-five years before the birth of Chrift, was born Quintus Horatius Flaccus, the oldeft of the fatirills whole works we now polTefs, and the moft polilhed of Roman poets. * Quintilian says, “ Satira qmicm tota nojira ejir De Instif. Orator., lib. x. c. 1. in Literature and Art. 33 poets. Ill the time of Horace, the fatire of the Romans had reached its higheft degree of perfedtion. Of the two other great fatirifts whofe works are preferved, Juvenal was born about the year 40 of the Chritlian era, and Pertius in 43. During the period through which thefe writers flouriilied, Rome faw a confiderable number of other fatirifts of tlie fame clafs, whofe works have perifhed. In the time of Juvenal another variety of the fame clats of literature had already fprung up, more artificial and fomewhat more indiredf than the other, the profe fatiric romance. Three celebrated writers reprefent this fchool. Petronius, who, born about the commencement of our era, died in a.d. 63, is the earliefl. and moft remarkable of them. He compiled a romance, defigned as a fatire on the vices of the age of Nero, in which real perfons are fuppofed to be aimed at under fidlitious names, and which rivals in licenfe, at leaft, anything that could have been uttered in the Atellanes or other farces of the mimi. Lucian, of Samofata, who died an old man in the year 200, and who, though he wrote in Greek, may be conlidered as belonging to the Roman fchool, compofed feveral fatires of this kind, in one of the moft remarkable of which, entitled “ Lucius, or the Afs,” the author defcribes himfelf as changed by forcery into the form of that animal, under which he palfes through a number of adventures which illuftrate the vices and weakneffes of contemporary fociety. Apuleius, who was ccnfiderably the junior of Lucian, made this novel the groundwork of his “ Golden Afs,” a much larger and more elaborate work, written in Latin. This work of Apuleius was very popular through fubfequent ages. Let us return to Roman caricature, one form of which feems to have been efpecially a favourite among the people. It is difticult to imagine how the ftoryof the pigmies and of their wars with the cranes originated, but it is certainly of great antiquity, as it is fpoken of in Homer, and it was a very popular legend among the Romans, who eagerly fought and purchafed dwarfs to make domeftic pets of them. The pigmies and cranes occur frequently among the piftorial ornamentations of the houfes of Pompeii and Herculaneum 5 and the painters of Pompeii not only reprefented them in their proper charadfer, but they made ufe of them for the F 34 Hijlory of Caricature a?2ci Grotefque the purpote of caricaturing the various occupations of life — domeftic and focial fcenes, grave conferences, and many other lubjefts, and even perfonal charadler. In this dais of caricatures they gave to the pigmies, or dwarfs, very large heads, and very fmall legs and arms. I need hardly remark that this is a clafs of caricature which is very common in modern times. Our hrll group of thefe pigmy caricatures (No. 19) is No. 19 . The Farm-yard in Burlefque. taken from a painting on the walls of the Temple of Venus, at Pompeii, and reprefents the interior of a farm-yard in burlefque. The llrudure in the background is perhaps intended for a hayrick. In front of it, one of the farm fervants is attending on the poultry. The more important- looking perfonage with the pafloral flaff is poffibly the overfeer of the farm, who is vititing the labourers, and this probably is the caufe why their mov'ements have alPumed lb much adivity. The labourer on the right is ufing the ajilla, a wooden yoke or pole, which was carried over the Ihoulder, with the corlis, or balket, fufpended at each end. This was a common method of carrying, and is not unfrequently reprefented on Roman works of art. Several examples might be quoted from the antiquities of Pompeii. Our cut No. 20, from a gem in the Florentine Mufeum, and illullrating another clafs of caricature, that of introducing animals performing the adions and duties of men, reprefents a grafshopper carry ing the qjilla and the corles. A private in Literature and Art. 35 A private boufe in Pompeii furnillied another example of this Pyle of caricature, which is given in our cut No. 21. It reprefents the interior of a painter’s fludio, and is extremely curious on account of the numerous details of his method of operation with which it furnilhes us. 1 he JVg. 21 . ^‘1 Painter':, Studio. painter, who is, like moll of the figures in thefe pigmy caricatures, very fcantily clothed, is occupied with the portrait of another, who, by the rather exaggerated fulnefs of the gathering of his toga, is evidently intended for a dalliing and falliionable patrician, though he is fcated as bare-legged and bare-breeched as the artift himfelf. Both are dillinguilhed by a large allowance of nofe. The eafel here employed refembles greatly the fame article now in ufe, and might belong to the Pudio of a modern painter. Before it is a fmall table, probably formed of a flab of Pone, which lerves for a palette, on which the painter fpreads and mixes his colours. To the right a fervant, who Plls the office of colour- grinder, is feated by the Pde of a veffel placed over hot coals, and appears to be preparing colours, mixed, according to the diredtions given in old writers, with punic wax and oil. In the background is feated a Pudent, whole attention is taken from his drawing by what is going on at the other Pde of the room, where two fmall perfonages are entering, who look as if they were amateurs, and who appear to be talking about the portrait. Behind them Pands a bird, and when the painting was PrP uncovered 36 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque uncovered there were two. ]\Iazois, who made the drawing from which our cut is taken, before the original had perilhed — for it was found in a date of decay — imagined that the birds typified fome well-known fingers or muficians, but they are, perhaps, merely intended for cranes, birds fo generally alfociated with the pigmies. According to an ancient writer, combats of pigmies were favourite reprefentations on the walls of taverns and Ihops ;* and, curioully enough, the walls of a (hop in Pompeii have furnilhed the pidture reprefented in our cut No. 22, which has evidently been intended for a caricature. No. 22 . Vart of a Triumphal Proccjfion. ]wobably a parody. All the pigmies in this pidlure are crowned with laurel, as though the painter intended to turn to ridicule fome over- pompous triumph, or fome public, perhaps religious, ceremony. The tw'o figures to the left, who are clothed in yellow and green garments, appear to be difputing the polTellion of a bowl containing a liquid. One of thefe, like the two figures on the right, has a hoop throwm over his ihoulder. The firfl: of the latter perfonages wears a violet drefs, and holds in his right hand a rod, and in his left a ftatuette, apparently of a deity, * hzi -uiv KaTnjXUov. Problem. Aristotelic. Sec. x. 7. in Literature and Art. 37 deity, but its attributes are not diilinguilliable. The laft figure to the right has a robe, or mantle, of two colours, red and green, and holds in his hand a branch of a lily, or fome fimilar plant ; the rell of the pi£fure is lolf. Behind the other figure flands a fifth, who appears younger and more refined in cliara6ter than the others, and feems to be ordering or direfting them. His drefs is red. We can have no doubt that political and perfonal caricature flourifhed among the Romans, as we have fome examples of it on their works of art, chiefly on engraved fiones, though thefe are moflly of a charafter we could not here conveniently introduce ; but the fame rich mine of Roman art and antiquities, Pompeii, has furnifhed us with one fample of what maybe properly confidered as a political caricature. In the year 59 of the Chriflian era, at a gladiatorial exhibition in the amphitheatre of Pompeii, where the people of Nuceria were prefent, the latter exprefled themfelves in Inch fcornful terms towards the Pompeians, as led to a violent quarrel, which was followed by a pitched battle between the inhabitants of the two towns, and the Nucerians, being defeated, carried their complaints before the reigning emperor, Nero, who gave judgment in their favour, and condemned the people of Pompeii to fufpenfion from all theatrical amufements for ten years. The feelings of the Pompeians on this occafion are difplayed in the rude drawing reprefented in our cut No. 23, which is fcratched on the plafter of the external wall of a houfe in the flreet to which the Italian antiquarians have given the name of the flreet of Mercury. A figure, completely armed, his head covered with what might be taken for a mediaeval helmet, is defcending what appear to be intended for the fleps of the amphitheatre. He carries in his hand a palm-branch, the emblem of viftory. Another palm-branch Hands eredt by his fide, and underneath is the infcription, in rather ruflic Latin, “CAMPANI VICTORIA VNA CVM NVCERINIS PERISTIS”— “O Campa- nians, you perifhed in the viftory together with the Nucerians.” The other fide of the pi6fure is more rudely and haflily drawn. It has been fuppofed to reprefent one of the viftors dragging a prifoner, with his arms bound, up a ladder to a ftage or platform, on which he was perhaps to be exhibited to the jeers of the populace. Four years after this event, Pompeii 38 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotejque Pompeii was greatly damaged by an earthquake, and fixteen years later came the eruption of Vefuvius, which buried the town, and left it in the condition in which it is now found. This curious caricature belongs to a clafs of monuments to which archaeologilts have given technically the Italian name of graffiti, fcratches or fcrawls, of vhich a great number, confifting chiefly of writing, have been found on the walls of Pompeii. They alfo occur among the remains on other Roman lites, and one found in Rome itfelf is efpecially interelt- ing. During the alterations and extenfions which were made from time to time in the palace of the Caefars, it had been found necelPary to build acrofs a narrow llreet which interfedfed the Palatine, and, in order to give fupport to the ftrudture above, a portion of the ftreet was walled off, and remained thus hermetically fealed until about the year 1857, when fome excavations on the fpot brought it to view. The walls of the ftreet were found to be covered with thefe graffiti, among which one attradfed efpecial attention, and, having been carefully removed, is now preferved in the muieum of the Collegio Romano. It is a caricature upon a Chriftian named in Literature and Art. 39 named Alexamenos, by Ibme pagan who delpiled Chriftianity. The Saviour is reprel'ented under the form of a man with the head of an afs, extended upon a crofs, the Chrillian, Alexamenos, {landing on one {ide in the attitude of worlhip of that period. Underneath we read tlie inicrip- tion, AAE3AMENOi§ CEBETE (for atfttTai) ©EON, “Alexamenos worihips God.” This curious figure, which may be placed among the moll intereiling as well as early evidences of the truth of Gofpel hillory, is copied in our cut No. 24. It was drawn when the prevailing religion at Rome was hill pagan, and a Chriftian was an objebl of contempt. 40 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque CHAPTER III. THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE MIDDLE AGES. THE ROMAN MIMI CONTINUED TO EXIST. THE TEUTONIC AFTER- DINNER ENTERTAINMENTS. CLERICAL SATIRES ; ARCHBISHOP HE- RIGER AND THE DREAMER ; THE SUPPER OF THE SAINTS. TRANSI- TION FROM ANCIENT TO MEDIAEVAL ART. TASTE FOR MONSTROUS ANIMALS, DRAGONS, ETC. ; CHURCH OF SAN FEDELE, AT COMO. SPIRIT OF CARICATURE AND LOVE OF GROTESQUE AMONG THE ANGLO-SAXONS. — GROTESQUE FIGURES OF DEMONS. NATURAL TEN- DENCY OF THE EARLY MEDI.BVAL ARTISTS TO DRAW IN CARICATURE. EXAMPLES FROM EARLY MANUSCRIPTS AND SCULPTURES. tranfition from antiquity to what we ufually underftand by the J- name of the middle ages was long and flow; it was a period during which much of the texture of the old fociety was dedroyed, while at the fame time a new life was gradually given to that which remained. We know very little of the comic literature of this period of tranfition ; its literary' remains confid chiefly of a mafs of heavy theology and of lives of faints. The flage ill its perfedlly' dramatic form — theatre and amphitheatre — had dis- appeared. The pure drama, indeed, appears never to have had great vitality among the Romans, whofe taftes lay far more among the vulgar performances of the mimics and jefters, and among the favage fcenes of the amphitheatre. While probably the performance of comedies, fuch as thofe of Plautus and Terence, foon went out of fafliion, and tragedies, like thofe of Seneca, were only written as literary compofitions, imitations of the limilar works which formed fo remarkable a feature in the litera- ture of Greece, the Romans of all ranks loved to witnels the loofe atti- tudes of their mimi, or liften to their equally' loofe fongs and dories. The theatre and the amphitheatre were date inditutions, kept up at the national expenfe, and, as juft dated, they perilhed with the overthrow of the wedern empire ; and the fanguinary' performances of the amphitheatre, if in Literature and Art. 41 if the amphitheatre itfelf continued to be ufed (which was perhaps the cafe in fome parts of weftern Europe), and they gave place to the more harmlefs exhibitions of dancing bears and other tamed animals,* * * § for deliberate cruelty was not a charafteriffic of the Teutonic race. But the mimi, the performers who fung fongs and told dories, accompanied with dancing and mufic, furvived the fall of the empire, and continued to be as popular as ever. St. Auguftine, in the fourth century, calls thefe things nefaria, detefiable things, and fays that they were performed at night.f We trace in the capitularies the continuous exiftence of thefe performances during the ages which followed the empire, and, as in the time of St. Auguftine, they ftill formed the amufement of nofturnal alTemblies. The capitulary of Childebert profcribes thofe who palTed their nights with drunkennefs, jelling, and fongs.]: The council of Narbonne, in the year 589, forbade people to fpend their nights “with dancings and filthy fongs.” § The council of Mayence, in 813, calls thefe fongs “filthy and licentious ” {turpia atque luxuriofa) 5 and that of Paris fpeaks of them as “obfcene and filthy” {obfccena et turpia)-, while in another they are called “frivolous and diabolic.” From the bitternefs with which the ecclefiaftical ordinances are exprelfed, it is probable that thefe performances continued to preferve much of their old paganifm 3 yet it is curious that they are fpoken of in thefe capitularies and a6ts of the councils as being ftill pradtifed in the religious feftivals, and even in the churches, fo tenacioufly did the old fentirnents of the race keep their polTeffion of the minds of the populace, long after they had embraced Chriftianity. Thefe “fongs,” as they are called, continued alfo to confift not only of general, but of perfonal fatire, and contained fcandalous * On this subject, see my “ History of Domestic Manners and Sentiments,” p. 65. The dancing-bear appears to have been a favourite performer among the Germans at a very early period. + Per lotam noctem cantabantur hie nefaria et a cantatoribus saltabatur. Augustini Serm. 311, part v. J Noctes pervigiles cum ebrietate, scurrilitate, vel canticis. See the Capitulary in Labbei Concil , vol. v. § Ut populi saltationibus et turpibus invigilant canticis. G 42 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque fcandalous ftories of perfons living, and well known to thofe who heard them. A capitulary of the Frankilli king Childeric III., publiflred in the year 744, is diredted againft thofe who conipofe and fing fongs in defamation of others (in llafphemiam allerius, to ufe the rather energetic language of the original) j and it is evident that this offence was a very common one, for it is not unfrequently repeated in later records of this charadter in the fame words or in words to the fame purpofe. Thus one refult of the overthrow of the Roman empire was to leave comic literature almoft in the fame condition in which it was found by Thefpis in Greece and by Livius Andronicus in Rome. There was nothing in it which would be contrary to the feelings of the new races who had now planted themfelves in the Roman provinces. The Teutonic and Scandinavian nations had no doubt their popular feffivals, in which mirth and frolic bore fway, though we know little about them ; but there were circumftances in their domeflic manners which implied a necefflty for amufement. After the comparatively early meal, the hall of the primitive Teuton was the fcene — efpecially in the darker months of winter — of long fittings over the feflive board, in which there was much drinking and much talking, and, as we all know, fuch talking could not preferve long a very ferious tone. From Bede’s account of the poet Caedmcn, we learn that it was the pradlice of the Anglo-Saxons in the feventh century, at their entertainments, for all thofe prefent to fing in their turns, each accompanying himfelf with a mufical inftrument. From the fequel of the ftory we are led to fuppofe that thefe fongs were extemporary eff'ufions, probably mythic legends, ftories of perfcnal adventure, praife of themfelves, or vituperation of their enemies. In the chieftain’s houfehold there appears to have been ufually fome individual who adfed the part of the fatiriff, or, as we fhould perhaps now fay, the comedian. Hunferth appears as holding fome fuch pofition in Beowulf j in the later romances. Sir Kay held a fimilar pofition at the court of king Arthur. At a ffill later period, the place of thefe heroes was occupied by the court fool. The Roman mimus mull have been a welcome addition to the entertainments of the Teutonic hall, and there is every reafon to think that he was cordially received. The performances of in Literature and Art. 43 of the hall were foon delegated from the guells to fuch hired aftors, and vve have reprefentations of them m the illuminations of Anglo-Saxon manufcripts.* Among the earlieft amufements of the Anglo-Saxon table were riddles, which in every form prefent fome of the features of the comic, and are capable of being made the fource of much laughter. The iaintly Aldhelm condefcended to write fuch riddles in Latin verfe, which were, of courfe, intended for the tables of the clergy. In primitive fociety, verfe was the ordinary form of conveying ideas. A large portion of the celebrated colledlion of Anglo-Saxon poetry known as the “Exeter Book,” confifts of riddles, and this tafte for riddles has continued to exill down to our own times. But other forms of entertainment, if they did not already exift, were foon introduced. In a curious Latin poem, older than the twelfth century, of which fragments only are preferved, and have been publilhed under the title of “ Ruodlieb,” and which appears to have been a tranflation of a much earlier German romance, we have a curious defcription of the poft-prandial entertainments after the dinner of a great Teutonic chieftain, or king. In the firti place there was a grand dillribution of rich prefents, and then were fliown flrange animals, and among the reft tame bears. Thefe bears flood upon their hind legs, and performed fome of the offices of a man ; and when the minllrels {inimi) came in, and played upon their mufical inftruments, thefe animals danced to the mufic, and performed all forts of ftrange tricks. Et pariles urji Slut -vas tollebant, ut homo, bipedejque gerebant. Mimi quando jides digitis tangunt modulantes, Illi Jaltabant, neumas pedibus vartabant. Inter dum faliunt , fejeque Juper jadebant, Alterutrum dorjo fe portabant reftdendo, Amplexando fe, lu&ando defciunt Je. Then followed dancing-girls, and exhibitions of other kinds.f Although * The reader is referred, for further information on this subject, to my “ History of Domestic Manners and Sentiments,” pp. 33-39- f This curious Latin poem was printed by Grimm and Schmeller, in their Lateinische Gedichte des x. und xi. Jh., p. 129. 44 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque Although thefe performances were profcribed by the ecclefiaftical laws, they were not difcountenanced by the ecclefiaftics themfelves, who, on the contrary, indulged as much in after-dinner amufements as any- body. The laws againfl the profane fongs are often direfted efpecially at the clergy 5 and it is evident that among the Anglo-Saxons, as well as on the Continent, not only the priefts and monks, but the nuns alfo, in their love of fuch amufements, far tranfgrelTed the bounds of decency.* Thefe entertainments were the cradle of comic literature, but, as this literature in the early ages of its hittory was rarely committed to writing, it has almoll entirely periflied. But, at the tables of the ecclefiaftics, thefe ftories were fometimes told in Latin verfe, and as Latin was not fo eafily carried in the memory as the vernacular tongue, in this lan- guage they were fometimes committed to writing, and thus a few examples of early comic literature have fortunately been preferved. Thefe confift chiefly of popular ftories, wdiich were among the favourite amufe- ments of mediaeval fociety — ftories many of which are derived from the earlieft period of the hiftory of our race, and are ftill cherilhed among our peafantry. Such are the ftories of the Child of Snow, and of the Mendacious Hunter, preferved in a manufcript of the eleventh century. t The firft of thefe was a very popular ftory in the middle ages. According to this early verfion, a merchant of Conftance, in Switzerland, was detained abroad for feveral years, during wdiich time his wife made other acquaintance, and bore a child. On his return, flie excufed her fault by telling him that on a cold wintry day flie had fwallowed fnow, by which flie had conceived ; and, in revenge, the hutband carried away the child, and fold it into flavery, and returning, told On the character of the nuns among the Anglo-Saxons, and indeed of the inmates of the monastic houses generally, I would refer my readers to the excellent and interesting volume by Mr. John Thrupp, “ The Anglo-Saxon Home : a History of the Domestic Institutions and Customs of England from the fifth to the eleventh century.” London, 1862. •f These will be found in M. Edelestand du Meril’s Po&ies Populaires Latines anterieures au douzieme siecle, pp. 275, 276. in Literature aiid Art. 45 told its mother, that the infant which had originated in fnow, had melted away under a hotter fun. Some of thefe dories originated in the ditferent colleftions of fables, which were part of the favourite literature of the later Roman period. Another is rather a ridiculous dory of an afs belonging to two dders in a nunnery, which was devoured by a wolf.* It is curious how foon the mediaeval clergy began to imitate their pagan predecedbrs in parodying religious fubjedls and forms, of which we have one or two very curious examples. Vidts to purgatory, hell, and paradife, in body or fpirit, were greatly in falhion during the earlier part of the middle ages, and afforded extremely good material for fatire. In a metrical Latin dory, preferved in a manufcript of the eleventh century, we are told how a “ prophet,” or vidonary, went to Heriger, archbifhop of Mayence from 912 to 926, and told him that he had been carried in a vidon to the regions below, and defcribed them as a place furrounded by thick woods. It was the Teutonic notion of hell, and indeed of all fettlements of peoples ; and Heriger replied with a fneer that he would fend his herdfmen there with his lean fwine to fatten them. Each “ mark,” or land of a family or clan, in the early Teutonic fettlements, was furrounded by woodland, which was common to all members of the clan for fattening their fwine and hunting. The falfe dreamer added, that he was afterwards carried to heaven, where he faw Chrid dtting at the table and eating. John the Baptift was butler, and ferved excellent wine round to the faints, who were the Lord’s gueds. St. Peter was the chief cook. After fome remarks on the appointments to thefe two offices, archbifhop Heriger afked the informant how he was received in the heavenly hall, where he fat, and what he eat. He replied that he fat in a corner, and dole from the cooks a piece of liver, which he eat, and then departed. Indead of rewarding him for his information, Heriger took him on his own confedion for * This, and the metrical story next referreil to, were printed in the “ Altdcutsche Blatter,” edited by Moriz Haupt and Heinrich Hoffmann, vol. i. pp. 390, 392, to whom I communicated them from a manuscript in the University Library at Cambridge. 46 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque for the theft, and ordered him to be bound to a flake and flogged, wdiich, for the offence, was ratlier a light punifhment. Heriger ilium jujj'it ad palum loris ligariy JcopiJque cediy jermone duro hunc arguendo. I’hefe lines will ferve as a fpecimen of the popular Latin verfe in which thefe monkilli after-dinner flories were written j but the moft remarkable of thefe early parodies on religious fubjefts, is one which may be defcribed as the fupper of the faints; its title is Amply Cczna. It is falfely afcribed to St. Cyprian, who lived in the third century; but it is as old as the tenth century, as a copy was printed by profelLor Endliclier from a manufcript of that period at Vienna. It was fo popular, that it is found and known to have exifted in different forms in verfe and in profe. It is a sort of drollery, founded upon the wedding feafi at which the Saviour changed water into wine, though that miracle is not at all introduced into it. It was a great king of the Eafl, named Zoel, who held his nuptial feaft at Cana of Galilee. The perfonages invited are all fcriptural, beginning with Adam. Before the feaft, they walh in the river Jordan, and the number of the guefts was fo great, that feats could not be provided for them, and they took their places as they could. Adam took the Arft place, and feated himfelf in the middle of the affembly, and next to him Eve fat upon leaves {fuper folia), — Ag-leaves, we may fuppofe. Cain fat on a plough, Abel on a milk-pail, Noah on an ark, Japhet on tiles, Abraham on a tree, Ifaac on an altar. Lot near the door, and fo with a long lift of others. Two were obliged to Hand — Paul, who bore it patiently, and Efau, who grumbled — while Job lamented bitterly becaufe he was obliged to At on a dunghill. Mofes, and others, who came late, were obliged to And feats out of doors. When the king faw that all his guefts had arrived, he took them into his wardrobe, and there, in the fpirit of mediaev^al generoAty, diftributed to them dreffes, which had all fome burlefque alluAon to their particular charatlers. Before they were allowed to At down in Literature and Art. 47 down to the feaft, they were obliged to go through other ceremonies, which, as well as the eating, are defcribed in the fame flyle of cari- cature. The wines, of which there was great variety, were ferved to the guefts with the fame allufions to their individual charadters 5 but fome of them complained that they were badly mixed, although Jonah was the butler. In the fame manner are defcribed the proceedings which followed the dinner, the walhing of hands, and the delfert, to the latter of which Adam contributed apples, Samfon honey; while David played on the harp and Mary on the tabor; Judith led the round dance; Jubal played on the pfalter; Afael fung fongs, and Herodias adted the part of the dancing-girl : — Tunc Adam poma minijirat^ Samfon fanji dulcia, Da'vid cytharum percuffit^ et Maria tympana, Judith choreas ducebaty et Jubal pjalteria. Afael metra canebat^ faltabat Herodias. Mambres entertained the company with his magical performances ; and the other incidents of a mediae\al feftival followed, throughout which the fame tone of burlefque is continued ; and fo the ftory continues, to the end.* We lliall find thefe incipient forms of mediaeval comic literature largely developed as we go on. The period between antiquity and the middle ages was one of fuch great and general defirudtion, that the gulf between ancient and mediaeval art feems to us greater and more abrupt than it really was. The want of monuments, no doubt, prevents our feeing the gradual change of one into the other, but neverthelefs enough of fadts remain to convince us that it was not a fudden change. It is now indeed generally underftood that the knowledge and pradtice of the arts and manufadtures of the Romans were handed onward from mafter to pupil after the empire had fallen ; and this took place efpecially in the towns, fo that the workman- Ihip * The text of this singular composition, with a full account of the various forms in which it was published, will be found in M. du M6ri!’s “ Poesies Populaires Latines ant4rieures au douzieme siecle,” p. 193- 48 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque fhip which had been declining in charaifter during the later per'ods of the empire, only continued in the courfe of degradation afterwards. Thus, in the hrft Chriftian edifices, the builders who were employed, or at lead many of them, muff have been pagans, and they would follow their old models of ornamentation, introducing the fame grotefque figures, the fame malks and monftrous faces, and even fometimes the fame fubjedts from the old mythology, to which they had been accuftomed. It is to be obferved, too, that this kind of iconographical ornamentation had been encroaching more and more upon the old architedfural purity during the latter ages of the empire, and that it was employed more profufely in the later works, from which this tafle was transferred to the ecclefiaftical in Literature and Art. 49 ecdefiaftical and to the domeftic architedture of the middle ages. After the workmen themfelves had becom.e Chriftians, they ftill found pagan emblems and figures in their models, and Hill went on imitating them, fometimes merely copying, and at others turning them to caricature or burlefque. And this tendency continued fo long, that, at a much later date, where there ftill exifted remains of Roman buildings, the mediaeval architedts adopted them as models, and did not hefitate to copy the fculpture, although it might be evidently pagan in charadter. The accompanying cut (No. 2 ^) reprefents a bracket in the church of Mont Majour, near Nifmes, built in the tenth century. The fubjeft is a monftrous head eating a child, and we can hardly doubt that it was really intended for a caricature on Saturn devouring one of his children. Sometimes the mediaeval fculptors miftook the emblematical defigns of the Romans, and mifapplied them, and gave an allegorical meaning to that which was not intended to be emblematical or allegorical, until the fubjedts themfelves became extremely confufed. They readily employed that clafs of parody of the ancients in which animals were reprefented performing the adtions of men, and they had a great tafte for monfters of every defcription, efpecially thofe which were made up of portions of incongruous animals joined together, in contradidtion to the precept of Horace Humana capiti cer'vicem piBor equinam Jungere Ji et 'varias inducere plumas^ Undique collath memhris, ut turpiter atruni Dejinet in pijcem mulier formofa Juperne , SpeBatum adtnijfi rijum teneatis^ amici ? The mediaeval architedts loved fuch reprefentations, always and in all parts, and examples are abundant. At Como, in Italy, there is a very ancient and remarkable church dedicated to San Fedele (Saint Fidelis); it has been confidered to be of fo early a date as the fifth century. The fculptures that adorn the doorway, which is triangular-headed, are efpecially interefting. On one of thefe, reprefented in our cut No. 26 , in a compartment to the left, appears a figure of an angel, holding in one hand a dwarf figure, probably intended for a child, by a lock of his hair, and H I Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque. 51 and with the other hand direfting his attention to a feated figure in the compartment below. This latter figure has apparently the head of a fiieep, and as the head is furrounded with a large nimbus, and the right hand is held out in the attitude of benediftion, it may be intended to reprefent the Lamb. This perfonage is feated on fomething which is difficult to make out, but which looks fomewhat like a crab-fith. The boy in the com- partment above carries a large bafin in his arms. The adjoining compart- ment to the right contains the reprefentation of a conflift between a dragon, a winged ferpent, and a winged fox. On the oppofite fide of the door, two winged monfiers are reprefented devouring a lamb’s head. I owe the drawing from which this and the preceding engraving were made to my friend Mr. John Robinfon, the architeft, who made the Iketches while travelling with the medal of the Royal Academy. Figures of dragons, as ornaments, were great favourites with the peoples of the Teutonic race ; they were creatures intimately wrapped up in their national mythology and romance, and they are found on all their artifiic monuments mingled together in grotefque forms and groups. When the Anglo-Saxons began to ornament their books, the dragon was continually introduced for ornamental borders and in forming initial letters. One of the latter, from an Anglo-Saxon manufcript of the tenth century (the well-known manufcript of Caedmon, where it is given as an initial V), is reprefented in our cut on the next page. No. 27. Caricature and burlefque are naturally Intended to be heard and feen publicly, and would therefore be figured on fuch monuments as w'ere mofl; expofed to popular gaze. Such was the cafe, in the earlier periods of the middle ages, chiefly with ecclefiaftical buildings, which explains how they became the grand receptacles of this clafs of Art. We have few traces of what may be termed comic literature among our Anglo- Saxon forefathers, but this is fully explained by the circumftance that very little of the popular Anglo-Saxon literature has been preferved. In their feftive hcmrs the Anglo-Saxons feem to have efpecially amufed themfelves in boafting of what they had done, and what they could do; and thefe boafts were perhaps often of a burlefque charafter, like the gabs of the French and Anglo-Norman romancers of a later date, or lb extravagant 52 Hijloiy of Caricatii7~e and Grotefque extravagant as to produce laughter. The chieftains appear alfo to have encouraged men who could make jokes, and fatirife and caricature others; for the company of fuch men feems to have been cherilhed, and they are not unfrequently introduced in the dories. Such a perfonage, as I have remarked before, is Hunferth in Beowulf; fuch was the Sir Kay of the later Arthurian romances; and fuch too was the Norman minftrel in the hidory of Hereward, who amufed the Norman foldiers at their feads by mimicry of the manners of their Anglo-Saxon opponents. The too perfonal fatire of thefe wits often led to quarrels, which ended in fanguinary brawls. The Anglo-Saxon love of caricature is lliown largely in their proper names, which w'ere modly dgnidcant of perfonal qualities their parents hoped they would pod'efs ; and in thefe we remark the pronenefs of the Teutonic race, as well as the peoples of antiquity, to reprefent thefe qualities by the animals fuppofed to podefs them, the animals mod popular being the wolf and the bear. But it is not to be expedted that the hopes of the parents in giving the name would always be fuldlled, and it is not an uncommon thing to dnd individuals lodng their original names to receive in their place nicknames, or names which probably in Literature and Art. 53 probably exprelfed qualities they did polVels, and which were given to them by their acquaintances. Thefe names, though often not very complimentary, and even fometimes very much the contrary, completely luperfeded the original name, and were even accepted by the individuals to whom they applied. The fecond names were indeed fo generally acknowledged, that they were ufed in ligning legal documents. An Anglo-Saxon abbefs of rank, whofe real name was Hrodwaru, but who was known univerfally by the name Bugga, the Bug, wrote this latter name in figning charters. We can hardly doubt that fuch a name was intended to afcribe to her qualities of a not agreeable charafter, and very different to thofe implied by the original name, which perhaps meant, a dweller in heaven. Another lady gained the name of the Crow. It is well known that furnames did not come into ufe till long after the Anglo-Saxon period, but appellatives, like thefe nicknames, were often added to the name for the purpofe of diffindtion, or at pleafure, and thefe, too, being given by other people, were frequently fatirical. Thus, one Harold, for his fwiftnefs, w'as called Hare-foot ; a well-known Edith, for the elegant form of her neck, was called Swan- neck ; and a Thurcyl, for a form of his head, which can hardly have been called beautiful, was named Mare’s-head. Among many other names, quite as fatirical as the laft-mentioned, we find Flat-nofe, the Ugly, Squint-eye, Hawk-nofe, &c. Of Anglo-Saxon fculpture we have little left, but we have a few illuminated manufcripts which prcfent here and there an attempt at caricature, though they are rare. It would feem, however, that the two favourite fubjedfs of caricature among the Anglo-Saxons were the clergy and the evil one. We have abundant evidence that, from the eighth century downwards, neither the Anglo-Saxon clergy nor the Anglo- Saxon nuns were generally objedfs of much refpedt among the people ; and their charadfer and the manner of their lives fufficiently account for it. Perhaps, alfo, it was increafed by the hollility between the old clergy and the new reformers of Dunffan’s party, who would no doubt caricature each other. A manufcript pfalter, in the Univerfity Library, Cambridge (Ff. i, 23), of the Anglo-Saxon period, and apparently of the tenth 54 Hijloiy of Caricature and Grotefque tenth century, illuftrated with rather grotefque initial letters, furnifhes us with the figure of a jolly Anglo-Saxon monk, given in our cut No. 28, and which it is hardly neceflary to Hate reprefents the letter Q. As we proceed, we fiiall fee the clergy continuing to furnifii a butt for the fliafts ot fatire through all the middle ages. The inclination to give to the demons (the middle ages always looked upon them as innumerable) monftrous forms, which eafily ran into the grotefque, was natural, and the painter, indeed, prided himfelf on drawing them ugly ; but he was no doubt influenced in fo generally caricaturing them, by mixing up this idea with thole furnilhed by the popular fuper- llitions of the Teutonic race, who believed in multitudes of fpirits, repre- fentatives of the ancient fatyrs, who were of a playfully malicious defcription, and went about plaguing mankind in a very droll manner, and fometimes appeared to them in equally droll forms. They w'ere the Pucks and Robin Goodfellows of later times; but the Chriftian milTionaries to the well: taught their converts to believe, and probably believed them- felves, that all thefe imaginary beings w'ere real demons, who wandered over the earth for people’s ruin and deftrudtion. Thus the grotefque imagination of the converted people was introduced into the Chriftian fyftem of demonolog)^ It is a part of the fubjed to which we lhall return m our next chapter ; but I will here introduce two examples of tJie in Literature and Art. 55 the Anglo-Saxon demons. To explain the hr(l of thefe, it will be neceliary to hate that, according to the mediaeval notions, Satan, the arch demon, who had fallen from heaven for his rebellion againll the Almighty, was not a free agent who went about tempting mankind, but he was himfelf plunged in the abyfs, where he was held in bonds, and tormented by the demons who peopled the infernal regions, and alto itfued thence to feek their prey upon God’s neweft creation, the earth. The hihory of Satan’s fall, and the defcription of his pofition (No. 29), form the fubjedt of the earlier part of the Anglo-Saxon poetry afcribed to Caedmon, and it is one of the illuminations to the manufcript of Caedmon (which is now preferved at Oxford), which has furnilhed us with our cut. reprefenting Satan in his bonds. The fiend is here pidured bound to flakes, over what appears to be a gridiron, while one of the demons, riling out of a fiery furnace, and holding in his hand an infirument of puniihment, feems to be exulting over him, and at the fame time urging on the troop of grotefque imps who are fwarming round and tormenting their vidim. The next cut. No. 30, is alfo taken from an Anglo-Saxon manufcript 56 Hi/iory oj Caricature and Grotefque manulcript, prelerved in the Britilh Mufeum (MS. Cotton., Tiberius, C.vi.), which belongs to the earlier halt of the eleventh century, and contains a copy of the pfalter. It gives us the Anglo-Saxon notion of the demon under another form, equally charadteritlic, wearing only a girdle of flames, but in this cafe the efpecial fingularity ot the detign contifls in the eyes in the fiend’s wings. Another circumftance had no doubt an in- fluence on the mediaeval tafte for grotefque and caricature — the natural rudenefs of early mediaeval art. The writers of antiquity tell us of a remote period of Grecian art when it was neceffary to write under each figure of a pidture the name of what it was intended to reprefent, in order to make the whole intelligible — “ this is a horfe,” “this is a man,” “this is a tree.” Without being quite fo rude as this, the early mediaeval artifts, through ignorance of perfpedfive, want of know- ledge of proportion, and of Ikill in drawing, found great difficulty in reprefenting a fcene in which there was more than one figure, and in which it was neceffary to diftinguilli them from each other; and they were continually trying to help themfelves by adopting conventional forms or conventional pofitions, and by fometimes adding fymbols that did not exatfly reprefent what they meant. The exaggeration in form confifted chiefly in giving an undue prominence to fome charadferiffic feature, which anfwered the fame purpofe as the Anglo-Saxon nickname and dif- tindfive name, and which Is, in fadf, one of the firfl; principles of all cari- cature. Conventional pofitions partook much of the charadter of conventional forms, but gave fiill greater room for grotefque. Thus the very til ft charadferiflics of mediaeval art implied the exiftence of caricature, and no doubt led to the tafte for the grotefque. The effedl of this influence in Literature and Art. 57 influence is apparent everywhere, and in innumerable cafes ferious pidures of the graveft and moft important fubjeds are limply and abfolutely caricatures. Anglo-Saxon art ran much into this flyle, and is often very grotefque in charader. The firft example we give (cut No. 31) is taken from one of the illuftrations to Alfric’s Anglo- Saxon verlion of the Pentateuch, in the profufely illuminated manufcript in the Britilh Mufeum (MS. Cotton., Claudius B iv.), which was written at the end of the tenth, or beginning of the eleventh, century. It reprefents the temptation and fall of man ; and the fubjed is treated, as will be feen, in a rather grotefque manner. Eve is evidently didating to her hufband, who, in obeying her, iBows a mixture of eagernefs and trepidation Adam is no lefs evidently going to fwallow the apple whole, which is, perhaps, in accordance with the mediaeval legend, according to which the fruit ftuck in his throat. It is hardly necelfary to remark that the tree is entirely a conventional one ; and it would be difficult to imagine how it came to bear apples at all. The mediaeval artifts were extremely unfldlful in drawing trees ; to thefe they ufually gave the forms of cabbages, or fome fuch plants, of which the form was Ample, or often of a mere bunch of leaves. Our next example (cut No. 32 ) is alfo I Anglo- 58 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque Anglo-Saxon, and is furnillied by the manufcript in the Britilh Mufeum already naentioned (MS. Cotton., Tiberius C vi.) It probably reprefents young David killing the lion, and is remarkable not only for the ftrange pollure and bad proportions of the man, but for the tranquillity of the animal and the exaggerated and violent aftion of its flayer. This is very commonly the cafe in the mediaeval drawings and fculptures, the artills apparently polTefling far lefs iBill in reprefenting adlion in an animal than in man, and therefore more rarely attempting it. Thefe illutirations are both taken from illuminated manufcripts. The two which follow are furnilhed by fculptures, and are of a rather later date than the preceding. The abbey of St. George of Bofcherville, in the diocefe of Auxerre (in Normandy)", was founded by Ralph de Tancarville, one of the minifters of William the Conqueror, and therefore in the latter half of the eleventh century. A hiftory of this religious houfe was publilhed by a clever local antiquary — M. Achille Deville — from whofe work we take our cut No. 33, No. 32 . David and the Lion. one in Literature and Art. 59 one of a few rude fculptures on the abbey church, which no doubt belonged to the original fabric. It is not difficult to recognife the fubjedt as Jofeph taking the Virgin Mary with her Child into Egypt 5 but there IS fomething exceedingly droll m the unintentional caricature of the faces, as well as in the whole defign. The Virgin Mary appears without a nimbus, while the nimbus of the Infant Jefus is made to look very like a bonnet. It may be remarked that this fubjedt of the flight into Egypt is by no means an uncommon one in mediaeval art ; and a drawing of the fame fubjedt, copied in my “ Hiftory of Domeftic Manners and Sentiments” (p. 1 15), prefen ts a remarkable illuftration of the contrail of the Ikill of a Norman fculptor and of an almoft contemporary Anglo- Norman illuminator. Our cut alfo furniflies us with evidence of the error of the old opinion that ladies rode aftride in the middle ages. Even one, who by his ftyle of art mull have been an obfcure local carver on ftone, when he reprefented a female on horfeback, placed her in the polition which has always been confidered fuitable to the fex. For 6o Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque For the drawing of the other fculpture to which I allude, I am indebted to Mr. Robinfon. It is one of the fubjedts carved on the facade of the church of St. Gilles, near Nifmes, and is a work of the twelfth century. It appears to reprefent the young David flaying the giant Goliah, the latter fully armed in fcale armour, and with tliield No, 34 . Da'vid and Goliah, and fpear, like a Norman knight ; while to David the artift has given a figure which is feminine in its forms. What we might take at firfl: fight for a balket of apples, appears to be meant for a fupply of ftones for the lling which the young hero carries fufpended from his neck. He has llain the giant with one of thefe, and is cutting off his head with his own fword. in Literature and Art. 6i CHAPTER JV. THE DIABOLICAL IN CARICATURE. MEDIEVAL LOVE OF THE LUDICROUS. CAUSES WHICH MADE IT INFLUENCE THE NOTIONS OF DEMONS. STORIES OF THE PIOUS PAINTER AND THE ERRING MONK. DARKNESS AND UGLINESS CARICATURED. — THE DEMONS IN THE MIRACLE PLAYS. THE DEMON OF NOTRE DAME. S I have already liated in the laft chapter^ there can be no doubt that the whole lyftein of the demonology of the middle ages was derived from the older pagan mythology. The demons of the monkith legends were limply the elves and hobgoblins of our forefathers, who haunted woods, and fields, and waters, and delighted in milleading or plaguing mankind, though their mifchief was ufually of a rather mirthful charadter. They were reprefented m clallical mythology by the fauns and fatyrs, who had, as we have feen, much to do with the birth of comic literature among the Greeks and Romans j but thefe Teutonic elves were more ubiquitous than the fatyrs, as they ev^en haunted men’s houfes, and played tricks, not only of a mifchievous, but of a very familiar charafter. The Chriftian clergy did not look upon the perfonages of the popular fuper- flitions as fabulous beings, but they taught that they were all diabolical, and that they were lb many agents of the evil one, conllantly employed in enticing and entrapping mankind. Hence, in the mediaeval legends, we frequently find demons prefenting themfelves under ludicrous forms or in ludicrous lituations ; or performing atts, fuch Us eating and drinking, which are not in accordance with their real charadter; or at times even letting themfelves be outwitted or entrapped by mortals in a very undignified manner. Although they alfumed any form they pleafed, their natural form was remarkable chiefly for being extremely ugly; one of them, which appeared in a wild wood, is defcribed by Giraldus Cambrenlis, who wrote at the end of the twelfth century, as being hairy. fl'aggy. 62 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque 3nd rough, and monftroully deformed.* According to a mediaeval dory, wliich was told in different forms, a great man’s cellar was once haunted by thefe demons, who drank all his wine, while the owmer was totally at a lofs to account for its rapid difappearance. After many unfuccefsful attempts to difcover the depredators, fome one, probably fufpedting the truth, fuggelled that he lliould mark one of the barrels with holy water, and next morning a demon, much refembling the defcription given by Giraldus, was found ftuck fall: to the barrel. It is told alfo ot Edward the Confeffor, that he once went to fee the tribute called the Danegeld, and it was fliown to him all packed up in great barrels ready to be fent away — for this appears to have been the ufual mode of tranfporting large quantities of money. The faintly king had the faculty of being able to fee fpiritual beings — a fort of fpiritual fecond- ■* “ Formam quandam viliosam, hispidani, et hir.sutam, adeoque enormiter detormein.” Girald. Camb., Itiner. Camb., lib. i. c. 5. in Literature and Art. 63 fight — and he beheld ieated on the largeft barrel, a devil, who was “ black and hideous.” Vit un de'ahle faer defus Le trejor, noir et hidus , — Life of S. Edward, I. 944, An early illuminator, in a raanufcnpt preferved in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge (MS. Trin. Col., B x. 2), has left us a pidtorial reprefentation of this fcene, from which I copy his notion of the form of the demon in cut No. 35. The general idea is evidently taken from the figure of the goat, and the relationfhip between the demon and the clalfical fatyr is very evident. Uglinels was an eJffential charadleriftic of the demons, and, moreover, their features have ufually a mirthful caft, as though they greatly enjoyed their occupation. There is a mediaeval ftory of a young monk, who was facriftan to an abbey, and had the diredtions of the building and orna- mentation. The carvers of Hone were making admirable reprefentations of hell and paradife, in the former of which the demons “ feemed to take great delight in well tormenting their vidtims ” — S^ui par femhiant fe delltoit En ce que bien les tormentoit* The facriftan, who watched the fculptors every day, was at laft moved by pious zeal to try and imitate them, and he fet to work to make a devil himfelf, with fuch fuccefs, that his fiend was lb black and ugly that nobody could look at it without terror. Tant qii'un deable a fere empr 'iji ; Si i mijl Ja poine et fa cure, ^ue la forme fu ft ojcure Et f laide, que cil doutaji ^lue entre deus oUx V ejgardaft. The facriftan, encouraged by his fuccefs — for it muft be underftood that his art was a fudden infpiration (as he had not been an artift before) — continued his work till it was completed, and then “ it was fo horrible and fo ugly, that all who faw it affirmed upon their oaths that they had never 64 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque never feen fo ugly a figure either in fculpture or in painting, or one which had fo repulfive an appearance, or a devil which w^as a better likeneft than the one this monk had made for them ” — S\ horribles fu et fi ^lue treJlou% cels que le veoient ^cur leur jerement afermoient Oonques mh fi laide figure^ Ne en taille ne en peintiire^ N'a'uoient d nul jor 'veue^ ^ui fi eiijl laide oje'ue^ Ne de'able miex contrefit ^^e cil moines leur anjoit fet . — Meon’s Fabliaux, tom. ii. p. 414. The demon himlelf now took offence at the affront which had been put upon him, and appearing the night following to the facriftan, reproached him with having made him fo ugly, and enjoined him to break the fculpture, and execute another reprefenting him better looking, on pain of very fevere punithment ; but, although this vilit was repeated thrice, the pious monk refuted to comply. The evil one now began to work in another way, and, by his cunning, he drew the facriftan into a difgraceful amour with a lady of the neighbourhood, and they plotted not only to elope together by night, but to rob the monaftery of its treafure, which was of courfe in the keeping of the facriftan. They were difeovered, and caught in their flight, laden with the treafure, and the unfaithful facriftan was thrown into prifon. The fiend now appeared to him, and promifed to clear him out of all his trouble on the mere condition that he Ihould break his ugly ftatue, and make another reprefenting him as looking handfome — a bargain to which the facriftan acceded without further hefitation. It would thus appear that the demons did not like to be reprefented ugly. In this cafe, the fiend immediately took the form and place of the facriftan, while the latter went to his bed as if nothing had happened. When the other monks found him there next morning, and heard him difclaim all knowledge of the robbery or of the prifon, they hurried to the latter place, and found the devil in chains-, who, when they attempted to exorcife him, behaved in a very turbulent manner, and difappeared m Literature ajid Art. 65 difappeared from their fight. The monks believed that it was all a deception of the evil one, while tVie facriftan, who was not inclined to brave his difpleafure a fecond time, performed faithfully his part of the contradt, and made a devil who did not look ugly. In another verfion of the ftory, however, it ends differently. After the third warning, the monk went in defiance of the devil, and made his pidlure uglier than ever; in revenge for which the demon came unexpeftedly and broke the ladder on which he was mounted at his work, whereby the monk would undoubtedly have been killed. But the Virgin, to whom he was much devoted, came to his afliflance, and, feizing him with her hand, and holding him in the air, difappointed the devil of his purpofe. It is this latter denouement which is reprefented in the cut No. 36, taken from the celebrated manufcript in the Britith Mufeum known as “ Queen Mary’s Pfalter” (MS. Reg. •z B vii.). The two demons employed here prefent, well defined, the air of mirthful jollity which was evidently derived from the popular hobgoblins. There was another popular tlory, which alfo was told under feveral K forms. 66 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque forms. The old Norman hiftorians tell it of their duke Richard Sanf- Peur. There was a monk of the abbey of St. Ouen, who alfo held the office of facritlan, but, neglefting the duties of his pofition, entered into an intrigue with a lady who dwelt in the neighbourhood, and was accuf- tomed at night to leave the abbey fecretly, and repair to her. His place as lacrillan enabled him thus to leave the houfe unknown to the other brethren. On his way, he had to pafs the little river Robec, by means of a plank or wmoden bridge, and one night the demons, who had been w^atching him on his errand of fin, caught him on the bridge, and threw him over into the water, where he was drowned. One devil feized his foul, and would have carried it away, but an angel came to claim him on account of his good adtions, and the difpute ran fo high, that duke Richard, whofe piety was as great as his courage, was called in to decide it. The fame manufcript from which our lafi: cut was taken has furnifiied our cut No. 37, which reprefents two demons tripping up the monk, and throwing him very unceremonioufly into the river. The body of one of the demons here affiimes the form of an animal, inftead of taking, like the other, that of a man, and he is, moreover, furnifiied with a dragon’s wings. There was one verfion of this ftory, in which it found its place among the legends of the Virgin Mary, inftead of thofe of duke Richard. The monk, in fpite of his failings, had been a conftant worlhipper in Literature and Art. 67 worfliipper of the Virgin, and, as he was falling from the bridge into the river, the Hepped forward to proteft him from his perfecutors, and taking hold of him with her hand, faved him from death. One of the compart- ments of the rather early wall-paintings in Winchetler Cathedral reprefents the fcene according to this verlion of the llory, and is copied in our cut No. 38. The tiends here take more fantalfic llrapes than we have prevloudy feen given to them. They remind us already of the infinitely varied grotefque forms which the painters of the age of the Renaiffance crowded together in fuch fubjefts as “ The Temptation of St. Anthony.” In fa6t these ftrange notions of the forms of the demons were not only preferved through the whole period of the middle ages, but are Hill hardly extinft. They appear in almofl; exaggerated forms in the illuftrations to books of a popular religious charafter which appeared in the firfl ages of printing. I may quote, as an example, one of the cuts of an early and very rare block-book, entitled the Ars Morimdi, or “Art of Dying,” or, in a fecond title, Z)e Tentationihus Morientium, on the temptations to which dying men are expofed. The fcene, of which a part is given in the 68 Hiftory of Caricature a?id Grotefque the annexed cut (No. 39), is in the room of the dying man, whofe bed is fur- rounded by three demons, who are come to tempt him, while his relatives of both fexes are looking on quite unconfcious of their prefence. The figures of thefe demons are particularly grotefque, and their ugly features betray a degree of vulgar cunning which adds not a little to this effedl. The one leaning over the dying man fuggells to him the words exprelfed in the label ilTuing from his mouth, Provideas amicis, “ provide for your friends while the one whofe head appears to the left whifpers to him. Yntende thefanro, “think of your treafure.” The dying man feems grievoufly perplexed with the various thoughts thus fuggefted to him. Why did the mediaev'al Chritlians think it neceflary to make the devils black and ugly? The tirft reply to this quelfion which prefents itfelf is, that the charadleriftics intended to be reprefented were the blacknefs and uglinefs of fin. This, however, is only partially the explanation of the faft ; for there can be no doubt that the notion was a popular one, and that it had previoutly exifted in the popular mythology; and, as has been already remarked, the uglinefs exhibited by them is a vulgar, mirthful uglinefs, which makes you laugh inftead of fliudder. Another fcene, from hi Literature and Art. 69 from the interefting drawings at the foot of the pages in “ Queen Mary’s Pfalter,” is given in our cut No. 40. It reprefents that mod; popular of mediaeval piftures, and, at the fame time, mod remarkable of literal interpretations, hell mouth. The entrance to the infernal regions was always reprefented pidlorially as the mouth of a mondrous animal, where the demons appeared leaving and returning. Here they are feen bringing the dnful fouls to their lad dedinaticn, and it cannot be denied that they are doing the work right merrily and jovially. In our cut No. 41, from the manufcript in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge, which furnilhed a former fubjedl, three demons, who appear to be the guardians of the entrance to the regions below — for it is upon the brow above the mondrous mouth that they are danding— prefent varieties of the diabolical form. The one in the middle is the mod remarkable, for he has wings not only on his diouiders, but alfo on his knees and heels. All three have horns j in fact, the three fpecial charadteridics of mediaeval demons were horns, hoofs — or, at lead, the feet of beads, — and tails, which fudiciently indicate the fource from which the popular notions of thefe beings were derived. In the cathedral of Treves, there is a mural painting by William of Cologne, a painter of the fifteentb century, which reprefents 70 mjiory of Caricature and Grotefque reprefents the entrance to the fliades, the monftrous mouth, with its keepers, in hill more grotefque forms. Our cut No. 42 gives but a fmall portion of this pidture, in which the porter of the regions of punilli- ment is fitting afiride the fnout of the monflrous mouth, and is founding with a trumpet what may be fuppofed to be the call for thofe who are condemned. Another minftrel of the fame ftamp, fpurred, though not booted, fits afiride the tube of the trumpet, playing on the bagpipes; and the found which ifiues from the former inftrument is reprefented by a hofi of fmaller imps who are fcattering themfelves about. It mufi not be fuppofed that, in fubjedts like thefe, the drollery of the fcene was accidental ; but, on the contrary, the mediaeval artifis and No. 41 . The Guardians of Hell Mouth, popular writers gave them this charadter purpofely. The demons and the executioners — the latter of whom were called in Latin tortores, and in popular old Englilh phrafeology the “ tormentours ” — were the comic charadters of the time, and the fcenes in the old myfieries or religious plays in which they were introduced were the comic fcenes, or farce, ot the in Literature and Art. 71 the piece. The love of burlefqiie and caricature was, indeed, fo deeply planted in the popular mind, that it was found neceffary to introduce them even in pious works, in which fuch fcenes as the daughter of the innocents, where the “knights” and the women abufed each other in vulgar language, the treatment of Chrili at the time of His trial, fome parts of the fcene of the crucifixion, and the day of judgment, were elTentially comic. The lafl: of thefe fubjedls, efpecially, was a fcene of mirth, becaufe it often confided throughout of a coarfe fatire on the vices of the age, efpecially on thofe which were moft obnoxious to the populace, fuch as the pride and vanity of the higher ranks, and the extortions and frauds of ufurers, bakers, taverners, and others. In the play of “Juditium,” or the day of doom, in the “ Towneley Myfteries,” one of the earlieft colledlions of myfteries in the Englifli language, the whole converfation among the demons is exadly of that joking kind which we might expedt from their countenances in the pittures. When one of them appears carrying a bag full of different offences, another, his companion, is fo joyful at this circumftance, that he fays it makes him laugh till he is out Ao 42. The Trumpeter of E'vil. of 72 Hiflory of Caricature and Grotefqiie of breath, or, in other words, till he is ready to burft j and, while alking if anger be not among the tins he had colledted, propofes to treat him with fomething to drink — Primus deemon. Peafze, I pray the, he fiille ; I laghe that I kynke. Is oghte ire in thi bille ? and then Jalle thou drynke . — Towneley Mysteries, p. 309. And in the continuation of the converfation, one telling of the events which had preceded the announcement of Doomfday says, rather jeeringly, and fomewhat exultingly, “ Souls came fo thick now of late to hell, that our porter at hell gate is ever held fo clofe at work, up early and down late, that he never refts ” — Saules cam Jo thyk no'iv late unto helle^ As enjer Oure porter at helle gate Is halden Jo JlratCy Up erly and do%vne latCy He ryjlys ne'ver^ — H\, p. 314. With fuch popular notions on the fubjeft, we have no reafon to be furprifed that the artids of the middle ages frequently chofe the figures of demons as objefts on which to exercife their Ikill in burlefque and carica- ture, that they often introduced grotefque figures of their heads and bodies in the fculptured ornamentation of building, and that they prefented them in ludicrous lituations and attitudes in their pidtures. They are often brought in as fecondary adfors in a pidlure in a ver)" fingular manner, of which an excellent example is furnifhed by the beautifully illuminated manufcript known as “ Queen Mary’s Pfalter,” which is copied in our cut No. 43. Nothing is more certain than that in this inftance the intention of the artifi; was perfedUy ferious. Eve, under the influence of a rather Angularly formed ferpent, having the head of a beautiful woman and the body of a dragon, is plucking the apples and offering them to Adam, who is preparing to eat one, with evident hefitation and reludfance. But three demons, downright hobgoblins, appear as fecondary adfors in the fcene, who exercife an influence upon the principals. One is patting Eve on the in Literature and Art. 73 the fhoulder, with an air of approval and encouragement, while a fecond, with wings, is urging on Adam, and apparently laughing at his appre- henfions ; and a third, in a very ludicrous manner, is preventing him from drawing back from the trial. In all the delineations of demons we have yet feen, the ludicrous is the fpirit which chiefly predominates, and in no one inflance have we had a figure which is really demoniacal. The devils are droll but not frightful ; they provoke laughter, or at leaft excite a fmile, but they create no horror. Indeed, they torment their vidtims fo good-humouredly, that we hardly feel for them. There is, however, one well-known inflance in which the mediaeval artifl has fhown himfelf fully fuccefsful in reprefenting the features of the fpirit of evil. On the parapet of the external gallery of the cathedral church of Notre Dame in Paris, there is a figure in flone, of the ordinary ftature of a man, reprefenting the demon, apparently looking with fatisfadlion upon the inhabitants of the city as they were everywhere indulging in fin and wickednefs. We give a fketch of this figure in our cut No. 44. The unmixed evil — horrible in its L 74 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque its expreflion in this countenance — is marvelloufly portrayed. It is an abfolute Mephiftophiles, carrying in his features a ftrange mixture of hateful qualities — malice, pride, envy — in fa6t, all the deadly fins combined in one diabolical whole. in Literature aJid Art. 75 CHAPTER V. EMPLOYMENT OF ANIMALS IN MEDIEVAL SATIRE, POPULARITY OF FABLES; ODO DE CIRINGTON. REYNARD THE FOX. BUIINELLUS AND FAUVEL. THE CHARIVARI. — LE MONDE BESTORNE. ENCAUSTIC TILES. SHOEING THE GOOSE, AND FEEDING PIGS WITH ROSES. SATIRICAL SIGNS ; THE MUSTARD MAKER. people of the middle ages appear to have been great admirers JL of animals, to have obferved clofely their various cltaradters and peculiarities, and to have been fond of domefticating them. They foon began to employ their peculiarities as means of fatirifing and caricaturing mankind; and among the literature bequeathed to them by the Romans, they received no book more eagerly than the “ Fables of iEfop,” and the other colledlions of fables which were publiihed under the empire. We find no traces of fables among the original literature of the German race ; but the tribes who took poffelfion of the Roman provinces no fooner became acquainted with the fables of the ancients, than they began to imitate them, and ftories in which animals adled the part of men were multiplied immenfely, and became a very important branch of mediaeval fidtion. Among the Teutonic peoples efpecially, thefe fables often aflimied very grotefque forms, and the fatire they convey is very amufing. One of the earlieft of thefe colledtions of original fables was compofed by an Engliih ecclefiailic named Odo de Cirington, who lived in the time of Henry H. and Richard I. In Odo’s fables, we find the animals figuring under the fame popular names by which they were afterwards fo well known, fuch as Reynard for the fox, Ifengrin for the wolf, Teburg for the cat, and the like. Thus the fubjedl of one of them is “ Ifengrin made Monk ” {de Ifengrino monacho). “Once,” we are told, “ Ifengrin defired to be a monk. By dint of fervent fupplications, he obtained the confent of the chapter, ?6 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefqiie chapter, and received the tonfure, the cowl, and the other infignia of nicnachil'm. At length they put him to fchool, and he was to learn the ‘ Paternofter,’ but he always replied, ‘ lamb ’ {agnus) or 'ram’ {aries). The monks taught him that he ought to look upon the crucifix and upon the facrament, but he ever direfled his eyes to the lambs and rams.” The fable is droll enough, but the moral, or application is ftill more grotefque. “Such is the conduft of many of the monks, whofe only cry is ‘ aries,’ that is, good wine, and who have their eyes always fixed on fat flefli and their platter ; whence the faying in Englilh — They thou the 'vulf here hod to prejlcy they thou him to fhle Je’te Jaimes to lerne^ he'vere bet hife geres to the gro've grenef'' Though thou the hoary *zvolf ccnfecrate to a priefly though thou put him to fchool to learn PjalmSy e'ver are his ears turned to the green grove. Thefe lines are in the alliterative verfe of the Anglo-Saxons, and Ihow that Inch fables had already found their place in the popular poetry of the Englilh people. Another of thefe fables is entitled “ Of the Beetle ifcral-o) and his Wife.” “ A beetle, flying through the land, palTed among moll beautiful blooming trees, through orchards and among rofes and lilies, in the mofl lovely places, and at length threw himfelf upon a dunghill among the dung of horfes, and found there his wife, who alked him a\hence he came. And the beetle faid, ‘I have flown all round the earth and through it ; I have feen the fiowers of almonds, and lilies, and rofes, but I have feen no place fo pleafant as this,’ pointing to the dung- hill.” The application is equally droll with the former and equally un- complimentary to the religious part of the community. Odo de Cirington tells us that, “ Thus many of the clergy, monks, and laymen lifien to the lives of the fathers, pafs among the lilies of the virgins, among the rofes of the martyrs, and among the violets of the confellbrs, yet nothing ever appears fo pleafant and agreeable as a flrumpet, or the tavern, or a finging party, though it is but a ftinking dunghill and congregation of finners.” Popular fculpture and painting were but the tranflation of popular literature, and nothing was more common to reprefent, in pidlures and carvings. in Literature and Art. 77 carvings, than individual men under the forms of the animals who difplayed fimilar charadters or limilar propenfities. Cunning, treachery, and intrigue were the prevailing vices of the middle ages, and they were thofe alfo of the fox, who hence became a favourite charafter in fatire. The vidory of craft over force always provoked mirth. The fabulilts, or, we Ihould perhaps rather fay, the fatirifls, foon began to extend their canvas and enlarge their pidture, and, inftead of tingle examples of fraud or injuttice, they introduced a variety of charadters, not only foxes, but wolves, and flieep, and bears, with birds alfo, as the eagle, the cock, and the crow, and mixed them up together in long narratives, w’hich thus formed general fatires on the vices of contemporary fociety. In this manner originated the celebrated romance of “ Reynard the Fox,” which in various forms, from the twelfth century to the eighteenth, has enjoyed a popularity which was granted probably to no other book. The plot of this remarkable fatire turns chiefly on the long flruggle between the brute force of Ifengrin the Wolf, poffelTed only with a fmall amount of intelligence, which is eafily deceived — under which charafter is prefented the powerful feudal baron — and the craftinefs of Reynard the Fox, who reprefents the intelligent portion of fociety, which had to hold its ground by its wits, and thefe were continually abufed to evil purpofes. Reynard is fwayed by a conllant impulfe to deceive and vidimife everybody, whether friends or enemies, but efpecially his uncle Ifengrin. It was fomewhat the relationfliip between the ecclefiaflical and baronial ariftocracy. Reynard was educated in the fchools, and intended for the clerical order ; and at different times he is reprefented as ading under the difguife of a priefl, of a monk, of a pilgrim, or even of a prelate of the church. Though frequently reduced to the greatefl firaits by the power of Ifengrin, Reynard has generally the better of it in the end : he robs and defrauds Ifengrin continually, outrages his wife, who is half in alliance with him, and draws him into all forts of dangers and fufferings, for which the latter never fucceeds in obtaining juftice. The old fculptors and artifts appear to have preferred exhibiting Reynard in his ecclefiaflical difguifes, and in thefe he appears often in the ornamentation of mediaeval architedural fculpture, in wood-carvings, in the Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque 78 the illuminations of' manufcripts, and in other objefts of art. The popular feeling againll the clergy was ftrong in the middle ages, and no caricature was received with more favour than thofe which expofed the immorality or dilhonelly of a monk or a priell. Our cut No. 45 is taken from a fculpture in the church of Chriftchurch, in Hamplhire, for the drawing of which I am indebted to my friend, Jtlr. Llewellynn Jewitt. It reprefents Reynard in the pulpit preaching ; behind, or rather perhaps belide him, a diminutive cock Hands upon a ftool — in modern times we Ihould be inclined to fay he was adting as clerk. Reynard’s coftume confifls merely of the ecclefiatlical hood or cowl. Such fubjefts are frequently found on the carved feats, or mifereres, in the Halls of the old cathedrals and collegiate churches. The painted glafs of the great window of the north crofs-aille of St. Marlin’s church in Leiceller, which w'as deflroyed in the lall century, reprefented the fox, in the charadter of an ecclefiaHic, preaching to a addrefling them in the words — Teflis ejl mihi Deus, tjuam cupiam vos omnes vifceribus meis (God is witnefs. how I defire you all in my bowels), a parody on the words of the New Teflament.* Our cut No. 46 is taken from one of the mifereres in the church of St. ISIary, at Beverley, in Yorkfliire. Two foxes are reprefented in the difguife of ecclefiallics, each furnilhed with a paftoral Haff, and they appear to be receiving inflrudtions from a prelate or perfonage of rank — perhaps they are undertaking a pilgrimage of penance. But their fincerity is rendered fomewhat doubtful by the geefe concealed in their hoods. congregation of geefe, and * An engraving of t’ni« scene, modernised in character, is given in Nichols’s “ Leicestershire,” vol. i. plate 43. in Literature and Art. 79 hoods. In one of the incidents of the romance of Reynard, the hero enters a monaftery and becomes a monk, in order to efcape the wrath of King Noble, the lion. For fome time he made an outward Ihow of fandtity and felf-privation, but unknown to his brethren he fecretly helped himfelf freely to the good things of the monaftery. One day he obferved, with longing lips, a melfenger who brought four fat capons as a prefent from a lay neighbour to the abbot. That night, when all the monks had retired to reft, Reynard obtained admiffion to the larder, regaled himfelf with one of the capons, and as foon as he had eaten it, truftTed the three others on his back, efcaped fecretly from the abbey, and, throwing away his monaftic garment, hurried home with his prey. We might almoft imagine our cut No. 47, taken from one of the Halls of the church of Nantwich, in Chelhire, to have been intended to reprefent this incident, or, at leaft, a fimilar one. Our next cut. No. 48, is 8o Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque is taken from a Hall in the church of Bofton, in Lincolnflfire. A prelate, equally falfe, is featecl in his chair, with a mitre on his head, and the jjalloral ftaif in his right hand. His flock are reprefented by a cock and hens, the former of which he holds fecurely with his right hand, while he appears to be preaching to them. Another mediaeval fculpture has furniflied events for a rather curious hitlory, at the fame time that it is a good illullration of our fubjedf. Odo de Cirington, the fabulill, tells us how, one day, the wolf died, and the lion called the animals together to celebrate his exequies. The hare carried the holy water, hedgehogs bore the candles, the goats rang the bells, the moles dug the grave, the foxes carried the corpfe on the bier. Berengarius, the bear, celebrated mafs, the ox read the gofpel, and the afs the epillle. When the mafs was concluded, and Ifengrin buried, the animals made a Iplendid featl out of his goods, and wilhed for fuch another funeral. Our fatirical ecclefiaftic makes an application of this Ifory which tells little to the credit of the monks of his time. “ So it frequently happens,” he fays, “ that when fome rich man, an extortionift or a ufurer, dies, the abbot or prior of a convent of beads, i.c. of men living like beads, caufes them to ademble. For it commonly happens that in a great convent of black or white monks (Benedidtines or Augudinians) in Literature and Art. 8i Auguftinians) there are none but beafts — lions by their pride, foxes by their craftinefs, bears by their voracity, flinking goats by their incontinence, alfes by their tluggilhnefs, hedgehogs by their afperity, hares by their timidity, becaufe they were cowardly where there was no fear, and oxen by their laborious cultivation of their land.” * A fcene clofely refembling that here defcribed by Odo, differing only in the diftribution of the charadters, was tranflated from fome fuch written ftory into the pidtorial language of the ancient fculptured ornamen- tation of Stralburg Cathedral, where it formed, apparently, two fides of the capital or entablature of a column near the chancel. The deceafed in this pidture appears to be a fox, which was probably the animal intended to be reprefented in the original, although, in the copy of it preferved, it looks more like a fquirrel. The bier is carried by the goat and the boar. while a little dog underneath is taking liberties with the tail of the latter. Immediately before the bier, the hare carries the lighted taper, preceded by the wolf, who carries the crofs, and the bear, who holds in one hand the holy-water vellel and in the other the afperfoir. This forms the firft divifion of the fubjedt, and is reprefented in our cut No. 49. In the next * The Latin text of this and some others of the fables of Odo de Cirington will be found in my “ Selection of Latin Stories, pp. S°"5^» 55"S^> and 80 . M Hijiory of Caricature and Grotejque next divilion (cut No. 50), the flag is reprefented celebrating mafs, and the afs reads the Gofpel from a book which the cat fuppcrts with its head. This curious fculpture is faid to have been of the thirteenth century. In the fixteenth century it attradfed the attention of the reformers, who looked upon it as an ancient protefl: againfl: the corruptions of the mafs, and one of the more didinguilhed of them, John Fifchart, had it copied and engraved on wood, and publilhed it about the year 1580, with fome verfes of his own, in which it was interpreted as a fatire upon the papacy. This publication gave fuch dire oflence to the ecclefiadical authorities of Stralburg, that the Lutheran bookfeller who had ventured to publilli it, was compelled to make a public apology in the church, and the wood- engraving and all the impreffions were feized and burnt by the common hangman. A. few years later, however, in 1608, another engraving was made, and publillred in a large folio with Fifchart’s verfes; and it is from the diminilhed copy of this fecond edition — given in Flogel’s “Gefchichte des Komifches Literatur ” — that our cuts are taken. The original fculpture was dill more unfortunate. Its publication and explanation by Fifchart was the caufe of no little fcandal among the Catholics, who tried to retort upon their opponents by aderting that the figures in this funeral celebration were intended to reprefent the ignorance of the Protedant preachers ; and the fculpture in the church continued to be regarded by the ecclefiadical authorities with dilFatisfaftion until the year 1685, when in Literature and Art. 83 No. 51 The Fox Provided. when, to take away all further ground of fcandal, it was entirely defaced. Reynard’s mediaeval celebrity dates certainly from a rather early period. Montflaucon has given an alphabet of ornamental initial letters, formed chiefly of figures of men and animals, from a manufcript which he afcribes to the ninth century, among which is the one copied in our cut No. ^51, reprefenting a fox walking upon his hind legs, and carrying two fmall cocks, fufpended at the ends of a crofs ftaff. It is hardly neceflary to fay that this group forms the letter T. Long before this, the Frankifli hiftorian Fredegarius, who wrote about the middle of the feventh century, introduces a fable in which the fox figures at the court of the lion. The fame fable is repeated by a monkifli writer of Bavaria, named Fromond, who flouriflied in the tenth century, and by another named Aimoinus, who lived about the year 1,000. At length, in the twelfth century, Guibert de Nogent, who died about the year 1124, and who has left us his autobiography {de Vita fua), relates an anecdote in that work, in explanation of which he tells us that the wolf was then popularly defignated by the name of Ifengrin ■, and in the fables of Odo, as we have already feen, this name is commonly given to the wolf, Reynard to the fox, Teburg to the cat, and fo on with the others. This only Ihows that in the fables of the twelfth century the various animals were known by thefe names, but it does not prove that what we know as the romance of Reynard exifted. Jacob Grimm argued from the derivation and forms of thefe names, that the fables themfelves, and the romance, originated with the Teutonic peoples, and were indigenous to them ; but his reafons appear to me to be more fpecious than conclufive, and I certainly lean to the opinion of my friend Paulin Paris, that the romance of Reynard was native of France,* and that it was partly founded upon old Latin legends, perhaps ^ See the dissei tation by M. Paulin Paris, published m his nice popular modern abridgment ot the French romance, published in 1861, under the title “ Les Aven- Hijlory of Caricature a?id Grotefque 84 perhaps poems. Its charatler is altogether feudal, and it is ftridlly a pidture of fociety, in France primarily, and fecondly in England and the other nations of feudalifm, in the twelfth century. The earlieft form in which this romance is known is in the French poem — or rather poems, for it confifts of feveral branches or continuations — and is fuppofed to date from about the middle of the twelfth century. It foon became fo popular, that it appeared in different forms in all the languages of Weftern Europe, except in England, wdiere there appears to have exilled no edition of the romance of Reynard the Fox until Caxton printed his prole Englilh verlion of the ffory. From that time it became, if poffible, more popular in England than elfewhere, and that popularity had hardly diminitlied down to the commencement of the prefent century. The popularity of the ftory of Reynard caufed it to be imitated in a variety of lliapes, and this form of fatire, in which animals adted the part of men, became altogether popular. In the latter part of the twelfth century, an Anglo-Latin poet, named Nigellus Wireker, compofed a very fevere fatire in elegiac verfe, under the title of Speculum Stultorum, the “ Mirror of Eools.” It is not a wdfe animal like the fox, but a fimple animal, the afs, who, under the name of Brunellus, palfes among the various ranks and clalfes of fociety, and notes their crimes and vices. A profe introdudlion to this poem informs us that its hero is the reprefenta- tive of the monks in general, who were always longing for fome new acquifition which was inconfiflent with their profeffion. In fadt, Brunellus is abforbed with the notion that his tail was too fliort, and his great ambition is to get it lengthened. For this purpofe he confults a phylician, who, after reprefenting to him in vain the folly of his purfuit, gives him a receipt to make his tail grow longer, and fends him to the celebrated medical fchool of Salerno to obtain the ingredients. After various adventures, in the courfe of which he lofes a part of his tail inftead of its being lengthened, Brunellus proceeds to the Univerfity of Paris to ftudy and tures de Maitre Renart et d'Y^enol■in son compere.” On the debated qiie.stion of the origin of the Romance, see the learned and able work by lonckbloet, 8vo., Groningue, 1863 in Literature and Art. 85 and obtain knowledge ; and we are treated with a moft amuhngly fatirical account of the condition and manners of the fcholars of that time. Soon convinced of his incapacity for learning, Brunellus abandons the univerfity in delpair, and he refolves to enter one of the monaftic orders, the charafter of all which he paffes in review. The greater part of the poem confifts of a very bitter fatire on the corruptions of the monkilh orders and of the Church in general. While flill hefitating which order to choofe, Brunellus falls into the hands of his old mafter, from whom he had run away in order to feek his fortune in the world, and he is compelled to pafs the reft of his days in the fame humble and fervile condition in which he had begun them. A more direft imitation of “ Reynard the Fox ” is found in the early French romance of “ Fauvel,” the hero of which is neither a fox nor an afs, but a horfe. People of all ranks and clafles repair to the court of Fauvel, the horfe, and furnifti abundant matter for fatire on the moral, political, and religious hypocrify which pervaded the whole frame of fociety. At length the hero refolves to marry, and, in a finely illuminated manufcript of this romance, preferved in the Imperial Library in Paris, this marriage furniflies the fubje£I of a pi6ture, which gives the only reprefentation I have met with of one of the popular burlefque ceremonies which were fo common in the middle ages. Among other fuch ceremonies, it was cuftomary with the populace, on the occafion of a man’s or woman’s fecond marriage, or an ill-forted match, or on the efpoufals of people who were obnoxious to their neighbours, to aflemble outfide the houfe, and greet them with difcordant mufic. This cuftom is faid to have been praftifed efpecially in France, and it was called a charivari. There is ftill a laft remnant of it in our country in the mufic of marrow-bones and cleavers, with which the marriages of butchers are popularly celebrated ; but the derivation of the French name appears not to be known. It occurs in old Latin documents, for it gave rife to fuch fcandalous fcenes of riot and licentiousnefs, that the Church did all it could, though in vain, to fupprefs it. The earlielt mention of this cuftom, furnifhed in the Gloffarium of Ducange, is contained in the fy nodal ftatutes of the church of Avignon, palTed in the year 86 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque year 1337, from which we learn that when fuch marriages occurred, people forced their way into the houfes of the married couple, and carried away their goods, which they were obliged to pay a ranfom for before they were returned, and the money thus raifed was fpent in getting up what is called in the ftatute relating to it a Ckalvaricum. It appears from this llatute, that the individuals who performed the charivari accompanied the happy couple to the church, and returned with them to their refidence, with coarfe and indecent geftures and difcordant mufic, and Ao. 52. yi M.td'ia'val Chari'varu uttering fcurrilous and indecent abufe, and that they ended with feafting. In the ftatutes of Meaux, in 1365, and in thofe of Hugh, bilhop of Beziers, in 1368, the fame prattice is forbidden, under the name of Charavallium ; and it is mentioned in a document of the year 1372, alfo quoted by Ducange, under that of Carivarium, as then exifting at Nimes. Again, in 1445, the Council of Tours made a decree, forbidding, under pain of excommunication, “ the infolences, clamours, founds, and other tumults pradtifed at fecond and third nuptials, called by the vulgar a Charivarium , in hiterature and Art, 87 Charivarium, on account of the many and grave evils arifing out of them.”* It will be obferved that thefe early allufions to the charivari are found almoft folely in documents coming from the Roman towns in the fouth of France, fo that this pradice was probably one of the many popular cultoms derived diredtly from the Romans. When Cotgrave’s “ Didionary ” was publilhed (that is, in 1632) the pradice of the charivari appears to have become more general in its exiftence, as well as its application ; for he defcribes it as “a public defamation, or traducing ofj No. 53 , Continuation of the Chari'vari. a foule noife made, blacke fantus rung, to the lhame and difgrace of another ; hence an infamous (or infaming) ballad fung, by an armed troupe, under the window of an old dotard, married the day before unto a yong wanton, in mockerie of them both.” And, again, a charivaris de poellvs * “ Insultationes, clamores, sonos, et alios tumultus, in secundis et tertiis quo- rundam nuptiis, quos charivarium vulgo appellant, propter multa et gravia incom- nioda, prohibemus sub poena excommunicacionis.” — Ducange, v. Charmarium . 88 Hi/lory of Caricature and Grotejque poelles is explained as “ the carting of an infamous perfon, graced with the harmonic of tinging kettles and frying-pan muficke.”* The word is now generally ufed in the fenfe of a great tumult of difcordant mufic, produced often by a number of perfons playing different tunes on different intlruments at the fame time. As I have Hated above, the manufcript of the romance of “ Fauvel ” is in the Imperial Library in Paris. A copy of this illumination is engraved in Jaime’s “ Mufee de la Caricature,” from which our cuts Nos. 5a and 53 are taken. It is divided into three compartments, one above another, in the uppermofl of which Fauvel is feen entering the nuptial chamber to his young wife^ who is already in bed. The fcene in the compartment below, which is copied in our cut No. 52, reprefents the llreet outfide, and the mock revellers performing the charivari; and this is continued in the third, or lowefi, compartment, which is reprefented in our cut No. 53. Down each fide of the original illunfmation is a frame-work of windows, from which people, who have been difiurbed by the noife, are looking out upon the tumult. It will be feen that all the performers wear malks, and that they are drelfed in burlefque coftume. In confirmation of the ftatement of the ecclefiaftical fynods as to the licentioufnefs of thefe exhibitions, we fee one of the performers here difguifed as a woman, who lifts up his drefs to expofe his perfon while dancing. The mufical infiruments are no lefs grotefque than the coftumes, for they confift chiefly of kitchen utenfils, fuch as frying-pans, mortars, faucepans, and the like. There was another feries of fubjefts in which animals were introduced as the infiruments of fatire. This fatire confified in reverfing the pofition of man with regard to the animals over which he had been accufiomed to tyrannife, fo that he was fubjeded to the fame treatment from the animals which, in his aftual pofition, he ufes towards them. This change of relative pofition was called in old French and Anglo-Norman, le monde leftorne, which was equivalent to the Englilh phrafe, “ the world turned upfide down.” It forms the fubjedt of rather old verfes, I believe, both * Cotcrrave’s Diclionarie, v. Chari-varh. in Literature and Art. 89 both in French and Englilh, and individual fcenes from it are met with in piftorial reprefentation at a rather early date. During the year j 862^ in the courfe of accidental excavations on the fite of the Friary, at Derby, a number of encauftic tiles, fuch as were ufed for the floors of the interiors of churches and large buildings, were found.* The ornamentation of thefe tiles, efpecially of the earlier ones, is, like all mediaeval ornamentations, extremely varied, and even thefe tiles fome- times prefent fubjedts of a burlefque and fatirical charader, though they are more frequently adorned with the arms and badges of benefadors to the church or convent. The tiles found on the lite of the priory at Derby are believed to be of the thirteenth century, and one pattern, a diminilhed copy of which is given in our cut No. 54, prefents a fubjed taken * Mr. Llewellynn Jewitt, in his excellent publication, the Reliquary, ior Oi tober, 1862, has given an interesting paper on the encaustic tiles tound on thi.s occasion, and on the conventual house to which they belonged. N 90 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque taken from the monde leftorne. The hare, raafter of his old enemy, the dog, has become hunter himfelf, and feated upon the dog’s back he rides vigorouily to the chace, blowing his horn as he goes. The defign is fpiritedly executed, and its fatirical intention is Ihown by the monltrous and mirthful face, with the tongue lolling out, figured on the outer corner of the tile. It will be feen that four of thefe tiles are intended to be joined together to make the complete piece. In an illumination in a manufcript of the fourteenth century in the Britifli Mufeum (MS. Reg. TO E iv.), the hares are taking a ftill more fevere vengeance on their old enemy. The dog has been caught, brought to trial for his numerous murders, and condemned, and they are reprefented here (cut No. 55) conducing him in the criminal’s cart to the gallows. Our cut No. 56, the fubjeft of which is furniflied by one of the carved flails in Sherborne Minfter (it is here copied from the engraving in Carter’s “ Specimens of Ancient Sculpture ”), reprefents another execution fcene, fimilar in fpirit to the former. The geefe have feized their old enemy, Reynard, and are hanging him on a gallows, while two monks, who attend the execution, appear to be amufed at the energetic manner in which in Literature and Art. gi which the geefe perform their taik. Mr. Jewitt mentions two other fubjefts belonging to this feries, one of them taken from an illuminated manufcript 5 they are, the moufe chafing the cat, and the horfe driving No, 56 . Reynard brought to Account at Laji. the cart — the former luunan carter in this cafe taking the place of the horfe between the ihafts. “The World turned upfide down; or, the Folly of Man,” has continued amongfl: us to be a popular chap-book and child’s book till within a veiy few years, and I have now a copy before me printed in London about the year 1790. It confills of a fe ties of rude woodcuts, with a few doggrel verfes under each. One of thefe, entitled “ The Ox turned Farmer,” reprefents two men drawing the plough, driven by an ox. In the next, a rabbit is feen turning the fpit on which a man is roalling, while a cock holds a ladle and baftes. In a third, we fee a tournament, in which the horfes are armed and ride upon the men. Another reprefents the ox killing the butcher. In others we have birds netting men and women ; the afs, turned miller, employing the man- miller to carry his lacks ; the horfe turned groom, and currying the man ; and the fillies angling for men and catching them. In a cleverly fculptured ornament in Beverley Minller, reprefented in our cut No. 57, the goofe herfelf is reprefented in a grotefque fituation, w'hich 92 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque which might almoli give her a place in “ The World turned upfide down,” although it is a mere burlefque, without any apparent fatirical I No» 57 . Shoeing the Goofe. aim. The goofe has here taken the place of the horfe at the blackfmith’s, who is vigorouily nailing the llaoe on her webbed foot. Burlefque fubjeds of this defcription are not uncommon, efpecially among architeftural fculpture and wood-carving, and, at a rather later period, on all ornamental objedts. The field for fuch fubjedfs w'as fo extenfive, that the artift had an almofl: unlimited choice, and therefore hisfubjedls might be alraoft infinitely varied, though we ufually find them running on par- ticular clalTes. The old popular proverbs, for inffance, furnifhed a fruitful fource for drollery, and are at times delineated in an amufingly literal or pradfical manner. Pidtorial proverbs No. 58 . Food for Sudne. in Literature and Art. 93 proverbs and popular fa}ings are fometimes met with on the carved mifereres. For example, in one of thofe at Rouen, in Normandy, reprefented in our cut No. 58, the carver has intended to reprefent the idea of the old faying, in allufion to milplaced bounty, of throwing pearls to fwine, and has given it a much more pitdurefque and pidorially intelligible form, by introducing a rather dafhing female feeding her fwine with rofes, or rather offering them rofes for food, for the fwine difplay no eagernefs to feed upon them. We meet with fuch fubjefts as thefe fcattered over all mediaeval works of art, and at a fomewhat later period they were transferred to other objefts, fuch as the figns of houfes. The cuflorn of placing hgns over the doors of fliops and taverns, was well known to the ancients, as is abundantly manifefled by their frequent occurrence in the ruins of Pompeii ; but in the middle ages, the ufe of figns and badges was univerfal, and as — contrary to the apparent pradtice in Pompeii, where certain badges were appropriated to certain trades and profeffions — every individual was free to choofe his own fign, the variety was unlimited. Many ftill had reference, no doubt, to the particular calling of thofe to whom they belonged, while others were of a religious charafter, and indicated the faii^t under whofe protedlion the houfeholder had placed himfelf. Some people took animals for their figns, others monftrous or burlefque figures ; and, in fadf, there were hardly any of the fubjedls of iVo. 59. The Indujlncui caricature 94 Hijlory of Caricature a?id Grotefque caricature or burlelque familiar to the mediaeval fculptor and illuminator which did not from time to time ajrpear on thefe popular ligns. A few of the old figns dill preferved, efpecially in the quaint old towns of France, Germany, and the Netherlands, Ihow us how frequently they were made the indruments of popular latire. A dgn not uncommon in France was La Truie qui Jile (the fow fpinning). Our cut No. 59 reprefents this luhjedt as treated on an old dgn, a carving in haf-relief of the dxteenth century, on a houfe in the Rue du Marche-aux-Poirees, in Rouen. The fow appears here in the charadter of the indudrious houfewife, employing herfelf in fpinning at the fame time that dre is attending to the wants of her children. There is a dngularly fatirical dgn at Beauvais, on a houfe wdiich was formerly occupied hyan ejncier-moutardier, or grocer who made mudard, in the Rue du Chatel. In front of this dgn, which is repre- fented in our cut No. 6 o, appears a large mudard-mill, on one dde of which dands Folly with a dad' in her hand, with which die is dirring the mudard, while an ape, wdth a fort of fardonic grin, throws in a feafoning, which may he conjedtured hy his pcdure.* The trade-mark of the individual who adopted this drange device, is carved helow. MauiUration. * See an interesting little book on this subject by M. Ed. de la Queriere, entitled “ Recherches sur les Enseignes des Maisons Particulieres,” 8vo., Rouen, 1852, from which both the above examples are taken. in Literature and Art. 05 CHAPTER VI. THE MONKEY IN BURLESOUE AND CARICATURE. TOURNAMENTS AND SINGLE COMBATS. MONSTROUS COMBINATIONS OF ANIMAL FORMS. CARICATURES ON COSTUME. THE HAT. THE HELMET. LADIEs’ HEAD-DRESSES. THE GOWN, AND ITS LONG SLEEVES. T he fox, the wolf, and their companions, were introduced as inflruments of fatire, on account of their peculiar charadlers ; but there were other animals which were alfo favourites with the fatirilt, becaufe they difplayed an innate inclination to imitate ; they formed, as it were, natural parodies upon mankind. I need hardly fay that of thefe the principal and mod; remarkable was the monkey. This animal mull have been known to our Anglo-Saxon forefathers from a remote period, for they had a word for it in their own language — apa, our ape. Monkey is a more modern name, and feems to be equivalent with maniken, or a little man. The earliefl Bejliaries, or popular treatifes on natural hillory, give anecdotes illullrative of the aptnefs of this animal for imitating the adtions of men, and aferibe to it a degree of underftanding which would almoll raife it above the level of the brute creation. Philip de Thaun, an Anglo-Norman poet of the reign of Henry I., in his Bejtiary, tells us that “ the monkey, by imitation, as books fay, counterfeits what it fees, and mocks people — lA finge par figure., fi cum dit ejeripture, Ceo que i! vait contrefia'it, de gent ejear halt.* He * See my “Popular Treatises on Science written during; the Middle Ages,” p. 107. 96 Hijtory of Caricature and Grotefque He goes on to inform us, as a proof of the extraordinary inftindt of this animal, that it has more affedlion for fome of its cubs than for others, and that, when running away, it carried thofe which it liked before it, and thofe it dilliked behind its back. The Iketch from the illuminated twelfth century, and one of the moll interelling of the early mediaeval writers on natural hillory, gives us many anecdotes, which fhow us how much attached our mediaeval forefathers were to domellicated animals, and how common a pradlice. it was to keep them in their houfes. The baronial caflle appears often to have prefented the appearance of a menagerie of animals, among which fome were of that Itrong and ferocious charafter that rendered it neceflary to keep them in dole conhnement, while others, fuch as monkeys, roamed about the buildings at will. One of Neckam’s flories is very curious in regard to our fubjed, for it llrows that the people in thofe days exercifed their tamed animals in pradically caricaturing contemporary weaknelTes and falhions. This writer remarks that "the nature of the ape is fo ready at ading, by ridiculous gelliculations, the reprefentations of things it has feen, and thus gratifying the vain curiofity of worldly men in public exhibitions, that it will even dare to imitate a military conflid. A jongleur {hijirio) was in the habit of conllantly taking two monkeys to the military exercifes which are commonly called tournaments, that the labour of teaching might be diminillied by frequent infpedion. He afterwards taught two dogs to carry thefe apes, who fat on their backs, furnilhed with proper arms. Nor did they want fpurs, with which they manufcript of the Romance of the Comte d’ Artois, of the fifteenth century, which forms our cut No. 6i, reprefents the monkey, carry- ing, of courfe, its favourite child before it in its flight, and what is more, it is taking that flight mounted on a donkey. A monkey on horfeback appears not to have been a novelty, as we lhall fee in the fequel. No 6 r . yd lilonkey M..untcd. Alexander Neckam, a very celebrated Englifli fcholar of the latter part of the flrenuoufly in Literature and Art. 97 ftrenuoullv urged on the dogs. Having broken their lances, they drew out their Iwords, with which they fpent many blows on each other’s Ihields. Who at this fight could refrain from laughter ?”* Such contemporary caricatures of the mediaeval tournament, which was in its greatefl: falliion during the period from the twelfth to the fourteenth century, appear to have been extremely popular, and are not unfrequently reprefented in the borders of illuminated manufcripts. The manufcript now fo well known as “ Queen Mary’s Pfalter ” (MS. Reg. 1 B vii.), and written and illuminated very early in the fourteenth century, contains not a few illuftrations of this defcriptlon. One of thefe, which forms our cut No. 62, reprefents a tournament not much unlike that defcribed by Alexander Neckam, except that the monkeys are here riding upon other monkeys, and not upon dogs. In faft, all the individuals here engaged are monkeys, and the parody is completed by the introdudtion of the trumpeter on one fide, and of minflrelfy, reprefented by a monkey playing on the tabor, on the other ; or, perhaps, the two monkeys are fimply playing on the pipe and tabor, which were looked upon as the lowell defcriptlon of minftrelly, and are therefore the more aptly Introduced into the fcene. The fame manufcript has furnifhed us with the cut No. 63. Here the * Alexander Neckam, De Naturis Rerum, lib. ii. c. 129. o 98 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque the combat takes place between a monkey and a flag, the latter having the claws of a griffin. They are mounted, too, on rather nondefcript animals — one having the head and body of a lion, with the forefeet of an eagle ; the other having a head fomewhat like that of a lion, on a lion’s body, with the hind parts of a bear. This fubjeft may, perhaps, be intended as a burlefque on the mediaeval romances, tilled with combats between the Chritiians and the Saracens ; for the ape — who, in the moralifations which accompany the Bejtiaries, is faid to reprefent the devil — is here armed with what are evidently intended for the fabre and thield of a Saracen, while the flag carries the Ihield and lance of a Chrilfian knight. The love of the mediaeval artifts for monffious figures of animals, and for mixtures of animals and men, has been alluded to in a former chapter. The combatants in the accompanying cut (No. 64), taken from the lame manufcript, prefent a fort of combination of the rider and the animal, and they again feem to be intended for a Saracen and a Chriffian. The figure to the right, which is compofed of the body of a fatyr, with the feet of a goofe and the wdngs of a dragon, is armed with a fimilar Saracenic fabre j while that to the left, which is on the wffiole lefs monltrous, wields a Norman fwmrd. Both have human faces below the navel as well as above, which was a favourite idea in the grotefque of the No» 63 . A. Feat of Arms, middle in Literature and Art. 99 middle ages. Our mediaeval forefathers appear to have had a decided tafte for monllrofities of every defcription, and efpecially for mixtures of different kinds of animals, and of animals and men. There is no doubt, to judge by the anecdotes recorded by fuch writers as Giraldus Cambrenfis, that a belief in the exifience of fuch unnatural creatures was widely entertained. In his account of Ireland, this writer tells us of animals which were half ox and half man, half flag and half cow, and half dog and half monkey.* It is certain that there was a general belief in fuch animals, and nobody could be more credulous than Giraldus himfelf. The defign to caricature, which is tolerably evident in the fubjefts juft given, is ftill more apparent in other grotefques that adorn the borders of the mediaeval manufcripts, as well as in fome of the mediaeval carvings and fculpture. Thus, in our cut Fajhionabk DreJ... No. 6j, taken from one of the borders in the Romance of the Comte d’Artois, * See Girald. Cambr., Topog. Hiberniae, dist. ii. cc. 21, 22 ; and the Itinerary of Wales, lib. ii. e. ii. lOO Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque d’Artois, a maiiufcript of the fifteenth century, we cannot fail to recognife an attempt at turning to ridicule the contemporary fafhions in drefs. The hat is only an exaggerated form of one which appears to have been commonly ufed in France in the latter half of the fifteenth century, and which appears frequently in illuminated manufcripts executed in Burgundy; and the hoot alio belongs to the fame period. I'lie latter reappeared at different times, until at length it became developed into the modern top-boots. In cut No. 66, from the fame maiiufcript, where it forms the letter T, we have the fame form of hat, ftill more exaggerated, and combined at the fame time with grotefque faces. Caricatures on cofiume are by no means uncommon among the artiflic remains of the middle ages, and are not confined to illuminated manufcripts. The fafhionable drefles of thofe days went into far more ridiculous exceffes of fhape than anything we fee in our times — at leafl, fo far as we can believe the drawings in the manufcripts ; but thefe, however ferioufly intended, were conflantly degenerating into caricature, from circumftances which are eafily explained, and which have, in fa6f, been explained already in their influence on other parts of our fubjedf. The mediaeval artifts in general were not very good delineators of form, and their outlines are much inferior to their finifli. Confcious of this, though perhaps unknowingly, they fought to remedy the defedt in a fpirit which has always been adopted in the early ftages of art-progrefs — they aimed at making themfelves underftood by giving a fpeeial prominence to No. 66. Heads ar.d Hats. the in Literature and Art. loi the peculiar charafteriftics of the obje6ts they wilhed to reprefent. Thefe were the points which naturally attrafted people’s firft attention, and the refemblance was felt moft by people in general when thefe points were put forward in excellive prominence in the pidture. The drelfes, perhaps, hardly exifled in the exadl: forms in which we fee them in the illuminationSj or at lead thofe were only exceptions to the generally more moderate forms ; and hence, in ufing thefe pidtorial records as materials for the hidory of coftume, we ought to make a certain allowance for exaggeration — we ought, indeed, to treat them almofl: as caricatures. In fadd, much of what we now call caricature, was then charadterillic of ferious art, and of what was confidered its high development. Many of the attempts which have been made of late years to introduce ancient coftume on the ftage, would probably be regarded by the people who lived in the age which they were intended to reprefent, as a mere defign to turn them into ridicule. Neverthelefs, the fafhions in drefs were, efpecially from the twelfth century to the fixteenth, carried to a great degree of extravagance, and were not only the objedts of fatire and caricature, but drew forth the indignant declamations of the Church, and furnilhed a continuous theme to the preachers. The contemporary chronicles abound with bitter refledtions on the extravagance in coftume, which was confidered as one of the outward figns of the great corruption of particular periods j and they give us not unfrequent examples of the coarfe manner in which the clergy difcuffed them in their fermons. The readers of Chaucer will remember the manner in which this fubjedt is treated in the “ Parfon’s Tale.” In this refpedi the fatirifts of the Church went hand in hand with the pidtorial caricaturifts of the illumi- nated manufcripts, and of the fculptures with which we fometimes meet in contemporary architedtural ornamentation. In the latter, this clafs of caricature is perhaps lefs frequent, but it is fometimes very expreftive. The very curious mifereres in the church of Ludlow, in Shroplhire, prefent the caricature reproduced in our cut No. 67. It reprefents an ugly, and, to judge by the expreffion of the countenance, an ill-tempered old woman, wearing the fafliionable head-drefs of the earlier half of the fifteenth century, which feems to have been carried to its greateft extravagance I 02 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque extravagance in the beginning of the reign of Henry VI. It is the flyle of coiffure known efpecially as the horned head-drefs, and the very name carries with it a fort of relationfliip to an individual who was notorioully No. 67 . A Fa/hionable Beauty, horned — the fpirit of evil. This dafhing dame of the olden time appears to have llruck terror into two unfortunates who have fallen within her influence, one of whom, as though he took her for a new Gorgon, is attempt- ing to cover himfelf with his buckler, while the other, apprehending danger of another kind, is prepared to defend him- felf with his fword. The details of the head-drefs in this figure are interefting for the hiftory of coflume. Our next cut. No. 68, is taken from a manufcript in private poffeffion, which is now rather well knowm among anti- quaries by the name of the “ Luttrell Pfalter,” and which belongs to the four- teenth century. It feems to involve a fatire on the ariflocratic order of fociety — on the knight who was diflinguifhed by his helmet, his Ihield, and his armour. The individual here repre- fented prefents a type which is anything but ariflocratic. While he holds a helmet in Literature and Art. 103 a helmet in his hand to tliow the meaning of the fatire, his own helmet, which he wears on his head, is (imply a bellows. He may be a knight of the kitchen, or perhaps a mere quij'tron, or kitchen lad. We have juft feen a caricature of one of the ladies’ head-dreffes of the earlier half of the fifteenth century, and our cut No. 69, from an illuminated manufcript in the Britilh Mufeum of the latter half of the fame century (MS. Hark, No. 4379), furnilhes us with a caricature of a head-drefs of a different charadter, which came into falhion in the reign of our Edward IV. The horned head-drefs of the previous generation had been entirely laid afide, and the ladies adopted in its place a fort of fteeple-fliaped head-drefs, or rather of the form of a fpire, made by rolling a piece of linen into the form of a long cone. Over this lofty cap was thrown a piece of fine lawn or muffin, which defcended almott to the ground, and formed, as it were, two wings. A fliort tranfparent veil was thrown over the face, and reached not quite to the chin, refembling rather clofely the veils in ufe among our ladies of the prefent day (1864). The whole head-drefs, indeed, has been preferved by the Norman peafantry ; for it may be oblerved that, during the feudal ages, the falhions in France and England were always identical. Thefe fteeple head-dreftes greatly pro- voked the indignation of the clergy, and zealous preachers attacked them roughly in their fermons. A French monk, named Thomas Conede, diftinguilhed himfelf efpecially in this crufade, and inveighed againft the head-drefs with fuch efted, that we are alfured that many of the women threw down their head-drelfes in the middle of the fermon, and made a bonfire of them at its conclufion. The zeal of the preacher foon extended itfelf to the populace, and, for a while, when ladies appeared in this head-drefs in public, they were expofed to be pelted by the rabble. Under fuch a double perfecution it difappeared for a moment, but when the preacher was no longer prefent, it returned again, and, to ufe the words No 69 , ji Lady^s Head-drefs. 104 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque words of the old writer who has prel'erved this anecdote, “ the women who, like Inails in a fright, had drawn in their horns, Ihot them oat again as foon as the danger was over.” The caricaturill would hardly overlook fo extravagant a lalhion, and accordingly the manufcript in the Britilh Mufeum, jutf mentioned, furnilhes us with the fubjeft of our cut No. 69. In thole times, when the palhons were fubjedted to no reftraint, the fine ladies indulged in fuch luxury and licentioufnefs, that the caricaturift has chofen as their fit reprefentative a fow, who wears the objedtionable head- drefs in full falhion. The original forms one of the illuftrations of a copy of the hillorian Froillart, and was, therefore, executed in France, or, more probably, in Burgundy. The fermons and fatires againft extravagance in coftume began at an early period. The Anglo-Norman ladies, in the earlier part of the twelfth century, firfl: brought in vogue in our itlaiid this extravagance in talhion, which quickly fell under the lafii of tatirift and caricaturill. It was firft exhibited in the robes rather than in the head-drefs. Thefe Anglo-Norman ladies are undertlood to have firfl introduced flays, in order to give an artificial appearance of flendernefs to their waifls; but the greatefl extravagance appeared in the forms of their Beeves. The robe, or gown, inflead of being loofe, as among the Anglo-Saxons, was laced dole round the body, and the Beeves, which fitted the arm tightly till they reached the elbows, or fometimes nearly to the wrifl, then fuddenly became larger, and hung down to an extravagant length, often trailing on the ground, and fometimes Biortened by means of a knot. The gown, alfo, was itfelf worn very long. The clergy preached againft thefe extravagances in falhion, and at times, it is laid, with elfedl ; and they fell under the vigorous lalli of the fatirill. In a clafs of fatires which became extremely popular in the twelfth century, and which produced in the thirteenth the immortal poem of Dante-^the vifions of purgatory and of hell — thefe contemporary extravagances in falhion are held up to public detellation, and are made the fubjed of fevere punilhment. They were looked upon as among the outward forms of pride. It arofe, no doubt, from this tafte — from the darker lhade which fpread over men’s minds in the twelfth century — that demons, inllead of animals, were introduced in Literature aiid Art. 105 introduced to perfonify the evil-doers of the time. Such is the figure (cut No. 70) which we take from a very interefting manufcript in the Britilh Mufeum (MS. Cotton. Nero, C iv.). The demon is here drefl'ed in the fafliionable gown with its long fleeves, of which one appears to have been ufually much longer than the other. Both the gown and lleeve are Ihortened by means of knots, while the former is brought clofe round No. 70. Sin in Satins. the waitl by tight lacing. It is a pidture of the ufe of Bays made at the time of their firft introduttion. This fuperfluity of length in the different parts of the drefs was a fubjedt of complaint and fatire at various and very diftant periods, and contemporary illuminations of a perfedtly ferious charadter tliow that thefe complaints were not without foundation. io6 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotejque CHAPTER VIE PRESERVATION OF THE CHARACTER OF THE MIMUS AFTER THE FALL OF THE EMPIRE. THE MINSTREL AND JOGELOUR. HISTORY OF POPULAR STORIES. THE FABLIAUX. ACCOUNT OF THEM. THE CONTES DEVOTS. X HAVE already remarked that, upon the fall of the Roman empire, X the popular inftitutions of the Romans were more generally preferved to the middle ages than thofe of a higher and more refined charafter. This is underfiood without difficulty, when we confider that the lower clafs of the population — in the towns, what we might perhaps call the lower and middle dalles — continued to exifl. much the fame as before, while the barbarian conquerors came in and took the place of the riding daffies. The drama, which had never much hold upon the love of the Roman populace, was loti, and the theatres and the amphitheatres, which had been fupported only by the wealth of the imperial court and of the ruling clafs, were abandoned and fell into ruin ; but the mimus, who furniihed mirth to the people, continued to exift, and probably underwent no immediate change in his charader. It will be well to ftate again the chief charaderiftics of the ancient mimus, before we proceed to defcribe his mediaeval reprefentative. The grand aim of the mimus was to make people laugh, and he employed generally every means he knew of for effeding this purpofe, by language, by geftures or motions of the body, or by drefs. Thus he carried, ftrapped over his loins, a wooden fword, wffiich w^as called gladius hiftricus and clunarulum, and wore fometimes a garment made of a great number of fmall pieces of cloth of difi'erent colours, which was hence called centunculus, or the hundred-patched drefs.* Thefe two charaderiftics * “Uti me consiiesse traacedi syrmate, histrionis crotalone ad trieterica orgia,aut mimi centunculo.” — Apuleius, Apolog. in Literature and Art. 107 chara6lerillics have been preferved in the modern harlequin. Other peculiarities of coflume may conveniently be left undefcribed ■, the female mimae fometimes exhibited themfelves unreflridted by drefs. They danced and fung; repeatedjok.es and told merry Ifories ; recited or afted farces and fcandalous anecdotes ; performed what we now call mimicry, a word derived from the name of mimus ; and they put themfelves in Ifrange poftures, and made frightful faces. They fometimes adfed the part of a fool or zany (mono), or of a madman. They added to thefe performances that of the conjurer or juggler (prcejligiator) , and played tricks of tleight of hand. The mimi performed in the flreets and public places, or in the theatres, and efpecially at feftivals, and they were often employed at private parties, to entertain the guefls at a fupper. We trace the exillence of this clafs of performers during the earlier period of the middle ages by the expreffions of hoftility towards them ufed from time to time by the ecclefiaftlcal writers, and the denunciations of fynods and councils, which have been quoted in a former chapter.* Neverthelefs, i is evident from many allufions to them!, that they found their way into the monaflic houfes, and were in great favour not only among the monks, but among the nuns alfo; that they were introduced into the religious feftivals j and that they were tolerated even in the churches. It is probable that they long continued to be known in Italy and the countries near the centre of Roman influence, and where the Latin language was continued, by their old name of mimys. I'he writers of the mediaeval vocabularies appear all to have been much better acquainted with the meaning of this word than of moft of the Latin words of the fame clafs, and they evidently had a clafs of performers exifting in their own times to whom they confidered that the name applied. The Anglo-Saxon vocabularies interpret the Latin mimus by g/ig-mon, a gleeman. In Anglo-Saxon, gUg or gliu meant mirth and game of every defcription, and as the Anglo-Saxon teachers who compiled the vocabularies give, as fynonyms of mimus, the words fcurra, jocijia, and pantomimus, it is evident that all thefe were included in the charadter of See before, p. 41 of the present vokiiiic. io8 Hi /lory of Caricature and Grotejque of the gleeman, and that the latter was quite identical with his Roman type. It was the Roman mimus introduced into Saxon England. We have no traces of the exitience of fuch a clafs of performers among the I'eutonic race before they became acquainted with the civilifation of imperial Rome. We know from drawings in contemporary illuminated manufcripts that the performances of the gleeman did include mufic, finging, and dancing, and alfo the tricks of mountebanks and jugglers, fuch as throwing up and catching knives and balls, and performing with tamed bears, &c.* But even among the peoples who preferved the Latin language, the word mimus was gradually exchanged for others employed to fignify the fame thing. The word jocus had been ufed in the lignification of a jefl, playfulnefs, jocari lignitied to jell, and joculator was a word for a jefter3 but, in the debafement of the language, y'ocKi was taken in the fignification of everything which created mirth. It became, in the courfe of time the French word jeu, and the Italian gioco, or giuoco. People introduced a form of the verb, jocare, which became the French juer, to play or perform. Joculator was then ufed in the fenfe of munus. In FVencli the word became yog/eo?', or jougleor, and in its later form jougleur. I may remark that, in mediaeval manu- fcripts, it is almotl impotlible to dillinguifh between the u and the ??, and that modern writers have mifread this lall word as jongleur, and thus introduced into tlie language a word which never exilled, and which ought to be abandoned. In old Englilli, as we fee in Chaucer, the ufual form was jogelere. The mediaeval joculator, or jougleur, embraced all the attributes of the Roman mimus, f and perhaps more. In the firft place * See examples of these illuminations in my “History of Domestic Manners and Sentiments,” pp. 34, 35, 37, 65. t People in the middle ages were so fully conscious of the identity of the mediaeval jougleur with the Roman mimus, that the Latin writers often use mimus to signify a jougleur, and the one is interpreted by the others in the vocabularies. Thus, in Latin-English vocabularies of the fifteenth century, we have — Hie joculator, , t AnHice jogulour. Hie mimus, ) j in Literature and Art. 1 09 place he was very often a poet himfelf, and compofed the pieces which it was one of his duties to fing or recite. Thefe were chiefly fongs, or ftories, the latter ufually told in verfe, and fo many of them are preferved in manufcripts that they form a very numerous and important clafs of mediaeval literature. The fongs were commonly fatirical and abufive, and they were made ufe of for purpofes of general or perfonal vituperation. Out of them, indeed, grew the political fongs of a later period. There were female jongleurs, and both fexes danced, and, to create mirth among thofe who encouraged them, they pradtifed a variety of performances, fuch as mimicking people, making wry and ugly faces, diflorting their bodies into ftrange poftures, often expofing their perfons in a very unbecoming manner, and performing many vulgar and indecent ads, which it is not necelTiry to defcribe more particularly. They carried about with them for exhibition tame bears, monkeys, and other animals, taught to perform the adions of men. As early as the thirteenth century, we find them including among their other accom- plilhments that of dancing upon the tight-rope. Finally, the jongleurs performed tricks of Height of hand, and were often conjurers and magicians. As, in modern times, the jongleurs of the middle ages gradually palled away. Height of hand appears to have become their principal accompli (hment, and the name only was left in the modern word juggler. The jongleurs of the middle ages, like the mimi ot antiquity, wandered about from place to place, and often from country to country, fometimes flngly and at others in companies, exhibited their performances in the roads and ftreets, repaired to all great feftivals, and were employed efpecially in the baronial hall, where, by their fongs, ftories, and other performances, they created mirth after dinner. dhis clafs of fociety had become known by another name, the origin of which is not fo eafily explained. The primary meaning of the Latin word minijler was a fervant, one who minifters to another, either in his wants or in his pleafures and amufements. It was applied particularly to the cup-bearer. In low Latinity, a diminutive of this word was formed, vrineftellus, or viinijlrellus, a petty fervant, or minifter. When we firll meet with this word, which is not at a very early date, it is ufed as perfectly I lO Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque perfedly fynotiymous w'wh joculator, and, as the word is certainly of Latin derivation, it is clear that it was from it the middle ages derived the French word meneftrel (the modern menetrier), and the Englilh minjirel. The mimi or jongleurs were perhaps conhdered as the petty minifters to the amufements of their lord, or of him who for the time employed them. Until the clofe of the middle ages, the minllrel and the jongleur were abfolutely identical. Poffibly the former may have been conhdered the more courtly of the two names. But in England, as the middle ages difappeared, and loft their influence on fociety fooner than in France, the word minftrel remained attached only to the muhcal part of the fundtions of the old mimus, while, as juft obferved, the juggler took the height of hand and the mountebank tricks. In modern French, except where employed technically by the antiquary, the word menetrier means a hddler. The jougleurs, or minftrels, formed a very numerous and important, though a low and defpifed, clafs of mediaeval fociety. The dulnefs of every-day life in a feudal caftle or manfion required fomething more than ordinary excitement in the way of amufement, and the old family bard, who continually repeated to the Teutonic chief the praifes of himfelf and his anceftors, was foon felt to be a wearifome companion. The mediaeval knights and their ladies wanted to laugh, and to make them laugh fuftlciently it required that the jokes, or tales, or comic performances, Ihould be broad, coarfe, and racy, with a good fpicing of violence and of the wonderful. Hence the jongleur was always welcome to the feudal manfion, and he feldom went away dilfatisfied. But the fubjedt of the prefent chapter is rather the literature of the jougleur than his perfonal hiftory, and, having traced his origin to the Roman mimus, we will now proceed to one clafs of his performances. It has been ftated that the mimus and the jougleurs told ftories. Of thofe of the former, unfortunately, none are preferved, except, perhaps, in a few anecdotes fcattered in the pages of fuch writers as Apuleius and Lucian, and we are obliged to guefs at their charadter, but of the ftories of the jougleurs a confiderable number has been preferved. It becomes an interefting queflion how far thefe ftories have been derived from the mimi. in Literature and Art. I 1 1 mirni, handed down traditionally from mimus to jongleur, how far they are native in our race, or how far they were derived at a later date from other fources. And in confidering this queftion, we muft not forget that the mediaeval jongleurs were not the only reprefentatives of the mimi, for among the Arabs of the Eafl: alfo there had originated from them, modified under different circumfiances, a very important clafs of minflrels and ftory-tellers, and with thefe the jougleurs of the weft were brought into communication at the commencement of the crufades. There can be no doubt that a very large number of the ftories of the jougleurs were borrowed from the Eafl, for the evidence is furniflred by the ftories themfelves ; and there can be little doubt alfo that the jougleurs improved themfelves, and underwent fome modification, by their inter- courfe with Eaftern performers of the fame clafs. On the other hand, we have traces of the exiftence of thefe popular ftories before the jougleurs can have had communication with the Eafl. Thus, as already mentioned, we find, compofed in Germany, apparently in the tenth century, in rhythmical Latin, the well-known ftory of the wife of a merchant who bore a child during the long abfence of her hufband, and who excufed herfelf by ftating that her pregnancy had been the refult of fwallowing a flake of fnow in a fnow-ftorm. This, and another of the fame kind, were evidently intended to be fung. Another poem in popular Latin verfe, which Grimm and Schmeller, who edited it,* believe may be of the eleventh century, relates a very amufing ftory of an adventurer named Unibos, who, continually caught in his own fnares, finiflies by getting the better of all his enemies, and becoming rich, by mere ingenious cunning and good fortune. This ftory is not met with among thofe of the jougleurs, as far as they are yet known, but, curioufty enough. Lover found it exifting orally among the Irifh peafantry, and inferted the Irifh ftory among his “ Legends of Ireland.” It is a curious illuftration of the pertinacity with which the popular ftories defcend along with peoples through generations from the remoteft * In a volume entitled “ Lateinische Gedichte des x. und xi. Jh.” 8vo. Gottingen, 1838. I I 2 Hi/iory of Caricature a?id Grotefque remoteft ages of antiquity. The fame ftory is found in an oriental form among the tales of the Tartars published in French by Guenlette. I'he people of the middle ages, who took their word falle from the Latin falula, which they appear to have underftood as a mere term for any Ihort narration, included under it the dories told by the mimi and jongleurs ; but, in the fondnefs of the middle ages for diminutives, by which they intended to exprefs familiarity and attachment, applied to them more particularly the Latin falella, which in the old French became fal fel, or, more ufually,ya//ia«. The fabliaux of the jougleurs form a mod important clafs of the comic literature of the middle ages. They mud have been wonderfully numerous, for a very large quantity of them dill remain, and thefe are only the fmall portion of what once exided, which have efcaped perifhing like the others by the accident of being written in manufcripts which have had the fortune to furvive ; while manufcripts containing others have no doubt peridied, and it is probable that many were only preferved orally, and never written down at all.* The recital of thefe fabliaux appears to have been the favourite employment of the jougleurs, and they became fo popular that the mediaeval preachers turned them into Ihort dories in Latin profe, and made ufe of them as illudrations in their fermons. Many colledions of thefe diort Latin dories are found in manufcripts which had ferved as note-books to the preachers,f and out of them was originally compiled that celebrated mediaeval book called the “ Geda Romanorum.” It is to be regretted that the fubjedts and language of a large portion of thefe fabliaux are fi^ch as to make it impodible to prefent them before modern readers, for they furnilli dngularly interefting and minute pidtures of mediaeval life in all clades of fociety. Domedic fcenes are among thofe mod frequent, and they reprefent the interior of the mediaeval houfehold * Many of the Fabliaux have been printed, but the two principal collections, and to which I shall chiefly refer in the text, are those of Barbazan, re-edited and much enlarged by Meon, 4 vols. Svo., 1808, and of Meon, 2 vols. 8vo., 1823. t A collection of these short Latin stories was edited by the author of the present work, in a volume printed for the Percy Society in 1842. in Liter atwe and Art. it3 houfehold in no favourable point of view. The majority of thefe tell loofe ftories of hutbands deceived by their fair fpoufeSj or of tricks played upon unfufpedling damfels. In fome inflances the treatment of the hulband is perhaps what may be called of a lefs objedfionable charafler, as in the fabliau of I>a Vilain Mire (the clown doftor), printed in Barbazan (iii. a), which was the origin of Moliere’s well-known comedy of “ Le Medecin malgre lui.” A rich peafant married the daughter of a poor knight ; it was of courfe a marriage of ambition on his part, and of intereft on hers — one of thole ill-forted matches which, according to feudal fentiments, could never be happy, and in which the wife was confidered as privileged to treat her hulband with all poffible contempt. In this inftance the lady hit upon an ingenious mode of punilhing her hulband lor his want of fubmilfion to her ill-treatment. Meffengers from the king palTed that way, feeking a Ikilful dodtor to cure the king’s daughter of a dangerous malady. The lady fecretly informed thefe meffengers that her hulband was a phylician of extraordinary talent, but of an eccentric temper, for he would never acknowledge or exercife his art until lirfl; fubjedled to a fevere beating. The hulband is feized, bound, and carried by force to the king’s court, where, of courfe, he denies all knowledge of the healing art, but a fevere beating obliges him to com- pliance, and he is fuccefsful by a combination of impudence and chance. This is only the beginning of the poor man’s miferies. Inftead of being allowed to go home, his fame has become fo great that he is retained at court for the public good, and, with a rapid fuccellion of patients, fearful of the refults of his confcious ignorance, he refutes them all, and is fubjedled in every cafe to the fame ill-treatment to force his compliance. The examples in which the hulband, on the other hand, outwits the wife are few. A fabliau by a poet who gives himfelf the name of Cortebarbe, printed alfo by Barbazan (iii. 398), relates how three blind beggars were deceived by a clerc, or fcholar, of Paris, who met them on the road near Compiegne. The clerk pretended to give the three beggars a bezant, which was then a good fum of money, and they hallened joyfully to the next tavern, where they ordered a plentiful fupper, and fealled to their hearts’ content. But, in fad, the clerk had not given them a bezant at a all. Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque 114 all, although, as he laid he did lb, and they could only judge by their hearing, they imagined that they had the coin, and each thought that it was in the keeping of one of his companions. Thus, when the time of [)aying came, and the money was not forthcoming, in the common belief that one of the three had received the bezant and intended to keep it and cheat the others, they quarrelled violently, and from abufe foon came to blows. The landlord, drawn to the fpot by the uproar, and informed of the ftate of the cafe, accufed the three blind men of a confpiracy to cheat him, and demanded payment with great threats. The clerk of Paris, who had followed them to the inn, and taken his lodging there in order to witnefs the refult, delivered the blind men by an equally ingenious trick which he plays upon the landlord and the prieft of the pari 111. Some of thefe florles have for their fubjedt tricks played among thieves. In one printed by Meon (i. 124), we have the llory of a rich but limple villan, or countryman, named Brifaut, who is robbed at market by a cunning lharper, and feverely corredted by his wife for his carelelfnefs. Robbery, both by force and by Height of hand and craft, prevailed to an extraordinary degree during the middle ages. The plot of the fabliau of Barat and Hairnet, by Jean de Boves (Barbazan, iv. 233), turns upon a trial of Ikill among three robbers to determine who lhall commit the cleverell adl of thievery, and the refult is, at lead, an extremely amuling (lory. It may be mentioned as an example of the numerous tlories which the jongleurs .certainly obtained from the Ball, that the well-known liory of the Hunchback in the “Arabian Nights” appears among them in two or three different forms. The focial vices of the middle ages, their general licentioufnefs, the prevalence of injultice and extortion, are very fully expofed to view in thefe compofitions, in which no clafs of fociety is fpared. The villan, or peafant, is always treated very contemptuoully ; he formed the clafs from which the jougleur received leaf! benefit. But the ariflocracy, the great barons, the lords of the foil, come in for their full fhare of fatire, and they no doubt enjoyed the ridiculous pidlures of their own order. I will not venture to introduce the reader to female life in the baronial caflle, as it appears m Liter at lire and Art. 115 appears in many of thefe ftoriesj and as it is no doubt truly painted, although, of courfe, in many inftances, much exaggerated. We have already feen how in the flory of Reynard, the charadler of mediaeval fociety was reprefented by the long ftruggle between brute force reprefented by the wolt, the emblem of the ariftocratic clafs, and the low aflutenefs of the fox, or the unariflocratic clafs. The fuccefs of the craft of the human fox over the force of his lordly antagonifl is often told in the fabliaux in ludicrous colours. In that of Trubert, printed by Meon (i. 192), the '' duke ” of a country, with his wife and family, become repeatedly the dupes of the grofs deceptions of a poor but impudent peafant. Thefe fatires upon the ariflocracy were no doubt greatly enjoyed by the good hourgeoijie, who, in their turn, furniflied abundance of dories, of the drolled defcription, to provoke the mirth of the lords of the foil, between whom and themfelves there was a kind of natural antipathy. Nor are the clergy fpared. The pried is ufually defcribed as living with a concubine — his order forbade marrying — and both are confidered as fair game to the community j while the monk figures more frequently as the hero of gallant adventures. Both pried and monk are ufually didinguilhed by their felfidmefs and love of indulgence. In the fabliau Du Bouchier d’ Abbeville, in Barbazan (iv. i), a butcher, on his way home from the fair, feeks a night’s lodging at the houfe of an inhofpitable pried, who refufes it. But when the former returns, and oders, in exchange for his hofpitality, one of his fat flieep which he has purchafed at the fair, and not only to kill it for their dipper, but to give all the meat they do not eat to his hod, he is willingly received into the houfe, and they make an excellent dipper. By the promife of the fkin of the dieep, the gued fucceeds in feducing both the concubine and the maid- fervant, and it is only after his departure the following morning, in the middle of a domedic uproar caufed by the condidting claims of the pried, the concubine, and the maid, to the poirelfion of the Ikin, that it is difcovered that the butcher had dolen the dieep from the pried’s own dock. The fabliaux, as remarked before, form the mod important clafs of the extenfive mafs of the popular literature of the middle ages, and the writers, I 1 6 Hi/lory of Caricature and Grotefque writers, confident in their firong hold upon public favour, fometimes turn round and hurlefque the literature of other clalTes, efpecially the long heavy monotony of ftyle of the great romances of chivalry and the extravagant adventures they contained, as though confcious that they were gradually undermining the popularity of the romance writers. One of thefe poems, entitled “ De Audigier,” and printed in Barbazan (iv. 217), is a parody on the romance writers and on their ftyle, not at all wanting in fpirit or wit, but the fatire is coarfe and vulgar. Another printed in Barbazan (iv. 287), under the title “ De Berengier,” is a fatire upon a fort of knight-errantry which had found its way into mediaeval chivalry. Berengier was a knight of Lombardy, much given to boalling, wdio had a beautiful lady for his wife. He ufed to leave her alone in his caftle, under pretext of fallying forth in fearch of chivalrous adventures, and, after a while, having well hacked his fword and fliield, he returned to vaunt the defperate exploits he had performed. But the lady was ihrewd as well as handfome, and, having fome fufpicions of his truthfulnefs as well as of his courage, Ihe determined to make trial of both. One morning, when her hulband rode forth as ufual, ftie haftily difguiled herfelf in a fuit of armour, mounted a good fteed, and hurrying round by a difterent way, met the boaftful knight in the middle of a wood, where he no fooner faw that he had to encounter a real alfailant, than he difplayed the moft abjedl cowardice, and his opponent exadted from him an ignominious condition as the price of his efcape. On his return home at night, boalling as ufual of his fuccefs, he found his lady taking her revenge upon him in a ftill lefs refpedlful manner, but he was filenced by her ridicule. The Irouveres, or poets, who wrote the fabliaux — I need hardly remark that trouvere is the fame word as trohador, but in the northern dialedl of the French language — appear to have flourilhed chiefly from the clofe of the twelfth century to the earlier part of the fourteenth. They all compofed in French, w'hich was a language then common to England and France, but fome of their compofitions bear internal evidence of having been compofed in England, and others are found in contemporary manufcripts written in this illand. The fcene of a fabliau, printed in Literature and Art. 117 printed by Meon (i. 113), is laid at Colclielierj and that of La Male Honte, printed in Barbazan (Hi. 204), is laid in Kent. The latter, however, was written by a trouvere named Hugues de Cambrai. No objedtion appears to have been entertained to the recital of thefe licentious dories before the ladies of the caltle or of the domeftic circle, and their general popularity was fo great, that the more pious clergy feem to have thought necelfary to find fomething to take their place in the pod-prandial fociety of the monadery, and efpecially of the nunnery; and religions dories were written in the fame form and metre as tlie fabliaux. Some of thefe have been publidied under the title of “ Contes Devots,” and, from their general dulnefs, it may be doubted if they anfwered their purpofe of furnilhing amufement fo well as the others. I I 8 Hijlory of Caricatio'e a?id Grotefque CHAPTER Viri. CARICATURES OF DOMESTIC LIFE. STATE OF DOMESTIC LIFE IN THE MIDDLE AGES. EXAMPLES OF DOMESTIC CARICATURE FROM THE CARV'INGS OF THE MISERERES. KITCHEN SCENES. DOMESTIC BRAWLS. THE FIGHT FOR THE BREECHES. THE JUDICIAL DUEL BETWEEN MAN AND WIFE AMONG THE GERMANS. ALLUSIONS TO WITCHCRAFT. SATIRES ON THE TRADES ; THE BAKER, THE MILLER, THE WINE-PEDLAR AND TAV'ERN-KEEPER, THE ALE-WIFE, ETC. influence of the jougleurs over people’s minds generally. With their flories and fatirical pieces, their grimaces, their poftures, and their wonderful performances, was very confiderable, and may be eafily traced in mediaeval manners and fentiments. This influence would naturally be exerted upon inventive art, and when a painter had to adorn the margin of a book, or the fculptor to decorate the ornamental parts of a building, we might expedt the ideas which would firfl. prefent themfelves to him to be thofe fuggefted by the jongleur's performance, for the fame tafle had to be indulged in the one as in the other. The fame wit or fatire would pervade them both. Among the moll popular fubjedts of fatire during the middle ages, were domeflic fcenes. Domeflic life at that period appears to have been in its general charadler coarfe, turbulent, and, I Ihould fay, anything but happy. In all its points of view, it prefented abundant fubjedts for left and burlefque. There is little room for doubt that the Romifli Church, as it exilled in tlie middle ages, was extremely hoftile to domeftic happinefs among the middle and lower clalfes, and that the interference of the priell in the family was only a fource of domeftic trouble. The fatirical writings of the period, the popular tales, the difcourfes of thofe who fought reform, even the pidlures in the manufcripts in Literature and Art. 119 manuferipts and the Iculptures on the walls invariably reprelent the female portion of the family as entirely under the influence of the prieftsj and that influence as exercifed for the world of purpofes. They encouraged faithlelfnefs as well as difobedience in wives, and undermined the virtue of daughters, and were confequently regarded with anything but kindly feeling by the male portion of the population. The priefl, the wife, and the hulband, form the ufual leading charadfers in a mediaeval farce. Subjedls of this kind are not very unfrequent in the illuminations of manuferipts, and more efpecially in the Iculptures of buildings, and thole chiefly ecclefiaflical, in which monks or priefls are introduced in very equivocal lituations. This part of the fubjedt, however, is one into which we fliall not here venture, as we find the mediaeval caricaturifts drawing plenty of materials from the lefs vicious lhades of contemporary life ; and, in faft, fome of their mold arnufing piddures are taken from the droll, rather than from the vicious, feenes of the interior of the houfehold. Such feenes are very frequent on the mifereres of the old cathedrals and collegiate churches. Thus, in the flails at Worcefler Cathedral, there is a droll figure of a man feated before a fire in a kitchen I 20 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque No, 72 . 01 J Lady and her Friends. kitchen well tlored with flitches of bacon, he himfelf occupied in attending to the boiling pot, while he warms his feet, for which purpofe he has taken off his ihoes. In a fimilar carving in Hereford Cathedral, a man, alfo in the kitchen, is feen attempting to take liberties with the cook maid, who throws a platter at his head. A copy of this curious fubjedt is given m cut No. 71, and the cut No. 72 is taken from a fimilar mife- rere in Minfter Church, in the Ifle of Thanet. It reprefents an old lady feated, occupied induftrioufly in fpinning, and accompanied by her cats. AVe might eafily add other examples of fimilar fubjedls from the fame fources, fuch as the fcene in our cut No. 7,3, taken from one of the flails of AVinchefter Cathedral, which feems to be intended to reprefent a witch riding away upon her cat, an enormous animal, whofe jovial look is only outdone by that of its mifirefs. The latter has carried her diftaff with her, and is diligently employed in fpinning. A flail in Sher- borne Minfter, given in our cut No. 74, reprefents a fcene in a fchool, in which an unfortunate fcholar is experiencing punilhment of a rather fevere defcrip- tion, to the great alarm of his com- panions, on whom his difgrace is evi- dently adfing as a warning. The flog- ging fcene at fchool appears to have been rather 3 favourite fubjed among the early caricaturifts, for the fcourge was looked upon in the middle ages as the grand ftimulant to fcholarfhip. In thofe good old times, when a man recalled to memory his fchoolboy days, he did not fay, “ When I was at fchool,” but, “ AVhen I was under the rod.” I\fo. 7 3 . The Lady and her Cat. An in Literature and Art. I 2 I An extenfive field for the liudy of this interefting part of our fubjedt will be found in the architeftural gallery in the Kenfington Mufeum, which contains a large number of calls from flails and other fculptures. No. 74 Scholaftic Dijdpline. chiefly felefted from the French cathedrals. One of thefe, engraved in our cut No. 7_5, reprefents a couple of females, feated before the kitchen fire. The date of this fculpture is flated to be 1382. To judge by their No. 75. A Point in Difpote. looks and attitude, there is a difagreement between them, and the objed in difpute feems to be a piece of meat, which one has taken out of the pot and placed on a diih. This lady wields her ladle as though fhe wore R prepared I 22 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque prepared to ute it as a weapon, while her opponent is armed with the bellows. The ale-pot was not unfrequently the fubjedt of pidtures of a turbulent charafter, and among the grotefque and monftrous figures In the margins of the noble manufcript of the fourteenth century, known as the Luttrell Pfalter,” one reprefents two perfonages not only quarrelling over their pots, which they appear to have emptied, but adtually fighting with them. One of them has literally broken his pot over his companion’s head. The fcene is copied in our cut No. 76. It mull be flated, however, that the more common fubjedts of thefe homely fcenes are domeftic quarrels, and that the man, or his wife, enjoying their firefide, or limilar bits of domeftic comfort, only make their appearance at rare inter\'als. Domeftic quarrels and combats are much more frequent. We have already feen, in the cut No. 75, two dames of the kitchen evidently beginning to quarrel over their cookery. A ftall in the church of Stratford-upon-Avon gives us the group reprefented in our cut No. 77. The battle has here become defperate, but whether the male combatant be an opprefiTed hufband or an in Literature and Art. 123 an impertinent intruder, is not clear. The quarrel would feem to have arifen during the procefs of cooking, as the female, who has feized her opponent by the beard, has evidently fnatched up the ladle as the readieft weapon at hand. The anger appears to be mainly on her fide, and the rather tame countenance of her antagonifi contrails flrangely with her inflamed features. Our next cut. No. 78, is taken from the fculpture of a column in Ely Cathedral, here copied from an engraving in Carter’s “ Specimens of Ancient Sculpture.” A man and wife, apparently, are llruggling for the pof- feflion of a ftaflf, which is perhaps in- , . - No. 77 . Domejiic Strife. tended to be the emblem or mattery. As is generally reprefented to be the cafe in thefe fcenes of domeflic No. 78 . A Struggle for the NLiftery. ftrife, the woman fliows more energy and more ftrength than her opponent. 124 Hijiory of Caricature arid Grotefque opponent, and fhe is evidently overcoming him. The maflery of the wife over the hulband feems to have been a univerfally acknowledged date of things. A ftall in Sherborne Minder, in Dorfet, which has A’o. 79. The TJ’y'e In the A fccndant. furnidied the fnbjed of our cut No. 79, might almod be taken as the tequel of the lad cut. The lady has potTeded herfelf of the datf, has overthrown her hulband, and is even driking him on the head wuth it A'o. So, Violence Rejljlcd. when he is dowm. In our next cut. No. 80, which is taken from one of the cads of dalls in the French cathedrals exhibited in the Kenfmgton Mufeum, it is not quite clear which of the two is the offender, but, perhaps. in Ijiterature and Art. 125 perhaps, in this cafe, the archer, as his profeflion is indicated by his bow and arrows, has made a gallant aflault, which, although Ihe does not look much difpleafed at it, the offended dame certainly refifts with fpirit. One idea connedted with this pidture of domeflic antagonifm appears to have been very popular from a rather early period. There is a proverbial phrafe to fignify that the wife is mafler in the houfehold, by which it is intimated that “Ihe we.ars the breeches.” The phrafe is, it muft be confelfed, an odd one, and is only half underftood by modern explanations; but in mediaeval llory we learn how “die” firft put in her claim to wear this particular article of drefs, how it was firft difputed and contefted, how ftie was at times defeated, but how, as a general rule, the claim was enforced. There was a French poet of the thirteenth century, Hugues Piaucelles, two of whofe falliaux, or metrical tales, entitled the “Fabliau d’Eftourmi,” and the “Fabliau de Sire Hains et de Dame Anieufe,” are preferved in manufcript, and have been printed in the colledfion of Barbazan. The fecond of thefe relates fome of the adventures of a mediaeval couple, whofe houfehold was not the bell regulated in the world. The name of the heroine of this ftory, Anieufe, is limply an old form of the French word ennuyeufe, and certainly dame Anieufe was fufficiently “ ennuyeufe ” to her lord and hufband. “Sire Hains,” her hufband, was, it appears, a maker of “ cottes ” and mantles, and we fhould judge alfo, by the point on which the quarrel turned, that he was partial to a good dinner. Dame Anieufe was of that difagreeable temper, that whenever Sire Hains told her of fome particularly nice thing which he wilhed her to buy for his meal, ftie bought inftead fome- thing which the knew was difagreeable to him. If he ordered boiled meat, ftie invariably roafted it, and further contrived that it ftiould be fo covered with cinders and afhes that he could not eat it. This would Ihow that people in the middle ages (except, perhaps, profeffional cooks) were very unapt at roafting meat. This ftate of things had gone on for fome time, when one day Sire Hains gave orders to his wife to buy him fifh for his dinner. The difobedient wife, inftead of buying fifti, provided nothing for his meal but a dilh of fpinage, telling him falfely that all the fifh flank. This leads to a violent quarrel, in which, after fome fierce wrangling. 126 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque wrangling, efpecially on the part of the lady, Sire Hains propofes to decide their difference in a novel manner. Early in the morning,” he faid, “ I will take off my breeches and lay them down in the middle of the court, and the one who can win them flrall be acknowledged to be mafler or miflrefs of the houfe.” he fans contredircy Voudra'i mes bra'ies defchauc'iery Et tnmi noflre cort couchier j Et qui conquerre les porroy Par bone refon moujierra ^u'ii ert fire ou dame du noflre^ Barbazan, Fabliaux, tome iii. p. 3S3. Dame Ameufe accepted the challenge with eagernefs,and each prepared for the ftruggle. After due preparation, two neighbours, friend Symon and Dame Aupais, having been called in as witneffes, and the objedt of difpute, the breeches, having been placed on the pavement of the court, the battle began, with fome flight parody on the formalities of the judicial combat. The firft blow was given by the dame, who was fo eager for the fray that flie flruck her hulband before he had put himfelf on his guard j and the war of tongues, in which at lead: Dame Anieufe had the bed of it, went on at the fame time as the other battle. Sire Hains ventured a dight expodulation on her eagernefs for the fray, in anfwer to which die only threw in his teeth a derce defiance to do his word. Provoked at this. Sire Hains druck at her, and hit her over the eyebrows, fo ededlively, that the Hein was difeolou edj and, over-confident in the ededt of this fird blow, he began rather too foon to exult over his wife’s defeat. But Dame Anieufe was lefs difconcerted than he expedfed, and recovering quickly from the effedf of the blow, die turned upon him and druck him on the fame part of his face with fuch force, that die nearly knocked him over the Iheepfold. Dame Anieufe, in her turn, now fneered over him, and while he was recovering from his confufion, her eyes fell upon the objedt of contention, and die rudied to it, and laid her hands upon it to carry it away. This movement roufed Sire Hains, who indantly feized another part of the article of his drefs of which he was m Literature and Art. 1 27 was thus in danger of being deprived, and began a ftruggle for poirellion, in which the faid article underwent confiderable dilapidation, and fragments of it were fcattered over the court. In the midft; of this llruggle the aftual fight recommenced, by the hufband giving his wife fo heavy a blow on the teeth that her mouth was filled with blood. The efiett was fuch that Sire Hains already reckoned on the vidtory, and proclaimed himfelf lord of the breeches. Hains jiert fa fame enmi les dcn% Tel cop., que la boucke deden% Li a toute emplie de fancx, “ Tien oref diji Sire Hains^ anc, fe cuit que je Tai bien atainte^ Or Tai-je de deux colors tainte — faurai les braies toutes 'voiesd^ But the immediate eflfedt on Dame Anieufe was only to render her more defperate. She quitted her hold on the difputed garment, and fell upon her hutband with fuch a Ihower of blows that he hardly knew which way to turn. She was thus, however, unconfcioufly exhaufting herfelf, and Sire Hains foon recovered. The battle now became fiercer than ever, and the lady feemed to be gaining the upper hand, when Sire Hains gave her a Ikilful blow in the ribs, which nearly broke one of them, and confider- ably checked her ardour. Friend Symon here interpofed, with the praife- worthy aim of refioring peace before further harm might be done, but in vain, for the lady was only rendered more obfiinate by her milhap; and he agreed that it was ufelefs to interfere until one had got a more decided advantage over the other. The fight therefore went on, the two com- batants having now feized each other by the hair of the head, a mode of combat in which the advantages were rather on the fide of the male. At this moment, one of the judges. Dame Aupais, fympathifing too much with Dame Anieufe, ventured fome words of encouragement, which drew upon her a fevere rebuke from her colleague, Symon, who intimated that if Ihe interfered again there might be two pairs of combatants inftead of one. Meanwhile Dame Anieufe was becoming exhaufted, and was evidently getting the word: of the contefi, until at length, daggering from 128 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque from a vigorous pufli, Ihe fell back into a large balket which lay behind her. Sire Hains flood over her exultingly, and Symon, as umpire, pronounced him vidtorious. He thereupon took pofleflion of the difputed article of raiment, and again invefled himfelf with it, while the lady accepted faithfully the conditions impofed upon her, and we are aflured by the poet that flie was a good and obedient wife during the refl of her life. In this ftory, which affords a curious pidture of mediaeval life, we learn the origin of the proverb relating to the poireflion and wearing of the breeches. Plugues Piaucelles concludes his falliau by recommending every man who has a difobedient w'ife to treat her in the fame manner; and mediaeval hufbands appear to have followed his advice, without fear of laws againfl the ill-treatment of women. A fubjedf like this was well fitted for the burlefques on the flails, and accordingly we find on one of thofe in the cathedral at Rouen, the group given in our cut No. 8i, which feems to reprefent the part of the flory No. 8l. The Fight for the Breeches, in which both combatants feize hold of the difputed garment, and flruggle for polTeflion of it. The hufband here grafps a knife in his hand, with wdiich he feems to be threatening to cut it to pieces rather than give it up. The falliau gives the vidtor}' to the hufband, but the wife was generally confidered as in a majority of cafes carrying off the prize. In an extremely rare engraving by the Flemifli artifl Van Mecken, dated m 1480, of which I give a copy in our cut No. 82, the lady, while putting in Literature and Art. 129 putting on the breeches, of which fhe has juli become potfefled, thows an inclination to lord it rather tyrannically over her other half, whom flie has condemned to perform the domeflic drudgery of the manfion. In Germany, where there was Hill more roughnefs in mediaeval life, what was told in England and France as a good ftory of domeftic doings, was a6tually carried into praftice under the authority of the laws. The judicial duel was there adopted by the legal authorities as a mode of fettling the differences between hutband and wife. Curious particulars on this fubje6t are given in an interefting paper entitled “ Some obfervations on Judicial Duels as pra6tifed in Germany,” publilhed in the twenty- ninth volume of the Archaeologia of the Society of Antiquaries (p. 348). Idiefe obfervations are chiefly taken from a volume of direftions, accom- panied with drawings, for the various modes of attack and defence, compiled by Paulus Kail, a celebrated teacher of defence at the court of Bavaria about the year 1400. Among thefe drawings we have one reprefenting the mode of combat between hutband and wife. The only weapon allowed the female, but that a very formidable one, was, according to thefe dire6tions, a heavy ftone wrapped up in an elongation of her chemife, while her opponent had only a fliort ftaif, and he was placed up to the waift in a pit formed in the ground. The following s IS Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque is a literal tranllation of the diredions given in the manufcript, and our cut No. 83 is a copy of the drawing which illuftrates it : — “ The woman muft be fo prepared, that a fleeve of her chemife extend a fmall ell beyond her hand, like a little fack ; there indeed is put a Hone weighing three pounds 5 and flie has nothing elfe but her chemife, and that is bound together between the legs with a lace. Then the man makes himfelf ready in the pit over againft his wife. He is buried therein up to the girdle, and one hand is bound at the elbow to the fide.” At this time the pradice of fuch combats in Germany feems to have been long known, for it is ftated that in the year T200 a man and his wife fought under the fandion of the civic authorities at Bale, in Switzerland. In a pidure of a combat between man and wife, from a manufcript refembling that of Paulus Kali, but executed nearly a century later, the man is placed in a tub inflead of a pit, with his left arm tied to his fide as before, and his right holding a fhort heavy fiaft'; while the woman is drelTed, and not ftripped to the S3. A Legal Combat. chemife. in "Literature and Art. 131 chemife, as in the former cafe. The man appears to be holding the flick in fuch a manner that the fling in which the ftone was contained would twift round it, and the woman would thus be at the mercy of her opponent. In an ancient manufcript on the fcience of defence in the library at Gotha, the man in the tub is reprefented as the conqueror of his wife, having thus dragged her head-foremofl into the tub, where file appears with her legs kicking up in the air. This was the orthodox mode of combat between man and wife, but it was fometimes prattifed under more fanguinary forms. In one pi6ture given from thefe old books on the fcience of defence by the writer of the paper on the fubjeft in the Archaeologia, the two combatants, naked down to the waift, are reprefented fighting with fliarp knives, and inflitfing upon each other’s bodies frightful gallies. A feries of ftall carvings at Corbeil, near Paris, of which more will be faid a little farther on in this chapter, has furniflied the curious group reprefented in our cut No. 84, which is one of the rather rare pidorial No. 84 . The Witch ami the Dcmci:. allufions to the fubjed of witchcraft. It reprefents a woman who mull, by tier occupation, be a witch, for Ihe has lb far got the maftery of the demon that llie is fawing oft' his head with a very uncomfortable looking iullrument. 132 llijlory of Caricature and Grotefque inftmment. iVnother flor}' of witchcraft is told in the fculpture of a Hone panel at the entrance of the cathedral of Lyons, which is repre- fented in our cut No. 85. One power, fuppofed to be poffefled by witches, was that of transforming people to animals at will. William of Malmelbury, in his Chronicle, tells a ftory of two witches in the neighbourhood of Rome, who ufed to allure travellers into their cottage, and there transform them into horfes, pigs, or other animals, which they fold, and feafted themfelves with the money. One day a young man, who lived by the profeffion of a jongleur, fought a night’s lodging at their cottage, and was received, but they turned him into an afs, and, as he retained his underftanding and his power of afting, they gained much money by exliibiting him. At length a rich man of the neighbourhood, who wanted him for his private amufement, offered the two women a large fum for him, which they accepted, but they warned the new polfelfor of the afs that he Ihould carefully reflrain him from going Into the water, as that would deprive him of his power of performing. The man who had purchafed the afs aded upon this advice, and carefully kept him from water, but one day, through the negligence of his keeper, the als in Literature and Art. 133 afs efcaped from his ftable, and, rulhing to a pond at no great diftance, threw himfelf into it. Water — and running water efpecially — was believed to deftroy the power of witchcraft or magic j and no fooner was the afs immerfed in the water, than he recovered his original form of a young man. He told his ftory, which foon reached the ears of the pope, and the two women were feized, and confelfed their crimes. The carving from Lyons Cathedral appears to reprefent fome fuch fcene of forcery. The naked woman, evidently a witch, is, perhaps, feated on a man whom Ihe has transformed into a goat, and the feems to be whirling the cat over him in fuch a manner that it may tear his face with its claws. There was ftill another clafs of fubjedls for fatire and caricature which belongs to this part of our fubjedt — I mean that of the trader and manufadturer. We mufl; not fuppofe that fraudulent trading, that deceptive and imperfedt workmanlhip, that adulteration of everything that could be adulterated, are peculiar to modern times. On the contrary, there was no period in the world’s hiflory in which dilhonell: dealing was carried on to fuch an extraordinary extent, in which there was fo much deception ufed in manufadtures, or in which adulteration was pradtifed on to fhamelefs a fcale, as during the middle ages. Thefe vices, or, as we may, perhaps, more properly defcribe them, thefe crimes, are often mentioned in the mediaeval writers, but they were not eafily reprefented pidtorially, and therefore we rarely meet with diredt allufions to them, either in fculpture, on done or wood, or in the paintings of illuminated manufcripts. Reprefentations of the trades themfelves are not fo rare, and are fometimes droll and almoft burlefque. A curious feries of fuch reprefentations of arts and trades was carved on the mifereres of the church of St. Spire, at Corbeil, near Paris, which only exifl: now in Millin’s engravings, but they feem to have been works of the fifteenth century. Among them the firft place is given to the various occupations necetfary for the produdtion of bread, that article fo important to the fupport of life. Thus we fee, in thefe carvings at Corbeil, the labours of the reaper, cutting the wheat and forming it into Ibeaves, the miller carrying it away to be ground into meal. 1 34 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque meal, and the baker thrutVmg it into the oven, and drawing it out in the lliape of loaves. Our cut No. 86, taken from one of thefe fculptures, reprefents the baker either putting in or taking out the bread with his A'». 86. Bjkcr of the Fifteenth Century. peel j by the carneft manner in which he looks at it, we may fuppofe that it is the latter, and that he is afeertaining if it be fufficiently baked. We have an earlier reprefentation of a mediaeval oven in our cut No. 87, taken from the celebrated illu- minated manufeript of the “Ro- mance of Alexandre,” in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, which appears to belong to an early period of the fourteenth century% Here the baker is evi- dentl}' going to take a loaf out ] of the oven, for his companion holds a difh for the purpofe of No, 87. ,A Buker, . . receiving it. In nothing was fraud and adulteration pradtifed to fo great an extent as in Literature and Art. 135 as in the important article of bread, and the two occupations el’pecially employed in making it were objefts of very great diflike and of fcornful fatire. The miller was proverbially a thief. Every reader of Chaucer will remember his charabter fo admirably drawn in that of the miller of Trumpington, who, though he was as proud and gay “ as eny pecok,” was neverthelels eminently ditlionell. A theef he luas fur foth of corn and mele. And that a feigh (dy), and ujyng (practisecl) for to fele. Chaucer’s Heeves Tale. This pradtice included a large college then exifting in Cambridge, but now forgotten, the Soler Hall, which fufiered greatly by his depredations. And on a day it happed in a founde, Syk lay the mauncyple on a maledye. Men ’wenden ’wijjy that he Jchulde dye ; For which this meller flal bathe mele and corn A tkoujend part more than byforn. For ther biforn he flal hut curteyfy ; But now he is a theef outrageoufly. For which the wardeyn chidde and made fare, But therof fette the meller not a tare f He crakked hoof, and fwor it was not fo. Two of the fcholars of this college refolved to go with the corn to the mill, and by their watchfulnefs prevent his depredations. Thofe who are acquainted with the ftory know how the fcholars fucceeded, or rather how they failed ; how the miller dole half a butliel of their flour and caufed his wife to make a cake of it ; and how the vidims had their revenge and recovered the cake. As already dated, the baker had in thefe good old times no better charader than the miller, if not worfe. There was an old faying, that if three perfons of three obnoxious profetfions were put together in a fack and lhaken up, the firfl who came out would certainly be a rogue, and one of thefe was a baker. Moreover, the opinion concerning the baker was fo flrong that, as in the phrafe taken from the old legends of the witches, who in their feftivals fat thirteen at a table, this number was popularly 136 Hifiory of Caricature and Grotefque popularly called a devil’s dozen, and was believed to be unlucky — fo, when the devil’s name was abandoned, perhaps for the fake of euphony, the name fubftituted for it was that of the baker, and the number thirteen was called “ a baker’s dozen.” The makers of nearly all forts of provifions for fale were, in the middle ages, tainted with the fame vice, and there was nothing from which fociety in general, efpecially in the towns where few made bread for themfelves, fuffered fo much. This evil is alluded to more than once in that curious educational treatife, the “ Diftionarius ” of John de Garlande, printed in my ‘‘Volume of Vocabularies.” This writer, who wrote in the earlier half of the thirteenth century, infinuates that the makers of pies (pajtillarii), an article of food which was greatly in repute during the middle ages, often made ufe of bad eggs. The cooks, he fays further, fold, efpecially in Paris to the fcholars of the univerfity, cooked meats, faufages, and fuch things, which were not lit to eat; while the butchers furniflied the meat of animals which had died of difeafe. Even the fpices and drugs fold by the apothecaries, or epiciers, were not, he fays, to be trufled. John de Garlande had evidently an inclination to fatire, and he gives way to it not unfrequently in the little book of which I am fpeaking. He fays that the glovers of Paris cheated the fcholars of the univerfity, by felling them gloves made of bad materials ; that the women who gained their living by winding thread (devacuatrices, in the Latin of the time), not only emptied the fcholars’ purfes, but wafted their bodies alfo (it is intended as a pun upon the Latin word) ; and the huckflers fold them unripe fruit for ripe. The drapers, he fays, cheated people not only by felling bad materials, but by meafuring them with falfe meafures; while the hawkers, who went about from houfe to houfe, robbed as well as cheated. M. Jubinal has publifhed in his curious volume entitled ‘‘ Jongleurs et Trouveres,” a rather jocular poem on the bakers, written in French of, perhaps, the thirteenth century, in which their art is lauded as much better and more ufeful than that of the goldfmith’s. The mJllers’ depredations on the corn fent to be ground at the mill, are laid to the charge of the rats, which attack it by night, and the hens, which find their way to it by day; and he explains the diminution the bakings experienced in Lite7~ature and Art. 137 experienced in the hands of the baker as ariling out of the charity of the latter towards the poor and needy, to whom they gave the meal and pafte before it had even been put into the oven. The celebrated Englilli poet, John Lydgate, in a Ihort poem preferved in a manufcript in the Harleian Library in the Britilh Mufeum (MS. Harl. No. 2,255, fol. 157, v°), defcribes the pillory, which he calls their Ballile, as the proper heritage of the miller and the baker; — Vut out hh hed^ lyji nat for to dare^ But lyk a man upon that tour to abyde^ For cafi of eggys w/7 not oonys /pare, Tyl he be quallyd body, bak, and Jyde. His heed endooryd, and of njerray pryde Put out his armys, foenvith abrood his face ; The fenejlrallys be made for hym fo wyde, Claymyth to been a capteyn of that place. The hafyle longith of •verray deiue ryght To fals bakerys, it is trc%ve herytage Se'veralle to them, this knouueth e'very ivyght. Be kynde ajfygned for ther fttyng Jiage ,* Wheer they may freely Jhe^e out ther •vifage, IVhan they tak oonys their pojfejjioun, Owthir in youthe or in myddyl age ; M.en doon hem 'wrong yif they take hym down. Let mellerys and bakerys gadre hem a gilde, .And alle of ajfent make a fraternite, Undir the pillory a letil chapelle bylde. The place amorteyje, and purchaje lyberte. For alle thos that of ther noumbre be ; What e'uir it coofi afftir that they 'wendc. They may dayme, be juji audorite. Upon that baf ile to make an cnde. The wine-dealer and the publican formed another clafs in mediaeval fociety who lived by fraud and dilhonefty, and were the objedts of fatire. The latter gave both bad wine and bad meafure, and he often alfo adted as a pawnbroker, and when people had drunk more than they could pay for, he would take their clothes as pledges for their money. The tavern, in the middle ages, was the refort of very mifcellaneous company; T gamblers 138 Hlftory of Caricature a?id Grotefque gamblers and loofe women were always on the watch there to lead more honeft people into ruin, and the tavern-keeper profited largely by their gains ; and the more vulgar minftrel and “ jogelour ” found employment there ; for the middle clalfes of fociety, and even their betters, frequented the tavern much more generally than at the prefent day. In the carved flails of the church of Corbeil, the liquor merchant is reprefented by the figure of a man wheeling a hogflread in a barrow, as fhown in our cut No. 88. The gravenefs and air of importance with which he regards it would lead us to fuppofe that the barrel contains wine ; and the cup and jug on the thelf above Ihow that it was to be fold retail. The wme- fellers called out their wines from their doors, and -boafted of their qualities, in order to tempt people in ; and John de Garlande alfures us that when they entered, they were ferved with wine which was not worth drinking. “The criers of wine,” he fays, “proclaim with extended throat the diluted wine they have in their taverns, offering it at four pennies, at fix, at eight, and at twelve, frelh poured out from the gallon calk into the cup, to tempt people.” (“Volume of Vocabularies,” p. 126.) The ale-wife was an efpecial fubjedf of jefl and in Literature and Art. 139 and latire, and is not unfVequently reprefented on the pi6torial monuments of our forefathers. Our cut No. 89 is taken from one of the No. 89 . The Ale-lVfe. mifereres in the church of Wellingborough, in Northamptonlhire ; the ale-wife is pouring her liquor from her jug into a cup to ferve a ruftic, who appears to be waiting for it with impatience. The figure of the ale-drawer. No. 90, is taken from one of the mifereres in the parilh church of Ludlow, in Shroplhire. The fi2e of his jug is fomewhat difpropor- tionate to that of the barrel from which he obtains the ale. The fame mifereres of Ludlow Church furnifh the next fcene, cut No. 91, which reprefents the end of the wicked ale-wife. The day of judgment is fuppcfed to have arrived, and Ihe has received her fentence. A demon, feated on one fide, is reading a lirt of the 140 Hi [lory of Caricature and Grotefque the crimes (lie has committed, which the magnitude of the parchment Ihows to be a rather copious one. Another demon (whofe head has been broken off in the original) carries on his back, in a very irreverent manner, the unfortunate lady, in order to throw her into hell- inouth, on the other fide of the pifture. She is naked w'ith the exception of the falhionable head-gear, which formed one of her vanities in the world, and the carries with her the falfe meafure wdth which fiie cheated her cuftomers. A demon bagpiper welcomes her on her arrival. The fcene is full of wit and humour. The ruftic claffes, and inftances of their rufticity, are not unfrequently met with in thefe interefting carvings. The Halls of Corbeil prefent teveral agricultural fceues. Our cut No. 92 is taken from thofe of Gloucefter cathedral, of an earlier date, and reprefents the three fliepherds, afioniilied at the appearance of the ftar which announced the birth of the Saviour of mankind. Like the three kings, the ihepherds to whom this revelation was made were always in the middle ages reprefented as three in number. In our drawing from the miferere in Gloucefter cathedral, the coftume of the Ihepherds is remarkably well depidted in Literature and Art. I4I depiSed, even to the details, with the various implements appertaining to their profellion, moft of which are fufpended to their girdles. They are drawn with much fpirit, and even the dog is well reprefented as an efpecially adlive partaker in the fcene. Of the two other examples we feledt from the mifereres of Corbeil, the firft reprefents the carpenter, or, as he was commonly called by our Anglo-Saxon and mediaeval forefathers, the wright, which fignities limply the “maker.” The application of this higher and more general term — for the Almighty himfelf is called, in the Anglo-Saxon poetry, ealra gefcefta wyrhta, the Maker, or Creator, of all things— Ihows how important an art that of the carpenter was conlidered in the middle ages. Everything made of wood came within his province. In the Anglo- Saxon “ Colloquy ” of archbilhop Alfric, where feme of the more ufeful artifans are introduced difputing about the relative value of their feveral crafts, the “wright” fays, '‘Who of you can do without my craft, lince I make houfes and all forts of velTels {vafa), and fhips for you all?” (“Volume of Vocabularies,” p. ii.) And John de Garlande, in the thirteenth century, deferibes the carpenter as making, among other things, tubs, and barrels, and wine-cades. The workmanfhip of thole times was exercifed, before all other materials, on wood and metals, and the 142 Hi/iory of Caricature a?id Grotefque the Wright, or worker in the former material, was diftinguiflied by this circiimtiance from the Iraith, or worker in metal. The carpenter is Itill called a w'right in Scotland. Our lad cut (No. 94), taken alfo from one of the mifereres at Corbeil, reprefents the fhoemaker, or as he was then ufually in Literature and Art. H3 ufually called, the cordwainer, becaufe the leather which he chiefly ufed came from Coidova in Spain, and was thence called cordewan, or cordewaine. Our fhoemaker is engaged in cutting a flcin of leather with an inftrument of a rather Angular form. Shoes, and perhaps forms for making thoes, are fufpended on pegs againfl the wall. 1 144 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque CHAPTER IX. GROTESGUE FACES AND FIGURES. PREVALENCE OF THE TASTE FOR UGLV AND GROTESQUE FACES. SOME OF THE POPULAR FORMS DERIVED FROM ANTIQUITY J THE TONGUE LOLLING OUT, AND THE DISTORTED MOUTH. HORRIBLE SUBJECTS : THE MAN AND THE SERPENTS. ALLEGORICAL FIGURES : GLUTTONY AND LUXURY. OTHER REPRESENTATIONS OF CLERICAL GLUTTONY AND DRUNKEN- NESS. GROTESQUE FIGURES OF INDIVIDUALS, AND GROTESQUE GROUPS. ORNAMENTS OF THE BORDERS OF BOOKS. UNINTENTIONAL CARICATURE ; THE MOTE AND THE BEAM. ri^HE grimaces and ftrange poftures of the jougleurs feem to have had great attraftions for thofe who witnelfed them. To unrefined and uneducated minds no objedl conveys fo perfedl a notion of mirth as an ugly and diftorted face. Hence it is that among the common peafantry at a country fair few exhibitions are more fatisfadory than that of grinning through a horfe-collar. This fentiment is largely exemplified in the fculpture efpecially of the middle ages, a long period, during which the general charadler of fociety prefented that want of refinement which we now obferv^e chiefly in its leafl: cultivated claflTes. Among the moll common decorations of our ancient churches and other mediaeval buildings, are grotefque and monftrous heads and faces. Antiquity, which lent us the types of many of thefe monftrofities, faw in her Typhous and Gorgons a fignification beyond the furface of the pidlure, and her grotefque malks had a general meaning, and were in a manner typical of the whole field of comic literature. The malk was lefs an individual grotefque to be laughed at for itfelf, than a perfonification of comedy. In the middle ages, on the contrary, although in fome cafes certain forms were often regarded as typical of certain ideas, in general the defign extended no farther than the forms which the artift had given to it ; the grotelque in Literature and Art. H5 grotefque features, like the grinning through the horfe-collar, gave fatisfa6fion by their mere uglinefs. Even the applications, when fuch figures were intended to have one, were coarfely fatirical, without any intelle6fuality, and, where they had a meaning beyond the plain text of the fculpture or drawing, it was not far-fetched, but plain and eafily underllood. When the Anglo-Saxon drew the face of a bloated and disfigured monk, he no doubt intended thereby to proclaim the popular notion of the general charafter of monaftic life, but this was a delign which nobody could mifunderfland, an interpretation which everybody was prepared to give to it. We have already feen various examples of this defcription of fatire, fcattered here and there among the immonfe mafs of grotefque fculpture which has no fuch meaning. A great proportion, indeed, of thefe grotefque fculptures appears to prefent mere variations of a certain number of difliu6t types which had been handed down from a remote period, fome of them borrowed, perhaps involuntarily, from antiquity. Hence we naturally look for the earlier and more curious examples of this clafs of art to Italy and the fouth of France, where the tranfition from claffical to mediaeval was more gradual, and the continued influence of claffical forms is more eafily traced. The early Chriftian mafons appear to have caricatured under the form of fuch grotefques the perfonages of the heathen mythology, and to this praftice we perhaps owe fome of the types of the mediaeval monfters. We have feen in a former chapter a grotefque from the church of Monte Majour, near Nifmes, the original type of which had evidently been fome burlefque figure of Saturn eating one of his children. The claffical malk doubtlefs furniflied the type for thofe figures, fo common in mediaeval fculpture, of faces with difproportionately large mouths ; jult as another favourite clafs of grotefque faces, thofe with diftended mouths and tongues lolling out, were taken originally from the Typhous and Gorgons of the ancients. Many other popular types of faces rendered artificially ugly are mere exaggerations of the diflortions produced on the features by different operations, fuch, for inflance, as that of blowing a horn. The pradice of blowing the horn, is, indeed, peculiarly calculated to u exhibit 146 Hifiory of Caricature and Grotefque exhibit the features of the face to difadvantage, and was not overlooked by the deligners of the mediaeval decorative fculpture. One of the large colledtion of cafts of fculptures from French cathedrals exhibited in the mufeum at South Kenfington, has furnifhcd the two fubjedfs given in our cut No. 95. The firll is reprefented as blowing a horn, but he is No. 95 . Grctejque Illonjicrs. producing the greateft poffible dillortion in his features, and elpecially in his mouth, by drawing the horn forcibly on one fide with his left hand, while he pulls his beard in the other diredtion with the right hand. The force with which he is fuppofed to be blowing is perhaps reprefented by the form given to his eyes. The face of the lower figure is in at lead comparative repofe. The defign of reprefenting general dillortion in the firll is further lliown by the ridiculoully unnatural pofition of the arms. Such dillortion of the members was not unfrequently introduced to heighten the. elfedl of the grimace in the face ; and, as in thefe examples, it was not uncommon to introduce as a further element of grotefque, the bodies, or parts of the bodies, of animals, or even of demons. Another in Literature ajid Art. 147 Another cafl in the Kenfington Muleum is the lubje6l of our out No. 96, which prefents the fame idea of ftretching the mouth. The fubjehl is here exhibited by another rather mirthful looking individual, but whether the exhibitor is intended to be a goblin or demon, or No. 96 . Diabolical M.lrth. whether he is merely furnilhed with the wings and claws of a bat, feems rather un(;ertain. The bat was looked upon as an unpropitious if not an unholy animal j like the owl, it was the companion of the witches, and of the fpirits of darknefs. The group in our cut No. 97 is taken from one of the carved flails m the church of Stratford-upon-Avon, and reprefents a trio of grimacers. I'he firll of thefe three grotefque faces is lolling out the tongue to an extravagant length j the fecond is Amply grinning; while the third has taken a faufage between his teeth to render 148 H'lflor'y of Caricature a?id Grotefque render his grimace ftill more ridiculous. The number and variety of fuch grotefque faces, which we find fcattered over the architedural decoration of our old ecclefiafiical buildings, are fo great that I will not attempt to give any more particular claffification of them. All this church decoration was calculated efpecially to produce its effed upon the middle and lower clafles, and mediaeval art was, perhaps more than any- thing elfe, fuited to mediaeval fociety, for it belonged to the mafs and not to the individual. The man who could enjoy a match at grinning through horfe-collars, mull have been charmed by the grotefque works of the mediaeval ftone fculptor and wood carver ; and we may add that thefe difplay, though often rather rude, a very high degree of ikill in art, a great power of producing ftriking imagery. Thefe mediaeval artills loved alfo to produce horrible objeds as well as laughable ones, though even in their horrors they were continually- running into the grotefque. Among the adjunbts to thefe fculptured figures, we fometimes meet with inftruments of pain, and very talented attempts to exhibit this on the features of the vidims. The creed of the middle ages gave great fcope for the indulgence of this talle in the infinitely varied terrors of purgatory and hell ; and, not to fpeak of the more crude defcriptions that are fo common in mediaeval popular literature, the account to which thefe defcriptions might be turned by the poet as well as the artifl: are well known to the reader of Dante. Coils of ferpents and dragons, which were the moft ufual inftruments in the tortures of the infernal regions, were always favourite objeds in mediaeval ornamentation, whether fculptured or drawn, in the details of architedural decoration, or m the initial letters and margins of books. They are often combined in forming grotefque tracery with the bodies of animals or of human beings, and their movements are generally hcftile to the latter. We have already feen, in previous chapters, examples of this ufe of ferpents and dragons, dating from the earlieft periods of mediaeval art ; and it is perhaps the moft common ftyle of ornamentation in the buildings and illuminated mauufcripts in our iftand from the earlier Saxon times to the thirteenth century. This ornamentation is fometimes ftrikingly bold and eft'edive. In the cathedral of Wells there is a feries of in hiterature and Art. 149 of ornamental bolfes, formed by faces writhing under the attacks of numerous dragons, who are feizing upon the lips, eyes, and cheeks of their vidlims. One of thefe boffes, which are of the thirteenth century, is reprefented in our cut No. 98. A large, coarfely featured face is the No. 98 . Horror. vidtim of two dragons, one of which attacks his mouth, while the other has feized him by the eye. The exprellion of the face is ftrikingly horrible. The higher mind of the middle ages loved to fee inner meanings through outward forms; or, at lead, it was a fafliion which manifefted itfelf mod drongly in the latter half of the twelfth century, to adapt thefe outward forms to inward meanings by comparifons and moralifa- tions; and under the ededt of this feeling certain dgures were at times adopted, with a view to fome other purpofe than mere ornament, though this was probably an innovation upon mediaeval art. The tongue lolling out, taken originally, as we have feen, from the imagery of cladic times, was accepted rather early in the middle ages as the emblem or fymbol of luxury ; and, when we dnd it among the fculptured ornaments of the architedlure efpeciallyof fome of the larger and more important churches, it implied probably an allufion to that vice — at lead the face prefented to us was intended to be that of a voluptuary. Among the remarkable feries Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque feries of fculptures which crown the battlements of the clohlers of Magdalen College, Oxford, executed a very few years after the middle of the fifteenth century, amid many figures of a very mifcellaneous charafter, there are feveral which were thus, no doubt, intended to be reprefen- tatives of vices, if not of virtues. I give two examples of thefe curious fculptures. The firft. No. 99, is generally confidered to reprefent gluttony, and it is a remarkable circumftance that, in a building the charadter of w'hich was partly ecclefiaftical, and which was eredfed at the expenfe and under the diredfions of a great prelate, Bilhop Wainfiete, the vice of gluttony, with which the ecclefiaftical order was efpecially reproached, fliould be reurefented in ecclefiaftical coftume. It is an additional proof that the detail of the work of the building was left entirely to the builders. The coarfe, bloated features of the face, and the “ villainous ” low forehead. 99 . Glutto'iy, No. 100 . Luxury. are in hiterature and Art. 151 are chara6teriftically executed ; and the lolling tongue may perhaps be intended to intimate that, in the lives of the clergy, luxury went hand in with its kindred vice. The fecond of our examples. No. too, appears by its different charadterillics (feme of which we have been unable to introduce in our woodcut) to be intended to reprefent luxury itfelf. Sometimes qualities of the individual man, or even the clafs of fociety, are reprefented in a manner far lefs difguifed by allegorical clothing, and therefore much more plainly to the underftanding of the vulgar. Thus in an illuminated manufcript of the fourteenth cen- tury, in the Britilh Mufeum (MS. Arundel, No. 91), gluttony is reprefented by a monk Gluttony. devouring a pie alone and in fecret, except that a little cloven-footed imp holds up the difli, and teems to enjoy the profpedl: of monaftic indulgence. This pitture is copied in our cut No. loi. Another manufcript of the fame date (MS. Sloane, No. 2435) contains a fcene, copied in our cut No. 102, reprefenting drunkennefs under the form of another monk, who has obtained the keys and found his way into the cellar of his monaftery, and is there indulging his love for good ale in fimilar fecrecy. It is to be remarked that here, again, the vices are laid to the charge of the clergy. Our cut No. 103, from a baf-relief in Ely Cathedral, given in Carter’s “ Specimens 152 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque “ Specimens of Ancient Sculpture/’ reprefents a man drinking from a horn, and evidently enjoying his employment, but his coftume is not futficiently charadleriftic to betray his quality. The fubjedt of grotefque faces and heads naturally leads us to that of monftrous and grotefque bodies and groups of bodies, which has already been partly treated in a former chapter, where we have noticed the great love fhown in the middle ages for monftrous animated figures, not only monllers of one nature, but, and that efpecially, of figures formed by joining together the parts of different, and entirely dilTimilar, Ao. 104. Strat 7 ge lidcnficr. animals, of fimilar mixtures between animals and men. This, as ffated above, was often effedled by joining the body of forae nondefcript animal to a human head and facej fo that, by the difproportionate fize of the latter, the body, as a fecondary part of the pifture, became only an adjundt to fet off’ ftill further the grotefque charadler of the human face. More importance was fometimes given to the body combined with fantaftic forms, which baffle any attempt at giving an intelligible defcription. The accompanying cut. No. 104, reprefents a winged monfter of this kind ; in Literature and Art. 153 kind 5 it is taken from one of the cafts from French churches exhibited in the Kenfington Mufeum. Sometimes the mediaeval artift, without giving any unufual form to his human figures, placed them in ftrange poftures, or joined them in fingular combinations. Thefe latter are commonly of a playful charadler, or fometimes they reprefent droll feats of Ikill, or puzzles, or other fubjefts, all of which have been publilhed pidtorially and for the amufe- ment of children down to very recent times. There were a few of thefe groups which are of rather frequent occurrence, and they were evidently favourite types. One of thefe is given in the annexed cut, No. 105. It Ldo. 10^, Rolling Topjy Turnjy. is taken from one of the carved mifereres of the flails in Ely cathedral, as given in Carter, and reprefents two men who appear to be rolling over each other. The upper figure exhibits animal’s ears on his cap, which feem to proclaim him a member of the fraternity of fools : the ears of the lower figure are concealed from view. This group is not a rare one, efpecially on fimilar monuments in France, where the architedural antiquaries have a technical name for it j and this Ihows us how even the particular forms of art in the middle ages were not confined to any par- ticular country, but more or lefs, and with exceptions, they pervaded all X thofe 154 Hifiory of Caricature a?id Grotefque thofe which acknowledged the ecclefiaffical fupremacy of the church of Romej whatever peculiarity of (lyle it took in particular countries, the fame forms were fpread through all wellern Europe. Our next cut, No. io6, gives another of thefe curious groups, conlilling, in fa6t, of two individuals, one of which is evidently an ecclefiaflic. It will be feen that, as we follow this round, we obtain, by means of the two heads, four difterent figures in fo No. io6, yi Contnuious Group. many totally different pofitions. This group is taken from one of the very curious feats in the cathedral of Rouen in Normandy, which were engraved and publifhed in an interelling volume by the late Monfieur E. H. Langlois. Among the mofl interelling of the mediaeval burlefque drawings are thofe which are found in fuch abundance in the borders of the pages of illuminated manufcripts. During the earlier periods of the mediaeval miniatures, the favourite objefts for thefe borders were monltrous animals, efpecially dragons, which could eafily be twined into grotefque combinations. In courfe of time, the fubjebfs thus introduced became more numerous, and in the fifteenth century they were very varied. Strange animals Itlll continued to be favourites, but they were more light and elegant in their forms, and were more gracefully defigned. Our cut No. 107, taken from the beautifully-illuminated manufcript of the romance of the “Comte d Artois, of the fifteenth century, which has furnilhed us previoufly with feveral cuts, will illuflrate my The graceful lightnels of the tracery of the foliage fhown in this No. 107 . Border Ornament, meaninof. in Literature and Art. 155 this defign is found in none of the earlier works of art of this clafs. This, of courfe, is chiefly to be afcribed to the great advance which had been made in the art of defign fince the thirteenth century. But, though lb greatly improved in the llyle of art, the fame clafs of fubjedls con- tinued to be introduced in this border ornamentation long after the art of printing, and that of engraving, which accompanied it, had been introduced. The revolution in the ornamentation of the borders of the pages of books was effedted by the artifls of the fixteenth century, at which time people had become better acquainted with, and had learnt to appreciate, ancient art and Roman antiquities, and they drew their infpiration from a corredt knowledge of what the middle ages had copied blindly, but had not underflood. Among the fubjedls of burlefque which the monuments of Roman art prefented to them, the flumpy figures of the pigmies appear to have gained fpecial favour, and they are employed in a manner which reminds us of the pidtures found in Pompeii. Jofl Amman, the well-known artift, who exercifed his profeffion at Nurem- berg in the latter half of the fixteenth century, engraved a fet of illuflrations to Ovid’s Metamorphofes, which were printed at Lyons in 1574, and each cut and page of which is enclofed in a border of very fanciful and neatly-executed burlefque. The pigmies are introduced in thefe borders very freely, and are grouped with great fpirit. I feledt as an example, cut No. to8, a fcene which reprefents a triumphal proceffion — fome 156 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque fome pigmy Alexander returning from his conquefts. The liero is feated on a throne carried by an elephant, and before him a bird, perhaps a vanqnilhed crane, proclaims loudly his praife. Before them a pigmy attendant marches proudly, carrying in one hand the olive branch of peace, and leading in the other a ponderous but captive oftrich, as a trophy of his mailer’s victories. Before him again a pigmy warrior, heavily armed with battle-axe and falchion, is mounting the Heps of a Itage, on which a nondefcript animal, partaking fomewhat of the charafter of a fow, but perhaps intended as a burlefque on the ftrange animals which, in mediaeval romance, Alexander was faid to have encountered in Egypt, blows a horn, to celebrate or announce the return of the conqueror. A fnail, alfo advancing llowly up the ftage, implies, perhaps, a fneer at the whole fcene. Neverthelefs, thefe old German, Flemilti, and Dutch artifts were Bill much influenced by the mediaeval fpirit, which they difplayed in their coarfe and clumly imagination, in their negle6t of everything like ccngruity in their treatment of the fubjedt with regard to time and place, and their naive exaggerations and blunders. Extreme examples of thefe charadteriltics are fpoken of, in which the Ifraelites croffing the Red Sea are armed with mulkets, and all the other accoutrements of modern foldiers, and in which Abraham is preparing to facrifice his fon Ifaac by fliooting him with a matchlock. In delineating fcriptural fubjedts, an attempt is generally made to clothe the figures in an imaginary ancient oriental cofiume, but the landfcapes are filled with the modern cafiles and manfion houfes, churches, and monalleries of wefiern Europe. Thefe half-mediaeval artifis, too, like their more ancient predecelTors, often fall into unintentional caricature by the exaggeration or fimplicity with which they treat their fubjedts. There was one fubjedt which the artifis of this period of regeneration of art feemed to have agreed to treat in a very unimaginative manner. In the beautiful Sermon on the Mount, our Saviour, in condemning hafiy judgments of other people’s adlions, fays (Matt. vii. 3 — 5), “ And why beholdefi thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but confidereft not the beam that is in thine own eye ? Or how wilt thou fay to thy brother. Let me pull out the mote in Literature and Art, ^S1 mote out of thine eye, and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye ? Thou hypocrite, firfl; call out the beam out of thine own eye, and then flialt thou fee clearly to call out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” What- ever be the exabl nature of the beam which the man was expedted to overlook in his “ own eye,” it certainly was not a large beam of timber. Yet fuch was the conception of it by artills of the fixteenth century. One of them, named Solomon Bernard, deligned a feries of woodcuts illullrating the New Teflament, which were publilhed at Lyons in 1553 • and the manner in which he treated the fubjebl will be feen in our cut No. 109, taken from one of the illullrations to that book. The individual feated is the man who has a mote in his eye, which the other, approach- ing him, points out ; and he retorts by pointing to the “ beam,” which is certainly fuch a maffive objebl as could not eafily have been overlooked. About thirteen years before this, an artill of Auglburg, named Daniel Hopfer, had publilhed a large copper-plate engraving of this fame fubjeft, a reduced copy of which is given in the cut No. 110. The individual who fees the mote in his brother’s eye, is evidently treating it in the iVb. 109. The Mote and the Beam. charabler 1 5 8 Hijlory of Caricature and Crotefque charafter of a phyliciaa or furgeon. It is only neceffary to add that the beam in his own eye is of Hill more extraordinary dimenfions than the former, and that, though it feems to efcape the notice both of himfelf and his patient, it is evident that the group in the diftance contemplate it with allonilhment. The building accompanying this fcene appears to be a church, with paintings of faints in the windows. in Literature and Art. 159 CHAPTER X. SATIRICAL LITERATURE IN THE MIDDLE AGES. JOHN DE HAUTEVILLE AND ALAN DE LILLE.— GOL I AS AND THE GOLIARDS. THE GOLIARDIC POETRT. TASTE FOR PARODY.— PARODIES ON RELIGIOUS SUBJECTS. POLITICAL CARICATURE IN THE MIDDLE AGES. THE JEWS OF NORWICH. CARICATURE REPRESENTATIONS OF COUNTRIES. LOCAL SATIRE. POLITICAL SONGS AND POEMS. I N a previous chapter I have fpoken of a clafs of fatirical literature which was entirely popular in its charafter. Not that on this account it was original among the peoples who compofed mediaeval fociety, for the intelleHual development of the middle ages came almofl all from Rome through one medium or other, although we know fo little of the details of the popular literature of the Romans that we cannot always trace it. The mediaeval literature of wetlern Europe was moftly modelled upon that of France, which was received, like its language, from Rome. But when the great univerfity fylfem became eftablilhed, towards the end of the eleventh century, the fcholars of weltern Europe became more diredly acquainted with the models of literature which antiquity had left them ; and during the twelfth century thefe found imitators fo Ikilful that fome of them almofl; deceive us into accepting them for clallical writers themfelves. Among the firft of thefe models to attra6l the attention of mediaeval fcholars, were the Roman fatirifls, and the fludy of them produced, during the twelfth century, a number of fatirical writers in Latin prole and verfe, who are remarkable not only for their boldnefs and poignancy, but for the elegance of their flyle. I may mention among thole of Englilh birth, John of Salilbury, Walter Mape.s, and Giraldus Cambrenfis, who all wrote in prole, and Nigellus Wireker, already mentioned in a former chapter, and John de Hauteville, who wrote in verle. i6o HJiory of Caricature and Grotefque verfe. The lirft of thefe, in his “ Polycraticus,” Walter Mapes, in his book “ De Nugis Curialiuin,” and Giraldus. in his “ Speculum Ecclefiae,” and feveral other of his writings, lay the lalli on the corruptions and vices of their contemporaries with no tender hand. The two mod remarkable Englilh fatirids of the twelfth century were John de Hauteville and Nigellns Wireker. The former wrote, in the year 1184, a poem in nine books of Latin hexameters, entitled, after the name of its hero, “ Archi- trenius,” or the Arch-mourner. Architrenius is reprefented as a youth, arrived at years of maturity, who forrows over the fpeftacle of human vices and weaknelfes, until he refolves to go on a pilgrimage to Dame Nature, in order to expodulate with her for having made him feeble to redd the temptations of the world, and to entreat her adidance. On his way, he arrives fuccedively at the court of Venus and at the abode of Gluttony, which give him the occadon to dwell at condderable length on the licenfe and luxury which prevailed among his contemporaries; He next reaches Paris, and vidts the famous mediaeval univerdty, and his fatire on the manners of the dudents and the fruitlelfnefs of their dudies, forms a remarkable and intereding pidture of the age. The pilgrim next arrives at the Mount of Ambition, tempting by its beaut}' and by the dately palace with which it was crowned, and here we are prefented with a duire on the manners and corruptions of the court. Near to this was the Hill of Prefumption, which was inhabited by eccledadics of all clalPes, great fcholadic dodtors and profed'ors, monks, and the like. It is a fatire on the manners of the clergy. As Architrenius turns from this painful fpeftacle, he encounters a gigantic and hideous monder named Cupidity, is led into a feries of refledtions upon the greedinefs and avarice of the prelates, from which he is roufed by the uproar caufed by a derce combat between the prodigals and the mifers. He is fubfequently carried to the illand of far-didant Thule, which he dnds to be the reding- place of the philofophers of ancient Greece, and he lidens to their declamations againd the vices of mankind. After this vidt, Architrenius reaches the end of his pilgrimage. He dnds Nature in the form of a beautiful woman, dwelling with a hod of attendants in the midd of a dowery plain, and meats with a courteous reception, but die begins by giving in Literature and Art. i6i giving him a long le6ture on natural philofophy. After this is concluded. Dame Nature liftens to his complaints, and, to confole him, gives him a handlbme woman, named Moderation, for a wife, and difmiffes him with a chapter of good counfels on the duties of married life. The general moral intended to be inculcated appears to be that the retirement of domeftic happinefs is to be preferred to the vain and heartlefs turmoils of aftive life in all its phafes. It will be feen that the kind of allegory which fubfequently produced the “ Pilgrim’s Progrefs,” had already made its appearance in mediaeval literature. Another of the celebrated fatirifts of the fcholaftic ages was named Alanus de Infulis, or Alan of Lille, becaufe he is underflood to have been born at Lille m Flanders. Lie occupied the chair of theology for many years in the univerfity of Paris with great diltinbtion, and his learning was fo extenflve that he gained the name of do6lor univerfalis, the univerfal debtor. In one of his books, which is an imitation of that favourite book in the middle ages “Boethius de Confolatione Philofophiae,” Dame Nature, in the place of Philofophy- — not, as in John de Hauteville, as the referee, but as the complainant — is introduced bitterly lamenting over the deep depravity of the thirteenth century, efpecially difplayed in the prevalence of vices of a revolting charabter. This work, which, like Boethius, confifls of alternate chapters in verfe and profe, is entitled “ De Planbtu Naturae,’’ the lamentation of nature. I will not, however, go on here to give a lifl of the graver fatirical writers, but we will proceed to another clafs of fatirifls which fprang up among the mediaeval fcholars, more remarkable and more peculiar in their charabler — I mean peculiar to the middle ages. The fatires of the time thow us that the fludents in the univerfities in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, who enjoyed a great amount of independence from authority, were generally wild and riotous, and, among the vafl number of youths who then devoted themfelves to a fcholaftic life, we can have no doubt that the habit of diffipation became permanent. Among thefe wild ftudents there exifled, probably, far more wit and fatirical talent than among their fteadier and more laborious brethren, and this wit, and the manner in which it was difplayed, made its poflelPors welcome guefls at the luxurious tables of the liigher and Y richer 1 62 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque richer clergy, at which Latin feems to have been the language in ordinary life. In all probability it was from this circumftance (in allufion to the Latin word gula, as intimating their love of the table) that thefe merry fcholars, who difplayed in Latin fome of the accomplifliments which the jongleurs profelfed in the vulgar tongue, took or received the name of goliards (in the Latin of that time, goliardi, or goliardenjes) .* The name at leatl appears to have been adopted towards the end of the twelfth century. In the year 1229, during the minority of Louis IX., and while the government of France was in the hands of the queen- mother, troubles arofe in the univerlity of Paris through the intrigues of the papal legate, and the turbulence of the fcholars led to their difperfion and to the temporary doting of the fchools ; and the contemporary hitlorian, Matthew Paris, tells us how “ fome of the ferv^ants of the departing fcholars, or thofe whom we ufed to call goliardenfes,” com- pofed an indecent epigram on the rumoured familiarities between the legate and the queen. But this is not the firft mention of the goliards, for a flatute of the council of Treves, in 1227, forbade “all priells to permit truants, or other wandering fcholars, or goliards, to fing verfes or Sandhis and Angelas Dei in the fervice of the mafs.”f This probably refers to parodies on the religious fen ice, fuch as thofe of which I fliall loon have to fpeak. From this time the goliards are frequently mentioned. In ecclefiaftical ftatutes publilbed in the year 1289, it is ordered that the clerks or clergy {clerici, that is, men who had their education in the univerfity) fhould not be jongleurs, goliards, or buffoons and the fame flatute proclaims a heavy penalty againfl: thofe clerici “who perfift in the pradice * In the mediaeval Latin, the viord goUardia was introduced to express the pro- fession of the goliard, and the verb goUard'vzare, to signify the practice of it. t “ Item, prascipimus ut omnes sacerdotes non permittant trutannos et alios vagos scholares, aut goliardos, cantare versus super SanSius et Angelus Dei in missis,” etc. — Concil. Trevir., an 1227, ap. Marten, et Durand. Ampliss. Coll., vii. col. 117. I “ Item, prascipimus quod clerici non sint joculatores, goliardi, seu bufones.” — Stat. Synod. Caduacensis, Ruthenensis, et Tutelensis Eccles. ap. Martene, Thes. Anecd., iv. col. 727. in Literature and Art, 1 6 3 praftice of goliardy or Ilage performance during a year,”* which fliows that they exercifed more of the fundtions of tiie jougleur than the mere fmging of fongs. Thefe vagabond clerks made for themfelves an imaginary chieftain, or prefident of their order, to whom they gave the name of Golias, probably as a pun on the name of the giant who combated againft David, and, to lliow further their defiance of the exifling church government, they made him a bifhop — Golias cpifcopus. Bilhop Golias was the burlefque repre- fentative of the clerical order, the general fatirift, the reformer of eclefiaftical and all other corruptions. If he was not a doftor of divinity, he was a mafter of arts, for he is fpoken of as Magi/ler Golias. But above all he was the father of the Goliards, the “ribald clerks,” as they are called, who all belonged to his houfehold,f and they are fpoken of as his children. Summa falus omnium, Jilius Marita, Pajcat, potat, •vejliat pueros Golya ^ | “ May the Saviour of all, the Son of Mary, give food, drink, and clothes to the children of Golias!” Still the name was clothed in lb much myftery, that Giraldus Cambrenfis, who flourilhed towards the latter end of the twelfth century, believed Golias to be a real perfonage, and his contemporary. It may be added that Golias not only boafts of the dignity of billiop, but he appears fometimes under the title of archipoela, the archpoet or poet-in-chief. Casfarius of Heiflerbach, who completed his book of the miracles of his time in the year 1222, tells us a curious anecdote of the charabter of the wandering clerk. In the year before he wrote, he tells us, “ It happened at Bonn, in the diocefe of Cologne, that a certain wandering clerk. * “ Cleric! .... si in goliardiavel histrionatu per annum fuerint.” — Ib.col. 729. In one of the editions of this statute it is added, “ after they have been warned three times.” f “ Clerici ribaldi, maxime qui vulgo dicuntur de famila GoUa ." — Concil. Sen. ap. Concil., tom. ix. p. 578. X See my “ Poems of Walter Mapes,” p. 70. 1 64 HJlory of Caricature and Grotefque clerk, named Nicholas, of the clafs they call archpoet, was grievoufly ill, and when he fuppofed that he was dying, he obtained from our abbot, through his own pleading, and the intercellion of the canons of the fame church, admiffion into the order. What more ? He put on the tunic, as it appeared to us, with much contrition, but, when the danger was pad, he took it off immediately, and, throwing it down with derifion, took to flight.” We learn bed the charafier of the goliards from their own jioetry, a condderable quantity of which is preferved. They wandered about from mandon to mantion, probably from monadery to monaflery, iud like the jougleurs, but they feem to have been efpecially welcome at the tables of the prelates of the church, and, like the jougleurs, beddes being well feaded, they received gifts of clothing and other articles. In few indances only were they otherwife than welcome, as defcribed in the rhyming epigram printed m my “ Latin Poems attributed to Walter Mapes.” “ I come uninvited,” fays the goliard to the billiop, “ready for dinner; fuch is my fate, never to dine invited.” The bilhop replies, “I care not for vagabonds, who wander among the delds, and cottages, and villages ; fuch gueds are not for my table. I do not invite you, for I avoid fuch as you ; yet without my will you may eat the bread you alk. Walli, wipe, dt, dine, drink, wipe, and depart.” Goliardus. Non in'vitatus ^cnio prandere paratut ,* Sic jum fatatusy nunquam prandere 'vocatus. Episcopus. Non ego euro •vagosy qui rura^ mapaliay pagos Perlujlranty tales non 'vult mea menja Jodales, Te non innjitOy tihi conjimiles ego vitc ; lide tatnen in'uito potieris pane petko, Ahluey tergCy fede, prandcy blhcy tergCy recede. In another dmilar epigram, the goliard complains of the bilhop who had given him as his reward nothing but an old worn-out mantle. Mod of the writers of the goliardic poetry complain of their poverty, and fome of them admit that this poverty arofe from the tavern and the love of gambling. One of them alleges as his claim to the liberality of his in Literature and Art. 165 his hoft, that, as he was a fcholar, he had not learnt to labour, that his parents were knights, but he had no tafte for fighting, and that, in a word, he preferred poetry to any occupation. Another fpeaks ftill more to the point, and complains that he is in danger of being obliged to fell his clothes. “If this garment of vair which I wear,” he fays, “be fold for money, it will be a great difgrace to me 5 I would rather futfer a long fall. A bilhop, who is the mofl generous of all generous men, gave me this cloak, and will have for it heaven, a greater reward than St. Martin has, who only gave half of his cloak. It is needful now that the poet’s want be relieved by your liberality [addretling his hearers] ; let noble men give noble gifts — gold, and robes, and the like.” Si 'vendatur propter dcnarium Indumentum quod porto njarium., Grande mihi jiet opprobrium ; M.alo diu pati jejunium. Largijfimui largorum omnium Prceful dedit mihi hoc pallium.^ Majus kabens in calis premium 'dluam Martinus^ qui dedit medium^ Nunc eji opus ut njejira copia Skble'vetur 'vatis inopia ,• Dent ncbiles dona nobilia ^ — AurmUy njejies^ et his Jimilia. There has been fome difterence of opinion as to the country to which this poetry more efpecially belongs. Giraldus Cambrenfis, writing at the end of the twelfth or the beginning of the thirteenth century, evidently thought that Golias was an Englifhman ; and at a later date the goliardic poetry was almoft all afcribed to Giraldus’s contemporary and friend, the celebrated humourift, Walter Mapes. This was, no doubt, an error. Jacob Grimm feemed inclined to claim them for Germany; but Grimm, on this occafion, certainly took a narrow view of the queftion. We thall probably be more correft in faying that they belonged in common to all the countries over which univerfity learning extended; that in whatever country a particular poem of this clafs was compofed, it became the property of the whole body of thefe fcholattic jougleurs, and that it was thus 1 66 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque tluis carried from one land to another, receiving Ibmetimes alterations or additions to adapt it to each. Several of thefe poems are found in manufcripts written in different countries with fuch alterations and additions, as, for inftance, that in the well-known “ Confeliion,” in the Englilh copies of which we have, near the conclufion, the line — Praful Co'uentrenjium, parce conjitenli ; an appeal to the bilhop of Coventry, which is changed, in a copy in a German manufcript, to EUBe Colonies., parce poenitenti, “ O eleft of Cologne, fpare me penitent." From a comparifon of what remains of this poetry in manufcripts written in different countries, it appears probable that the names Golias and goliard originated in the univerfity of Paris, but were more efpecially popular in England, while the term archipoeta was more commonly ufed in Germany. In 1841 I colledled all the goliardic poetr)' which I could then find in Englilh manufcripts, and edited it, under the name of Walter Mapes, as one of the publications of the Camden Society.* At a rather later date I gave a chapter of additional matter of the fame defcription in my “ Anecdota Literaria."t All the poems I have printed in thefe two volumes are found in manufcripts written in England, and fome of them are certainly the compofitions of Englilh writers. They are diftinguilhed by remarkable facility and eafe in verfification and rhyme, and by great pungency of fatire. The latter is diredled efpecially againft the clerical order, and none are fpared, from the pope at the fummit of the fcale down to the lowell of the clergy. In the “ Apocalypfis Goliae," or Golias’s Revelations, which appears to have been the moll popular of all thefe poems. * The Latin Poems commonly attributed to Walter Mapes, collected and edited by Thomas Wright, Esq., 4to., London, 1841. t “ Anecdota Literaria ; a Collection of Short Poems in English, Latin, and French, illustrative of the Literature and History of England in the Thirteenth Century.” Edited by Thomas Wright, Esq. 8vo., London, 1844. in Literature and Art. 167 poems,* the poet defcribes himtelf as carried up in a vifion to heaven, where the vices and diforders of the various claffesof thepopifh clergy are fucceffively revealed to him. The pope is a devouring lion j in hiseager- nefs for pounds, he pawns books ; at the fight of a mark of money, he treats Mark the Evangelill with disdain ; while he fails aloft, money alone is his anchoring-place. The original lines will ferve as a fpecimen of the tfyle of thefe curious compofitions, and of the love of punning which was fo charatterillic of the literature of that age ; — Eft leo pontifex fummus^ qui devorat^ librae fitiens^ libros impignorat ^ IlLarcam rejpkiet^ Marcum dedecorat ; In Jummis nu'viganSy in nummh anchorat. The bilhop is in hafte to intrude himfelf into other people’s paftures, and fills himfelf with other people’s goods. The ravenous archdeacon is com- pared to an eagle, becaufe he has fharp eyes to fee his prey afar off, and is fwift to feize upon it. The dean is reprefented by an animal with a man’s face, full of filent guile, who covers fraud with the form of jullice, and by the ihow of fimplicity would make others believe him to be pious. In this fpirit the faults of the clergy, of all degrees, are minutely criticifed through between four and five hundred linesj and it mufl; not be forgotten that it was the Englifh clergy whofe charadter was thus expofed. Tu Jcribes etiam, forma Jed alia, Septem ecc/efiis quce Junt in Anglia. Others of thefe pieces are termed Sermons, and are addrelfed, fome to the bifhops and dignitaries of the church, others to the pope, others to the monaflic orders, and others to the clergy in general. The court of Rome, we are told, was infamous for its greedinefs ; there all right and juftice were put up for fale, and no favour could be had without money. In this court money occupies everybody’s thoughts ; its crofs — i. e. the mark on * In my edition I have collated no less than sixteen copies which occur among the MSS. in the British Museum, and in the libraries at Oxford and Cambridge, and there are, no doubt, many more. i68 Hiflory of Caricature and Grotefque on the reverfe of the coin — its roundnefs, and its whitenefs, all pleafe the Romans ; where money fpeaks law is filent. Nummh in hac curia non efl qui non •vacet ; Crux placet^ rotunditasy et albedo placet^ Et cum totum placeat^ et Romanis placet^ Ubi nummus loquitur et lex omnis tacet. Perhaps one of the moft curious of thefe poems is the “ Confeffion of Golias,” in which the poet is made to fatirife himftlf, and he thus gives us a curious pitlure of the goliard’s life. He complains that he is made of light material, which is moved by every wind ; that he wanders about irregularly, like the Ihip on the fea or the bird in the air, feeking worth- lefs companions like himfelf. He is a tlave to the charms of the fair fex. He is a martyr to gambling, which often turns him out naked to the cold, but he is warmed inwardly by the infpiration of his mind, and he writes better poetry than ever. Lechery and gambling are two of his vices, and the third is drinking. “ The tavern,” he fays, “ I never defpifed, nor ihall I ever defpife it, until I fee the holy angels coming to fing the eternal requiem over my corpfe. It is my defign to die in the tavern; let wine be placed to my mouth when I am expiring, that when the choirs of angels come, they may fay, ‘ Be God propitious to this drinker ! ’ The lamp of the foul is lighted with cups; the heart fteeped in nedlar flies up to heaven ; and the wine in the tavern has for me a better flavour than that which the bilhop’s butler mixes with water Nature gives to every one his peculiar gift ; I never could write falling; a boy could beat me in compofition when I am hungry; I hate thirfl: and fading as much as death.” Tertio capitulo rr.emoro tahernam : lllam nullo tempore Jprevi, neque fpernam. Donee JanBos angelos njementn cernam, Contantes pro mortuo requiem ceternam. M.eum eji propojltum in taherna mori ; Vindum Jit appojitum morientis ori, Ut dicant cum 'venermt angeiorum chori, ‘ Deut fit propitius huic potatori ! ’ PocuHs in Literature ajid Art. 1 6o Poculis accendxtur animt lucenia ; Cor imbiitmn ncEiare njolat ad Juperna : M.ihi Japit dulcius 'vinum in taberna^ quod aqua mijcuit prcejulh pincerna, ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Umcuique proprium dat natura munus : Ego nunquam potui jcribere jejunus ; Me jejunum njincere pojjet puer unus ,* Shim et jejunium odi tanquam jiinui* Another of the more popular of thefe goliardic poems was the advice of Golias againrt marriage, a grofs fatire upon the female fex. Contrary to what we might perhaps expedt from their being written in Latin, many of thefe metrical fatires are diredted againfl; the vices of the laity, as well as againfl: thofe of the clergy. In 1844 the celebrated German fcholar, Jacob Grimm, publilhed in the “ Tranfadlions of the Academy of Sciences at Berlin” a feledtion of goliardic verfes from manufcripts in Germany, which had evidently been written by Germans, and fome of them containing allufions to German affairs in the thirteenth century. f They prefent the fame form of verle and the fame flyle of fatire as thofe found in England, but the name of Golias is exchanged for archipoeta, the archpoet. Some of the ftanzas of the “ Confeflion of Golias ” are found in a poem in which the archpoet addreifes a petition to the archchancellor for afliflance in his diflrefs, and confefles his partiality for wine. A copy of the Confeflion itfelf is allb found in this German colledtion, under the title of the “ Poet’s Confeflion.” The Royal Library at Munich contains a very important manufcript of this goliardic Latin poetry, written in the thirteenth century. It belonged originally to one of the great Benedidtine abbeys in Bavaria, where it appears to have been very carefully preferved, but flill with an apparent confciouf- nefs that it was not exadtly a book for a religious brotherhood, which led the *■ Poems attributed to Walter Mapes, p. 73. The stanzas here quoted, with some others, were afterwards made up into a drinking song, which was rather popular in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. f “ Gedichte des Mittelaltcrs auf Kbnig Friedrich I. den Staufar, und aus seiner so wie der nachstfolgenden Zeit,” 4to. Separate copies of this work were printed off and distributed among mediaeval scholars z 170 llijiory of Caricature and Grotefcpie the monks to omit it in the catalogue of their library, no doubt as a book the polfeirion of which was not to be proclaimed publicly. When written, it was evidently intended to be a careful feleftion of the poetry of this clafs then current. One part of it confills of poetry of a more ferious charafter, Inch as hymns, moral poems, and efpecially fatirical pieces. In this dais there are more than one piece which are alfo found in the manufcripts written in England. A very large portion of the colledion confills of love fongs, which, althougn evidently treafured by the Benedidtine monks, are fometimes licentious in charadler. A third clafs confills of drinking and gambling fongs {potatoria et hiforia). I'he general charadler of this poetry is more playful, more ingenious and intricate in its metrical llrudlure, in fadl, more lyric than that of the poetry we have been defcribing ; yet it came, in all probability, from the fiime clafs of poets — the clerical jougleurs. The touches of fentiment, the defcriptions of female beauty, the admiration of nature, are fometimes exprefied with remarkable grace. Thus, the green wood fweetly enlivened by the joyous voices of its feathered inhabi- tants, the Ikade of its branches, the thorns covered with flowers, which, fays the poet, are emblematical of love, which pricks like a thorn and then foothes like a flower, are tallefully defcribed in the following lines: — Cantu ncmus a'vium Lajci'via canentium Sua've deUnitur^ Fronde redimitur^ Vcrnant Jp'mce Jioribus Micantibus^ Venerem fignantih us Fluia jp'ina pungit^ jios blanditur. And the following fcrap of the defcription of a beautiful damfel fliows no fmall command of language and verfification — AiUcit dulcibus Verbis et ofculisy Labcllulis Cajligate tumentibusy Rojeo ne&areus Odor infufus ort ; Pariter eburneus Sedat ordo dcntium Par ni'ueo candori. The i?i Literature and Art. 171 The whole contents of this inanufcript were printed in 1847, in an o6i:avo volume, ilfued by the Literary Society at Stuttgard.* * * § I had already printed fome examples of fuch amatory Latin lyric poetry in 1838, in a volume of “ Early Mylleries and Latin Poems ;”t but this poetry does not belong properly to the fubjeft of the prefent volume, and I pafs on from it. The goliards did not always write in verfe, for we have fome of their profe compofitions, and thefe appear efpecially in the form of parodies. We trace a great love for parody in the middle ages, which fpared not even things the mofl; facred, and the examples brought forward in the celebrated trial of William Hone, were mild in comparifon to fome which are found fcattered here and there in mediaeval manufcripts. In my Poems, attribu^fed to Walter Mapes,]: I have printed a fatire in profe entitled “ Ma gift er Golyas de quodam alhate’ (i.e., Maher Golias’s account of a certain abbot), which has fomewhat the charadter of a parody upon a faint’s legend. The voluptuous life of the fuperior of a monadic houfe is here defcribed in a tone of banter which nothing could excel. Several parodies, more diredl in their charadler, are printed in the two volumes of the “ Reliquae Antiquae.”§ One of thefe (vol. ii. p. 208) is a complete parody on the fervice of the mafs, which is entitled in the original, “ Mifjd, de Potatorilus," the Mafs of the Drunkard. In this extraordinary compofition, even the pater-nolier is parodied. A portion of this, with great variations, is found in the German colledlion of the Carmina Burana, under the title of Officiurn Luforum, the Office of the Gamblers. In * “ Carmina Burana. Lateinische und Deutsche Lieder und Gedichte einer Handsthrift des XIII. Jahrhunderts aus Benedictbeurn auf der K. Bibliothek zu Miinchen.” 8vo. Stuttgart, 1847. f “ Early Mysteries and other Latin Poems ot the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries,” edited by Thomas Wright, Esq. 8vo. London, 1838. I Introduction, p. xl. § “Reliquiae Antiquae. Scraps from Ancient Manuscripts, illustrating chiefly Early English Literature and the Engli.sh Language.” Edited by Thomas Wright, Esq., and J. O. Halliwell, Esq. 2 vols. 8vo. Vol. i., Lonilon, 1841 ; vol. ii., 1843. 1 72 Hijlory of Caricature ajid Grotefque In the “ Reliquae Antiquae” (ii. 58) we have a parody on the Gofpel of St. Luke, beginning with the words, Initiuni fallacis EvangcUi fecunduin Lupum, this laft word being, of courfe, a fort of pun upon Lucam. Its fubjedt alfo is Bacchus, and the fcene having been laid in a tavern in Oxford, we have no difficulty in afcribing it to fome fcholar of that univerllty in the thirteenth century. Among the Carmina Burana we find a fimilar parody on the Gofpel of St. Mark, which has evidently belonged to one of thefe burlefques on the church fervdce ; and as it is lefs profane than the others, and at the fame time pidures the mediaeval hatred towards the church of Rome, I will give a tranllation of it as an example of this lingular clafs of compofitions. It is hardly neceffary to remind the reader that a mark was a coin of the value of thirteen ffiillings and fourpence : — “ The beginning of the holy gospel according to Marks of silver. At that time the pope said to the Romans : ‘ When the son of man shall come to the seat of our majesty, first say. Friend, for what hast thou come But if he should persevere in knocking without giving you anything, cast him out into utter darkness.’ And it came to pass, that a certain poor clerk came to the court of the lord the pope, and cried out, saying, ‘ Have pity on me at least, you doorkeepers of the pope, for the hand of poverty has touched me. For I am needy and poor, and therefore I seek your assistance in my calamity and misery.’ But they hearing this were highly indignant, and said to him: ‘ Friend, thy poverty be with thee in perdition; get thee backward, Satan, for thou dost not savour of those things which have the savour of money. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Thou shah not enter into the joy of thy lord, until thou shalt have given thy last farthing.’ “ Then the poor man went away, and sold his cloak and his gown, and all that he had, and gave it to the cardinals, and to the doorkeepers, and to the chamberlains. But they said, ‘ And what is this among so many ?’ And they cast him out of the gates, and going out he wept bitterly, and was without consolation. After him there came to the court a certain clerk who was rich, and gross, and fat, and large, and who in a tumult had committed manslaughter. He gave first to the doorkeeper, secondly to the chamberlain, third to the cardinals. But they judged among themselves, that they were to receive more. Then the lord the pope, hearing that the cardinals and officials had received many gifts from the clerk, became sick unto death. But the rich man sent him an electuary of gold and silver, and he was immediately made whole. Then the lord the pope called before him the cardinals and officials, and said to them : ‘ Brethren, see that no one deceive you with empty words. For I give you an example, that, as I take, so take ye also.’ ” This mediaeval love of parody was not unfrequently difplayed in a more in Literature and Art. 173 more popular form, and in the language of the people. In the Rdiquce Antiquce (i. 82) we have a very lingular parody in Englilh on the fermons of the Catholic priedhood, a good part of which is fo written as to prefent no confecutive fenfe, which circumllance itfelf implies a fneer at the preachers. Thus our burlefque preacher, in the middle of his difcourfe, proceeds to narrate as follows (I modernife the Englilh) : — “ Sirs, what time that God and St. Peter came to Rome, Peter asked Adam a full great doubtful question, and said, “ Adam, Adam, why ate thou the apple un- pared?’ ‘ Forsooth,’ quod he, ‘ for I had no wardens (pears) fried.’ And Peter saw the fire, and dread him, and stepped into a plum-tree that hanged full of ripe red cherries. And there he saw all the parrots in the sea. There he saw steeds and stockfish pricking ‘ swose ’(?) in the water. There he saw hens and herrings that hunted after harts in hedges. There he saw eels roasting larks. There he saw haddocks were done on the pillory for wrong roasting of May butter ; and there he saw how bakers baked butter to grease with old monks’ boots. There he saw how the fox preached,” &c. The fame volume contain.s fome rather clever parodies on the old Eoglilli alliterative romances, compofed in a limilar flyle of confecutive nonfenle. It is a clafs of parody which we trace to a rather early period, which the French term a coq-d-l' dne, and which became fafhionable in England in the feventeenth century in the form of longs entitled “ Tom-a-Bedlams.” M. Jubinal has printed two Inch poems in French, perhaps of the thirteenth century,* and others are found fcattered through the old manufcripts. There is generally fo much coarfenefs in them that it is not ealy to feleft a portion for tranllation, and in fa6t their point conlills in going on through the length of a poem of this kind without imparting a lingle clear idea. Thus, in the fecond of thole publillied by Jubinal, we are told how, “The fliadow of an egg carried the new year upon the bottom of a pot ; two old new combs made a ball to run the trot j when it came to paying the fcot, I, who never move my fell'. * “ Achille Jubinal, Jongleurs et Trouveres.” 8vo., Paris, 1835, p. 34; and “ Nouveau Recueil de Contes, Diis, Fabliaux,” &c. 8vo., Paris, 1842. ’Vol. ii. p. 208. In the fiist instance M. Jubinal has given to this little poem the title RcJ-veries, in the second, Fatrafes. 174 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque mylelt', cried out, without fliying a word, ‘Take the feather of an ox, and clothe a wife fool with it.’ ” — hi ombres d’' un oef Portoit Van rencuf Sur la fon% d'' un pot ; Deus 'vie% pinges neuf Firent un efiuef Pour courre le trot ; !^ant njint au paier Vejcot^ Je^ qui onques ne me muef^ M ejcriai^fi ne dls mot ; — ‘ Prene's la plume d' un buefy S'en njeftete, un Jage Jotf ' — Jubinal, Nouv. Rec., ii. 217- d'he fpirit of the goliards continued to exift long after the name had been forgotten} and the mafs of bitter fatire which they had left behind them againli the whole papal lyllem, and againtl the corruptions of the papal church of the middle ages, were a perfeft godfend to the reformers of the fixteenth century, who could point to them triumphantly as irreliftible evidence in their favour. Such fcholars as Flacius Illyricus, eagerly examined the manufcripts which contained this goliardic poetry, and printed it, chiefly as good and efl’eftive weapons in the great religious ftrife which was then convulfmg European fociety. To us, befides their interefl as literary compolitions, they have alfo a hiftorical value, for they introduce us to a more intimate acquaintance with the charatder of the great mental ftruggle for emancipation from mediaeval darknefs which extended efpecially through the thirteenth century, and which was only overcome for a while to begin more ftrongly and more fuccefsfully at a later period. They dilplay to us the grofs ignorance, as well as the corruption of manners, of the great mafs of the mediaeval clergy. Nothing can be more amufing than the fatire which fome of thefe pieces throw on the charafter of monkifh Latin. I printed in the “ Reliquas Antiquae,” under the title of “The Abbot of Gloucefler’s Feafl,” a complaint fuppofed to ifl'ue from the mouth of one of the common herd of the monks, againft the felfilhnefs of their fuperiors, in which all the rules of Latin grammar are entirely fet at defiance. The abbot and prior of Glouceller, with their whole convent, are invited to a feafl, and on their in Literature and Art. •75 their arrival, “ the abbot,” lays the complainant, “ goes to fit at the top, and the prior next to him, but I flood always in the back place among the low people.” Abbas ire Jede furfum, Et prioris juxta ipjum ,* Ego fcmper Jiaui dorjum inter rajcalllia. The wine was ferved liberally to the prior and the abbot, but “nothing was give to us poor folks — everything was for the rich.” Vinum '2. An Iri/hman, teems to have been, like many ot thete official clerks, fomewhat of a wag, and he has amufed himfelf by drawing in the margin figures of the inhabitants of the provinces of Edward’s A A crown 1 78 Hijlory o[ Caricature and Grotefque crown to which the documents referred. Some of thefe are evidently defigned for caricature. Thus, the figure given in our cut No. 112 was intended to reprefent an Irilhman. One trait, at lead, in this caricature is well known from the defcription given by Giraldus Cambrenfis, who fpeaks with a fort of horror of the formidable axes which the Irilh were accuftomed to carry about with them. In treating of the manner in which Ireland ought to be governed when it had been entirely reduced to fubjedtion, he recommends that, “ in the meantime, they ought not to be allowed in time of peace, on any pretence or in any place, to ufe that detetlable inftrument of deflrudlion, which, by an ancient but accurfed cutiom, they conflantly carry in their hands inftead of a llatf'.” In a chapter of his “Topography of Ireland,” Giraldus treats of this “ ancient and wicked cuflom ” of always carrying in their hand an axe, inftead of a ftaft', to the danger of all perfons who had any relations with them. Another Irilhman, from a drawing in the fame manufcript, given in our cut No. 113, carries his axe in the fame threatening attitude. The coftume of thefe figures anfwers with fufficient accuracy to the de- fcription given by Giraldus Cambrenfis. The drawings exhibit more exaftly than that writer’s defcription the “fmall clofe-fitting hoods, hanging a cubit’s length Irijhman. (half-a-yard) below the flioulders,” which, he tells us, they were accuflomed to wear. This fmall hood, with the flat cap attached to it, is Ihown better perhaps in the fecond figure than in the firft. The “breeches and hofe of one piece, or hole and breeches joined too-ether.” are alfo exhibited here very diftindly, and appear to be tied over the heel, but the feet are clearly naked, and evidently the ufe of the “ brogues ” was not yet general among the Irilh of the thirteenth century. If the Welfliman of this period was fomewhat more fcantily clothed than the Irifhman, he had the advantage of him, to judge by this manufcript, in wearing at leaf! one flioe. Our cut No. 114, taken from it, reprefents a Welfhman armed with bow and arrow, whofe clothing con fills in Literature and Art. 179 confifts apparently only of a plain tunic and a light mantle. This is quite in accordance with the defcription by Giraldus Cambrentis, who tells us that in all feafons their drefs was the fame, and that, however fevere the weather, “ they defended themfelves from the cold only by a thin cloak and tunic.” Giraldus fays nothing of the pradtice of the Welfli in wearing but one Ihoe, yet it is evident that at the time of this record that was their pradtice, for in another figure of a Wellhman, given Ao. 114. yi Py'eljh Archer. No. 115. A IVcljhman ^ith his Spear. in our cut No. T15, we fee the fame peculiarity, and in both cafes the Ihoe is worn on the left foot. Giraldus merely fays that the Wellhmen in general, when engaged in warfare, “ either walked bare-footed, or made ufe of high fhoes, roughly made of untanned leather.” He defcribes them as armed fometimes with bows and arrows, and fometimes with long fpears ; and accordingly our firfl: example of a Wellhman from this manufcript is uling the bow, while the fecond carries the Ipear, which he apparently refts on the fingle fhoe of his left foot, while he brandilhes a fword in his left hand. Both our Wellhmen prefent a finguhirly grotefque appearance. The Hi/lory of Caricature and Grotefque I oo The Gafcon is reprefented with more peaceful attributes. Gafcony was the country of vineyards, from whence we drew our great fupply of wines, a very important article of confumption in the middle ages. When the official clerk who wrote this manufeript came to documents relating to Gafcony, his thoughts wandered naturally enough to its rich vineyards and the wine they fupplied fo plentifully, and to which, according to old reports, clerks feldom Ihowed any ditlike, and accordingly, in the iketch, which we copy m our cut No. 1 1 6, we have a Gafcon occupied diligently in pruning his vine-tree. He, at lead:, wears two ffioes, though his clothing is of the lighted defeription. He is perhaps the vinitor of the mediaeval documents on this fubjedl, a ferf attached to the vineyard. Our fecond Iketch, cut No. 117, prefents a more enlarged feene, and introduces us to the whole procefs of making wine. Firft we fee a man better clothed, w ith Ihoes (or boots) of much fuperior The IV'ine IHanufa^urer, make, and a hat on his head, carrying away the grapes from the vineyard to the place where another man, with no clothing at all, is treading out the juice in a large vat. This is dill in fome of the wine countries the in Literature and Art. i8i the common method of extradting the juice from the grape. Further to the left is the large calk in which the juice is put when turned into wine. Satires on the people of particular localities were not uncommon during the middle ages, becaufe local rivalries and confequent local feuds prevailed everywhere. The records of fuch feuds were naturally of a temporary charadter, and perillied when the feuds and rivalries themfelves ceafed to exift, but a few curious fatires of this kind have been preferved. A monk of Peterborough, who lived late in the twelfth or early in the thirteenth century, and for fome reafon or other nouriHied an unfriendly feeling to the people of Norfolk, gave vent to his hoftility in a Ihort Latin poem in what we may call goliardic verfe. He begins by abufing the county itfelf, which, he fays, was as bad and unfruitful as its inhabitants were vile ; and he fuggefls that the evil one, when he fled from the anger of the Almighty, had patfed through it and left his pollution upon it. Among other anecdotes of the fimplicity and folly of the people of this county, which clofely refemble the ftories of the wife men of Gotham of a later date, he informs us that one day the peafantry of one diftridt were fo grieved by the oppreflions of their feudal lord, that they fubfcribed together and bought their freedom, which he fecured to them by formal deed, ratified with a ponderous feal. They adjourned to the tavern, and celebrated their deliverance by feafting and drinking until night came on, and then, for want of a candle, they agreed to burn the wax of the feal. Next day their former lord, informed of what had taken place, brought them before a court, where the deed was judged to be void for want of the feal, and they loft all their money, were reduced to their old pofition of flavery, and treated worfe than ever. Other ftories, ftill more ridiculous, are told of thefe old Norfolkians, but few of them are worth repeating. Another monk, apparently, who calls himfelf John de St. Omer, took up the cudgels for the people of Norfolk, and re- plied to the Peterborough fatirift in fimilar language.* I have printed in another * Both these poems are printed in my “ Early Mysteries, and other Latin Poems ot the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries.” 8vo., London, 1838. 182 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque another tolledion,^ a fatirical poem againft the people of a place called Stockton (perhaps Stockton-on-Tees in Durham), by the monk of a monaftic houfe, of which they were ferfs. It appeared that they had rifen againti the tyranny of their lord, but had been unfuccefsful in defending their caufe in a court of law, and the ecclefiaftical fatirift exults over their defeat in a very uncharitable tone. There will be found in the “ Reliquae Antiquae,”f a very curious fatire in Latin profe direfted againti the inhabitants of Rochetler, although it is in truth aimed againll Englilhmen in general, and is entitled in the manufcript, which is of the fourteenth century, “ Proprietates Anglicorum ” (the Peculiarities of Englilhmen). In the firll place, we are told, that the people of Rochetler had tails, and the queftion is difculfed, very fcholaflically, what fpecies of animals thefe Rocetlrians were. We are then told that the caufe of their deformity arofe from the infolent manner in which they treated St. Auguiline, when he came to preach the Gofpel to the heathen Englitli. After viliting many parts of England, the faint came to Rochetler, where the people, inllead of liflening to him, hooted at him through the tireets, and, in derifion, attached tails of pigs and calves to his vetiments, and fo turned him out of the city. The vengeance of Heaven came upon them, and all who inhabited the city and the country round it, and their defendants after them, were condemned to bear tails exadlly like thofe of pigs. This ftory of the tails w'as not an invention of the author of the fatire, but was a popular legend connedled with the hiftory of St. Augulline’s preaching, though the fcene of the legend was laid in Dorfetlhire. The wiiter of this fingular compofition goes on to defcribe the people of Rochefter as feducers of other people, as men without gratitude, and as traitors. He proceeds to Ihow that Rochefter being lituated in England, its vices had tainted the whole nation, and he illuftrates the bafenefs of the Englilh charadler by a number of anecdotes of worfe than doubtful authenticity. It is, in faft, a fatire on the Englifh compofed in France, and leads us into the domains of political fatire. Political * “ Anecdota Literaria,” p. 49. t “ Reliquae Antiquae,” vol. ii. p. 230. in Literature and Art, >83 Political fatire in the middle ages appeared chiefly in the form of poetry and fong, and it was efpecially in England that it flourifhed, a fure fign that there was in our country a more advanced feeling of popular independence, and greater freedom of fpeech, than in France or Germany.* M. Leroux de Lincy, who undertook to make a colledtion of this poetry for France, found fo little during the mediaeval period that came under the chara£ter of political, that he was obliged to fubflitute the word “hiftorical” in the title of his book.f Where feudalifm was fupreme, indeed, the fongs which arofe out of private or public ftrife, which then were almoft infeparable from fociety, contained no political fentiment, but confifted chiefly of perfonal attacks on the opponents of thofe who employed them. Such are the four fliort fongs written in the time of the revolt of the French during the minority of St. Louis, which commenced in 12263 they are all of a political chara6ter which M. Leroux de Lincy has been able to collect previous to the year 1270, and they confill merely of perfonal taunts againft the courtiers by the diflatisfied barons who were out of power. We trace a fimilar feeling in fome of the popular records of our baronial wars of the reign of Henry III., efpecially in a fong, in the baronial language (Anglo-Norman), preferved in a fmall roll of vellum, which appears to have belonged to the minftrel who chanted it in the halls of the partifans of Simon de Montfort. The fragment which remains conllfts of ftanzas in praife of the leaders of the popular party, and in reproach of their opponents. Thus of Roger de Clifford, one of earl Simon’s friends, we are told that “ the good Roger de Clifford behaved like a noble baron, and exercifed great * I have published from the original manuscripts the mass of the political poetry composed in England during the middle ages in mv three volumes — “The Political Songs of England, from the Reign of John to that of Edward II.” 4to., London, 1839 (issued by the Camden Society) ; and “ Political Poems and Songs relating to English History, composed during the Period from the Accession of Edward III. to that of Richard III.” 8vo., vol i., London, 18593 vob (published by the Treasury, under the direction of the Master of the Rolls.) t “ Receuil de Chants Historiques Framjais depuis le xii®. jusqu’au xviii®. Siecle, par Leroux de Lincy .... Premiere Serie, xii®., xiii'^., xiyi^., et xv'’., Siocles.” 8vo., Paris, 1841. 184 Hijlo'^y of Caricature and Grotefque great juftice; he fuffered none, either fmall or great, or fecretly or openly, to do any wrong.” Et de Cl’iffort ly bon Roger Sc contint cum noble bery Si fit de grant jiif'ce ; Ne fuffri qpas petit ne granty Ne arhe ne par deuanty Fere nul mejp'-ife. On the other hand, one of Montfort’s opponents, the bilhop of Hereford, is treated rather contemptuoully. We are told that he “ learnt well that the earl was ftrong when he took the matter in hand ; before that he (the bilhop) was very fierce, and thought to eat up all the Englilh j but now he is reduced to ftraits.” Ly evejke de Herefort Sout bien que ly qnens fu forty Kant il prid Caffere ,* De'vant ce ejleit mult ftVy Les Englais quida towz manger^ Ales ore ne Jet que fere. This bilhop was Peter de Aigueblanche, one of the foreign favourites, who had been intruded into the lee of Hereford, to the exclufion of a better man, and had been an opprelTor of thofe who were under his rule. The barons feized him, threw him into prifcn, and plundered his poflelfions, and at the time this fong was written, he was fuffering under the imprifon- ment which appears to have Ihortened his life. The univerfities and the clerical body in general were deeply involved in thefe political movements of the thirteenth century; and our earlieft political longs now known are compofed in Latin, and in that form and fiyle of v'erle which feems to have been peculiar to the goliards, and which I venture to call goliardic. Such is a fong againft the three bilfiops who fupported king John in his quarrel with the pope about the prefen- tation to the fee of Canterbury, printed in my Political Songs. Such, too, is the fong of the Wellh, and one or two others, in the fame volume. And fuch, above all, is that remarkable Latin poem in which a partifan in Literature and Art. 185 of the baronSj immediately after the vidlory at Lewes, fet forth the political tenets of his party, and gave the principles of Englilh liberty nearly the fame broad bafis on which they Hand at the prefent. It is an evidence of the extent to which thefe principles were now acknowledged, that in this great baronial flruggle our political fongs began to be written in the Englilh language, an acknowledgment that they concerned the whole Englith public. We trace little of this clafs of literature during the reign of Edward 1 . 5 but, when the popular feelings became turbulent again under the reign of his Ion and fuccelfor, political fongs became more abundant, and their fatire was diredted more even than formerly againft meafures and principles, and was lefs an inftrument of mere perfonal abufe. One fatirical poem of this period, which I had printed from an imperfedt copy in a manu- fcript at Edinburgh, but of which a more complete copy was fubfequently found in a manufcript in the library of St. Peter’s College, Cambridge,* is extremely curious as being the earlieft fatire of this kind written in Englilh that we polTefs. It appears to have been written in the year 1320. The writer of this poem begins by telling us that his objedt is to explain the caufe of the war, ruin, and manflaughter which then prevailed throughout the land, and why the poor were fuffering from hunger and want, the cattle perilhed in the field, and the corn was dear. Thefe he afcribes to the increaling wickednefs of all orders of fociety. To begin with the church, Rome was the head of all corruptions, at the papal court falfehood and treachery only reigned, and the door of the pope’s palace was Ihut againft truth. During the twelfth and following centuries thefe complaints, in terms more or lefs forcible, againft the corruptions of Rome, are continually repeated, and fhow that the evil mull have been one under which everybody felt opprelfed. The old charge of Romilh limony is repeated in this poem in very ftrong terms. “ The clerk’s voice lhall be little heard at the court of Rome, were he ever lb good, unlefs he * “ A Poem on the Times of Edward III., from a MS. preserved in the Library of St. Peter’s College, Cambridge.” Edited by the Rev. C. Hardwick. 8vo. London, 1849. (One of the publications of the Percy Society.) I! B I 86 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque he bring lilver with himj though he were the holieft man that ever was born, unlefs he bring gold or filver, all his time and anxiety are loft. Alas ! why love they fo much that which is perithable ? ” Voys of clerk Jhall lytyl be heard at the court of Ro?ne, M'^ere he tie'ver Jo gode a clerk^ without filnjer and he come ,* Though he ivere the holyji man that e'ver yet %uas ibore, But he hryng gold or fyl'very al hys 'ivhile is forlore And his thoivght, A lias ! ‘whi lo've thei that Jo much that Jchal turne to noivght ? When, on the contrary, a wicked man prefented himfelf at the pope’s court, he had only to carry plenty of money thither, and all went well with him. According to our fatirift, the biihops were “fools,” and the other dignitaries and officials of the church were influenced chiefly by the love of money and felf-indulgence. The parfon began humbly, when he firft obtained his benefice, but no fooner had he gathered money together, than he took “ a wenche ” to live with him as his wife, and rode a hunting with hawks and hounds like a gentleman. The priefls were men with no learning, who preached by rote what they neither under- ftood nor appreciated. “Truely,” he fays, “it fares by our unlearned priefls as by a jay in a cage, who curies himfelf : he fpeaks good Englilh, but he knows not what it means. No more does an unlearned priefl know his gofpel that he reads daily. An unlearned priefl, then, is no better than a jay.” Certes al fo Iiyt fareth by a preji that is lewed. As by a jay in a cage that hymjclf hath hefhretued : Gode Englyjh he fpeketh, but he not nemer ’what. No more •wot a lewcd preji hys gofpel avat he rat By day. Than is a le’wed frcjl no better than a jay. Abbots and priors were remarkable chiefly for their pride and luxury, and the monks naturally followed their examples. Thus was religion debafed everywhere. The charadter of the phyfician is treated with equal feverity, and his various tricks to obtain money are amufingly defcribed. In this manner the fongfler prefents to view the failings of the various orders of lay fociety alfo, the felfiflinefs and oppreffive bearing of the knights and ariflocracy in Literature and Art. 187 ariftocracy, and their extravagance m drefs and living, the negledl of julhce, the ill-management of the wars, the weight of taxation, and all the other evils which then afflidted the ftate. This poem marks a period in our focial hiftory, and led the way to that larger work of the fame charadter, which came about thirty years later, the well-known “ Vifions of Piers Ploughman,”* one of the molt remarkable fatires, as well as one of the moft remarkable poems, in the Englilh language. We will do no more than glance at the further progrefs of political fatire which had now taken a permanent footing in Englilh literature. We fee lefs of it during the reign of Edward IIL, the greater part of which was occupied with foreign wars and triumphs, but there appeared towards the clofe of his reign, a very remarkable fatire, which I have printed in my “Political Poems and Songs.” It is written in Latin, and confifls of a pretended prophecy in verfe by an infpired monk named John of Bridlington, with a mock commentary in profe — in fadt, a parody on the commentaries in which the fcholaftics of that age difplayed their learning, but in this cafe the commentary contains a bold though to us rather obfcure criticifra on the whole policy of Edward’s reign. The reign of Richard II. was convulfed by the great flruggle for religious reform, by the infurredlions of the lower orders, and by the ambition and feuds of the nobles, and produced a vaft quantity of political and religious fatire, both in profe and verfe, but efpecially the latter. We mull not overlook our great poet Chaucer, as one of the powerful fatirifts of this period. Political fong next makes itfelf heard loudly in the wars of the Rofes. It was the laft flruggle of feudalifm in England, and the charadter of the fong had fallen back to its earlier charadleriflics, in which all patriotic feelings were abandoned to make place for perfonal hatred. * “The Vision and the Creed of Piers Ploughman with Notes and a Glossary by Thomas Wright. 2 vols. i2mo. London, 1842. Second and revised edition, 2 vols. i2mo, London, 1856. I 88 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque CHAPTER XI. MINSTRELSY A SUBJECT OF BURLESaUE AND CARICATURE. CHARACTER OF THE MINSTRELS. THEIR JOKES UPON THEMSELVES AND UPON ONE ANOTHER. VARIOUS MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS REPRESENTED IN THE SCULPTURES OF THE MEDIjEVAL ARTISTS. SIR MATTHEW GOURNAY AND THE KING OF PORTUGAL. DISCREDIT OF THE TABOR AND BAG- PIPES. MERMAIDS. NE of the principal dalTes of the fatirifts of the middle ages, the mintlrels, or jongleurs, were far from being unamenable to fatire themfelves. They belonged generally to a low clafs of the population, one that was hardly acknowledged by the law, which merely adminiftered to the pleafures and amufements of others, and, though fometimes liberally rewarded, they were objedts rather of contempt than of refpedt. Of courfe there were minftrels belonging to a clafs more refpedlable than the others, but thefe were comparatively few ; and the ordinary minftrel teems to have been timply an unprincipled vagabond, who hardly polfelfed any fettled refling-place, who wandered about from place to place, and was not too nice as to the means by which he gained his living — perhaps fairly reprefented by the ftreet minftrel, or mountebank, of the prefent day. One of his talents was that of mocking and ridiculing others, and it is not to be wondered at, therefore, if he fometimes became an objedt of mockery and ridicule himfelf. One of the well-known minftrels of the thirteenth century, Rutebeuf, was, like many of his fellows, a poet alfo, and he has left feveral fliort pieces of verfe defcriptive of himfelf and of his own mode of life. In one of thefe he complains of his poverty, and tells us that the world had in his time — the reign of St. Louis — become fo degenerate, that few people gave anything to the unfortunate minftrel. According to his own account, he was without food. in Literature and Art. I 89 food, and in a fair way towards ftarvation, expofed to the cold without fufficient clothing, and with nothing but ftraw for his bed. Je tou% de froit^ de fain baallle., Dont je fuls mors et maubalUi%., Je fuls fanz coutes et fans Hz ,* N'a f povre jujqud Senliz. Slre^f ne fai quel part aille ; Mes cofeiz connoit le paiUiz^ Et Hz de paille n'ef pas Hzy Et en mon lit n a fors la paille . — CEuvres de Rutebeuf, vol. i. p. 3. In another poem, Rutebeuf laments that he has rendered his condition flill more miferable by marrying, when he had not wherewith to keep a wife and family. In a third, he complains that in the midft of his poverty, his wife has brought him a child to increafe his domellic expenfes, while his horfe, on which he was accuflomed to travel to places where he might exercife his profeffion, had broken its leg, and his nurfe was dunning him for money. In addition to all thefe caufes of grief, he had loft the ufe of one of his eyes. Or a d'' enfant geu ma fame ,* M.on chenjal a brifie la jame A une lice ,* Or *ueut de V argent ma norrice^ ^i md en deflraint et me peTice, For r enfant pefre. Throughout his complaint, although he laments over the decline of liberality among his contemporaries, he neverthelefs turns his poverty into a joke. In feveral other pieces of verfe he fpeaks in the fame way, half joking and half lamenting over his condition, and he does not conceal that the love of gambling was one of the caufes of it. “The dice,” he fays, “ have flripped me entirely of my robe ; the dice watch and fpy me ; it is thefe which kill me; they alfault and ruin me, to my grief.” hi de que H de'tier ont fet^ Mdont de ma robe tout desfet ,* Li de' rn'ocient. Li de m''aguetent et efpient ; Li de' m'' afj'aillcnt et difient^ Ce poije moi. — Ib., vol. i. p. 27. And I go Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque And ellewhere he intimates that what the minftrels fometiines gained from the lavilh generofity of their hearers, foon pafled away at the tavern in dice and drinking. One of Rutebeuf s contemporaries in the fame profeflion, Colin Mufet, indulges in firnilar complaints, and fpeaks bitterly of the want of generofity difplayed by the great barons of his time. In addreffing one of them who had treated him ungeneroufly, he fays, “ Sir Count, I have fiddled before you in your hofiel, and you neither gav'e me a gift, nor paid me my wages. It is difcreditable behaviour. By the duty I owe to St. Mary, I cannot continue in your fervice at this rate. My purfe is ill furnifhed, and my wallet is empty.” Sire quens^ j*ai 'vie/e Denjant njos en •vojlre ojiel ; Si ne rn a'vez riens donne'y Ne mes gages acquiteZy C' eft njilante, Foi que doi Jainte MariCy Enft ne njos fteurre-je mie, L/1'* aumojniere eft tnal garnie, Et ma male mal farfie^ He proceeds to hate that when he went home to his wife (for Colin Mufet alfo was a married minllrel), he was ill received if his purfe and wallet were empty ; but it was very different when they were full. His wife then fprang forward and threw her arms round his neck ; fhe took his wallet from his horfe with alacrity, while his lad condu6fed the animal cheerfully to the liable, and his maiden killed a couple of capons, and prepared them with piquant fauce. His daughter brought a comb for his hair. “Then,” he exclaims, “I am mailer in my own houfe.” L^a fame 'va deftrofer Ma male fans demorer j Mon gar^n *va abu'urer Mon che'ual et conreer ; Ma pucele va tuer Deux chapons por deportcr A la jauje aillie, Ma ftlle m'aporte un pigne En fa main par cortoifte, Lors fui de men oftel fire. When in Literature and Art. 191 When the minftrels could thus joke upon themfelves, we need not be furprifed if they fatirifed one another. In a poem of the thirteenth century, entitled “Les deux Troveors Ribauz,” two minftrels are introduced on the ftage abufing and infulting one another, and while indulging in mutual accufations of ignorance in their art, they difplay their ignorance at the fame time by mifquoting the titles of the poems which they profefs to be able to recite. One of them boafts of the variety of inftruments on which he could perform : — Je Juis jugleres de 'viele. Si fai de mufe et de frejlele^ Et de harpes et de ch fonie^ De la gigue^ de rarmonie^ De Lfalteire, et en la rote Sai~ge bien chanter une note. It appears, however, that among all thefe inftruments, the viol, or ftddle, was the one moft generally in ufe. The mediaeval monuments of art abound with burlefques and fatires on the minftrels, whofe inftruments of muftc are placed in the hands fometimes of monfters, and at others in thofe of animals of a not very refined cha- radler. Our cut No. 118 is taken from a manufcript in the Britilh Mufeum (MS. Cotton, Domitian A. ii.), and reprefents a female minftrel playing on the fiddle ; the has the upper part of a lady, and the lower parts of a mare, a combination which appears to have been rather familiar to the imagination of the mediaeval artifts. In our cut No. 119, which is taken from a copy made by Carter of one of the mifereres in Ely Cathedral, it is not quite clear whether the performer on the fiddle be a monfter or merely a cripple ; but perhaps the latter was intended. The inftrument, too, aftumes a rather fingular form. Our cut No 120, alfo taken from Carter, was furnifhed by a fculpture in the church of St. John, at Cirencefter, and reprefents a man performing on an inftrument rather clofely refembling the modern hurdy-gurdy, which is evidently played by turning 192 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque turning a handle, and the mulic is produced by ftriking wires or firings in fide. The face is evidently intended to be that of a jovial companion. Gluttony was an elpecial charadteriftic ot that dais of fociety to which the in hiterature and Art. 193 the minftrel belonged, and perhaps this was the idea intended to be con- No. 1 2 1 . A Sw'mijh Minflrel. veyed in the next pidture. No. 121, taken from one of the (tails in Win- No. 122 . A Mujical Mother, chefier Cathedral, in which a pig is performing on the fiddle, and appears c c to 1 94 Hi (lory of Caricature and Grotefqiie to be accompanied by a juvenile of the fame fpecies of animal. One of the hnne flails, copied in our cut No. 122, reprefents a fow performing on another fort of mufical inllrument, which is not at all uncommon in mediaeval delineations. It is the double pipe or flute, which was evidently borrowed from the ancients. Minftrelfy was the ufual accompaniment of the mediaeval meal, and perhaps this pidlure is intended to be a burlefque on that circumftance, as the mother is playing to her brood while they are feeding. They all feem to lillen quietly, except one, who is evidently much more aftedted by the mufic than his companions. The fame inllrument is placed in the hands of a rather jolly-looking female in No. 123 . The Double Flute, one of the fculptures of St. John's Church in Cirencefter, copied in our cut No. 123. Although this inftrument is rather frequently reprefented in mediaeval works of art, we have no account of or allufion to it in mediaeval writers ; and perhaps it was not held in very high eftimation, and w’as ufed only by a low clafs of performers. As in many other things, the employment of particular mufical inftruraents was guided, no doubt, by fafliion, new ones coining in as old ones went out. Such was the cafe with the inftrument m Literature and Art. 195 inftrument which is named m one of the above extradfs, and in fome other mediaeval writers, a chiffonie, and which has been fuppofed to be the dulcimer, that had fallen into difcredit in the fourteenth century. This inftrument is introduced in a ftory which is found in Cuvelier’s metrical hiftory of the celebrated warrior Bertrand du Guefclin. In the courfe of the war for the expulfion of Pedro the Cruel from the throne of Caftile, an Englilh knight. Sir Matthew Gournay, was fent as a fpecial ambalTador to the court of Portugal. The Portuguefe monarch had in his fervice two minftrels whofe performances he vaunted greatly^ and on whom he fet great ftore, and he inlided on their performing in the prefence of the new ambalTador. It turned out that they played on the inftrument juft mentioned, and Sir Matthew Gournay could not refrain from laughing at the performance. When the king prelTed him to give his opinion, he faid, with more regard for truth than politenefs, ‘‘ In France and Normandy, the inftruments your minftrels play upon are regarded with contempt, and are only in ufe among beggars and blind people, fo that they are popularly called beggar’s inftruments.” The king, we are told, took great offence at the bluntnefs of his Englilh gueft. The fiddle itfelf appears at this time to have been gradually finking in credit, and the poets complained that a degraded tafte for more vulgar mulical inftruments was introducing itfelf. Among thefe we may mention efpecially the pipe and tabor. The French antiquary, M. Jubinal, in a very valuable colledtion of early popular poetry, publilhed under the title of “Jongleurs et Trouveres,” has printed a curious poem of the thirteenth or fourteenth century, intended as a proteft againft the ufe of the tabor and the bagpipes, which he charadterifes as properly the mulical inftru- ments of the peafantry. Yet people then, he fays, were becoming fo befotted on fuch inftruments, that they introduced them in places where better minftrelly would be more fuitable. The writer thinks that the introduction of fo vulgar an inftrument as the tabor into grand feftivals could be looked upon in no other light than as one of the figns which might be expedted to be the precurfors of the coming of Antichrift. “ If fuch people are to come to grand feftivals as carry a bufliel [z.e. a tabor made in the form of a bufliel meafure, on the end of which they beat], and 196 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefqiie and make fuch a terrible noife, it would feem that Antichrift muft now be being born ; people ought to break the head of each of them with a ftaff.” D/uJfent itiels gen% -venir a bele fejie Slui portent un boijfcl, qui ma'inent tel tempefte, II Jatnble que Antecrijl dole maintenant nejlre ; L'en duroit d'un bajion chajcun brijier la tejie. This fatirilf adds, as a proof of the contempt in which the Virgin Mary held fuch inllruments, that flie never loved a tabor, or confented to hear one, and that no tabor was introduced among the minftrelfy at her No, 124 . The Tabor, or Drum, efpoufals. “ The gentle mother of God,” he fays, “ loved the found of the fiddle,” and he goes on to prove her partiality for that inftrument by citing fome of her miracles. Onques le mere Dieu, qui eji mrge honoree, Et ejl a-voec let angles hautement coronee, N'ama onques tabour, ne point ne U agree, IT onques tabour n'i ot quant el fu ejpoufee. La douce mere Dieu ama fon de •viele. The m Literature and Art. 197 The artifl who carved the curious ftalls in Henry VII. ’s Chapel at Weftminfter, feems to have entered fully into the fpirit difplayed by this fatirift, for in one of them, reprefented in our cut No. 124, he has introduced a malted demon playing on the tabor, with an expreffion apparently of derillon. This tabor prefents much the form of a bufliel meafure, or rather, perhaps, of a modern drum. It may be remarked that the drum is, in fa6t, the fame inflrument as the tabor, or, at lead, is derived from it, and they were called by the fame names, tabor or tambour. The Engliflr name drum, which has equivalents in the later forms of the Teutonic dialedts, perhaps means fimply fomething which makes a noife, and is not, as far as I know, met with before the fixteenth century. Another carving of the fame feries of Halls at Weftminfter, copied in our cut No. 12^, reprefents a tame bear playing on the bagpipes. This is perhaps intended to be at the fame time a fatire on the inllrument itfelf, and upon the ftrange exhibitions of animals domefticated and taught various Angular performances, which were then fo popular. In 198 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque In our cut No. 126 we come to the fiddle again, which long fuftained its place in the higheft rank of mufical inftruments. It is taken from one of the fculptures on the porch of the principal entrance to the Cathedral of Lyons in France, and reprefents a mermaid with her child, liflening to the mufic of the fiddle. She wears a crown, and is intended, no doubt. to be one of the queens of the fea, and the introduction of the fiddle under fuch circumftaiices can leave no doubt how highly it was efleemed. The mermaid is a creature of .the imagination, which appears to have been at all times a favourite objedt of poetry and legend. It holds an important place in the mediaeval beftiaries, or popular treatifes on natural hiflory, and it has only been expelled from the domains of fcience at a comparatively recent date. It flill retains its place in popular legends of our fea-coafts, and more efpecially in the remoter parts of our iflands. The flories of the merrow, or Irilh fairy, hold a prominent place among my late friend Crofton Croker's “ Fairy Legends of the South of Ireland,” The mermaid is alfo introduced not unfrequently in mediaeval fculpture in Liiterature and Art. 199 fculpture and carving. Our cut No. \i~j, reprefenting a mermaid and a merman, is copied from one of the flails of Winchefler Cathedral. The ufual attributes of the mermaid are a looking-glafs and comb, by the aid of which flie is drcfling her hair ; but here Ihe holds the comb alone. Her companion, the male, holds a filli, which he appears to have jufl caught, in his hand. While, after the fifteenth century the profellion of the minflrel became entirely degraded, and he was looked upon more than ever as a rogue and vagabond, the fiddle accompanied him, and it long remained, as it flill remains in Ireland, the favourite inflrument of the peafantry. The blind fiddler, even at the prefent day, is not unknown in our rural diftridts. It has always been in England the favourite inflrument of miuflrelly. No. 127, Mermaids. 200 Hiftory oj Caricature and Grotefque CHAPTER XII. THE COURT FOOL. THE NORMANS AND THEIR GABS. EARLT HISTORY OF COURT FOOLS. THEIR COSTUME. CARVINGS IN THE CORNISH CHURCHES. THE BURLESQUE SOCIETIES OF THE MIDDLE AGES. THE -FEASTS OF ASSES, AND OF FOOLS. THEIR LICENCE.^THE LEADEN MONEY OF THE FOOLS. THE BISHOP’s BLESSING. F rom the employment of minftrels attached to the family, probably arofe another and well-known charadter of later times, the court fool, who took the place of fatirift in the great houfeholds. I do not contider what we underfland by the court fool to be a charadter of any great antiquity. It is fomewhat doubtful whether what we call a jeft, was really appreciated in the middle ages. Puns teem to have been confidered as elegant figures of fpeech in literary compofition, and we rarely meet with anything like a quick and clever repartee. In the earlier ages, when a party of warriors would be merry, their mirth appears to have confitied ufually in ridiculous boafts, or in rude remarks, or in fiieers at enemies or opponents. Thefe jefts were termed by the French and Normans gabs {gahce, in mediaeval Latin), a word fuppofed to have been derived from the claflical Latin word cavilla, a mock or taunt j and a Ihort poem in Anglo-Norman has been preferved which furnilbes a curious illuftration of the meaning attached to it in the twelfth century. This poem relates how Charlemagne, piqued by the taunts of his emprefs on the fuperiority of Hugh the Great, emperor of Conflantinople, went to Conftantinople, accompanied by his douze pairs and a thoufand knights, to verify the truth of his wife’s ftory. They proceeded firft to Jerufalem, where, when Charle- magne and his twelve peers entered the Church of tli6 Holy Sepulchre, they looked fo handfome and majeftic, that they were taken at firfl; for Chrifl in Literature and Art. 20 I Chrirt and his twelve apoftles, but the myftery was foon cleared up, and they were treated by the patriarch with great hofpitality during four months. They then continued their progrels till they reached Conllanti- nople, where they were equally well received by the the emperor Hugo. At night the emperor placed his guefts in a chamber furnillied with thirteen fplendid beds, one in the middle of the room, and the other twelve diftributed around it, and illuminated by a large carbuncle, which gave a light as bright as that of day. When Hugh left them in their quarters for the night, he fent them wine and whatever was necelTary to make them comfortable ; and, when alone, they proceeded to amufe themfelves with gabs, or jokes, each being expedted to fay his joke in his turn. Charlemagne took the lead, and boalled that if the emperor Hugh would place before him his llrongeft “ bachelor,” in full armour, and mounted on his good deed, he would, with one blow of his fword, cut him through from the head downwards, and through the faddle and horfe, and that the fword Ihould, after all this, fink into the ground to the handle. Charlemagne then called upon Roland for his gab, who boalled that his breath was lb llrong, that if the emperor Hugh would lend him his horn, he would take it out into the fields and blow it with fuch force, that the wind and noife of it would lhake down the whole city of Confiantinople. Oliver, whofe turn came next, boalled of exploits of another defcription if he were left alone with the beautiful princels, Hugh’s daughter. The reft of the peers indulged in fimilar boalls, and when the gabs had gone round, they went to deep. Now the emperor of Confiantinople had very cunningly, and rather treacheroully, made a hole through the wall, by which all that palfed inlide could be feen and heard, and he had placed a fpy on the outlide, who gave a full account of the converfation of the difiinguilhed guefts to his imperial mailer. Next morning Hugh called his guefts before him, told them what he had heard by his fpy, and declared that each of them ihould perform his boaft, or, if he failed, be put to death. Charlemagne expofiulated, and repre- fented that it was the cuftom in France when people retired for the night to amufe themfelves in that manner. “ Such is the cuftom in France,” he faid, “ at Paris, and at Chartres, when the French are in bed they D D amufe 202 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque amule theml'elves and make jokes, and fay things both of wifdom and of folly.” Si ej} tel cujiume en France, a Paris e d Cartres, S^uand Franceis June culchiez, que fe giuunt e gabent, E Ji d'lent ambure e fa'ver e ffage. But Charlemagne expoflulated in vain, and they were only faved from the confequeuce of their imprudence by the intervention of fo many miracles from above.* In fuch trials ot Ikill as thi.s, an individual muft continually have arifen who excelled in fome at lead of the qualities needful for raifmg mirth and making him a good companion, by lliowing himfelf more brilliant in wit, or more biting in farcafms, or more impudent in his jokes, and he would thus become the favourite mirth-maker of the court, the boon companion of the chieftain and his followers in their hours of relaxation. We find fuch an individual not unufually introduced in the early romances and in the mythology of nations, and he fometimes unites the charafter of court orator with the other. Such a perfonage was Uie Sir Kay of the cycle of the romances of king Arthur. I have remarked in a former chapter that Hunferth, in the Anglo-Saxon poem of Beowulf, is defcribed as holding a fomewhat fimilar polition at the court of king Hrothgar. To go farther back in the m)’thology of our forefathers, the Loki of Scandinavian fable appears fometimes to have performed a fimilar charadler in the alfembly of his fellow deities; and we know that, among the Greeks, Homer on one occafion introduces Vulcan adfing the part of joker (yfXcu-o-otoc) to the gods of Olympus. But all thefe hav^e no relationfhip whatever to the court-fool of modern times. The German writer Flcigel, in his “ Hiftory of Court Fools,” f has thrown this fubjedf into much confulion by introducing a great mafs of irrelevant matter ; and thole who have fince compiled from Fldgel, have made the confufion ftill greater. Much of this confulion has arifen from the “ Charlemagne, an Anglo-Norman Poem of the Twelfth Century, now first published, by Francisque Michel,” i2ino., 8vo., London, 1836. t “ Geschichte der Hofnarren, von Karl Friedrich Flogel,” 8vo. Liegnitz und Leipzig, 1789. in Literature and Art. 203 the mifunderliandiiig and confounding of names and terms. The mimus, the joculator, the minillrel, or whatever name this clafs of fociety went by, was not in any refpedfs identical with what we underftand by a court fool, nor does any fuch charadter as the latter appear in the feudal houfehold before the fourteenth century, as far as we are acquainted with the focial manners and cufloms of the olden time. The vatl extent of the early French romans de gejte, or Carlovingian romances, which are filled with pidtures of courts both of princes and barons, in which the court fool muft have been introduced had he been known at the time they were compofed, that is, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, contains, I believe, no trace of fuch perfonage ; and the fame may be faid of the numerous other romances, fabliaux, and in fadl all the literature of that period, one fo rich in works illullrative of contemporary manners in their moll minute detail. From thefe fadts I conclude that the Angle brief charter publilhed by M. Rigollot from a manufcript in the Imperial Library in Paris, is either mifunderftood or it prefents a very exceptional cafe. By this charter, John, king of England, grants to his foUus, William Picol, or Piculph (as he is called at the clofe of the document), an eftate in Normandy named in the document Fons Olfanae (Menil-Ozenne in Mortain), with all its appurtenances, “ to have and to hold, to him and to his heirs, by doing there-for to us once a year the fervice of one foUus, as long as he lives j and after his death his heirs lhall hold it of us, by the fervice of one pair of gilt fpurs to be rendered annually to us.” * The fervice {fervitium) here enjoined means the annual payment of the obligation of the feudal tenure, and therefore * The words of this charter, as given by Rigollot, are : — “ Joannes, D. G., etc. Sciatis nos dedisse et prassenti charta confirmasse Willehno Picol, folio nostro, Fontem Ossanae, cum omnibus pertinenciis suis, habendum et tenendum sibi et haeredibus suis, faciendo inde nobis annuatim scrvitium iinius folli quoad vixerit ; et post ejus decessum haeredes sui earn tenebunt, et per servitium unius paris calca- rium deauratorum nobis annuatim leddendo. (yuare volumus et firmiter praecipimus quod praedictus Piculphus et haeredes sui habeant et teneant in perpetuum, bene et in pace, libere et quiete, praedictam terram.” — Rigollot, Monnaies inconnues des Ev^ques des Innocens, etc., 8vo., Paris, 1837. 204 llifiory of Caricature and Grotefque therefore foUus is to be taken as fignifying fool,” it only means that Picol was to perform that charafter on one occafion in the courfe of the year. In this cafe, he may have been fome fool whom king John had taken into his fpecial favour; but it certainly is no proof that the pradtice of keeping court fools then exifted. It is not improbable that this prafl'ce was firtl introduced in Germany, for Fldgel fpeaks, though rather doubtfully, of one who was kept at the court of the emperor Rudolph I. (of Haptburg), whofe reign lafted from 1273 to 1292. It is more certain, however, that tlie kings of France poffelfed court fools before the middle of the fourteenth century, and from this time anecdotes relating to them begin to be common. One of the earliell and moll curious of thefe anecdotes, if it be true, relates to the celebrated viftory of Sluys gained over the French fleet by our king Edward III. in the year 1340. It is faid that no one dared to announce this difafter to the French king, Philippe VI., until a court fool undertook the talk. Entering the king’s chamber, he continued muttering to himfelf, but loud enough to be heard, “ Thofe cowardly Engliflr! the chicken-hearted Britons!” “How fo, coufin?” the king inquired. “Why,” replied the fool, “ becaufe they have not courage enough to jump into the fea, like your French foldiers, who went over headlong from their lliips, leaving thofe to the enemy who Ihowed no inclination to follow them.” Philippe thus became aware of the full extent of his calamity. The inftitution of the court fool was carried to its greateft degree of perfedlion during the fifteenth century; it only expired in the age of Louis XIV. It was apparently with the court fool that the coflume was introduced which has ever fince been confidered as the charadleriftic mark of folly. Some parts of this coflume, at leaft, appear to have been borrowed from an earlier date. The gclotopoei of the Greeks, and the mimi and moriones of the Romans, iliaved their heads ; but the court fools perhaps adopted this falhion as a fatire upon the clergy and monks. Some writers pro- felled to doubt whether the fools borrowed from the monks, or the monks from the fools; and Cornelius Agrippa, in his treatife on the Vanity of Sciences, remarks that the monks had their heads “all fliaven like fools” (rq/o toto capite ut fntid). The cowl, alfo, was perhaps adopted in in Literature and Art. 205 in derifion of the monks, but it was difliinguillied by the addition of a pair of affes’ ears, or by a cock’s head and comb, which formed its termi- nation above, or by both. The court fool was alfo furnifhed with a daft’ or club, which became eventually his bauble. The bells were another necelfary article in the equipment of a court fool, perhaps alfo intended as a fatire on the cuftom of wearing fmall bells in the drefs, which pre- vailed largely during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, el'pecially among people w'ho were fond of childifh oftentation. The fool wore alfo a party-coloured, or motley, garment, probably with the fame aim — that of fatirifing one of the ridiculous falliions of the fourteenth century. It is in the fifteenth century that we firll meet with the fool in full collume 2o6 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque coftume in the illuminations or rnanufcripts, and towards the end of the century this codume appears continually in engravings. It is alfo met with at this time among the fculptures of buildings and the carvings of wood-work. The two very interelling examples given in our cut No. 127 are taken from carvings of the hfteenth century, in the church of St. Levan, in Cornwall, near the Land’s End. They reprefent the court fool in two varieties of codume ; in the firft, the fool’s cowl, or cap, ends in the cock’s head ; in the other, it is fitted with affes' ears. There are variations alfo in other parts of the drefs ; for the fecond only has bells to his lleeves, and the firft carries a fingularly formed llafi', which may perhaps be intended for a flrap or belt, with a buckle at the end 5 while the other has a ladle in his hand. As one poffelTes a beard, and prefents marks of age in his countenance, while the other is beardlefs and youthful, we may confider the pair as an old fool and a young fool. The Corniilr churches are rather celebrated for their early carved wood-work, chiefly of the fifteenth century, of which two examples are given in our cut. No. 128, taken from bench pannels in the church of St. Mullion, on the Cornifli coaft, a little to the north of the Lizard I in Literature and Art, 207 Lizard Point. The firft has bells hanging to the lleeves, and is no doubt intended to reprefent folly in home form ; the other appears to be intended for the head of a woman making grimaces.* The fool had long been a charadter among the people before he became a court fool, for Folly — or, as the was then called, “ Mother Folly ” — was one of the favourite objedls of popular worlhip in the middle ages, and, where that worflup fprang up fpontaneoutly among the people, it grew with more energy, and prefented more hearty joyoufnefs and bolder fatire than under the patronage of the great. Our forefathers in thofe times were accuftomed to form themfelves into alfociations or focieties of a mirthful charadler, parodies of thofe of a more ferious defcription, efpecially eccle- fiallical, and eledted as their officers mock popes, cardinals, archbilhops and biflrops, kings, &c. They held periodical feffivals, riotous and licentious carnivals, which were admitted into the churches, and even taken under the efpecial patronage of the clergy, under fuch titles as “ the feafl: of fools,” “ the feaft of the afs,” “ the feaft of the innocents,” and the like. There was hardly a Continental town of any account which had not its “ company of fools,” with its mock ordinances and mock ceremonies. In our own illand we had our abbots of mifrule and of unreafon. At their public feftivals fatirical fongs were fung and fatirical matks and dreffes were worn; and in many of them, efpecially at a later date, brief fatirical dramas were adted. Thefe fatires atfumcd much of the fundtions of modern caricature ; the caricature of the pidtorial reprefentations, which were moffiy permanent monuments and deftined for future generations, was naturally general in its charadler, but in the reprefentations of which I am fpeaking, which were temporary, and detigned to excite the mirth of the moment, it became perfonal, and, often, even political, and it was conftantly diredted againft the ecclefiaftical order. The fcandal of the day furnilhed it with abundant materials. A fragment of one of their fongs * For the drawings of these interesting carvings from the Cornish churches, I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. J. T. Blight, the author of an extremely pleasing and useful guide to the beauties of a well-known district of Cornwall, entitled “A Week at the Land’s End.” 2 o 8 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque fongs of an early date, fung at one of thefe “ feafls ” at Rouen, has been preferved, and contains the following lines, written in Latin and Frencli ; — De afino bono no/lro, Meiiori et cptimo, Dchemus faire fete. En revenant de Grauinana, Un gro3 chaj don rcperit in •via, II lui coupa la lete. yir mjnachui in menfe ‘Julio Egreffus ejl e monajicrio, C’est dom de la Bucuille ; Egrejfus eft fine Ucentia, Ponr alter voir dona Venissia, Et faire la ripaille. TR.VXSLATIOX. For cur good aft, The better and the beft, IVe ought to rejoice. In returning from Gra'viniere, A great thiftle he fo'und in the uvajj He cut off its head. A monk in the month of July IVcnt out of his monaftcry. It is dom de la Bucaille ; He •went out •without licenfe. To pay a •viftt to the dame de Vcniffc, And make jo-uial cheer . It appears that De la Bucaille was the prior of the abbey of St. Taurin, at Rouen, and that the dame de Venilfe was priorefs of St. Saviour, and thefe lines, no doubt, commemorate fome great fcandal of the day relating to the private relations between thefe two individuals. Thefe mock religious ceremonies are fuppofed to have been derived from the Roman Saturnalia; they were evidently of great antiquity in the mediaeval church, and were moft prevalent in France and Italy. Under the name of “the feaft of the fub-deacons” they are forbidden by the adls of the council of Toledo, in 63,3 ; at a later period, the French punned on the word fous-diacres, and called them Saouls-diacres (Drunken Deacons), words which had nearly the fame found. The “feali of the afs ’’ in Literature and Art. 209 al's ” is faid to be traced back in France as far as the ninth century. It was celebrated in motl of the great towns in that country, fuch as Rouen, Sens, Douai, &c., and the fervice for the occalion is actually preferved in fome of the old church books. From this it appears that the afs was led in proceffion to a place in the middle of the church, which had been decked out to receive it, and that the proceffion was led by two clerks, v/ho fung a Latin fong in praife of the animal. This tong commences by telling us how “ the afs came from the eaft, handfome and very ftrong, and moft fit for carrying burthens”: — Orientis partibus Ad'venta'vit ajinusy Fulcher et fortijfimut^ Sarcinh aptijfnnus. The refrain or burthen of the fong is in French, and exhorts the animal to join in the uproar — “Eh ! sir afs, chant now, fair mouth, bray, you ffiall have hay enough, and oats in abundance — He'z^jire afnes, car chant Belle bouche^ rechignez^ V 7US aurez du foin ajjez^ Et de r a'vo 'me d plantez. In this tone the chant continues through nine fimilar ffimzas, defcribing the mode of life and food of the afs. When the proceffion reached the altar, the prieft began a fervice in profe. Beleth, one of the celebrated do6lors of the univerfity of Paris, who fiouriffied in 1182, fpeaks of the “ feaft of fools ” as in exiftence in his time j and the a6ts of the council of Paris, held in 1212, forbid the prefence of archbiffiops and bilhops, and more efpecially of monks and nuns, at the feafts of fools, “in which a ftaff was carried.”* We know the proceedings of this latter feffival rather minutely from the accounts given in the ecclefiaftical cenfures. It * “ A festis follorum ubi baculus accipituromnino abstineatiir Idem fortius monachis et monialibus proliibemus.” E E 210 Hi ft or y of Caricature and Grotefque It was ill the cathedral churches that they elefted the archbilliop or bithop of fools, whofe eledtion was confirmed, and he was confecrated, with a multitude of buffooneries. He then entered upon his pontifical duties, wearing the mitre and carrying the crofier before the people, on whom he bellowed his folemn benediftion. In the exempt churches, or thofe which depended immediately upon the Holy See, they eledled a pope of fools {unum papam fatiiorum), who wore fimilarly the enligns of the papacy. Thefe dignitaries were aflifled by an equally burlefque and licentious clergy, who uttered and performed a mixture of follies and im- pieties during the church fervice of the day, which they attended in difguifes and mafquerade drelfes. Some wore mallcs, or had their faces painted, and others were dreffed in women’s clothing, or in ridiculous collumes. On entering the choir, they danced and fang licentious fongs. The deacons and fub-deacons ate black puddings and faufages on the altar while the priefl, was celebrating; others played at cards or dice under his eyes ; and others threw bits of bid leather into the confer in order to raife a difagreeable fmell. After the mafs was ended, the people broke out into all forts of riotous behaviour in the church, leaping, dancing, and exhibiting themfelves in indecent poflures, and fome went as far as to flrip themfelves naked, and in this condition they were drawn through the flreets with tubs full of ordure and filth, which they threw about at the mob. Every now and then they halted, when they exhibited immodefl poflures and actions, accompanied with fongs and fpeeches of the fame chara6ler. Many of the laity took part in the proceffion, dreffed as monks and nuns. Thefe diforders feem to have been carried to their greateft degree of extravagance during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.* Towards * On the subject of all these burlesques and popular feasts and ceremonies, the reader may consult Flogel’s “ Geschichte des Grotesk-Komischen,” of which a new and enlarged edition has recently been given by Dr. Friedrich W. Ebeling, 8vo., Leipzig, 1862. Much interesting information on the subject was collected by Du Tilliot, in his “ Memoires pour servir a I'Histoire de la Fete des Fous,” 8vo., Lausanne, 1751. See also Rigollot, in the work quoted above, and a popular article on the same subject will be found in my “ Archaeological Album.” in Literature and Art. 21 I Towards the fifteenth century, lay focieties, having apparently no connexion with the clergy or the church, but of juft the fame burlefque charadter, arofe in France. One of the earlieft of thefe was formed by the clerks of the Bazoche, or lawyers’ clerks of the Palais de Juftice in Paris, whofe prefident was a fort of king of mifrule. The other principal fociety of this kind in Paris took the rather mirthful name of Enfans fans Souci (Carelefs Boys) ; it confifted of young men of education, who gave to their prefident or chieftain the title of Pr'mce des Sots (the Prince of Fools). Both thefe focieties compofed and performed farces, and other fmall dramatic pieces. Thefe farces were fatires on contemporary fociety, and appear to have been often very perfonal. Almoft the only monuments of the older of thefe focieties confift of coins, or tokens, ftruck in lead, and fometimes commemorating the names of their mock dignitaries. A confiderable number of thefe have been found in France, and an account of them, with engravings, was publifhed by Dr. Rigollot fome years ago.* Our cut No. 129 will ferve as an Eo. 129 . Money of the yirchbijhop of the Innocents. example. It reprefents a leaden token of the Archbifliop of the Innocents of the parifti of St. Firmin, at Amiens, and is curious as bearing a date. On one fide the archbithop of the Innocents is reprefented in the adl of giving his blefling to his flock, furrounded by the infcription, MONETA • ARCHiEPi • scTi • fiRMiNi. On the Other fide we have the name * “Monnaies inconnues des Ev6qiies des Iniiocens, des Fous,” Sec., Paris, 1837. 2 I 2 Hifiory o[ Caricature and Grotefque name of the individual who that year held the office of archbilhop, NicoLAVS • GAVDRAM ' AKCHiEPVs ‘ 1520, furrounding a group ccnfifting of two men, one of whom is dreffed as a fool, holding between them a bird, which has fomewhat the appearance of a magpie. Our cut No. 1,30 is Hill more curious ; it is a token of the pope of fools. On one fide appears the pope with his tiara and double crofs, and a fool in full coftume, who approaches his bauble to the pontifical crofs. It is certainly a bittei caricature on the papacy, whether that were the intention or not. Two perfons behind, dreffed apparently in fcholaftic coftume, feem to be merely fpedlators. The iiffcription is, moneta • nova • adriani • STVLTORV [m] • PAPE (the laft E being in the field of the piece), “new money of Adrian, the pope of fools.” The infcription on the other fide of the token is one frequently repeated on thefe leaden medals, stvltorv [m] • iNFiNiTvs • EST ' NVMERVS, “ the number of fools is infinite.” In the field we fee Mother Folly holding up her bauble, and before her a grotefque figure in a cardinal’s hat, apparently kneeling to her. It is rather furprifing that we find fo few allufions to thefe burlefque focieties in the various claffes of pidtorial records from which the fubjedt of thefe chapters has been illuftrated j but we have evidence that they w’ere not altogether overlooked. Until the latter end of the laft century, the mifereres of the church of St. Spire, at Corbeil, near Paris, were remarkable for the fingular carvings with which they were decorated, and which have fince been deftroyed, but fortunately they were engraved by No. 130. Money of the Pope of Fools. Millin. in Literature and Art. 213 Millin. One of them, copied in our cut No. 13 1, evidently reprefents the bilhop of fools conferring his blefling ; the fool’s bauble occupies the place of the paftoral ftatf. 2 1 4 Hi (lory of Caricature and Grotefjue CHAPTER XIII. THE DANCE OF DEATH. THE PAINTINGS IN THE CHURCH OF LA CHAISE DIEU. THE REIGN OF FOLLY. SEBASTIAN BRANDT ; THE “ship OF FOOLS. DISTURBERS OF CHURCH SERVICE. TROUBLE- SOME BEGGARS. GEILER’s SERMONS. RADIUS, AND HIS SHIP OF FOOLISH WOMEN.- THE PLEASURES OF SMELL. ERASMUS ; THE “praise OF FOLLY.” HERE is ftill one cycle of fatire which almoft belongs to the middle ages, though it only became developed at their clofe, and became moft popular after they were paft. There exilled, at leaft as early as the beginning of the thirteenth century, a legendary ftory of an interview between three living and three dead men, which is ufually told in French verfe, and appears under the title of “Des trois vifs et des trois morts.” According to fome verfions of the legend, it was St. Macarius, the Egyptian reclufe, who thus introduced the living to the dead. The verfes are fometimes accompanied with figures, and thefe have been found both fculptured and painted on ecclefiaftical buildings. At a later period, apparently early in the fifteenth century, fome one extended this idea to all ranks of fociety, and pidtured a lEeleton, the emblem of death, or even more than one, in communication with an individual of each clafs; and this extended fee ne, from the manner of the grouping — in which the dead appeared to be wildly dancing off with the living — - became known as the “Dance of Death.” As the earlier legend of the three dead and the three living was, however, ftill often introduced at the beginning of it, the whole group was motf generally known — efpecially during the fifteenth century — as the “ Danfe Macabre,” or Dance in Literature and Art, 215 Dance of Macabre, this name being confidered as a mere corruption of Macarius. The temper of the age — in which death in every form was conftantly before the eyes of all, and in which people fought to regard life as a mere tranfitory moment of enjoyment — gave to this grim idea of the fellowfliip of death and life great popularity, and it was not only painted on the walls of churches, but it was fufpended in tapeflry around people’s chambers. Sometimes they even attempted to reprefent it in mafquerade, and we are told that in the month of Odtober, 1424, the “ Danfe Macabre ” was publicly danced by living people in the cemetery of the Innocents, in Paris — a fit place for fo lugubrious a performance — in the prefence of the Duke of Bedford and the Duke of Burgundy, who came to Paris after the battle of Verneuil. During the reft of the century we find not unfrequently allufions to the “Danfe Macabre.’’ The Englifli poet Lydgate wrote a feries of ftanzas to accompany the figures, and it was the fubjeft of fome of the earliefi engravings on wood. In the poflure and accompaniments of the figures reprefenting the different claffes of fociety, and in the greater or lefs reludtance with which the living accept their not very attradtive partners, fatire is ufually implied, and it is in fome cafes accompanied with drollery. The figure reprefent- ing death has almofl always a grimly mirthful countenance, and appears to be dancing with good will. The mofl; remarkable early reprefentation of the “ Danfe Macabre ’’ now preferved, is that painted on the wall of the church of La Chaife Dieu, in Auvergne, a beautiful fac-limile of which was publifhed a few years ago by the well-known antiquary M. Jubinal. This remarkable pifture begins with the figures of Adam and Eve, who are introducing death into the world in the form of a ferpent with a death’s head. The dance is opened by an ecclefiaftic preaching from a pulpit, towards whom death is leading firfi in the dance the pope, for each individual takes his precedence flridtly according to his clafs — alternately an ecclefiaftic and a layman. Thus next after the pope comes the emperor, and the cardinal is followed by the king. The baron is followed by the biftiop, and the grim partner of the latter appears to pay more attention to the layman than to his own prieft, fo that two dead men appear to liave the former in charge. The group thus repre- fcnted 2 i 6 Hiflory of Caricature and Grotejque fented by the nobleman and the two deaths, is copied in our cut No. 132, and will ferve as an example ot the flyle and grouping of this remarkable painting. After a few other figures, perhaps lefs ftriking, we come to the merchant, who receives the advances of his partner with a thoughtful air; while immediately after him another death is trying to make him- felf more acceptable to the bafliful nun by throwing a cloak over his nakednefs. In another place two deaths armed with bows and arrows are fcattering their ihafts rather dangeroufly. Soon follow fome of the more gay and youthful members of fociety. Our cut No. 133 reprefents the mulician, who appears alfo to attraft the attentions of two of the perfe- cutors. In his difmay he is treading under foot his own viol. The dance clofes with the lower orders of fociety, and is concluded by a group which is not fo eafily underflood. Before the end of the fifteenth century, there had appeared in Paris feveral editions of a feries of bold engravings on m Literature and Art. 2iy on wood, in a fmall folio fize, reprefenting the fame dance, tliough fome- what differently treated. France, indeed, appears to have been the native country of the “ Danfe Macabre.” But in the century following the beautiful let of drawings by the great artiftHans Holbein, firtl publillied at Lyons in 1538, gave to the Dance of Death a Hill greater and wider celebrity. From this time the fubjeHs of this dance were commonly introduced in initial letters, and in the engraved borders of pages, efpecially in books of a religious charaHer. Death may truly be faid to have lliared with Folly that melancholy period — the fifteenth century. As fociety then prefented itfelf to the eye, people might eafily fuppofe that the world was running mad, and folly, in one fhape or other, feemed to be the principle which ruled moft men’s abtions. The jocular focieties, defcribed in my lafl chapter, which multiplied in France during the fifteenth century, initiated a fort of mock worfhip of Folly. That fort of inauguration of death which was F F performed 2 1 8 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque performed ia the “ Danfe Macabre,” was of French growth, but the grand crufade againll folly appears to have originated in Germany. Sebalfian Brandt was a native of Stralburg, born in 1458. He ifudied in that city and in Bale, became a celebrated profelfor in both thofe places, and died at the former in 1520. The ” Ship of Fools,” which has immortalifed the name of Sebaftian Brandt, is believed to have been firft publillied in the year 1494. The original German text went through numerous editions within a few years ; a Latin tranllation was equally popular, and it was afterwards edited and enlarged by Jodocus Badius Al'cenfius. A French text was no lels fuccefsful j an Englilh tranflation was printed by Richard Pynfon in 1509 ; a Dutch verlion appeared in 1519. During the lixteenth century, Brandt’s “Ship of Fools” was the moll popular of books. It confifts of a feries of bold woodcuts, which form its characteriftic feature, and of metrical explanations, written by Brandt, and annexed to each cut. Taking his text from the words of the preacher, “ Stultorum numerus eft infinitus,” Brandt expofes to the eye, in all its lhades and forms, the folly of his contemporaries, and bares to view hs roots and caufes. The cuts are efpecially interefting as ftriking pictures of contemporary manners. The “ Ship of Fools ” is the great Ihip of the world, into which the various defcriptions of fatuity are pouring from all quarters in boat-loads. The firft folly is that of men who colledted great quantities of books, not for their utility, but for their rarity, or beauty of execution, or rich bindings, lb that we fee that bibliomania had already taken its place among human vanities. The fecond dais of fools were interefted and partial judges, who fold juftice for money, and are reprefented under the emblem of two fools throwing a boar into a caldron, according to the old Latin proverb, Agere aprum in lebetem. Then come the various follies of mifers, fops, dotards, men who are foolilhly indulgent to their children, mifehief-makers, and defpifers of good advice 3 of nobles and men in power ; of the profane and the improvident ; of foolilh lovers 3 of extravagant eaters and drinkers, &c., &c. Foolilh talking, hvpocrily, frivolous purfuits, ecclefiaftical corruptions, impudicity, and a great number of other vices as well as follies, are duly palFed in review, and are reprefented in various forms of fatirical caricature, and fometimes in fimple in Literature and Art. 219 Ampler unadorned pidtures. Thus the fooUfh valuers of things are repre- fented by a fool holding a balance, one fcale of which contains the fun, moon, and ftars, to reprefent heaven and heavenly things, and the other a caftle and fields, to reprefent earthly things, the latter fcale overweighing the other ; and the procraftinator is pidured by another fool, with a parrot perched on his head, and a magpie on each hand, all repeating eras, eras, eras (to-morrow). Our cut No. 134 reprefents a group of ditlurbers of No. 1 34 . Dijiurbers of Church ScrNice church feivice. It was a common pradice in former days to take to church hawks (which were conftantly carried about as the outward enfign of the gentleman) and dogs. The fool has here thrown back his fool’s-cap to exhibit more fully the fafhionable “ gent ” of the day; he carries his hawk on his hand, and wears not only a falbionable pair of Ihoes, but very fafhionable clogs alfo. Thefe gentlemen d la mode, turgentes genere et nalalibus aids, we are told, were the perfons who difiurbed the church fendee 220 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque fcrvice by the creaking of their flioes and clogs, the noife made by their birds, the barking and quarrelling of their dogs, by their own whifperings, and efpecially with immodeft women, whom they met in church as in a convenient place of allignation. All thefe forms of the offence are exprelfed in the pidture. Our fecond example cut No. 135, which forms the fifty-ninth title or fubjedf in the “ Ship of Fools,” reprefents a party of the beggars with which, either lay or ecclefiaftical, the country was then overrun. In the explanation, thefe wicked beggars are defcribed as indulging in idlenefs, in eating, drinking, rioting, and fleep, while they levy contributions on the charitable feelings of the honeft and induftrious, and, under cover of begging, commit robbery wherever they find the opportunity. The beggar, who appears to be only a deceptive cripple, leads his donkey laden with children, whom he is bringing up in the fame profelhon, while his wife lingers behind to indulge in her bibulous pro- penfities. in Literature and Art. 22 1 penfities. Thefe cuts will give a tolerable notion of the general chara6ter of the whole, which amount in number to a hundred and twelve, and therefore prefent a great variety of fubjedts relative to almofl every clafs and profeliion of life. We may remark, however, that after Folly had thus run through all the ftages of fociety, until it had reached the loweft of all, the ranks of mendicity, the gods themfelves became alarmed, the more fo as this great movement was directed efpecially againtf Minerva, the goddefs of wifdom, and they held a conclave to provide againft it. The refult is not told, but the courfe of Folly goes on as vigoroutly as ever. Ignorant fools who let up for phyficians, fools who cannot underhand jokes, unwife mathematicians, aftrologers, of the latter of which the moralifer fays, in his Latin verfe — Siqua *voles forth jprrenojcere damna futura^ Et 'vitare malum^fol tibi figna dabit. Sed tibi, ftiilte^ tui cur non dedit ille furoris Signa f aut,fi dederit, cur tanta mala fubis Nondum grammatica callis primordia, et audes Vim cceli radio JuppoJuiffe tuo. The next cut is a very curious one, and appears to reprefent a dilfefting- houfe of this early period. Among other chapters which afford interefting pidtures of that time, and indeed of all times, w'e may inftance thofe of litigious fools, who are always going to law, and who confound blind juftice, or rather try to unbind her eyes ; of lilthy-tongued fools, who glorify the race of fwine j of ignorant fcholars ; of gamblers ; of bad and thievilh cooks 5 of low men who feek to be high, and of high who are defpifers of poverty ; of men who forget that they will die j of irreligious men and blafphemers ; of the ridiculous indulgence of parents to children, and the ungrateful return which was made to them foi it ; and of women’s pride. Another title defcribes the ruin of Chriftianity : the pope, emperor, king, cardinals, &c., are receiving willingly from a fuppliant fool the cap of Folly, while two other fools are looking derilively upon them from an adjoining wall. It need hardly be faid that this was publilhed on the eve of the Reformation. In the midft of the popularity which greeted the appearance of the work 222 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque work of Sebaftian Brandt, it attraded the fpecial attention of a celebrated preacher of the time named Johann Geiler. Geiler was born at Schaff- haufen, in Switzerland, in 1445, but having loft his father when only three years of age, he was educated by his grandfather, who lived at Keyferlberg, in Alface, and hence he was commonly called Geiler of Keyferlberg. He ftudied in Freiburg and Bale, obtained a great repu- tation for learning, was efteemed a profound theologian, and was finally fettled in Strafburg, where he continued to Ihine as a preacher until his death in 1510. He was a bold man, too, in the caufe of truth, and de- claimed with earneft zeal againft the corruptions of the church, and efpe- cially againft the monkifti orders, for he compared the black monks to the devil, the white monks to his dam, and the others he faid were their chickens. On another occafion he faid that the qualities of a good monk were an almighty belly, an afs’s back, and a raven’s mouth. He told his congregation from the pulpit that a great reformation was at hand, that he did not e.\pe 61 ; to live to fee it himfelf, but that many of thofe who heard him would live to fee it. As may be fuppofed, the monks hated him, and fpoke of him with contempt. They faid, that in his fermoas he took his texts, not from the Scriptures, but from the “ Ship of Fools ” of Sebaftian Brandt j and, in fii6t, during tbe year 1498, Geiler preached at Stralburg a feries of fermons on the follies of his time, which were evidently founded upon Brandt’s book, for the various follies were taken in the fame order. They were originally compiled in German, but one of Geiler’s fcholars, Jacob Other, tranflated them into Latin, and publilhed them, in ijOi, under the title of “ Navicula five Speculum Fatuorum praeftantiflimi facrarum literarum dottoris Johannis Geiler.” Within a few years this work went through feveral editions both in Latin and in German, fome of them illuftrated by w'oodcuts. The ftyle of preaching is quaint and curious, full of fatirical wit, which is often coarfe, according to the manner of the time, fometimes very indelicate. Each fermon is headed by the motto, “ Stultorum infinitus eft numerus.” Geiler takes for his theme in each fermon one of the titles of Brandt’s “ Ship of Fools,” and he feparates them into fubdivifions, or branches, which he calls the bells (nolas) from the fool’s-cap. The in Literature and Art. 223 The other fcholar who did moft to fpread the knowledge of Brandt’s work, was Jodocus Badius, who alfumed the additional name of Afcentius becanfe he was born at Alfen, near Brulfels, in 1462. He was a very diffin- guilhed fcholar, but is beft known for having eftablilhed a celebrated printing eftablilhment in Paris, where he died in 153.5. I have already dated that Badius edited the Latin tranllation of the “ Ship of Fools ” of Sebaftian Brandt, with additional explanations of his own, but he was one of the firft of Brandt’s imitators. He feems to have thought that Brandt’s book was not complete — that the weaker lex had not received its fair lhare of importance ; and apparently in 1498, while Geiler was turning the “ Stultifera Navis ” into fermons, Badius compiled a fort of fupplement to it (additamentum), to which he gave the title of “ Stultiferae naviculae, feu Scaphae, Fatuarum Mulierum,” the Boats of Foolifh Women. As far as can be traced, the firlf edition appears to have been printed in 1502. The lirft cut reprefents the Ihip carrying Eve alone of the female race, whole folly involved the whole world. The book is divided into live chapters, according to the number of the live fenfes, each fenfe reprefented by a boat carrying its particular clafs of foolilh women to the great Ihip of foolilh women, which lies oft’ at anchor. The text confifts of a dilfertation on the ufe and abufe of the particular fenfe which forms the fubftance of the chapter, and it ends with Latin verfes, which are given as the boat- man’s celeufma, or boat fong. The lirft of thefe boats is the fcapha Jiultije vifioyiis ad Jiultiferain navem perveniens — the boat of foolilh feeing proceed- ing to the Ihip of fools. A party of gay ladies are taking polfellion of the boat, carrying with them their combs, looking-glalfes, and all other implements necelTary for making them fair to be looked upon. The fecond boat is the fcapha auditionis fatuce, the boat of foolilh hearing, in which the ladies are playing upon mulical inftruments. The third is the fcapha olfadiionis fultoe, the boat of foolilh fmell, and the pidorial illuftra- tion to it is partly copied in our cut No. 136. In the original fome of the ladies are gathering fweet-fmelling flowers before they enter the boat, while on board a pedlar is vending his perfume. One folic femme, with her fool’s cap on her head, is buying a pomander, or, as we Ihould perhaps now fay, a fcent-ball, from the itinerant dealer. Figures of pomanders are 224 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque are extremely rare, and this is an interelling example; in fa£t, it is only recently that our Shaklpearian critics really underftood the meaning of the word. A pomander was a fmall globular velfel, perforated with holes, and hlled with ftrong perfumes, as it is reprefented in our woodcut. The J\’o. I 36. The Boat of Plcajant Odours. fourth of thele boats is that of foolilh tafting, /capita guftalmnis fatuoe, and the ladies have their ^^■ell-furni^hed table on board the boat, and are largely indulging in eating and drinking. In the laft of thefe boats, the /capita contaciionis /aluce, or boat of foolilh feeling, the women have men on board, and are proceeding to great liberties with them ; one of the gentle damfels, too, is picking the pocket of her male companion in a very unlady-like manner. Two ideas combined in this peculiar field of fatiric literature, that of the Ihip and that of the fools, now became popular, and gave rife to a hoft of imitators. There appeared Ihips of health, lliips of penitence, Ihips of all forts of things, on the one hand ; and on the other, folly was a favourite theme of fatire from many quarters. One of the moll remarkable of the perfonages involved in this latter warfare, was the great fcholar Defiderius Erafmus, of Rotterdam, who was born in that city in 1467. Like moft of thefe fatirifts, Erafmus was ftrongly imbued with the fpirit of the Reformation in Literature and Art. 225 Reformation, and lie was the acquaintance and friend of thofe to whom the Reformation owed a great part of its fuccefs. In 1497, when the “ Ship of Fools” of Seballian Brandt was in the firft full flulh of its popularity, Erafmus came to England, and was fo well received, that from that time forward his literary life feemed more identified with our illand than with any other country. Elis name is ftill a fort of houfehold word in our univerfities, efpecially in that of Cambridge. He made here the friendly acquaintance of the great Sir Thomas More, himfelf a lover of mirth, and one of thofe whole names are celebrated for having kept a court fool. In the earlier years of the fixteenth century, Erafmus vifited Italy, and palfed two or three years there. He returned thence to Eng- land, as appears, early in the year 1508. It is not eafy to decide whether his experience of fociety in Italy had convinced him more than ever that folly was the prefiding genius of mankind, or what other feeling infiuenced him, but one of the firft refults of his voyage was the Mojp/oc 'EyKtjjMov {Morice Encomium) , or “ Praife of Eolly.” Erafmus dedicated this little jocular treatife to Sir Thomas More as a fort of pun upon his name, although he protefts that there was a great contrail between the two charadters. Erafmus takes much the fame view of folly as Brandt, Geiler, Badius, and the others, and under this name he writes a bold fatire on the whole frame of contemporary fociety. The fatire is placed in the mouth of Folly herfelf (the Mere Folie of the jocular clubs), who delivers from her pulpit a declamation in which Ihe fets forth her qualities and praifes. She boafts of the greatnefs of her origin, claims as her kindred the fophifts, rhetoricians, and many of the pretentious fcholars and wife men, and defcribes her birth and education. She claims divine affinity, and boafts of her influence over the world, and of the beneficent manner in which it was exercifed. All the world, fire pretends, was ruled under her aufpices, and it was only in her prefence that mankind was really happy. Hence the happieft ages of man are infancy, before wifdom has come to interfere, and old age, when it has palfed away. Therefore, Ihe fays, if men would remain faithful to her, and avoid wifdom altogether, they would pafs a life of perpetual youth. In this long difcourfe of the influence of folly, written by a man of the known G G fentiments 2 26 Hijlory of Ccu'icature and Gi'otefque feiitiments ot Eralmus, ic would be llrange if the Romilh church, with its monks and ignorant priefthood, its faints, and relics, and miracles, did not tind a place. Eralmus intimates that the fuperflitious follies had become permanent, becaufe they were profitable. There are fome, he tells us, who cherilhed the fijolilb yet pleafant perfualiou, that if they fixed their eyes devoutly on a figure of St. Chriltopher, carved in wood No. 137 . Suptrjituen. or painted on the wail, they would be fafe from death on that dat" ; with many other examples of equal credulity. Then there are your pardons, your meafures of purgatory, which may be bought off at fo much the hour, or the day, or the month, and a multitude of other abfurdities. Ecclefiaftics, fcholars, mathematicians, philofophers, all come in for their iliare of the refined fatire of this book, which, like the “ Ship of Fools,” has gone through innumerable editions, and has been tranflated into many languages. In an early French tranilation, the text of this work of Erafmus is embellillied with fome of the woodcuts belonging to Brandt’s “ Ship of Fools,” in Literature and Art. 227 Fools,” which, it need hardly be remarked, are altogether inappropriate, but the “ Praife of Folly ” was deftined to receive illuftrations from a more dillinguithed pencil. A copy of the book came into the hands of Hans Holbein — it may polfibly have been prefented to him by the author — • and Holbein took fo much intereti in it, that he amufed himfelf with drawing illullrative iketches with a pen in the margins. This book after- wards palfed into the library of the Univerlity of Bale, where it was found in the latter part of the feventeenth century, and thefe drawings have lince been engraved and added to mofl of the fubfequent editions. Many of thefe Iketches are very flight, and fome have not a very clofe con- nehtion with the text of Erafmus, but they are all charadferiflic, and Ihow the fpirit — the Ipirit of the age — in which Holbein read his author. I give two examples of them, taken almoft haphazard, for it would require a longer analyfis of the book than can be given here to make many of them underlfood. The firft of thefe, our cut No. 137, reprefents the foolitb warrior, who has a fword long enough to trufl to it for defence. bowing with trembling fuperllition before a painting of St. Chrillopher croliing the water with the infant Chriff on his fboulder, as a more cer- tain fecurity for his fafety during that day. The other, our cut No. 138, reprefents the preacher. Lady Folly, defcending from her pulpit, after Ike has concluded her fermon. 228 Hijiofy of Caricature and Grotefjue CHAPTER XIV. POPULAR LITERATURE AND ITS HEROES ; BROTHER RUSH, TYLL EULEN- SPIEGEL, THE WISE MEN OF GOTHAM.— STORIES AND JEST-BOOKS. SKELTON, SCOGIN, TARLTON, PEELE. HE people in the middle ages, as well as its luperiors, had its comic literature and legend. Legend was the literature efpecially of the peafaat, and in it the fpirit of burlefque and fatire manifetted itfelf in niany ways. Simplicity, combined with vulgar cunning, and the circumftances arifing out of the exercife of thefe qualities, prefented the greateft ftimulants to popular mirth. They produced their popular heroes, who, at firll, were much more than half legendary, fuch as the familiar fpirit, Robin Goodfellow, whole pranks were a fource of con- tinual amufement rather than of terror to the fimple minds which litlened to thole who told them. Thefe llories excited with flill greater interell as their fpiritual heroes became incarnate, and the auditors were perfuaded that the perpetrators of lb many artful ads of cunning and of lb many mifchievous pradical jokes, were but ordinary men like them- felves. It was but a lign or fymbol of the change from the mythic age to that of pradical life. One of the earliell of thefe llories of mythic comedy transformed into, or at leall prefented under the guile of, humanity, is that of Brother Rulh. Although the earliell verfion of this llory with which we are acquainted dates only from the beginning of the lixteenth century,* there is no reafon for doubt that the llory itfelf was in exiltence at a much more remote period. * This earliest known version is in German verse, and was printed in 1515. An English version, in prose, was printed in 1620, and is reprinted in Thoms’s Collection of Early Prose Romances.” Rulh in Literature and Art. 229 Rulh was, in truth, a I'pirit of darknets, whofe miliion it was to wander on the earth tempting and impelling people to do evil. Perceiv- ing that the internal condition of a certain abbey was well fuited to his purpofe, he prefented himfell at its gates in the difguife of a youth who wanted employment, and was received as an allillant in the kitchen, but he pleafed the monks bell by the llcill with which he furnilhed them all with fair companions. At length he quarrelled with the cook, and threw him into the boiling caldron, and the monks, alfuming that his death was accidental, appointed Rulh to be cook in his place. After a fervice of feven years in the kitchen — which appears to have been conlldered a tair apprenticelhip for the new honour which was to be conferred upon him — the abbot and convent rewarded him by making him a monk. He now followed hill more earneflly his defign for the ruin of his brethren, both foul and body, and began by raifing a quarrel about a woman, which led, through his contrivance, to a fight, in which the monks all fulfered grievous bodily injuries, and in which Brother Rulh was efpecially adtive. He went on in this way until at lafl; his true charafter was accidentally difcovered. A neighbouring farmer, overtaken by night, took Ihelter in a hollow tree. It happened to be the night appointed by Lucifer to meet his agents on earth, and hear from them the report of their feveral jjroceedings, and he had feledled this very oak as the place of rendezvous. There Brother Rulh appeared, and the farmer, in his hiding-place, heard his confellion from his own lips, and told it to the abbot, who, being as it would appear a magician, conjured him into the form of a horfe, and banilhed him. Rufli hurried away to England, where he laid afide his equine form, and entered the body of the king’s daughter, who fulfered great torments from his polfelfion. At length fome of the great dodlors from Paris came and obliged the fpirit to confefs that nobody but the abbot of the difiant monaftery had any power over him. The abbot came, called him out of the maiden, and conjured him more forcibly than ever into the form of a horfe. Such is, in mere outline, the flory of Brother Rulh, which was gradually enlarged by the addition of new incidents. But the people wanted a hero who prefented more of the character ot reality, who, in fa6t. 230 Hii'iory of- Caricature and Grotefque fa£l, might be recogniled as one of themfelves ; and fuch heroes appear to have exifted at all times. They ulually reprefented a clafs in fociety, and efpecially that clafs which confided of idle lharpers, who lived by their wits, and which was more numerous and more familiarly known in the middle ages than at the prefent day. Folly and cunning combined prefented a never-failing fubjedt of mirth. This clafs of adventurers firft came into print in Germany, and it is there that we find its firfl: popular hero, to whom they gave the name of Eulenfpiegel, which means literally “ the owl’s mirror,” and has been fince ufed in German in the fenfe of a merry fool. Tyll Eulenfpiegel, and his ftory, are fuppofed to have be- longed to the fourteenth century, though we firfl: know them in the printed book of the commencement of the fixteenth, which is believed to have come from the pen of the w'ell-known popular writer, Thomas Murner, of whom I lhall have to fpeak more at length in another chapter. The popularity of this work was very great, and it was quickly tranflated into French, Englilh, Latin, and almofl every other language of Weftern Europe. In the Englilh verfion the name alfo was tranflated, and appears under the form of Owleglafs, or, as it often occurs with the fnperfluous afpirate, Howleglafs.* According to the flory, Tyll Eulen- I'piegel was the fon of a peafant, and was born at a village called Kneit- lingen, in the land of Brunfwick. The flory of his birth may be given in the words of the early Englilh verfion, as a fpecimen of its quaint and antiquated language ; — “ Yn the lancle of Sassen, in the vyllage of Ruelnige, there dwelleth a man that was named Nicholas Howleglas, that had a wife named Wypeke, that lay a childbed in the same wyllage, and that chylde was borne to christening and named Tyell Howlcglass. And than the chyld was brought into a taverne, where the father was wyth his gosseppes and made good chere. Whan the mydwife had wel dronke, * The title of this English translation is, “ Here beginneht a merye Jest of a man that was called Howleglas, and of many marveylous thinges and jestes that he dyd in his lyfe, in Eastlande, and in many other places.” It was printed by Coplande, supposed about 1520. An edition of Eulenspiegel in English, by Mr. Kenneth Mackenzie, has recently been published by Messrs. Triibner & Co., of Paternoster Row. hi Literature and Art. 231 dronke, she toke the rhilde to here it home, and in the wai was a litle bridg over a muddy water. And as the mydwife would have gone over the lytle brydge, she fel into the mudde with the chyide, for she had a lytel dronk to much wyne, for had not helpe come quickly, the had both be drowned in the mudde. And whan the came home with the childe, the made a kettle of warm water to be made redi, and therin they washed the child clen of the mudde. And thus was Howleglas thre tymes in one dai cristencd, once at the churche, once in the mudde, and once in the warm water.” It will be feen that the Englilh tranflator was not very corre6t in his geography or in his names. The child, having thus efcaped deftrudfion, grew rapidly, and difplayed an extraordinary love of mifchief, with various other evil propenfities, as well as a cunning beyond his age, in efcaping the rilks to which thefe expoled him. At a very early age, he difplayed a remarkable talent for fetting the other children by the ears, and this was his favourite amufement during life. His mother, who was now a widow, contemplating the extraordinary cunning of her child, which, as llie thought, muft necelfarily enfure his advancement in the world, refolved that he fliould no longer remain idle, and put him apprentice to a baker 5 but his wicked and refllefs difpofition defeated all the good intentions of his parent, and Eulenfpiegel was obliged to leave his mailer in confequence of his mal-prahtices. One day his mother took him to a church-dedica- tion, and the child drank fo much at the feall on that occalion, that he crept into an empty beehive and fell afleep, while his mother, thinking he had gone home, returned without him. In the night-time two thieves came into the garden to Ileal the bees, and they agreed to take firll the hive which was heaviell. fniis, as may be fuppofed, proved to be the hive in which Eulenfpiegel was hidden, and they fixed it on a pole which they carried on their fhoulders, one before and one behind, the hive hanging between them. Eulenfpiegel, awakened by the movement, foon difcovered the pofition in which he was placed, and hit upon a plan for efcaping. Gently lifting the lid of the hive, he put out his arm and plucked the hair of the man before, who turned about and accufed his companion of infulting him. The other alferted that he had not touched him, and the firll, only half fati.sfied, continued to bear his fliare of the burthen, but he had not advanced many tleps when a Hill (harper pull at his hair excited his 232 HiJio?'y of Caricature and Grotefque his great anger, and from wrathful words the two thieves proceeded to blows. While they were fighting, Eulenfpiegel crept out of the hive and ran away. After leaving the baker, Eulenfpiegel became a wanderer in the world, gaining his living by his trickery and deception, and engaging himfelf in all forts of tirange and ludicrous adventures. He ended every- where by creating difcord and ftrife. He became at different times a blackfmith, a fhoemaker, a tailor, a cook, a drawer of teeth, and alTumed a variety of other charadters, but remained in each fituation only long enough to make it too hot for him, and to be obliged to fecure his retreat. He intruded himfelf into all clalfes of fociety, and invariably came to fimilar refults. Many of his adventures, indeed, are fo droll that we can eafily underfland the great popularit}' they once enjoyed. But they are not merely amufing — they prefent a continuous fatire upon contemporary fociety, upon a focial condition in which every pretender, every recklefs impolfor, every private plunderer or public depredator, law the world expofed to him in its folly and credulity as an eafy prey. The middle ages polfelhed another clafs of thefe popular fatirical hitlories, which were attached to places rather than to perfons. There were few countries which did not poffefs a town or a diflrid, the inhabitants of which were celebrated for flupidity, or for roguery, or for fome other ridiculous or contemptible quality. We have feen, in a former chapter, the people of Norfolk enjoying this peculiarity, and, at a later period, the inhabitants of Pevenfey in Sulfex, and more efpecially thofe of Gotham in Nottinghamfhire, were fimilarly diffinguifhed. The inhabitants of many places in Germany bore this charadfer, but their grand reprefentatives among the Germans were the Schildburgers, a name which appears to belong entirely to the domain of fable. Schildburg, we are told, was a town “in Mifnopotamia, beyond Utopia, in the kingdom of Calecut.” The Schildburgers were originally fo renowned for their wifdom, that they were continually invited into foreign countries to give their advice, until at length not a man was left at home, and their wives were obliged to alfume the charge of the duties of their hulbands. This became at length fo onerous, that the wives held a council, and refolved on defpatching a folemn in Literature and Art. Iblenm meffage ia writing to call the men home. This had the delired eft'edt ; all the Schildburgers returned to their own town, and were fo joyfully received by their wives that they refolved upon leaving it no more. They accordingly held a council, and it was decided that, having experienced the great inconvenience of a reputation of wifdom, they would avoid it in future by affuming the charadter of fools. One of the lirlt evil refults of their long negledt of home affairs was the want of a council-hall, and this want they now refolved to fupply without delay. They accordingly went to the hills and woods, cut down the timber, dragged it with great labour to the town, and in due time completed the eredtion of a handfome and fubftantial building. But, when they entered their new council-hall, what was their confternation to find themfelves in perfedl darknefs ! In fadt, they had forgotten to make any windows. Another council was held, and one who had been among the wifeli in the days of their wifdom, gave his opinion very oracularly j the refult of which was that they Ihould experiment on every pofiible expedient for introducing light into the hall, and that they Ihould firll try that which feemed moll likely to fucceed. They had obferved that the light of day was caufed by funlhine, and the plan propofed w'as to meet at mid-day when the fun was brighteft, and fill lacks, hampers, jugs, and velfels of all kinds, with funlhine and daylight, which they propofed afterwards to empty into the unfortunate council-hall. Next day, as the clock firuck one, you might fee a crowd of Schildburgers before the council-houfe door, bufily employed, fome holding the lacks open, and others throwing the light into them with Ihovels and any other appropriate implements which came to hand. While they were thus labouring, a ftranger came into the town of Schildburg, and, hearing what they were about, told them they were labouring to no purpofe, and offered to lliow them how to get the daylight into the hall. It is unnecelfary to fay more than that this new plan was to make an opening in the roof, and that the Schild- burgers witnelled the effedt with allonilhment, and were loud in their Siratitude to their new comer. The Schildburgers met with further difficulties before they completed their council-hall. They lowed a field with fait, and when the falt-plant 234 Hi/lory cf Caricature and Grotefcjue grew up next year, after a meeting of tlie council, at which it was ftiffly difputed whether it ought to be reaped, or mowed, or gathered in in fome other manner, it M'as finally difcovered that the crop conliffed of nothing but nettles. After many accidents of this kind, the Schildburgers are noticed by the emperor, and obtain a charter of incorporation and freedom, but they profit little by it. In trying fome experiments to catch mice, they let fire to their houfes, and the whole town is burnt to the ground, upon which, in their furrow, they abandon it altogether, and become, like the Jews of old, fcattered over the world, carrying their own folly into every country they vilit. The earliell known edition of the hiftoiy of the Schildburgers was printed in 1597,* but the flory itfelf is no doubt older. It will be feen at once that it involves a fatire upon the municipal towns of the middle ages. A limilar feries of adventures, only a little more clerical, bore the title of “ Der Pfarrherrn vom Kalenberg,” or the Parfon of Kalenberg, and was hrft, as far as we know, publilhed in the latter half of the fixteenth century. The firft known edition, printed in 1582, is in profe. Von der Hagen, who reprinted a fubfequent edition in verfe, in a volume already quoted, feems to think that in its firfl form the ftory belongs to the fourteenth century. The Schildburgers of Germany were reprefented in England by the wife men of Gotham. Gotham is a village and parifh about feven miles to the fouth-wefl cf Nottingham, and, curioufly enough, a flory is told accord- ing to which the folly of the men of Gotham, like that of the Schild- burgers, was at firfl affumed. It is pretended that one day king John, on his way to Nottingham, intended to pafs through the village of Gotham, and that the Gothamites, under the influence of fome vague notion that his prefence w'ould be injurious to them, railed difficulties in his way which prevented his vifit. The men of Gotham w^ere now apprehenfive of the king’s vengeance, and they refolved to try and evade it byalfuming the character cf firapletons. When the king’s officers came to Gotham to * It was reprinted by Von der Hagen, in a little volume entitled “ Narrenbuch ; herausgegeben dutch Friedrich Heinrich von der Hagen.” lamo., Halle, 1811. in Literature and Art. 235 to inquire into the conduct of the inhabitants, they found them engaged in the moll extraordinary purfuits, home of them feeking to drown an eel in a pond of water, others making a hedge round a tree to confine a cuckoo which had fettled in it, and others employing themfelves in fimilar futile purfuits. The commillioners reported the people of Gotham to be no better than fools, and by this firatagem they efcaped any further perfecution, but the charafter they alfumed remained attached to them. This explanation is, of courfe, very late and very apocryphal ; but there can be little doubt that the charafter of the wife men of Gotham is one of confiderable antiquity. The ftory is believed to have been drawn up in its prefent form by Andrew Borde, an Englifh writer of the reign of Henry VI II. It was reprinted a great number of times under the form of thofe popular books called chap-books, becaufe they were hawked about the country by itinerant bookfellers or chap-men. The a6ts of the Gothamites difplayed a greater degree of fimplicity even than thofe of the Schildburgers, but they are lefs connedted. Here is one anecdote told in the unadorned language of the chap-books, in explana- tion of which it is only nectlfary to fate that the men of Gotham admired greatly the note of the cuckoo. “ On a time the men of Gotham fain would have pinn’d in the cuckow, that Ihe might fing all the year ; and, in the midfl: of the town, they had a hedge made round in compafs, and got a cuckow and put her into it, and laid, ‘ Sing here, and you lhall lack neither meat nor drink all the year.’ The cuckow, when the perceived herfelf encompaffed with the hedge, flew away. ‘A vengeance on her,’ faid thefe wife men, ‘we did not make our hedge high enough.’” On another occafion, having caught a large eel which otlended them by its voracity, they alfembled in council to deliberate on an appropriate punifli- ment, which ended in a refolution that it fhould be drowned, and the criminal was ceremonioufly thrown into a great pond. One day twelve men of Gotham went a-filhing, and on their way home they fuddenly difcovered that they had loft one of their number, and each counted in his turn, and could find only eleven. In fa6f, each forgot to count himfelf. In the midfl of their diflrefs — for they believed their companion to be drowned — a llranger approached, and learnt the caufe of their forrow. Finding 236 Hi [lory of Caricatiu'e and Grotefque Finding they were not to be convinced of their mitlake by mere argument, he offered, on certain conditions, to find the lofl Gothamite, and he proceeded as follows. He took one by one each of the twelve Gothamites, ftrnck him a hard blow on the Ihoulder, which made him fcream, and at each cry counted one, two, three, &c. When it came to twelve, they were all fatisfied that the loft Gothamite had returned, and paid the man for the fervice he had rendered them. As a chap-book, this hiflory of the men of Gotham became fo popular, that it gave rife to a hofl of other books of fimilar charadter, which were compiled at a later period under fuch titles — formerly well known to children — as, “The Merry Frolicks, or the Comical Cheats of Swalpo “ The Witty and Entertaining Exploits of George Buchanan, commonly called the King’s Fool;” “Simple Simon’s Misfortunes;” and the like. Nor muff it be forgotten that the hiflory of Eulenfpiegel was the proto- type of a clafs of popular hiflories of larger dimenfions, reprefented in our own literature by “ The Englifli Rogue,” the work of Richard Head and Francis Kirkman, in the reign of Charles II., and various other “rogues” belonging to different countries, which appeared about that time, or not long afterwards. The earliefi of thefe books was “The Spanifh Rogue, or Life of Guzman de Alfiirache,” written in Spanifh by Mateo Aleman in the latter part of the fixteenth century. Curioufly enough, fome Englifhman, not knowing apparently that the hiflory of Eulenfpiegel had appeared in Englilh under the name of Owlglafs, took it into his head to introduce him among the family of rogues which had thus come into fafhion, and, in 1720, publifhed as “Made Englilh from the High Dutch,” what he called “The German Rogue, or the Life and Merry Adventures, Cheats, Stratagems, and Contrivances of Tiel Eulefpiegle.” The fifteenth century was the period during which mediaeval forms generally were changing into forms adapted to another Rate of fociety, and in which much of the popular literature which has been in vogue during modern times took its rife. In the fourteenth century, the fabliaux of the jougleurs were already taking what we maj" perhaps term a more literary form, and were reduced into profe narratives. This took place efpecially in Italy, where thefe profe tales were called novelle, implying fome m Literature and Art. 237 Tome novelty in their charatter, a word which was transferred into the French language under the form of nouvelles, and was the origin of our modern Englilh novel, applied to a work of fidtion. The Italian novelifls adopted the Eaftern plan of ftringing thefe dories together on the flight framework of one general plot, in which are introduced caufes for telling them and perfons who tell them. Thus the Decameron of Boccaccio holds towards the fabliaux exadfly the fame pofition as that of the “Arabian Nights” to the older Arabian tales. The Italian novelifls became numerous and celebrated throughout Europe, from the time of Boccaccio to that of Straparola, at the commencement of the fixteenth century, and later. The talle for this clafs of literature appiears to have been introduced into France at the court of Burgundy, where, under duke Philippe le Bon, a well-kno«n courtier and man of letters named Antoine de La Sale, who had, during a fojourn in Italy, become acquainted with one of the mofl celebrated of the earlier Italian colledtions, the “Cento Novello,” or the Hundred Novels, compiled a collettion in French in imitation of them, under the title of“Les Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles,” or the Hundred new Novels, one of the pureft examples of the French language in the fifteenth century.* The later P'rench flory-books, fuch as the Heptameron of the queen of Navarre, and others, belong chiefly to the fixteenth century. Thefe colledfions of flories can hardly be faid to have ever taken root in this illand as a part of Englilh literature. But there arofe partly out of thefe flories a clafs of books which became greatly multiplied, and were, during a long period, extremely popular. With the houfehold fool, or jefter, inllead of the old jougleur, the flories had been Ihorn of their detail, and tank into the fliape of mere witty anecdote.s, and at the fame time a tafte arole for what we now clafs under the general term of jefts, clever fayings, what the French call Ions jnots, and what the Englilh of the fixteenth century termed “ quick anfwers.” * I am obliged to pass over this part of the subject very rapidly. For the history of that remarkable book, the “ Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles,” I would reter the reader to the preface to my own edition, “ Les Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles, publiees d'apr^s le seul manuscrit connu, avec Introduction et Notes, par M. Thomas Wright.” 2 vols. i2mo., Paris, 1858. 238 Hijlory of Caricature a?2d Grotefque n aniwers.” The worAjeJi itlelf arofe from the circumftance that the things defignated by it arofe out of the cider Itories, for it is a mere corruption of geftes, the Latin gejto, in the fenfe of narratives of afts or deeds, or tales. The Latin writers, who hrfi: began to collebl them into books, included them under the general name of facetice. The earlier of thefe collebtions of facetiae were written in Latin, and of the origin of the firft with which we are acquainted, that by the celebrated fcholar Poggio of Florence, a curious anecdote is told. Some wits of the court of pope Martin V., elefted to the papacy in 1417, among whom were the pope’s two fecretaries, Poggio and Antonio Lufco, Cincio of Rome, and Ruzello of Bologna, appropriated to themfelves a private corner in the Vatican, where they alfembled to chat freely among themfelves. They called it their l-uggiale, a word which hgnifies in Italian, a place of recreation, where they tell (lories, make jefts, and amufe themfelves with difcufiing fatirically the doings and charabters of everybody. This was the way in which Poggio and his friends entertained themfelves in their buggiale, and we are alfured that in their talk they neither fpared the church nor the pope himfelf or his government. The facetiae of Poggio, in faft, which are faid to be a felebtion of the good things faid in thefe meetings, Iliow neither reverence for the church of Rome nor refped for decency, but they are motllyftories which had been told over and over again, long before Poggio came into the world. It was perhaps this fatire upon the church and upon the ecclefiaflics which gave much of their popularity to thefe facetiae at a time when a univerfal agitation of men’s minds on religious alLairs prevailed, which was the great harbinger of the Reformation; and the next Latin books of facetiae came from men Inch as Henry Bebelius, who were zealous reformers themfeh'es. Many of the jells in thefe Latin colleblions are put into the mouths of jellers, or domellic fools, fatui, or moriones, as they are called in the Latin ; and in England, where thefe jeft-books in the vernacular tongue became more popular perhaps than in any other country, many of them were publilhed under the names of celebrated jeflers, as the “Merie Tales of Skelton,” “The Jells of Scogin,” “ Tarlton’s JeRs,” and “ The Jefts of George Peele.” John in Literature and Art. 239 John Skelton, poet-]aureat of his time, appears to have been known in the courts of Henry VII. and Henry VIII. quite as much in the charafter of a jeller as in that of a poet. Poet-laureat was then a title or degree given in the univerfity of Oxford. His “ Merye Tales ” are all perfonal of himfelf, and we fhould be inclined to fay that his jells and his poetry are equally bad. The former picture him as holding a place fomewhere between Eulenfpiegel and the ordinary court-fool. We may give as a fample of the bell of them the tale No. I. — H01.V Skelton came home late to Oxford from Abington. “ Skelton was an Engly>heinan borne as Skogyn was, and hee was educated and broughte up in Oxfooide, and there was he made a poete lauriat. And on a tyme he had ben at Abbington to make mery, wher that he had eate sake meates, and hee did com late home to Oxforde, and he did lye in an ine named the Tabere, whyche is now the Angel), and hee dyd drynke, and went to bed. About mid- night he was so thyrstie or drye that he was constrained to call to the tapster for drynke, and the tapster harde him not. Then hee cryed to hys ostc and hys ostes, and to the ostler, for drinke, and no man would here hym. Alacke, savd Skelton, I shall peryshe for lacke of drynke ! What reamedye } At the last he dyd crie out and sayd, Fyer, fyer, fyer ! When Skelton hard every man bustle hymselle upward, aiid some of them were naked, and some were hake asleepe and amased, and Skelton dyd crye, Fier, fier ! styll, that everye man knewe not whether to resorte. Skelton did go to bed, and the oste and ostis, and the tapster, with the ostler, dyd runne to Skeltons chamber with candles lyghted in theyr handes, saying. Where, where, where i,s the fyer ? Here, here, here, said Skelton, and poynted hys fynger to hys mouth, saying, Fetch me some drynke to quenche the fyer and the heate and the drinesse in my mouthe. And so they dyd.” Another of thefe “ Merye Tales ” of Skelton contains a fatire upon the prablice which prevailed in the fixteenth and early part of the feventeenth centuries of obtaining letters-patent of monopoly from the crown, and alfo on the bibulous propenfities of Wellhmen— “ How the irehhman dyd detyrc Skelton to ayde hym in hys sute to the kynge for a patent to sell drynke. “ Skelton, when he was in London, went to the kynges courte, where there did come to hym a Welshman, saying, Syr, it is so, that manye dooth come upp of my country to the kynges court, and some doth get of the kyng by patent a castell, and some a parke, and some a forest, and some one fee and some another, and they dooe lyve lyke honest men ; and I shoulde lyve as honestly as the best, if I myght have a patyne for good dryncke, wherefore I dooe praye yow to write a fewe woords for mee in a lytle byll to geve the same to the kvnges handes, and I wil geve you well for 240 Hijiory of Caricature ajtd Grotejqiie tor your laboure. I am contented, sayde Skelton. Syt downe then, sayde the Welsh- man, and write. What shall I wryte sayde Skelton. The Welshman sayde wryte dryncke, Nowe, sayde the Welshman, write more dryncke. What now? sayde Skelton. Wryte nowe, a great deale of dryncke. Nowe, sayd the Welshman, putte to all thys dryncke a littell crome of breade, and a great deale of drynke to it, and reade once agayne. Skelton dyd reade, Dryncke, more dryncke, and a great deale oj dryncke, and a lytle crome of breade, and a great deale of dryncke to it. Than the Welshman sayde. Put OUte the Idle crome of breade, and sette in, a/7 dryncke and no hreade. And it 1 myght have thys sygned ot the kynge, sayde the Welshman, I care tor no more, as longe as I dooe lyve. Well then, sayde Skelton, when you have thys signed ot the kyng, then wyll I labour tor a patent to have bread, that you wyth your drymke and I with the bread may tare well, and seeke our livinge with bagge and stafFe.” Thefe two tales are rather favourable fpecimens of the colleftion publilhed under the name of Skelton, which, as far as we know, was tirtl printed about the middle of the fixteenth century. The colledtion of the jetls of Scogaii, or, as he was popularly called, Scogin, which is faid to liave been comj)iled by Andrew Borde, was probably given to the world a few years before, but no copies of the earlier editions are now known to exill. Scogan, the hero of thefe jells, is defcribed as occupying at the court of Henry \TI. a polition not much ditferent from that of an ordinary court-fool. Good old Holinlhed the chronicler fays of him, perhaps a little too gently, that he was “a learned gentleman and lludent for a time in Oxford, of a pleafant wit, and bent to merrie devices, in refpedt whereof he was called into the court, where, giving himfelfe to his na- turall inclination of mirth and pleafant pallime, he plaied manie fporting parts, although not in fuch uncivil manner as hath beene of him reported.” This allulion refers molt probably to the jells, which reprefent him as lead- ing a life of low and coarfe buffoonery, in the courfe of which he difplayed a conliderable lhare of the dilhonell and mifchievous qualities of the lefs real Eulenfpiegel. He is even reprefented as perfonally infulting the king and queen, and as being confequently banilhed over the Channel, to Ihow no more refpeCl to the majelty of the king of France. Scogin’s jells, like Skelton’s, conllll in a great meafure of thole pradlical jokes which appear in all former ages to have been the delight of the Teutonic race. Many of them are directed againft the ignorance and worldlinefs of the clergy. Scogin is defcribed as being at one time himfelf a teacher in the univerfity, and in Literature and Art. 241 and on one occafion, we are told, a hufbandman fent his fon to fchool to him that he might be made a prieft. The whole ftory, which runs through feveral chapters, is an excellent caricature on the way in which men vulgarly ignorant were intruded into the priellhood before the Refor- mation. At length, after much blundering, the fcholar came to be ordained, and his examination is reported as follows ; — H01V the scholler said Tom Miller of Oseney luas facob's father. “After this, the said scholler did come to the next orders, and brought a pre- sent to the ordinary from Scogin, but the scholler’s father paid for all. Then said the ordinary to the scholler, I must needes oppose you, and for master Scogin’s sake, I will oppose you in a light matter. Isaac had two sons, Esau and Jacob. Who was Jacob’s father ? The scholler stood still, and could not tell. Well, said the ordinary, I cannot admit you to be priest untill the next orders, and then bring me an answer. The scholler went home with a heavy heart, bearing a letter to master Scogin, how his scholler could not answer to this question ; Isaac had two sons, Esau and Jacob ; who was Jacob’s father .? Scogin said to his scholler, Thou foole and asse-head ! Dost thou not know Tom Miller of Oseney i Yes, said the scholler ! Then, said Scogin, thou knowest he had two sonnes, Tom and Jacke ; who is Jacke’s father ? The scholler said, Tom Miller. Why, said Scogin, thou mightest have said that Isaac was Jacob’s father. Then said Scogin, Thou shalt arise betime in the morning, and carry a letter to the ordinary, and I trust he will admit thee before the orders shall be given. The scholler rose up betime in the morning, and carried the letter to the ordinary. The ordinary said. For Master Scogin’s sake I will oppose you no farther than I did yesterday. Isaac had two sons, Esau and Jacob; who was Jacob’s father.? Marry, said the scholler, I can tell you now that was Tom Miller of Oseney. Goe, foole, goe, said the ordinary, and let thy master send ttiee no more to me for orders, for it is impossible to make a foole a wise man.” Scogin’s fcholar was, however, made a prieft, and fome of the ftories which follow defcribe the ludicrous manner in which he exercifed the priefthood. Two other ftories illuftrate Scogin’s fuppofed pofition at court ; — “ How Scogin told those that mocked him that he had a ivall-eye, “ Scogin went up and down in the king’s hall, and his hosen hung downe, and his coat stood awry, and his hat stood a boonjour, so every man did mocke Scogin. Some said he was a proper man, and did wear his rayment cleanly ; some said the foole could not put on his owne rayment ; some said one thing, and some said another. At last Scogin said. Masters, you have praised me wel, but you did not [ I espy 242 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque espy one thing in me. What is that, Tom ? said the men. Marry, said Scogin, I have a wall-eye. What meanest thou by that ? said the men. Marry, said Scogin, I have spyed a sort ot knaves that doe mocke me, and are worse fooles themselves.” “ Hinu Scogin drcTV his sonne up and downs the court, “ After this Scogin went from the court, and put off his foole’s garments, and came to the court like an honest man, and brought his son to the court with him, and within the court he drew his sonne up and downe by the heeles. The boy crietl out, and Scogin drew the boy in every corner. At last every body had pity on the boy, and said. Sir, what doe you meane, to draw the boy about the court i* Masters, said Scogin, he is my sonne, and I doe it tor this cause. Every man doth say, that man or child which is drawne up in the court shall be the better as long as hee lives; and therefore I will every day once draw him up and downe the court, after that hee may come to preferment in the end.” The appreciation of a good joke cannot at this time have been very great or very general, for Scogin’s jefts were wonderfully popular during at lead a century, from thefirll half of thefixteenth century. Theypaffed through many editions, and are frequently alluded to by the writers of the Elizabethan age. The next individual whofe name appears at the head of a colletbon of his jefts, was the well-known wit, Richard Tarlton, who may be fairly confidered as court fool to Queen Elizabeth. His jells belong to the fame clafs as thofe of Skelton and Scogin, and if poftible, they prefent a ftill greater amount of dulnefs. Tarlton’s jefts were foon followed by the “ merrie conceited jefts ” of George Peele, the dramatift, who is deferibed in the title as “gentleman, fometimes ftudent in Oxford;” and it is added that in thefe jefts “ is Ihewed the courfe of his life, how he lived ; a man very well knowne in the city of London and elfewhere.” In fa6l, Peele’s jefts are chiefly curious for the ftriking pidlure they give us of the wilder Qiades of town life under the reigns of Elizabeth and James I. During the period which witnefled the publication in England of thefe books, many other jeft-books appeared, for they had already become an important clafs of Englilh popular literature. Moft of them were publiflied anonymoufly, and indeed they are mere com- pilations from the older colledlions in Latin and French. All that was at all good, even in the jefts of Skelton, Scogin, Tarlton, and Peele, had been repeated over and over again by the ftory-tellers and jefters in Literature and Art. 243 jefters of former ages. Two of the earlier Englilh colleftions have gained a greater celebrity than the reft, chiefly through adventitious circumftances. One of thefe, entitled “ A Hundred Merry Tales,” has gained diftindtion among Shakespearian critics as the one efpecially alluded to by the great poet in “ Much Ado about Nothing,” (Act ii.. Sc. i), where Beatrice complains that fomebody had laid “that I had my good wit out of the Hundred Merry Tales.” The other colledtion alluded to was entitled “ Mery Tales, Wittie Queftions, and Quicke Anfweres, very pleafant to be readde,” and was printed in 1567. Its modern fame appears to have arifen chiefly from the circumftance that, until the accidental difcovery of the unique and imperfeft copy of the “ Hundred Merry Tales,” it was fuppofed to be the book alluded to by Shakefpeare. Both thefe collettions are mere compilations from the “ Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles,” Poggio,” “ Straparola,” and other foreign works.* The words put into the mouth of Beatrice are correftly defcrip- tive of the ufe made of thefe jeft-books. It had become fafliionable to learn out of them jefts and ftories, in order to introduce them into polite converfation, and efpecially at table j and this prabtice continued to prevail until a very recent period. The number of fucb jeft-books pub- lilbed during the fixteenth, feventeeth, and eighteenth centuries, was quite extraordinary. Many of thefe were given anonymouflyj but many alfo were put forth under names which poflelfed temporary celebrity, fuch as Hobfon the carrier, Killigrew the jefter, the friend of Charles II., Ben Jonfon, Garrick, and a multitude of others. It is, perhaps, unneceflary to remind the reader that the great modern reprefen tative of this clafs of literature is the illuftrious Joe Miller. * A neat and useful edition of these two jest-books, with the other most curious hooks of the same class, published durinc; the Elizabethan period, has recently been published in two volumes, by Mr. VV. C. Hazlitt. 244 Hi ft or y of Caricature and Grotefque CHAPTER XV. THE AGE OF THE REFORMATION. THOMAS MURNER ; HIS GENERAL SATIRES. FRUITFULNESS OF FOLLY. HANS SACHS. THE TRAP FOR FOOLS. ATTACKS ON LUTHER. THE POPE AS ANTICHRIST. THE POPE-ASS AND THE MONK-CALF. OTHER CARICATURES AGAINST THE POPE. THE GOOD AND BAD SHEPHERDS. HE reign of Folly did not pafs away with the fifteenth century — on the whole the fixteenth century can hardly be faid to have been more fane than its predeceffor, but it was agitated by a long and fierce ffruggle to difengage European fociety from the trammels of the middle ages. We have entered upon what is technically termed the renaijjance, and are approaching the great religious reformation. The period during which the art of printing began firft to fpread generally over Weftern Europe, was peculiarly favourable to the produdtion of fatirical books and pamphlets, and a conliderable number of clever and fpirited fatirifts and comic w'riters appeared towards the end of the fifteenth century, efpecially in Germany, where circumflances of a political charader had at an early period given to the intelledual agitation a more permanent ftrength than it could eafily or quickly gain in the great monarchies. Among the more remarkable of thefe fatirifts was Thomas Murner, who was born at Strafburg, in 1^75. The circumflances even of his childhood are lingular, for he was born a cripple, or became one in his earlieft infancy, though he was fubfequently healed, and it was fo univerfally believed that this nialady was the efted of witchcraft, that he himfelf wrote after- wards a treatife upon this fubjed under the title of “ De Phitonico Contradu.” The fchool in which he was taught may at leall have encouraged his fatirical fpirit, for his mailer was Jacob Locher, the fame who tranflated into Latin verfe the “ Ship of Fools ” of Sebaftian Brandt. At in Literature and Art. 245 A.t the end of the century Murner had become a mafter of arts in the Univerfity of Paris, and had entered the Francifcan order. His reputa- tion as a German popular poet was fo great, that the emperor Maxi- milian L, who died in 1519, conferred upon him the crown of poetry, or, in other words, made him poet-laureat. He took the degree of dodor in theology in 1509. Still Murner was known bell as the popular writer, and he publillied feveral fatirical poems, which were remarkable for the bold woodcuts that illullrated them, for engraving on wood flourilhed at this period. He expofed the corruptions of all clalfes of fociety, and, before the Reformation broke out, he did not even fpare the corruptions of the ecclefiallical flate, but foon declared himfelf a fierce opponent of the Reformers. When the Lutheran revolt againft the Papacy became llrong, our king, Henry VHI., who took a decided part againft Luther, invited Murner to England, and on his return to his own country, the fatiric Francifcan became more bitter againft the Reformation than ever. He advocated the caufe of the Engliftr monarch in a pamphlet, now very rare, in which he difculfed the quellion whether Henry VHI. or Luther was the liar — “ Antwort dem Murner uft' feine frag, ob der kiinig von Engllant ein Liigner fey oder Martinus Luther.” Murner appears to have divided the people of his age into rogues and fools, or perhaps he confidered the two titles as identical. His “ Narrenbefchwerung,” or Confpiracy of Fools, in which Brandt’s idea was followed up, is fuppofed to have been publifned as early as 1506, but the firll printed edition with a date, appeared in 1512. It became fo popular, that it went through feveral editions during fubfequent years ; and that which I have before me was printed at Stratburg in 1518. It is, like Brandt’s “ Ship of Fools,” a general fatire againft fociety, in which the clergy are not fpared, for the writer had not yet come in face of Luther’s Reformation. The cuts are fuperior to thofe of Brandt’s book, and fome of them are remarkable for their deiign and execution. In one of the earlieft of them, copied in the cut No. 139, Folly is introduced in the garb of a hulband- man, fcattering his feed over the earth, the refnlt of which is a very quick and flouriftiing crop, the fool’s heads rifmg above ground, almoft mftantaneoufty, like fo many turnips. In a fubfequent engraving, repre- fented 246 Hifiory of Caricature and Grotefque fented in our cut No. 140, Folly holds out, as an objedt of emulation, the fool’s cap, and people of all clafles, the pope himfelf, and the emperor, and all the great dignitaries of this world, prefs forward eagerly to feize upon it. The fame year (1512) witneffed the appearance of another poetical, or at lead metrical, fatire by Murner, entitled “ Schelmenzunft,” or the Confraternity of Rogues, fimilarly illuftrated with very fpirited engravings on wood. It is another demonftration of the prevailing dominion of folly under its word forms, and the fatire is equally general with the preceding. IMurner’s fatire appears to have been felt not only generally, but perfonally; and we are told that he was often threatened with aflTaffi- nation, and he raifed up a number of literary opponents, who treated him with no little rudenefs ; in fatr, he had got on the wrong fide of politics, or at all events on the unpopular fide, and men who had more talents and greater weight appeared as his opponents — men like Ulrich von Utten, and Luther himfelf. Among the fatirifts who efpoufed the caufe to which Murner was oppofed, we muft not overlook a man who reprefented in its firongefl: features. in Literature and Art, 247 features, though in a rather debafed form, the old fpontaneous poetry of the middle ages. His name was Hans Sachs, at lead that was the name under which he was known, for his real name is faid to have been Loutrdorfter. His fpirit was entirely that of the old wandering minftrel, and it was fo powerful in him, that, having been apprenticed to the craft of a weaver, he was no fooner freed from his indentures, than he took to a vagabond life, and wandered from town to town, gaining his living by tinging theverfes he compofedupon every occalion which prefented itfelf. In 1519, he married and fettled in Nuremberg, and his compolitions were then given to the public through the prefs. The number of thefe was quite extraordinary — fongs, ballads, fatires, and dramatic pieces, rude in llyle, in accordance with the tafte of the time, but full of clevernefs. Many of them were printed on broadfides, and illuftrated with large engravings on wood. Hans Sachs joined in the crufade againfl. the empire of Folly, and one of his broadtides is illuftrated with a graceful defign, the greater part of which is copied in our cut No. 141. A party of ladies have fet a bird-trap to catch the fools of the age, who are waiting 24 ^ Hijiory of Caricature a?id Grotefque waiting to be caught. One fool is taken in the trap, while another is already fecured and pinioned, and others are rufhing into the fnare. A number of people of the world, high in their dignities and llations, are looking on at this remarkable fcene. iVtJ. 141. Bird-Tra^s. The evil influence of the female fex was at this time proverbial, and, in fad, it was an age of extreme licentioufnets. Another poet-laureat of the time, Henricus Bebelius, born in the latter half of the fifteenth century, and rather well known in the literature of his time, publilhed, in 1515, a fatirical poem in Latin, under the title of “Triumphus Veneris,” which was a fort of expotition of the generally licentious charader of the age in which he lived. It is diftributed into fix bocks, in the third of which the poet attacks the whole ecclefiaftical Hate, not fparing the pope himfelf, and we are thereby perfedly well initiated into the weaknelTes of the clergy. Bebelius had been preceded by another writer on this part of the fubjed, and we might fay by many, for the incontiirence of monks and in Literature and Art. 249 and nuns, and indeed of all the clergy, had long been a fubjedt of fatire. But the writer to whom I efpecially allude was named Paulus Olearius, his name in German being Oelfchliigel. He publilhed, about the year 1500, a fatirical tra6t, under the title of “De Fide Concubinarum in Sacerdotes.” It was a bitter attack on the licentioufnefs of the clergy, and was rendered more etfedtive by the engravings which accompanied it. We give one of thefe as a curious pidlure of contemporary manners ; the individual who comes within the range of the lady’s attradlions, thougli he may be a fcholar, has none of the charafteriftics of a prieft. She prefents a nofegay, which we may fuppofe to reprefent the influence of perfume upon the fenfes ; but the love of the ladies for pet animals is efpecially typified in the monkey, attached by a chain. A donkey appears to Ihow by his heels his contempt for the lover. From an early period, the Roman church had been accuflomed to treat contemptuoully, as well as cruelly, all who dilfented from its dc6lrines, or objefted to its government, and this feeling was continued down to the age of the Reformation, in fpite of the tone of liberalifm which was beginning No. 142. Court (kip. lo K K 250 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque to lliiiie forth in the writings of fome of its greateft ornaments. Some refearch among the dufty, becaufe little ufed, records of national archives and libraries would no doubt bring to light more than one lingular cari- cature upon the “ heretics ” of the middle ages, and my attention has been called to one which is polfelfed of peculiar interelf. There is, among the imperial archives of France, in Paris, among records relating to the country of the Albigeois in the thir- teenth century, a copy of the bull of pope Innocent IV. giving diredlions for the proceedings againll dilfenters from Romanifm, on the back of which the fcribe, as a mark of his contempt for thele arch-heretics of the fouth, has drawn a caricature of a woman bound to a flake over the Are which is to burn her as an open opponent of the church of Rome. The choice of a woman for the victim was perhaps intended to Ihow that the profe- lytifm of herefy was efpecially fuccefsful among the weaker fex, or that it was conlidered as having fome relation to witchcraft. It is, by a long period, the earliefl known pidlorial reprefentation of the punilhment of burning inflicted on a heretic. The lhafts of fatire were early employed againll Luther and his new principles, and men like Murner, already mentioned, Emfer, Cochlaeus, and others, fignalifed themfelves by their zeal in the papal caufe. As already flated, Murner diflinguilhed himfelf as the literary ally of our king Henry VII I. lire talle for fatirical writings had then become fo general, that Murner complains in one of his satires that the printers would print nothing but abuflve or fatirical works, and negledled his more ferious writings. Da Jindt die trucker Jchuld daran^ Die trucken ah die Gauc/iereien, Und lajfen mein ernfiliche bucher leihen. Some m Literature and Art. 251 Some of Murner’s writings againft Luther, moft of which are now very rare, are extremely violent, and they are generally illuftrated with fatirical woodcuts. One of thefe books, printed without name of place or date, is entitled, “ Of the great Lutheran Fool, how Dodor Murner has exorcifed him ” {Von dem. grojfm Luther I [jchen Narren, wie in Do6lor Murner lefchwortn hat). In the woodcuts to this book Murner himfelf is introduced, as Is ufually the cafe in thefe fatirical engravings, under the charader of a Francifean friar, with the head of a cat, while Luther appears as a fat and jolly monk, wear- ing a fool’s cap, and figuring in various ridiculous circumftances. In one of the firft woodcuts, the cat Francifean is drawing a rope so tight round the great Lutheran fool’s neck, that he compels him to difgorge a multitude of fmaller fools. In another the great Lutheran fool has his purfe, or pouch, full of little fools fufpended at his girdle. This latter figure is copied in the cut No. 144, as an example of the form under which the great reformer appears in thefe fatirical reprefentations. In a few other caricatures of this period which have been preferved, the apoflle of the Reformation is attacked fiill more favagely. The one here given (Fig. 145), taken from a contemporary engraving on wood, prefents a rather fantaflic figure of the demon playing on the bagpipes. The inflrument is formed of Luther’s head, the pipe through which the devil blows entering his ear, and that through which the mufic is No. 144 - Folly in ULonajiic Habit. produced forming an elongation of the reformers nofe. It was a broad intimation that Luther was a mere tool of the evil one, created for the purpofe of bringing mifehief into the w’orld. The reformers, however, were more than a match for their opponents in this fort of warfare. Luther himfelf was full of comic and fatiric humour. 252 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque humour, and a mals of the talent of that age was ranged on his lide, both literary and artillic. After the reformer’s marriage, the papal party quoted the old legend, that Antichrhl was to be born of the union of a monk and a nun, and it was intimated that if Luther himfelf could not be diredtiy identified with Antichrift, he had, at lead, a fair chance of becoming his parent. But the reformers had refolved, on what appeared to be much more conclufive evidence, that Antichrift was only emblematical of the papacy, that under this form he had been long dominant on earth, and that the end of his reign was then approaching. A remarkable pamphlet, defigned to place this idea pidtorially before the public, was produced from the pencil of Luther’s friend, the eelebrated painter, Lucas Cranach, and appeared in the year 1521 under the title of “The Paftionale of Chrill and Antichrift’’ {Paffional Chr'ifti und Anti- chrijii). It is a fmall quarto, each page of which is nearly filled by a woodcut, having a few lines of explanation in German below. The cut to in Literature and Art. 253 to the left reprefents fome incident in the life of Chrift, while that facing it to the right gives a contrafting fa6t in the hiftory of papal tyranny. Thus the firit cut on the left reprefents Jefus in His humility, refufing earthly dignities and power, while on the adjoining page we fee the pope, with his cardinals and bilhops, fupported by his hofts of warriors, his cannon, and his fortifications, in his temporal dominion over lecular princes. When we open again we fee on one lide Chrili crowned with thorns by the infulting foldiery, and on the other the pope, enthroned in all his worldly glory, exabling the worlliip of his courtiers. On another we have Chrili walhing the feet of His difciples, and in contrail the pope compelling the emperor to kifs his toe. And lb on, through a number ol curious illullrations, until at bill we come to Chrilf s afcenlion into heaven, in Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque 254 in contraft with which a troop of demons, of the moft varied and fingular forms, have feized upon the papal Antichrift, and are calling him down into the dames of hell, where fome of his own monks wait to receive him. This lall picture is drawn with fo much fpirit, that I have copied it in the cut No. 146. The tnonftrous figures of animals which had amufed the fculptors and miniaturills of an earlier period came in time to be looked upon as realities, and were not only regarded with wonder as phvfical deformities, but were objedls of fuperltition, for they were believed to be lent into the world as warnings of great revolutions and calamities. During the age preceding the Reformation, the reports of the births or difcoveries of fuch monllers were very common, and engravings of them were no doubt profitable articles of rnerchandife among the early book-hawkers. Two of thefe were very celebrated in the time of the Reformation, the Pope-afs and the jNIonk-calf, and were publilhed and re- publifiied with an explanation under the names of Luther and JVlclandlhon, which made them emblematical of the Papacy and of the abufes of the Romiflr church, and, of courfe, prognoftications of their approaching exjiolure and fall. It was pretended that the Pope-afs was found dead in the river Tiber, at Rome, in the year 1495. It is reprefented in our cut No. 147, taken from an engraving pre- ferred in a ver}' curious volume of broadfide Lutheran caricatures, in the library of the Britilli Mufeum, all belonging to the year 1545, though this defign had been publilhed many years before. The head of an afs, we are told, reprefented the pope himfelf, with his falfe and carnal dodlrines. The right hand refembled the foot of an elephant, fignifying the fpiritual power of the pope, which was heavy, and damped down and crulhed people’s in Literature and Art. 255 people’s confciences. The left hand was that of a man, fignifying the worldly power of the pope, which grafped at univerfal empire over kings and princes. The right foot was that of an ox, fignifying the fpiritual minifiers of the papacy, the dodtors of the church, the preachers, con- felfors, and fcholaftic theologians, and efpecially the monks and nuns, thofe who aided and fupported the pope in opprefling people’s bodies and fouls. The left foot was that of a griffin, an animal which, when it once feizes its prey, never lets it efcape, and fignified the canonifts, the monfters of the pope’s temporal power, who graiped people’s temporal goods, and never returned them. The breall and belly of this monfler were thofe of a woman, and fignified the papal body, the cardinals, bif- hops, priefls, monks, &c., who fpent their lives in eating, drinking, and incontinence; and this part of the body was naked, becaufe the popilh clergy were not alhamed to ex- pofe their vices to the public. The legs, arms, and neck, on the contrary, were clothed with filhes’ fcales ; thefe fignified the tem- poral princes and lords, who were moflly in alliance with the papacy. The old man’s head behind the monfler, meant that the papacy had become old, and was approachins a dragon, vomiting flames, which ferved for a tail, was fignificative of the great threats, the venomous horrible bulls and blafphemous writings, which the pontiff and his minifters, enraged at feeing their end approach, were launching into the world againft all who oppofed them. Thefe explanations were fupported by apt quotations from the Scriptures, and were fo etfedtive, and became fo popular, that the pidture was publifhed in various lhapes, and was feen adorning the walls of the humbleli cottages. I believe it is flill to be met with in a fimilar pofition in fome parts of Germany. It was confidered at the time to be a maflerly piece of fatire. The pidure of the Monk-calf, which is reprefented in our cut No. 148, its end ; and the head of 256 Hi [lory of Caricature and Grotefque was publillied at the fame time, and ufually accompanies it. This monfier is faid to have been born at Freyburg, in Mifnia, and is fimply a rather coarfe emblem of the monachal charafter. The volume of caricatures juft mentioned contains feveral fatires on the pope, which are all very fev-ere, and many of them clever. One has a movable leaf, which covers the upper part of the pidture ; when it is down, we have a reprefentation of the pope in his ceremonial robes, and over it the infeription ALEX . VI . PONT . MAX. Pope Alexander VI. was the infamous Roderic Borgia, a man ftained with all the crimes and vices which flrike moft horror into men’s minds. When the leaf is raifed, another figure joins itfelf with the lower part of the former, and reprefents a papal demon, crowned, the crofs being transformed into an inftrument of infernal punilhment. This figure is reprefented in our cut No. 149. Above in Literature and Art. 2,57 Above it are infcribed the words EGO . SVM . PAPA, “ I am the Pope.” Attached to it is a page of explanation in German, in which the legend of that pope’s death is given, a legend that his wicked life appeared fnfficient to fandtion. It was faid that, ditlrnfting the fuccefs of his intrigues to fecure the papacy for himfelf, he applied himfelf to the lludy of the black art, and fold himfelf, to the Evil One. He then alked the tempter if it were his detliny to be pope, and received an anfwer in the affirmative. He next inquired how long he Ihould hold the papacy, but Satan retairned an equivocal and deceptive anfwer, for Borgia underllood that he was to be pope fifteen years, whereas he died at the end of eleven. It is well known that Pope Alexander VI. died fuddenly and unexpeftedly through accidentally drinking the poifoned wine he had prepared with his own hand for the murder of another man. An Italian theatine wrote a poem againft the Reformation, in which he made Luther the oifspring of Megaera, one of the furies, who is reprefented as having been fent from hell into Germany to be delivered of him. I'his farcafm was thrown back upon the pope with much greater eftedt by the Lutheran caricaturifts. One of the plates in the above-mentioned volume reprefents the “ birth and origin ot the pope” {ortus et origo papm), making the pope identical with Antichrift. In different groups, in this rather elaborate defign, the child is reprefented as at- tended by the three furies, Megaera atl- As Pope's hurje. ing as his wet-nurfe, Aletdo as nurfery-maid, and Tifiphone in another capacity, &c. The name of Martin Luther is added to this caricature Hie nvird geborn der Widcrchrifl. Megera Jein Peugamme ifl ; Aledio jein Keitidermeidlin., Tifiphone die gengclt in. — M. Lu(!i., I>. iSiS. alfo. One of the groups in this plate, reprefenling the fury, Mega-ra, a L L becoming 258 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque becoming fuller-mother, fuckling No. 150. the pope-infant, is given in our cut, 111 another of thefe caricatures the pope is reprefented trampling on the emperor, to fliow the manner in which he uhirped and tyrannifed over the temporal power. Another illuftrates “ the kingdom of Satan and the Pope ” (regnum Satance et Papce), and the latter is reprefented as pre- liding over hell-mouth in all his date. One, given in our cut No. 151, repre- fents the pope under the form of an afs playing on the bagpipes, and is entitled Papa do 6 ior theologice et ma- glfter Jidei. Four lines of German verfe beneath the engraving date how “ the pope can alone expound Scrip- ture and purge error, jud as the afs corredfly.” Der Baf.fi kan allcin aufiegen Die Schriffiy und irthum ausfegen ; lyie der ejel allehi pfeiffen Karty und die noten recht greiffcn. — 154.5. This was the lad year of Luther’s aftive labours. At the commence- ment of the year following he died at Eidleben, whither he had gone to attend the council of princes. Thefe caricatures may perhaps be con- ddered as lb many proclamations of fatisfaftion and exultation in the dnal triumph of the great reformer. Books, pamphlets, and prints of this kind were multiplied to an extra- ordinary degree during the age of the Reformation, but the majority of them were in the intered of the new movement. Luther’s opponent, Eckius, complained of the indnite number of people who gained their living m Literature and Art. 259 living by wandering over all parts of Germany, and felling Lutheran books.* Among thofe who adminiftered largely to this circulation of polemic books was the poet of farces, comedies, and ballads, Hans Sachs, already mentioned. Hans Sachs had in one poem, publilhed in 1 1^3 L celebrated Luther under the title of “ the Wittemberg Nightingale — Die IViitembergijcK' Nciclitigally Die man jet%t horct iiberall ; and defcribed the cftedts of his fong over all the other animals ; and he publilhed, alfo in verfe, what he called a Monument, or Lament, on his death (“Ein Denkmal oder Klagred’ ob der Leiche Doktors Martin Luther”). Among the numerous broadlides publilhed by Hans Sachs, one contains the very clever caricature of which we give a copy in our cut No. 152. It is entitled “ Der gut Hirt und bbfs Hirt,” the good Ihepherd and bad Ihepherd, and has for its text tiie opening verfes of the tenth chapter of the gofpel of St. John. The good and bad ihepherds are, as may be fuppofed, Chrift and the pope. The church is here piftured as a not very ftately building; the entrance, efpecially, is a plain Itrufture of timber. Jefus laid to the Pharifees, “He that entereth not by the door into the Iheepfold, but climbeth up fome other way, the fame is a thief and a robber. But he that entereth in by the door is the Ihepherd of the flock.” In the engraving, the pope, as the hireling Ihepherd, hts on the roof of the flateliefl part of the building, pointing out to the Chriflian flock the wrong way, and blefling the climbers. Lbider him two men of worldly diftinflion are making their way into the church through a window ; and on a roof below a friar is pointing to the people the way up. xVt another window a monk holds out his arms to invite people up; and one in fpedlacles, no doubt emblematical of the dodlors of the church, is looking out from an opening over the entrance door to watch the proceedings of the Good Shepherd. To the r'gl't * “ Infinitiis jam erat numeriis qui victiim ex Lutlieranis lihris quaeritantes, in speciem bibliopolarum longe latequc per Germaniae provincias vagabantiir.” — Elk., p. 58. 260 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotejque right, on the papal fide of the church, the lords and great men are bringing the people under their influence, till they are flopped by the cardinals and bilhops, who prevent them from going forward to the door and point out very energetically the way up the roof At the door ftands, the The Two Shepherds, in Literature and Art. 26 I the Saviour, as the good ihepherd, who has knocked, and the porter has opened it with his key. Chrill’s true teachers, the evangelifts, fliow the way to the folitary man of worth who comes by this road, and who liftens with calm attention to the gofpel teachers, while he opens his purfe to beftow his charity on the poor man by the road tide. In the original engraving, in the difiance on the left, the Good Shepherd is feen followed by his flock, who are obedient to his voice ; on the right, the bad fiiep- herd, who has oftentatioufly drawn up his flieep round the image of the crofs, is abandoning them, and taking to flight on the approach of the wolf. “ He that entereth in by the door is the Ihepherd of the flteep. To him the porter openeth ; and the flieep hear his voice, and he calleth his own flieep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth his own flieep he goeth before them, and the flieep follow him, for they know his voice. . . . But he that is an hireling, and not the Ihepherd, whofe own the flieep are not, teeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the flieep, and fleeth ■, and the wolf catcheth them, and fcattereth the flieep.” (John X. 2 — 4, 12.) The triumph of Luther is the fubjedt of a rather large and elaborate caricature, which is an engraving of great rarity, but a copy of it is given in Jaime’s “ Mu!(e de Caricature.” Leo X. is reprefented feated on his throne upon the edge of the abyfs, into which his cardinals are trying to prevent his falling; but their 153 Mu, r.er and Luther's efforts are rendered vain by the appearance Dauihte,. of Luther on the other fide fupported by his principal adherents, and wielding the Bible as his weapon, and the pope is overthrown, in fpite of the fupport he receives from a vaft liott of popifli clergy, dottors, &:c. d'he popifli writers againtt Luther charged him with vices for which there was probably no foundation, and invented the mofl fcandalous llories againtl him. They accufed him, among other things, of drunkcnnefs and licentioufnefs ; 262 Hijiory oj Caricatia^e and Grotefqiie licentioufiiefs j and there may, perhaps, be feme allufion to the latter charge in our cut No. 153, which is taken from one of the comic illuftra- tions to Murner's book, “Von dem grolfen Lutherifehen Narren,” which was publilhed in 1522 ; but, at all events, it will fer\'e as a fpecimen of thefe illuftrations, and of Murner's fancy of reprefenting himfelf with the head of a cat. In 1525, Luther married a nuu who had turned Proteftant and quitted her convent, named Catherine de Bora, and this became the lignal to his opponents for indulging in abufive longs, and fatires, and caricatures, mofl of them too coarfe and indelicate to be deferibed in thefe pages. In many of the caricatures made on this occafion, which are ufually woodcut illnflrations to books written againll the reformer, Luther is reprefente.d dancing with Catherine de Bora, or fitting at table with a glafs in bis hand. An engraving of this kind, \^’hich forms one of the illuftrations to a work by Dr. Konrad Wimpina, one of the reformer’s violent opponents, reprefents Luther’s marriage. It is divided into three compartments ; to the left, Luther, whom the Catholics always repre- feiited in the chara 61 er of a monk, gives the marriage ring to Catherine de Bora, and above them, in a sort of aureole, is inferibed the word rovet>‘ ; on the right appears the nuptial bed, with the curtains drawn, and the infeription Reddite ; and in the middle the monk and nun are dancing joyoufty together, and over their heads we read the words — Difccdat ab aris Cui tulit kcftcrna gaud'ia node V irius. While Luther was heroically fighting the great fight of reform in Germanv, the foundation of religious reform was laid in France by John Calvin, a man equally lincere and zealous in the caufe, but of a totally dift’erent temper, and he efpoufed doftrines and forms of church govern- ment which a Lutheran would not admit. Literary fatire was ufed with great eftett by the French Calvinifls againft their popilh opponents, but they have left us few caricatures or burleique engravings of any kind ; at leaft, very few belonging to the earlier period of their hiftory. Jaime, in his “ Mufee de Caricature,” has given a copy of a very rare plate, repre- fenting the pope ftruggling with Luther and Calvin, as his two affailants. Both in Literature and Art. 263 Both are tearing the pope’s hair, but it is Calvin who is liere armed with the Bible, with which he is llriking at Luther, who is pulling him by the beard. The pope has his hands upon their heads. This Icene takes place in the choir of a church, but I give here (cut No. 154) only the group of the three combatants, intended to reprefent how the two great opponents to papal corruptions were hoflile at the fame time to each other. 264 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque CHAPTER XVI. ORIGIN OF MEDIAEVAL FARCE AND MODERN COMEDY. HROTSVITHA.- — MEDIAEVAL NOTIONS OF TERENCE. THE EARLY RELIGIOUS PLAYS. MYSTERIES AND MIRACLE PLAYS. THE FARCES. THE DRAMA IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. '^HERE is Hill another branch of literature which, however it may have been nioditied, has defcended to us from the middle ages. It has been remarked more than once in the courfe of this book, that the theatre of the Romans periflied in the tranfition from the empire to the middle ages ; but fomething in the Ihape of theatrical performances appears to be infeparable from fociety even in its moH barbarous Hate, and we foon trace among the peoples who had fettled upon the ruins of the empire of Rome an approach towards a drama. It is worthy of remark, too, that the mediaeval drama originated exadtiy in the fame way as that of ancient Greece, that is, from religious ceremonies. Such was the ignorance of the ancient Hage in the middle ages, that the meaning of the word conicedia was not underftood. The Anglo-Saxon glolfaries interpret the word by racu, a narrative, efpecially an epic recital, and this was the fenfe in which it was generally taken until late in the fourteenth or the fifteenth century. It is the fenfe in which it is ufed in the title of Dante’s great poem, the “ Divina Commedia.” When the mediaeval fcholars became acquainted in manufcripts with the comedies of Terence, they confidered them only as fine examples of a particular fort of literary compofition, as metrical narratives in dialogue, and in this feeling they began to imitate them. One of the firft of thefe mediaeval in Literature and Art. 265 mediaeval imitators was a lady. There lived in the tenth century a maiden of Saxony, named Hrotlvitha — a rather unfortunate name for one of her lex, for it means limply “a loud noife of voices,” or, as Ihe explains it herfelf, in her Latin, clamor validus. Hrotfvitha, as was common enough among the ladies of thofe days, had received a very learned education, and her I.atin is very refpedtable. About the middle of the tenth century, Ihe became a nun in the very ariltocratic Benedidline abbey of Gandef- heim, in Saxony, the abbelfes of which were all princelfes, and which had been founded only a century before. She wrote in Latin verfe a Ihort hiltory of that religious houfe, but Ihe is beli known byfeven pieces, which are called comedies {comccdm), and which conlift limply of legends of faints, told dialogue-wife, fome in verfe and fome in profe. As may be fuppofed, there is not much of real comedy in thefe compolitions, although one of them, the Dulcitius, is treated in a ftyle which approaches that of farce. It is the dory of the martyrdom of the three virgin faints — Agape, Chione, and Irene-— who excite the lull of the per- fecutor Dulcitius ; and it may be remarked, that in this “ comedy,” and in that of Callimachus and one or two of the others, the lady Hrotfvitha difplays a knowledge of love-making and of the language of love, which was hardly to be expedled from a holy nun.* Hrotfvitha, in her preface, complains that, in fpite of the general love for the reading of the Scriptures, and contempt for everything derived from ancient paganifm, people dill too often read the “fidlions” ofTerence, and thus, feduced by the beauties of his ftyle, foiled their minds with the knowledge of the criminal adts which are defcribed in his writings. A rather early manufcript has preferred a very curious fragment illuftrative of * Several editions of the writings of Hrotsvitha, texts and translations, have been published of late years both in Germany and in France, of which I may point out the following as most useful and complete — “ Theatre de Hrotsvitha, Religieuse Allemande du x' siecle. ... par Charles Magnin,” 8vo„ Paris, 1845 ; “ Hrotsvithas Gandeshemensis, virginis et monialis Germanicte, gente Saxonica orts, Comoe- dias sex, ad fidem codicis Emmeranensis typis expressas edidit. . . . J. Benedixen,” i6mo., Lubecae, 1857 ; “Die Werke der Hrotsvitha : Herausgegeben von Dr. K. A. Barack,” 8vo., Niimberg, 1858. M M 266 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotejque of the manner in which the comedies of the Romans were regarded by one clafs of people in the middle ages, and it has alfo a further meaning. Its form is that of a dialogue in Latin verfe between Terence and a per- fonage called in the original delufor, which was no doubt intended to exprels a performer of fome kind, and may be probably confidered as fynonymous with jongleur. It is a contention between the new jouglerie of the middle ages and the old jouglerie of the fchools, fomewhat in the fame llyle as the fabliau of “ Les deux Troveors Ribauz,” defcribed in a former chapter.* We are to fuppofe that the name of Terence has been in fome way or other brought forward in laudatory terms, upon which the jougleur tteps forward from among the fpeftators and exprelTes himfelf towards the Roman writer very contemptuoutly. Terence then makes his appearance to fpeak in his own defence, and the two go on abufing one another in no very meafured language. Terence alks his alLailant who he is ? to which the other replies, “If you alk who I am, I reply, I am better than thee. Thou art old and broken with years ; I am a tyro, full of vigour, and in the force of youth. You are but a barren trunk, while I am a good and fertile tree. If you hold your tongue, old fellow, it will be much better for you.” Si rogitas quh fum, rejfondeo : te melior fum. Tu “vetus atque fenex ego tyro^ ntalens^ adulejcens. Tu Jlerilis tr uncus ; ego fertUis arbor ^ opimus. Si taceas, o 'vetuky lucrum tibi quceris encrme, Terence replies ; — “ What fenfe have you left ? Are you, think you, better than me? Let me fee you, young as you are, compofe what I, however old and broken, will compofe. If you be a good tree, fliow us fome proofs of your fertility. Although I may be a barren trunk, I produce abundance of better fruit than thine.” finfus ineji ? numquid melior me es Nunc 'vetus atque fenex qua fecero fac adolejccns. Si bonus arbor adeSy qua fertilitate rcdundas ? Cum Jim tr uncus inerSy frublu meliore redundo* And * See p. 191 of the present volume. in Literature and Art. 267 And lb the dilpute continues, but unfortunately the latter part has been loft with a leaf or two of the manufcript. I will only add that I think the age of this curious piece has been overrated.* Hrotfvitha is the earlieft example we have of mediaeval writers in this particular clafs of literature. We find no other until the twelfth century, when two writers flourilbed named Vital of Blois (Vitalis Blcjhijis) and Matthew of Vendome {Alattlmus Vindoclnenjis) , the authors of feveral of the mediaeval poems diftinguilhed by the title of comadice, which give us a clearer and more diftinct idea of what was meant by the word. They are written in Latin Elegiac verfe, a form of compofition which was very popular among the mediaeval fcholars, and confift of ftories told in dialogue. Hence Profeftbr Ofann, of Gieften, who edited two of thofe of Vital of Blois, gives them the title of eclogues {eclogce). The name comedy is, however, given to them in manufcripts, and it may perhaps admit of the following expla- nation. Thefe pieces feem to have been firft mere abridgments of the plots of the Roman comedies, efpecially thofe of Plautus, and the authors appear to have taken the Latin title of the original as applied to the plot, in the fenfe of a narrative, and not to its dramatic form. Of the two “ comedies ” by Vital of Blois, one is entitled “ Geta,” and is taken from the “ Amphytrio ” of Plautus, and the other, which in the manu- fcripts bears the title of “ Querulus,” reprefents the “ Aulularia " of the fame writer. Independent of the form of compofition, the fcholaftic writer has given a firangely mediaeval turn to the incidents of the claftic ftory of Jupiter and Alcmena. Another fimilar “ comedy,” that of Babio, which I firft printed from the manufcripts, is ftill more mediaeval in charafter. Its plot, perhaps taken from a fabliau, for the mediaeval writers rarely invented ftories, is as follows, although it muft be confelfed that it comes out rather obfeurely in the dialogue itfelf. Babio, the hero of the piece, is a prieft, who, as was ftill common at that time (the twelfth * This singular composition was publishcxl with notes by M. cle Monlaigion, in a Parisian journal entitled, “L’ Amateur de Livies,” in 1849, under the title ot “ Fragment d’un Dialogue Latin du ix“ sibcle entre Terence et un BoutFon.” A few separate copies were printed, ot which I possess one. 268 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque twelfth century), has a wife, or, as the ftrift religionllls would then fay, a concubine, named Pecula. She has a daughter named Viola, with whom Babio is in love, and he purfues his defign upon her, of courfe unknown to his wife. Babio has alfo a man-fervant named Fodius, who is engaged in a fecret intrigue with his miftrefs, Pecula, and alfo feeks to feduce her daughter, V'iola. To crown the whole, the lord of the manor, a knight named Croceus, is alfo in love with Viola, though with more honourable defigns. Here is Purely intrigue enough and a fufficient abfence of morality to fatisfy a modern French novelift of the firll: water. At the opening of the piece, amid fome by-play between the four individuals who form the houfehold of Babio, it is fuddenly announced that Croceus is on his way to vifit him, and a feafl is haflily prepared for his reception. It ends in the knight carrying away Viola by force. Babio, after a little vain blutler, confoles himfelf for the lofs of the damfel with refledtions on the virtue of his wife, Pecula, and the faithfulnefs of his man, Fodius, when, at this moment. Fame carries to his ear reports which excite his fufpicions againft them. He adopts a llratagem very frequently introduced in the mediaeval dories, furprifes the two lovers under circumllances which leave no room for doubting their guilt, and then forgives them, enters a monaf- tery, and leaves them to themfelves. In form, thefe “ comedies ” are little more than fcholaftic exercifes ; but, at a later period, we fliall fee the fame dories adopted as the fubjedls of farces.* Already, however, by the fide of thefe dramatic poems, a real drama — the drama of the middle ages — was gradually developing itfelf. As dated before, it arofe, like the drama of the Greeks, out of the religious ceremonies. We know nothing of the exidence of anything approaching to dramatic forms which may have exided among the religious rites of the * To judge by the number ot copies found in manuscripts, especially of the “Geta,” these dramatic poems must have enjoyed considerable popularity. The “ Geta ” and the “ Querulus ” vs’ere published in a volume entitled, “ Vitalis Ble- sensis Amphitryon et Aulularia Eclogae. Edidit Fridericus Osannus, Professor Gisensis,” 8vo., Darmstadt, 1836. The “ Geta ” and the “ Babio ” are included in my “Early Mysteries, and other Latin Poems of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries.” in Literature and Art. 269 the peoples of the Teutonic race before their converlion to Chriftianity, but the Chrillian clergy felt the neceflity of keeping up fellive religious ceremonies in fome form or other^ and alfo of imprelling upon people’s imagination and memory by means of rude fcenical reprefentations fome of the broader fa 61s of fcriptural and ecclelialbcal hiftory. Thefe per- formances at firfl; conlitled probably in mere dumb Ihow, or at the molt the performers may have chanted the fcriptural account of the tranfadtion they were reprefenting. In this manner the choral boys, or the younger clerg}’', would, on fome fpecial faint's day, perform fome llriking adt in the life of die faint commemorated, or, on particular feltivals of the church, diofe incidents of gofpel hillory to which the feftival efpecially related. By degrees, a rather more impoling charadter w as given to thefe performances by the addition of a continuous dialogue, which, however, was w ritten in Latin verfe, and was no doubt chanted. This incipient drama in Latin, as far as we know it, belongs to the twelfth century, and is reprefented by a tolerably large number of examples Itill preferred in mediaeval manufcripts. Some of the earlieft of thefe have for their author a pupil of the celebrated Abelard, named Hilarius, who lived in the lirft half of the twelfth century, and is underdood to have been by birth an Englilhman. Hilarius appears before us as a playful Latin poet, and among a number of fhort pieces, which may be alraoll called lyric, he has left us three of thefe religious plays. The lubjedt of the tirlt of thefe is the raifmg of Lazarus from the dead, the chief peculiarity of which confifts of tlie fongs of lamentation placed in the mouths of the two lifters of Lazarus, Mary and IMartha. The fecond reprefents one of the miracles attributed to St. Nicholas j and the third, the hiftory of Daniel. The latter is longer and more elaborate than the others, and at its conclulion, the ftage diredtion tells us that, if it were performed at matins, Darius, king of the JMedes and Perfians, ^^•as to chant Te Dcum Laudamus, but if it were at vefpers, the great king was to chant ]\lagnijicat anima mea Dominurn.* That * “ Hllarii Versus et Ludi,” 8vo., Paris, 1835. Edited by M. Champollion Figeac. 2/0 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque That this mediaeval drama was not derived from that of the Roman is evident from the circumftance that entirely new terms were applied to it. The weftern people in the middle ages had no words exadly equi- valent with the Latin comcedia, tragoedia, theatrum, &c. ; and even the Latinifts, to delignate the dramatic pieces performed at the church feftivals, employed the word Indus, a play. The French called them by a word having exadtly the fame meaning, jew {imm jocus). Similarly in Englilh they were termed The Anglo-Saxon glolTaries prefent as the reprefentative of the Latin theatrum, the compounded words plege- stow, or plcg-stow, a play-place, and pleg-hus, a play-houfe. It is curious that we Englilhmen have preferred to the prefent time the Anglo-Saxon words in play, player, and play-houfe. Another Anglo-Saxon word with exaftly the fame lignification, lac, or gelac, play, appears to have been more in ufe in the dialed! of the Northumbrians, and a Yorklhireman hill calls a play a lake, and a player a laker. So alfo the Germans called a dramatic performance a fpil, i.e. a play, the modern fpiel, and a theatre, a fpil-hus. One of the pieces of Hilarius is thus entitled “ Ludus fuper iconia fmdti Nicolai,” and the French jeu and the Englilh play are conftantly ufed in the fame fenfe. But belides this general term, words gradually came into ufe to charadterife dilferent forts of plays. The church plays conlilled of two deferiptions of fubjedts, they either reprefented the miraculous adts of certain faints, which had a plain meaning, or fome incident taken from the Holy Scriptures, which was fuppofed to have a hidden mylierious lignification as well as an apparent one, and hence the one clafs of fubjedt was ufually fpoken of limply as miraculum, a miracle, and the other as myftenum, a myllery. Myfteries and miracle- plays are ffill the names ufually given to the old religious plays by writers on the hifiory of the llage. We have a proof that the Latin religious plays, and the feffivities in which they were employed, had become greatly developed in the twelfth century, in the notice taken of them in the ecclefiaftical councils of that period, for they were difapproved by the llridler church difeiplinarians. So early as the papacy of Gregory VIIL, the pope urged the clergy to “extirpate” from their churches theatrical plays, and other feftive pradtices in hiterature and Art. 271 pra6tices which were not quite in harmony with the facred charadler ot thefe buildings.* * * § Such performances are forbidden by a council held at Treves in i 237 .f We learn from the annals of the abbey of Corbei, publilhed by Leibnitz, that the younger monks at Heretburg performed on one occafion a “facred comedy” {sacram comcediam) of the felling into captivity and the exaltation of Jofeph, which was difapproved by the other heads of the order.J Such performances are included in a proclamation of the billiop of Worms, in 1316, againtl the various abufes which had crept into the feftivities obferved in his diocefe at Ealler and St. John’s tide.§ Similar prohibitions of the adting of fuch plays in churches are met with at fubfequent periods. While thefe performances were thus falling under the cenfure of the church authorities, they were taken up by the laity, and under their management both the plays and the machinery for adfing them under- went confiderable extenfion. The municipal guilds contained in their conllitution a confiderable amount of religious fpirit. They were great benefadtors of the churches in cities and municipal towns, and had ufually fome parts of the facred edifice appropriated to them, and they may, perhaps, have taken a part in thefe performances, while they were flill confined to the church. Thefe guilds, and fubfequently the municipal corporations, took them entirely into their own hands. Certain annual religious feflivals, and efpecially the feaft of Corpus Chrifti, were ftill the occafions on which the plays were adled, but they were taken entirely from the churches, and the performances took place in the open flreets. Each guild had its particular play, and they adted on movable ftages, which were dragged along the ftreets in the procetfion of the guild. Thefe ftages appear to have been rather complicated. They were * “ Interdum ludi fiunt in ecclesiis theatrales,” &c. — Dccret.Gregorii,]\h iil. tit. i. •f “ Item non permittant sacerdotes ludos theatrales fieri in ecrlesia et alios ludos inhonestos.” J “ Juniores fratres in Heresburg sacram habuere comocdiam de Josepho vendito et exaltato, quod veto reliqui ordinis nostri praelati male interpretati sunt."— Leiin., Script. Brunsv., tom. ii. p. 31 1. § The acts of this synod of Worms are printed in Harzhcim, tom. iv.p. 258. 272 Hiflory of Caricature and Grotefque were divided into three floors, that in the middle, which was the principal ftage, reprefenting this world, while the upper divifion reprefented heaven, and that at the bottom hell. The mediaeval writers in Latin called this machinery -a. peg7na, irom the Greek word 7r>7y/ia, a fcaffbld ; and they alto applied to it, for a reafon which is not fo eafily feen, unlefs the one word arofe out of a corruption of the other, that of pagina, and from a further corruption of thefe came into the French and Englilh languages the word pageant, which originally fignified one of thefe movable ftages, though it has fince received fecondary meanings which have a much wider appli- cation. Each guild in a town had its pageant and its own adtors, who performed in malks and coftumes, and each had one of a feries of plays, which were performed at places where they halted in the procethon. I’he fubjedts of thefe plays were taken from Scripture, and they ufually formed a regular feries of the principal hiftories of the Old and New Teflaments. For this reafon they were generally termed myfteries, a title already explained j and among the few feries of thefe plays ftill preferved, we have the “ Coventry Myfteries,” which were performed by the guilds of that town, the “ Chefter Myfteries,” belonging to the guilds in the city of Chefter, and the “ Towneley Myfteries,” fo called from the name of the poftelfor of the manufcript, but which probably belonged to the guilds of Wakefield in Yorklhire. During thefe changes in the method of performance, the plays them- felves had alfo been confiderably modified. The fimple Latin phrafes, even when in rhyme, which formed the dialogue of the earlier ludi — as in the four miracles of St. Nicholas, and the fix Latin myfteries taken from the New Teftament, printed in my volume of “ Early Myfteries and other Latin Poems ” — muft have been very uninterefting to the mats of the fpedtators, and an attempt w'as made to enliven them by intro- ducing among the Latin phrafes popular proverbs, or even fometimes a fong in the \mlgar tongue. Thus in the play of “ Lazarus ” by Hilarius, the Latin of the lamentations of his two lifters is intermixed with French verfes. Such is the cafe alfo with the play of “ St. Nicholas ” b)" the fame writer, as well as with the curious myftery of the Foolith Virgins, printed in my “ Early Myfteries ” juft alluded to, in which latter the Latin is intermingled m Literature and Art. 273 intermingled with Provencal verfe. A much greater advance was made when thefe performances were transferred to the guilds. The Latin was then difcarded altogether, and the whole play was written in French, or Englifli, or German, as the cafe might be, the plot was made more elaborate, and the dialogue greatly extended. But now that the whole inthtution had become fecularifed, the want of fomething to amufe people — to make them laugh, as people liked to laugh in the middle ages — was felt more than ever, and this want was fupplied by the intro- dudion of droll and ludicrous fcenes, which are often very llightlj", if at all, conneded with the fubjed of the play. In one of the earlieli of the French plays, that of “ St. Nicholas,” by Jean Bodel, the charaders who form the burlefque fcene are a party of gamblers in a tavern. In others, robbers, or peafants, or beggars form the comic fcene, or vulgar women, or any perfonages who could be introduced ading vulgarly andufing coarfe language, for thefe were great incitements to mirth among the populace. In the Englilh plays now remaining, thefe fcenes are, on the whole, lefs frequent, and they are ufually more clofely connedted with the general fubjed. The earlieli Englilh colledion that has been publilhed is that known as the “ Towneley Mylieries,” the manufcript of which belongs to the fifteenth century, and the plays themfelves may have been compofed in the latter part of the fourteenth. It contains thirty-two plays, begin- ning with the Creation, and ending with the Afcenfion and the Day of Judgment, with two fupplementary plays, the “ Railing of Lazarus ” and the “ Hanging of Judas.” The play of “ Cain and Abel ” is throughout a vulgar drollery, in which Cain, who exhibits the charader of a blullering ruffian, is accompanied by a garcio, or lad, who is the very type of a vulgar and infolent horfe-boy, and the converlation of thefe two worthies reminds us a little of that between the clown and his mailer in the open- air performances of the old wandering mountebanks. Even the death of Abel by the hand of his brother is performed in a manner calculated to provoke great laughter. In the old mirthful fpirit, to hear two perfons load each other with vulgar abufe, was as good as feeing them grin through a hcrfe-collar, if not better. Hence the droll fcene in the play of “ Noah ” is a domefiic quarrel between Noah and his wife, who was proverbially N N a Ihrew, Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque 274 a Ihrew, and here gives a tolerable example of abufive language, as it might then come from a woman’s tongue. The quarrel arifes out of her obflinate reful’al to go into the ark. In the New Teftament feries the play of “ The Shepherds” was one of thofe moll fufceptible of this fort of em- bellilhment. There are two plays of the Shepherds in the “ Towneley Myllerics,” the hrll of which is amufing enough, as it reprefents, in clever burlefque, the a6ts and converfation of a party of mediaeval lliepherds guarding their flocks at night 5 but the fecond play of the Shepherds is a much more remarkable example of a comic drama. The Ihepherds are introduced at the opening of the piece converfing very fatirically on the corruptions of the time, and complaining how the people were impoverilhed by over-taxation, to fupport the pride and vanity of the arillocracy. After a good deal of very amufing talk, the Ibepherds, who, as ufual, are three in number, agree to fing a long, and it is this fong, it appears, which brings to them a fourth, named Mak, who proves to be a llieep-llealer ; and, in fadt, no fooner have the fliepherds refigned them- felves to lleep for the night, than Mak choofes one of the bell fheep in their Hocks, and carries it home to his hut. Knowing that he will be fufpedted of the theft, and that he will foon be purfued, he is anxious to conceal the plunder, and is only helped out of his difficulty by his wife, who fuggells that the carcafe lhall be laid at the bottom of her cradle, and that Ihe lhall lie upon it and groan, pretending to be in labour. Meanwhile the fliepherds awake, difcover the lofs of a llieep, and perceiv- ing that Mak has difappeared alfo, they naturally fufpedl him to be the depredator, and purfue him. They find everything very cunningly pre- pared in the cottage to deceive them, but, after a large amount of round- about inquiry and refearch, and much drollery, they difcover that the boy of which Mak’s wife pretends to have been juft delivered, is nothing elfe but the Iheep which had been ftolen from their fiocks. The wife ftill afierts that it is her child, and Mak lets up as his defence that the baby had been “ forfpoken,” or enchanted, by an elf at midnight, and that it had thus been changed into the appearance of a flieep ; but the Ihepherds refufe to be fatisfied with this explanation. The whole of this little comedy is carried out with great Ikill, and with infinite drollery. The Ihepherds, in Literature and Art. 275 fliepherds, while fiill wrangling with Mak and his wife, are feized with drowlinefs, and lie down to lleep ; but they are aroufed by the voice of the angel, who proclaims the birth of the Saviour. The next play in which the drollery is introduced, is that of “ Herod, and the Slaughter of the Innocents.” Herod’s blufter and bombaft, and the vulgar abufe which paffes between the Hebrew mothers and the foldiers who are murdering their children, are wonderfully laughable. The plays which represented the arreft, trial, and execution of Jefus, are all full of drollery, for the grotefque charadler which had been given to the demons in the earlier middle ages, appears to have been transferred to the executioners or, as they were called, the tormentors,” and the language and manner in which they executed their duties, muft have kept the audience in a continual roar of laughter. In the play of “ Doomfday,” the bends retained their old charadter, and the manner in which they joke over the diltrefs of the bnful fouls, and the details they give of their bnfulnefs, are equally mirth-provoking. The “Coventry Myfteries” are alfo printed from a manufcript of the middle of the bfteenth century, and are, perhaps, as old as the “ Towneley Myfteries.” They conbft of forty-two plays, but they contain, on the whole, fewer droll fcenes than thofe of the Towneley collettion. But a very remarkable example is furnibied in the play of the “Trial of Jofeph and Mary,” which is a very grotefque pidlure of the proceedings in a mediaeval conbftory court. The fompnour, a charadler fo well known by Chaucer’s pidture of him, opens the piece by reading from his book a long lift of oftenders againft chaftity. At its conclubon, two “detradlors” make their appearance, who repeat various fcandalous ftories againft the Virgin Mary and her hutband Jofeph, which are overheard by fome of the high officers of the court, and Mary and Jofeph are formally accufed and placed upon their trial. The trial itfelf is a fcene of low ribaldry, which can only have afforded amufement to a very vulgar audience. There is a certain amount of the fame kind of indelicate drollery in the play of “ The Woman taken in Adultery,” in this colledlion. I'he “ Chefter Myfteries ” are ftill more fparing of fuch fcenes, but they are printed from manufcripts written after the Reforma- tion, which had, perhap.s, gone through the procefs of expurgation, in which 276 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque which fuch excrefcences had been lopped off. However, in the play of “ Noah’s Flood,” we have the old quarrel between Noah and his wife, which is carried fo far that the latter adlually beats her hulband in the prefence of the audience. There is a little drollery in the play of “ The Shepherds,” a conliderable amount of what may be called “ Billingfgate ” language in the play of the “ Slaughter of the Innocents,” but lefs than the ufual amount of infolence in the tormentors and demons.* It is probable, however, that thefe droll fcenes were not always confidered an integral part of the play in which they were introduced, but that they were kept as feparate lubjedts, to be introduced at will, and not always in the fame play, and therefore that they were not copied with the play in the manufcripts. In the Coventry play of “ Noah’s Flood,” when Noah has received the diredtions from an angel for the building of the ark, he leaves the llage to proceed to this important work. On his departure, Lamech comes forward, blind and led by a youth, who diredts his hand to Ilioot at a bead; concealed in a bulb. Lamech Ihoots, and kills Cain, upon which, in his anger, he beats the youth to death, and laments the misfortune into which the latter has led him. This was the legendar}^ explanation of the palfage in the fourth chapter of Genefis : “And Lamech faid 1 have llain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt : if Cain fhall be avenged feven-fold, truly Lamech feventy and feven-fold.” It is evident that this is a piece of fcriptural ftory which has nothing to do with Noah’s flood, and accordingly, in the Coventry play, we are told in the ftage diredlions, that it was introduced in the place of the “ inter- lude,” t as if there were a place in the machinery of the pageant where the * The editions of the three principal collections of English mysteries are — 1. “TheTowneley Mysteries,” 8vo., London, i836,publishedbytheSurtees Society. 2. “ Ludus Coventrise : a Collection of Mysteries, formerly represented at Coventry on the Feast of Corpus Christi,” edited by James Orchard Halliwell, Esq., 8vo., London, 1841, published by the Shakespeare Society ; 3. “The Chester Plays: a Collection of Mysteries founded upon Scriptural Subjects, and formerly represented by the Trades of Chester at Whitsuntide,” edited by Thomas Wright, Esq., 2 vols. 8vo., London, 1843 and 1847, published by the Shakespeare Society. t “Hie transit Noe cum tamilia ,sua pro navi, quo exevnte, iocum inter/udii jubimret statim Lameth, conductus ab adolescente, et dicens,” &c. in Literature and Art. 277 the epifode, which was not an integral part of the fubjedt, was performed, and that this part of the performance was called an interlude, or play introduced in the inteiral of the aftion of the main fubjed. The word interlude remained long in our language as applied to fuch fhort and fimple dramatic pieces as we may fuppofe to have formed the drolleries of the myfteries. But they had another name in France which has had a greater and more lafling celebrity. In one of the early French miracle- plays, that of “ St. Fiacre,” an interlude of this kind is introduced, con- taining five perfonages — a brigand or robber, a peafant, a fergeant, and the wives of the two latter. The brigand, meeting the peafant on the highway, alks the w’ay to St. Omer, and receives a clownllh anfwer, which is followed by one equally rude on a fecond queftion. The brigand, in revenge, fteals the peafant’s capon, but the fergeant comes up at this moment and, attempting to arreft the thief, receives a blow from the latter which is fuppofed to break his right arm. The brigand thus efcapes, and the peafant and the fergeant quit the fcene, which is immediately occupied by their wives. The fergeant’s wife is informed by the other of the injury fuftained by her hufband, and fire exults over it becaufe it will deprive him of the power of beating her. They then proceed to a tavern, call for wine, and make merry, the converfation turning upon the faults of their refpedlive hufbands, who are not fpared. In the midfl; of their enjoy- ments, the two hufbands return, and Ihow, by beating their wives, that they are not ver}" greatly difabled. In the manufcript of the miracle-play of “ St. Fiacre,” in which this amufing epifode is introduced, a marginal ftage diredtion is expreflfed in the following w'ords, “ cy eft interpofe une furjfe” (here a farce is introduced). This is one of the earlieft inftancesof the application of the term farce to thefe lliort dramatic facetiae. Difterent opinions have been expreffed as to the origin of the word, but it feems moft probable that it is derived from an old French verb, farcer, to jeft, to make merry, whence the modern w'ord farceur for a joker, and that it thus means merely a drollery or merriment. I have juft fuggefted as a reafon for the abfence of thefe interludes, or farces, in the myfteries as they are found in the manufcripts, that they were probably not looked upon as parts of the myfteries themfelves, but as 278 Hi [lory of Caricature and Grotefque as feparate pieces which might be ufed at pleafure. When we reach a certain period in their hiltory, we find that not only was this the cafe, but that thefe farces were performed feparately and altogether independently of the religious plays. It is in France that we find information which enables us to trace the gradual revolution in the mediaeval drama. A fociety was formed towards the clofe of the fourteenth century under the title of Confreres de la PaJJian, who, in 1398, eftablifiied a regular theatre at St. Maur-des-Foffes, and fubfequently obtained from Charles VI. a privilege to tranfport their theatre into Paris, and to perform in it myfteries and nfiracle-plays. They now rented of the monks of Hermieres a hall in the hofpital of the Trinity, outfide of the Porte St. Denis, per- forming there regularly on Sundays and taints’ days, and probably making a good thing of it, for, during a long period, they enjoyed great popu- larity. Gradually, however, this popularity was fo much diminilhed, that the confreres were obliged to have recourfe to expedients for reviving it. Meanwhile other limilar focieties had arifen into importance. The clerks of the Bazoche, or lawyers’ clerks of the Palais de Juftice, had thus atfociated together, it is faid, as early as the beginning of the fourteenth century, and t'ley difiinguilhed themfelves by compofing and performing farces, for which they appear to have obtained a privilege. Towards the clofe of the fourteenth century, there arofe in Paris another fociety, which took the name of Eifans fans fouci, or Carelefs Boys, who eleded a prefident or chief with the title of Prince des Sots, or King of the Fools, and who compofed a fort of dramatic fatires which they called Sotties. Jealoufies foon arofe between thefe two focieties, either becaufe the fotties were made fometimes to refemble too clofely the farces, or becaufe each tref- palfed too often on the territories of the other. Their differences were finally arranged by a compromife, whereby the Bazochians yielded to their rivals the privilege of performing farces, and received in return the per- miilion to perform fotties. The Bazochians, too, had invented a new clafs of dramatic pieces which they called Moralities, and in which allegorical perfonages were introduced. Thus three dramatic focieties continued to exifl: in France through the fifteenth century, and until the middle of the fixteenth. Thefe hi Literature and Art. 279 Thefe various pieces, under the titles of farces, fotties, moralities, or whatever other names might be given to them, had become exceedingly popular at the beginning of the lixteenth century, and a very confiderable number of them were printed, and many of them are ftill preferved, but they are books of great rarity, and often unique.* Of thefe the farces form the moft numerous clafs. They confitl limply of the tales of the older jougleurs or ftory-tellers reprefented in a dramatic form, but they often difplay great Ikill in conducing the plot, and a confiderable amount of wit. The flory of the llieep-fiealer in the Towneley play of “ The Shep- herds,” is a veritable farce. As in the fabliaux, the moft common fubjedts of thefe farces are love intrigues, carried on in a manner which fpeaks little for the morality of the age in which they were written. Family quarrels frequently form the fubjeft of a farce, and the weaknelTes and vices of women. The priefts, as ufual, are not fpared, but are introduced as the feducers of wives and daughters. In one the wives have found a means of re-modelling their hulbands and making them young again, which they put in pradtice with various ludicrous circumftances. Tricks of fervants are alfo common fubje6ts for thefe farces. One is the ftory of a boy who does not know his own father, and fome of the fubjefts are of a ftill more trivial chara6ter, as that of the boy who fteals a tart from the paftrycook’s Ibop. Two hungry boys, prowling about the ftreets, come to the fhop door juft as the paftrycook is giving direftions for fending an eel- pie after him. By an ingenious deception the boys gain pofleflion of the pie and eat it, and they are both caught and feverely chaftifed. This is the whole plot of the farce. A dull fchoolboy examined by his mafter in the prefence of his parents, and the mirth produced by his blunders and their * The most remarkable collection ot these early farces, sotties, and moralities yet known, was found accidentally in 1845, and is nowin the British Museum. These were all edited in Paris as the first three volumes ot a work in ten, entitled “ Ancien Theatre Francois, ou Coliection des Ouvrages draniatiques les plus remarquable depuis les Mysteres jusqu’a Corneille, public. . . . par M. Viollet le Due,” lamo., Paris, 1854. It is right to state that these three volumes were edited not by M. Viollet le Due, but by a scholar bettei known for his learning in the older French literature, M. Anatole de Montaiglon. 28 o Htjiory of Caricature and Grotefque their ignorance, formed alfo a favourite fubjeft among thefe farces. One or two examples are preferved, and, from a comparifon of them, we might be led to fufpe6t that Shakefpeare took the idea of the opening fcene in the fourth aft of the “ Merry Wives of Windfor ” from one of thefe old farces. The fotties and moralities were more imaginative and extravagant than the farces, and were filled with allegorical perfonages. The charafters introduced in the former have generally fome relation to the kingdom of folly. Thus, in one of the fotties, the king of fools (le roy des fotz) is reprefented as holding his court, and confulting with his courtiers, whofe names are Triboulet, Mitouflet, Sottinet, Coquibus, and Guippelin. Their converfation, as may be fuppofed, is of a fatirical charafter. Another is entitled “The Sottie of the Deceivers,” or cheats. Sottie — another name for mother Folly — opens the piece with a proclamation or addrefs to fools of all defcriptions, fummoning them to her prefence. Two, named Tefte-Verte and Fine-Mine, obey the call, and they are queftioned as to their own condition, and their proceedings, but their con- verfation is interrupted by the fudden intrufion of another perfonage named Ever)'one {Chafcun), who, on examination, is found to be as perfeft a fool as any of them. Tliey accordingly fraternife, and join in a fong. Finally, another charafter. The Time {le Temps), ]o\m them, and they agree to fubmit to his direftions. Accordingly he inftrudts them in the arts of flattery and deceiving, and the other fimilar means by which men of that time fought to thrive. Another is the Sottie of Foolilh Ollentation {de folle bolance). This lady fimilarly opens the fcene with an addrefs to all the fools who hold allegiance to her, and three of thefe make their appearance. The firft fool is the gentleman, the fecond the merchant, the fourth the peafant, and their converfation is a fatire on contemporary fociety. The perfonification of abftraft principles is far bolder. The three charafters who compofe one of thefe moralities are Everything {tout), Nothing {rien), and Everyone {chafcun). How the perfonification of Nothing was to be reprefented, we are not told. The title of another of thefe moralities will be enough to give the reader a notion of their general title; it is, “ A New Morality of the Children of Now-a-days ” 1 in Literature and Art. 28 I Now-a-Days {Maintenant) , who are the Scholars of Oace-good {Jabien), who Ihows them how to play at Cards and at Dice, and to entertain Luxury, whereby one comes to Shame (Honte), and from Shame to Defpair (Defefpoir), and from Defpair to the gibbet of Perdition, and then turns himfelf to Good-doing.” The charablers in this play are Now-a- Days, Once-good, Luxury, Shame, Defpair, Perdition, and Good-doing. The three dramatic focieties which produced all thefe farces, fotties, and moralities, continued to flourilh in France until the middle of the fixteenth century, at which period a great revolution in dramatic litera- ture took place in that country. The performance of the Mylleries had been forbidden by authority, and the Bazochians themftlves were fup- prelfed. The petty drama reprefented by the farces and fotties went rapidly out of falhion, in the great change through which the mind of fociety was at this time palling, and in which the talle for clallical literature overcame all others. The old drama in France had difap- peared, and a new one, formed entirely upon an imitation of the clallical drama, was beginning to take its place. This incipient drama was repre- fented in the fixteenth century by Etienne Jodel, by Jacques Grevin, by Remy Belleau, and efpecially by Pierre de Larivey, the moll prolific, and perhaps the moll talented, of the earlier French regular dramatic authors. Thefe French dramatic effays, the farces, the fotties, and the morali- tie.s, were imitated, and fometimes tranfiated, in Englilh, and many of them were printed; for the further our refearches are carried into the early hillor}" of printing, the more we are allonilhed at the extreme abtivity of the prefs, even in its infancy, in multiplying literature of a popular charadter. In England, as in France, the farces had been, at a rather early period, detached from the mylleries and miracle-plays, but (he word interludes had been adopted here as the general title for them, and continued in ufe even after the eflablilhment of the regular drama. Perhaps this name owed its popularity to the circumftance that it teemed more appropriate to its objedt, when it became fo falhionable in England to adl thefe plays at intervals in the great fellivals and entertainments given at court, or in the houfeholds of the great nobles. At all events, there o o 282 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque there can be no doubt that this fafbion had a great influence on the fate of the Englifli flage. The culloin of performing plays in the univerfities, great fchools, and inns of court, had alfo the eft'eft of producing a number of very clever dramatic writers ; for when this literature was fo warmly patrouifed by princes and nobles, people of the highefl qualifications fought to excel in it. Hence we find from books of houfehold expenfes and fimilar records of the period, that there was, during the fixteenth century, an immenfe number of fuch plays compiled in England which were never printed, and of which, therefore, very few are preferv'ed. The earlieft known plays of this defcription in the Englifh language belong to the clafs which were called in Erance moralities. They are three in number, and are prefervcd in a manufcript in the potTeflion of Mr. Hudfon Gurney, which I have not feen, but which is faid to be of the reign of our king Henry YE Several words and allufions in them feem to me to fhow that they were tranllated, or adapted, from the French. They contain exaftly the fame kind of allegorical perfonages. The allegory itfelf is a Ample one, and eafily underflood. In the firft, which is entitled the “ Caftle of Perfeverance,” the hero is Hurnanum Genus (Mankynd), for the names of the parts are all given in Latin. On the birth of this perfonage, a good and a bad angel oft'er themfelves as his proteiSlors and guides, and he choofes the latter, who introduces him to Mundus (the World), and to his friends, Slultitia (Folly), and Voluptas (Pleafure). Thefe and fome other perfonages bring him under the influence of the feven deadly fins, and Hurnanum Genus takes for his bedfellow a lady named Luxuria. At length Confejffio and Poenitentia fucceed in reclaiming Huinanum Genus, and they condubt him for fecurity to the Caftle of Perfeverance, where the feven cardinal virtues attend upon him. He is befieged in this caftle by the feven deadly fins, who are led to the attack by Belial, but are defeated. Hurnanum Genus has now become aged, and is expofed to the attacks of another aflTailant. This is jivaritia, who enters the Cafile flealthily by undermining the wall, and artfully perfuades Hurnanum Genus to leave it. He thus comes again under the influence of I\Iundus, until Hors (Death) arrives, and the bad angel carries off" the vi6tim to the domains of Satan. This, however. IS in Literature and Art. 283 is not the end of the piece. God appears, feated on His throne, and Mercy, Peace, Juftice, and Truth appear before Him, the two former pleading for, and the latter againft, Humanuin Genus, who, after fome difcullion, is faved. This allegorical pifture of human life was, in one lorm or other, a favourite fubjedt of the moralifers. I may quote as examples the interludes of “ Lufty Juventus,” reprinted in Hawkins’s “Origin of the Englilh Drama,” and the “Difobedient Child,” and “ Trial of Treafure,’’ reprinted by the Percy Society. The fecond of the moralities afcribed to the reign of Henry VI., has tor its principal charafters Mind, Will, and Underflanding. Thefe are alfailed by Lucifer, who fucceeds in alluring them to vice, and they change their modeft raiment for the drefs of gay gallants. Various other charadters are introduced in a fimilar drain of allegory, until they are reclaimed by Wifdom. Mankind is again the principal perfonage of the third of thefe moralities, and fome of the other charafters in the play, luch as Nought, New-guife, and Now-a-days, remind us of the fimilar allegorical perfonages in the French moralities defcribed above. Thefe interludes bring us into acquaintance with a new comic charadler. The great part which folly afted in the focial defiiities of mankind, had become an acknowledged fa 61 ; and as the court and almofi every great houfehold had its profelfed fool, fo it feems to have been confidered that a play alfo was incomplete without a fool. But, as the charaffer of the fool was ufually given to one of the mofi objedtionable charafters in it, fo, for this reafon apparently, the fool in a play was called the Vice. Thus, in “ Lufiy Juventus,” the charadfer of Hypocrily is called the Vice ; in the play of “All for Money,” it is Sin j in that of “ Tom Tyler and his Wife,” it is Defire; in the “ Trial of Treafure” it is Inclination; and in fome infiances the Vice appears to be the demon himfelf. The Vice feems always to have been drelTed in the ufual coftume of a couit fool, and he perhaps had other duties befides his mere part in the plot, filch as making jefis of his own, and ufing other means for provoking the mirth of the audience in the intervals of the affion. A few of our early Englilh interludes were, in the firift fenfe of the word, farces. Such is the “mery play” of “John the Hulband, Tyb the Wife, 284 Hi [lory of Caricature and Grotefque ^Vife, and Sir John the Pried,” written by John Heywood, the plot of which prefents the fame limplicity as thofe of the farces which were I'o popular in France. John has a threw for his wife, and has good caufes for fufpetfing an undue intimacy between her and the pried; but they find means to blind his eyes, which is the more eafily done, becaufe he is a great coward, except when he is alone. Tyb, the wife, makes a pie, and propofes that the pried lliall be invited to adld in eating it. The hulband is obliged, very unwillingly, to be the bearer of the invitation, and is not a little furprifed when the pried refufes it. He gives as his reafon, that he was unwilling to intrude himfelf into company where he knew he was didiked, and perfuaded John that he had fallen under the wife's difpleafure, becaufe, in private interviews with her, he had laboured to induce her to bridle her tem])er, and treat her hulband with more gentle- nefs. John, delighted at the difcovery of the pried’s honedy, infids on his going home with him to fead upon the pie. There the guilty couple contrive to put the hutband to a difagreeable penance, while they eat the pie, and treat him otherwife very ignominioudy, in confequence of which the married couple fight. The pried interferes, and the fight thus become.s general, and is only ended by the departure of Tyb and the pried, leaving the hulband alone. The popularity of the moralities in England is, perhaps, to be explained by peculiarities in the condition of fociety, and the greater pre-occupation of men’s minds in our country at that time with the religious and facial revolution which was then in progrefs. The Reformers foon faw the ufe which might be made of the dage, and compiled and caufed to be adled interludes in which the old doftrines and ceremonies were turned to ridicule, and the new ones were held up in a favourable light. We have excellent examples of the fuccefs with which this plan was carried out in the plays of the celebrated John Bale. His play of “ Kyng Johan,” an edition of which was publilbed by the Camden Society, is not only a remarkable work of a very remarkable man, but it may be confidered as the fird rude model of the Englilli hidorical drama. The dage became now a political indrument in England, almod as it had been in ancient Greece, and it thus became frequently the objedt of particular as well as general in Literature and Art. 281; general perlecution. In 1543, the vicar of Yoxford, in Sull'olk, drew upon himfelt the violent hotlility of the other clergy in that county by compofing and canting to be performed plays againtt the pope’s counfellors. Six years afterwards, in 1549, a royal proclamation prohibited for a time the performance of interludes throughout the kingdom, on the ground that they contained “ matter tendyng to fedicion and contempnyng of lundery good orders and lawes, whereupon are growen daily, and are likely to growe, muche difquiet, divifion, tumultes, and uproares in this realme.” From this time forward we begin to meet with laws for the regulation of llage performances, and proceedings in cafes of fuppofed infraftions of them, and it became cutlomary to obtain the approval of a play by the privy council before it was allowed to be a6ted. Thus gradually arofe the office of a dramatic cenfor. With Bale and with John Heywood, the Englith plays began to approach the form of a regular drama, and the two now rather celebrated pieces, “ Ralph Roifter Doilier,” and “ Gammer Gurton’s Needle,” which belong to the middle of the fixteenth century, may be confidered as comedies rather than as interludes. The former, written by a well- known fcholar of that time, Nicholas Udall, mailer of Eton, is a fatirical pidlure of fome phafes of London life, and relates the ridiculous adventures of a weak-headed and vain-glorious gallant, who believes that all the women mull be in love with him, and who is led by a needy and defigning parafite named Matthew Merygreeke. Rude as it is as a dramatic compofition, it difplays no lack of talent, and it is full of genuine humour. The humour in “Gammer Gurton’s Needle” is none the lefs rich becaufe it is of coarfer and rather broader call. The good dame of the piece. Gammer Gurton, during an interruption in the procefs of mending the breeches of her hulband, Hodge, has loft her needle, and much lamentation follows a misfortune fo great at a time when needles appear to have been rare and valuable articles in the rural houfehold. In the midft of their trouble appears Diccon, who is defcribed in the dramatis perjbnce as “Diccon the Bedlam,” meaning that he was an idiot, and who appears to hold the pofition of Vice in the play. Diccon, however, though weak-minded, is a cunning fellow, and efpecially given to 2 86 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque to making mifchief, and he accufes a neighbour. Dame Chat, of Healing the needle. At the fame time, the fame mifchievous individual tells Dame Chat that Gammer Gurton’s cock had been ftolen in the night from the henrooft, and that flie. Dame Chat, was accufed of being the thief. Amid the general mifunderftanding which refults from Diccon’s fuccefsful endeavours, they fend for the parfon of the parilh. Dr. Rat, who appears to unite in himfelf the three parts of preacher, phylician, and conjurer, in order to have advantage of his experience in finding the needle. Diccon now contrives a new piece of mifchief. He perfuades Dame Chat that Hodge intends to hide himfelf in a certain hole in the premifes, in order, that night, to creep out and kill all her hens; and at the fame time he informs Dr. Rat, that if he will hide in the fame hole, he will giv'e him ocular demonfiration of Dame Chat’s guilt of fitaling the needle. The confequence is that Dame Chat attacks by furprife, and fomewhat violently, the fuppofod depredator in the hole, and that Dr. Rat gets a broken head. Dame Chat is brought before “ Mafter Bayly” for the afiault, and the proceedings in the trial bring to light the deceptions which have been played upon them all, and Diccon ftands convidted as the wicked perpetrator. In fadi, the “ bedlam ” confelTes it all, and it is finally decided by “Mafter Bayly” that there fiiall be a general recon- ciliation, and that Diccon lliall take a folemn oath on Hodge’s breech, that he will do his befi to find the loft needle. Diccon has ftill the fpirit of mifchief in him, and inltead of laying his hand quietly on Hodge’s breech, he gives him a iharp blow, which is refponded to by an unexpedted fcream. The needle, indeed, which has never quitted the breeches, is driven rather deep into the fleftiy part of Hodge’s body, and the general joy at having found it again overruling all other confiderations, they all agree to be friends over a jug of “ drink.” We cannot but feel aftoniflied at the flrort period which it required to develop rude attempts at dramatic compofition like this into the wonderful creations of a Shakefpeare ; and it can only be explained by the fadt that it was an age remarkable for producing men of extraordinary genius in everj'^ branch of intelledlual development. Hitherto, the litera- ture of the ftage had reprefented the intelligence of the mafs; it became individualifed i in Literature and Art. 287 individualifed in Shakefpeare, and this faft marks an entirely new era in the hiftory of the drama. In the writings of our great bard, nearly all the peculiarities of the older national drama are preferved, even fome which may be perhaps confidered as its defedls, but carried to a degree of perfedtion which they had never attained before. The drollery, which, as we have feen, could not be difpenfed with even in the religious myfterics and miracle-plays, had become fo necelT’ary, that it could not be dil'penfed with in tragedy. Its omiffion belonged to a later period, when the foreign dramatitls became objedls of imitation in England. But in the earlier drama, thefe fcenes of drollery feem frequently to have no connedtion whatever with the general plot, while Shakefpeare always interweaves them Ikilfully with it, and they feem to form an integral and necelTar)' part of it. 288 Hi /lory of Caricature a?id Grotefque CHAPTER XVII. niABLERIE IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. EARLY TYPES OF THE DIABOLICAL FORMS. ST. ANTHONY. ST. GUTHLAC. REVIVAL OF THE TASTE FOR SUCH SUBJECTS IN THE BEGINNING OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. THE FLEMISH SCHOOL OF BREUGHEL. THE FRENCH AND ITALIAN SCHOOLS, CALLOT, SALVATOR ROSA. W E have feen how the popular demonology furniihed materials for the earlieft exercife of comic art in the middle ages, and how the talle for this particular clafs of grotefque lafted until the clofe of the mediaeval period. After the “ renailfance ” of art and literature, this talle took a Hill more remarkable form, and the fchool of grotefque diallcrie which floiirilhed during the fixteenth century, and the firlt hall cl the feventeenth, jullly claims a chapter to itfelf. I’he birthplace of this demonology, as far as it belongs to Chriftianity, mull probably be fought in the deferts of Egypt. It fpread thence over the eall: and the weft, and when it reached our part of the world, it grafted itfelf, as I have remarked in a former chapter, on the exifting popular fuperftitions of Teutonic paganifm. The playfully burlefque, which held lb great a place in thefe fuperftitions, no doubt gave a more comic cha- rabter to this Chriftian demonology than it had polfelTed before the mix- ture. Its primitive reprefentative was the Egyptian monk, St. Anthony, who is faid to have been born at a village called Coma, in Upper Egypt, in the year 251. His hiftory was written in Greek by St. Athanafius, and was tranflated into Latin by the ecclefiaftical hiftorian Evagrius. Anthony was evidently a fanatical vifionary, fubjebt to mental illulions, which were foftered by his education. To efcape from the temptations of the world, he fold all his property, which was confiderable, gave it to the poor, and then retired into the defert of the Thebaid, to live a life of the in Literature and Art. 289 the ftrihteft afceticil'in. The evil one perfecuted him in his folitude, and fought to drive him back into the corruptions of worldly life. He tirft tried to fill his mind with regretful reminifcences of his former wealth, polition in fociety, and enjoyments ; when this failed, he difturbed his mind with voluptuous images and defires, which the faint refilled with equal fuccefs. The perfecutor now changed his tadlics, and prefenting himfelf to Anthony in the form of a black and ugly youth, confelfed to him, with apparent candour, that he was the fpirit of uncleannefs, and acknow- leged that he had been vanquilhed by the extraordinary merits of Anthony’s fandlity. The faint, however, faw that this was only a ftratagem to llir up in him the fpirit of pride and felf-confidence, and he met it by fubjedting himfelf to greater mortifications than ever, which of courfe made him ftill more liable to thefe delufions. Now he fought greater folitude by taking up his refidence in a ruined Egyptian fepulchre, but the farther he withdrew from the world, the more he became the objedt of diabolical perfecution. Satan broke in upon his privacy with a hoft of attendants, and during the night beat him to fuch a degree, that one morning the attendant who brought him food found him lying fenfelefs in his cell, and had him carried to the town, where his friends were on the point of burying him, believing him to be dead, when he fuddenly revived, and inlifted on being taken back to his folitary dwelling. The legend tells us that the demons appeared to him in the forms of the mod: ferocious animals, fuch as lions, bulls, wolves, afps, ferpents, fcorpions, panthers, and bears, each attacking him in the manner peculiar to its fpecies, and with its peculiar voice, thus making together a horrible din. Anthony left his tomb to retire farther into the defert, where he made a ruined cafile his refidence ; and here he was again frightfully perfecuted by the demons, and the noife they made was fo great and horrible that it was often heard at a vaft diftance. According to the narrative, Anthony reproached the demons in very abufive language, called them hard names, and even fpat in their faces ; but his moft effedlive weapon was always the crofs. Thus the faint became bolder, and fought a ftill more lonely abode, and finally eftablilhed himfelf on the top of a high mountain in the upper Thebaid. The demons ftill continued to perfecute him, under p i> a great 290 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefqiie a great variety of forms ; on one occafion their chief appeared to him under the form of a man, with the lower members of an afs. The demons which tormented St. Anthony became the general type for fubfequent creations, in which thefe fird pictures were gradually, and in the fequel, greatly improved upon. St. Anthony’s perfecutors ufually alfumed the lhapes of bond fide animals, but thofe of later dories took mondrous and grotedjue forms, drange mixtures of the parts of different animals, and of others which nev^er exided. Such were feen by St. Guthlac, the St. Anthony of the Anglo-Saxons, among the wild moralfes of Croyland. One night, which he was palling at his devotions in his cell, they' poured in upon him in great numbers j “and they dlled all the houfe with their coming, and they poured in on every dde, from above and from beneath, and everywhere. They were in countenance horrible, and they had great heads, and a long neck, and lean vifage ; they were dlthy and fqualid in their beards, and they had rough ears, and didorted face, and derce eyes, and foul mouths ; and their teeth were like horfes’ tuiks, and their throats were dlled with dame, and they were grating in their voice; they had crooked fhanks, and knees big and great behind, and didorted toes, and ihrieked hoarfely with their voices ; and they came with fuch immoderate noifes and immenfe horror, that it feemed to him that all between heaven and earth refounded with their dreadful cries.” On another dmilar occadon, “ it happened one night, when the holy man Guthlac fell to his prayers, he heard the howling of cattle and various wild beads. Not long after he faw the appearance of animals and wild beads and creeping things coming in to him. Fird he faw the vifage of a lion that threatened him with his bloody tuiks, alfo the likenefs of a bull, and the vifage of a bear, as when they are enraged. Alfo he perceived the appearance of vipers, and a hog’s grunting, and the howling of wolves, and croaking of ravens, and the various whidlings of birds, that they might, with their fantadic appear- ance, divert the mind of the holy man.” Such were the fuggedions on which the mediaeval fculptors and illumi- nators worked with fo much edeft, as we have feen repeatedly in the courfe of our preceding chapters. After the revival of art in wedern Europe in in hiterature and Art. 29 1 ill the fifteenth century, this clafs of legends became great favourites with painters and engravers, and foon gave rife to the peculiar fchool of diallerie mentioned above. At that time the ftory of the Temptation of St. Anthony attrafted particular attention, and it is the fubjedt of many remarkable prints belonging to the earlier ages of the art of engraving. It employed the pencils of fuch artifts as Martin Schongauer, Ifrael van Mechen, and Lucas Cranach. Of the latter we have two different engravings on the fame fubjedt — St. Anthony carried into the air by the demons, who are reprefented in a great variety of grotefque and monftrous forms. The moll remarkable of the two bears the date of 1 506, and was, therefore, one of Cranach’s earlier works. But the great reprefentative of this earlier fchool of diallerie was Peter Breughel, a Flemilh painter who flourilhed in the middle of the fixteenth century. He was born at Breughel, near Breda, and lived fome time at Antwerp, but afterwards eftablillied himfelf at Bruffels. So celebrated was he for the love of the grotefque difplayed in his pidlures, that he was known by the name of Peter the Droll. Breughel’s “Temptation of St. Anthony,” like one or two others of his fubjedts of the fiime clafs, was engraved in a reduced form by J. T. de Bry. Breughel’s demons are figures of the mod fantaftic defcription — creations of a wildly grotefque imagination ; they prefent incongruous and laughable mixtures of parts of living things which have no relation whatever to one another. Our cut No. 155 reprefents a group of thefe grotefque demons, from a plate by Breughel, engraved in 1565, and entitled Divus Jacolus diaholicis prcejiigiis ante magum Jiftitur (St. James is arrefled before the magician by diabolical delufions). The engraving IS full of fimilarly grotefque figures. On the right is a fpacious chimney, and up it witches, riding on brooms, are making their efcape, while in the air are feen other witches riding away upon dragons and a goat. A kettle is boiling over the fire, around which a group of monkeys are feen fitting and warming themfelves. Behind thefe a cat and a toad are holding a very intimate converfation. In the background ftands and boils the great witches’ caldron. On the right of the pi 61 ure the magus, or magician, is feated, reading his grinioire, with a frame before him fupporting the pot containing his magical ingredients. The faint occupies the 292 Hifiory of Caricature and Grotef'que the middle of the pidture, furrounded by the demons reprefented in our cut and by many others : and as he approaches the magician, he is feen railing his right hand in the attitude of pronouncing a benediftion, the apparent confequence of which is a frightful explofion of the magician’s pot, which ftrikes the demons with evident confternation. Nothing can be more hixarre than the horfe’s head upon human legs in armour, the parody upon a crawling fpider behind it, the Ikull (apparently of a horfe) fupported upon naked human legs, the flrangely excited animal behind the latter, and the figure furnilhed with pilgrim's hood and Half, which appears to be mocking the faint. Another print — a companion to the foregoing — reprefents the ftill more complete difcomfiture of the magus. The faint here occupies the right-hand fide of the pidlure, and is railing his hand higher, with apparently a greater lliow of authority. I'he demons have all turned againfi: their mailer the magician, whom they are beating No. 155. St. James and his Perjecutors. in Literature and Art. 293 beating and hurling headlong from his chair. They feem to be pro- claiming their joy at his fall by all forts of playful attitudes. It is a fort of demon fair. Some of them, to the left of the picture, are dancing and llanding upon their heads on a tight-rope. Near them another is playing fome game like that which we now call the thimble-rig. The monkeys are dancing to the tune of a great drum. A variety of their mountebank tricks are going on in different parts of the fcene. Three of thefe playful adtors are reprefented in our cut No. 156. Breughel alfo executed a feries of fimilarly grotefque engravings, reprefenting in this fame fantaflic manner the virtues and vices, fuch as Pride (fuperl’ia). Courage {Jortitudo), Sloth {dejidia), &c. Thefe bear the date of 1558. They are crowded with figures equally grotefque with thofe juft mentioned, but a great part of which it would be almoll impofiible to defcribe. I give two examples from the engraving of “ Sloth,” in the accompanying cut (No. 157). From making up figures from parts of animals, this early fchool of grotefque proceeded to create animated figures out of inanimate things, fuch as machines, implements of various kinds, houfehold uteniils, and other fuch articles. A German artift, of about the fame time as Breughel, has 2 94 HJiory of Caricature and Grotefque has left us a lingular fenes of etchings of this defcription, which are intended as an allegorical fatire on the follies of mankind. The allegory Nq. 158 . The Folly of Hunting, attached to each of them. In this manner we learn that the group reprefented in our cut, No. 158, which is the fecond in this feries, is intended No. 157 . Imps of Sioth, is here of fuch a fmgular charafter, that we can only guefs at the meaning of thefc llrange groups through four lines of German verfe which are in Literature and Art. 295 intended as a fatire upon thole who wafte tlieir time in hunting, which, the verfes tell us, they will in the fequel lament bitterly ; and they are exhorted to cry loud and continually to God, and to let that lerve them in the place of hound and hawk. Die zcit die du 'uerleurji mit jagen^ Die %uirftu •zrivar noch Jchmert%lich klagen Ruff laut %u Gott gar oft und •vil^ Das fey dew hand und Jederfpil. The next pidlure in the feries, which is equally difficult to defcribe, is aimed agaiull thole who fail in attaining virtue or honour through lluggilhnefs. Others follow, but I will only give one more example. It forms our cut No. 159, and appears, from the verfes accompanying it, to be aimed againll: thofe who prablice waftefulnefs in their youth, and thus become objebts of pity and fcorn in old age. Whatever may be the point of the allegory contained in the engraving, it is certainly far-fetched, and not very apparent. This German-Flemilh fchool of grotefque does not appear to have outlived the fixteenth century, or at leall it had ceafed to Hourilh in the century following. But the talie for the diahlenc of the Temptation fcenes 296 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque fcenes palled into France and Italy, in which countries it affamed a much more refined charadler, though at the fame time one equally grotefque and imaginative. Thefe artifls, too, returned to the original legend, and gave it forms of their own conception. Daniel Rabel, a French artifi, who lived at the end of the fixteenth century, publiflied a rather remark- able engraving of the “Temptation of St. Anthony,” in which the faint appears on the right of the pidlure, kneeling before a mound on which three demons are dancing. On the right hand of the faint hands a naked woman, flieltering herfelf with a parafol, and tempting the faint with her charms. The rell of the piece is filled with demons in a great variety of forms and poflures. Another French artifi, Nicholas Cochin, has left us two “Temptations of St. Anthony,” in rather fpirited etching, of the earlier part of the feventeenth century. In the firfl, the faint is repre- fented kneeling before a crucifix, furrounded by demons. The youthful and charming temptrefs is here drelfed in the richeft garments, and the highefl flyle of fafhion, and difplays all her powers of fedudlion. The body of the pifture is, as ufual, occupied by multitudes of diabolical figures, in grotefque forms. In Cochin’s other pidlure of the Temp- tation of St. Anthony, the faint is reprefented as a hermit engaged in his prayers ; the female figure of voluptuoufnefs {voluptas) occupies the middle of the pidlure, and behind the faint is feeii a witch with her befom. But the artifi who excelled in this fubjedl at the period at which we now arrive, was the celebrated Jacques Callot, who was born at Nancy, in Brittaii}', in 1593, and died at Florence on the 24th of March, 1635, which, according to the old flyle of calculating, may mean March, 1636. Of Callot we fliall have to fpeak in another chapter. He treated the fubjedl of the Temptation of St. Anthony m two different plates, which are confidered as ranking among the moll remarkable of his works, and to which, in fadl, he appears to have given much thought and attention. He is known, indeed, to have worked diligently at it. They refemble thofe of the older artifts in the number of diabolical figures introduced into the pidlure, but they difplay an extraordinary vivid imagination in the forms, poflures, phyfiognomies, and even the equipments, of the chimerical in Literature and Art. 297 chimerical figures, all equally droll and burlefque, but which prefent an entire contrail to the more coarfe and vulgar conceptions of the German- Flemilh fchool. This difference will be underftood bed by an example. One of Callot’s demons is reprefented in our cut No. 160. Many of them are mounted on nondefcript animals, of the mod extraordinary demoniacal charadter, and fuch is the cafe of the demon in our cut, who is running a tilt at the faint with his tilting fpear in his hand, and, to make more lure, his eyes well furnilhed with a pair of fpedtacles. In our next cut, No. i6i, we give a fecond example of the dgures in Callot’s peculiar n a oiablnic. 298 Hi [lory of Caricature and Grotefque diahlerie. The demon in this cafe is riding very uneafily, and, in fad, feems in danger of being thrown, dlie heeds of both are of an anomalous charaderj the hrft is a fort of dragon-horfe j the fecond a mixture of a lobfter, a fpider, and a craw-filh. Mariette, the art-colledor and art- writer of the reign of Louis XV. as well as artih, confiders this grotefque, or, as he calls it, “ fantatlic and comic charader,” as almoft necelTary to the pidures of the Temptation of St. Anthony, which he treats as one of Callot’s efpecially yeriow^ fubjeds. “ It was allowable,” he fays, “to Cdilot, to give a High t to his imagination. The more his fidions were of the nature of dreams, the more they were fitted to what he had to exprefs. For the demon intending to torment St. Anthony, it is to be fuppofed that he mult have thought of all the forms moll hideous, and molt likely to firike terror.” Callot’s firlt and larger print of the Temptation of St Anthony is rare. It is filled with a vail number of figures. Above is a fantaltic being who vomits thoufands of demons. The faint is feen at the entrance of a cavern, tormented by fome of thefe. Others are fcattered about in different occupations. On one fide, a demoniacal party are drinking together, and pledging each other in their glalFes; here, a devil is playing on the guitar; there, others are occupied in a dance ; all fuch grotefque figures as our two examples would lead the reader to exped. In the fecond of Callot’s “ Temptations,” which is dated in 1635, and mull therefore have been one of his lateft works, the fame figure vomiting the demons occupies the upper part of the plate, and the field is covered with a prodigious number of imps, more hideous in their forms, and more varied in their extraordinary attitudes, than in the fame artill’s firlt defign. Below, a hofl: of demons are dragging the faint to a place where new torments are prepared for him. Callot’s prints of the Temptation of St. Anthony gained fo great a reputation, that imitations of them were fubfequently publilhed, fome of which fo far approached his ftyle, that they were long fuppofed to be genuine. Callot, though a Frenchman, fludied and flourilhed in Italy, and his llyle is founded upon Italian art. The lall great artift whofe treatment of the Temptation I fliall quote, is Salvator Rofa, an Italian by birth, who in Literature and Art. 299 who flourilhed in the middle of the feventeenth century. His ftyle, according to home opinions, is refined from that of Callot ; at all events, it is bolder in defign. Our cut No. 162 reprefents St. Anthony prote6t- ISo, I 62 . St. Anthony and his Perjccutor. ing himfelf with the crofs againll the alfaults of the demon, as reprefented by Salvator Rofa. With this artilt the fchool of diablerie of the lixteenth century may be confidered to have come to its end. 300 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque CHAPTER XVIII. CALLOT AND HIS SCHOOL. CALLOt’s ROMANTIC HISTORY. HIS “ CARRICI,” AND OTHER BURLESGUE WORKS. THE “ BALLI ” AND THE BEGGARS. I.MITATORS OF CALLOT; DELLA BELLA. EXAMPLES OF DELLA BELLA. ROMAIN DE HOOGHE. ^'^IIE art of engraving on copper, although it had made rapid advances J during the fixteenth century, was ftill very far from perfeftion ; but the clofe of that century witnelfed the birth of a man who was deftined not only to give a new charadter to this art, but alfo to bring in a new ftyle of caricature and burlefque. This was the celebrated Jacques Callot, a native of Lorraine, and defcended from a noble Burgundian familjG His father, Jean Callot, held the office of herald of Lorraine. Jacques was born in the year 1592,* at Nancy, and appears to have been deflined for the church, with a view to which his early education was regulated. But the early life of Jacques Callot prefents a romantic epifode in the hiltory of art afpirations. While yet hardly more than an infant, he feized every opportunity of negledling more ferious ftudies to pradtife drawing, and he difplayed el'pecially a very precocious tafte for fatire, for his artillic talent w'as Ihown principally in caricaturing all the people he knew. His father, and apparently all his relatives, difapproved of his love for drawing, and did wdiat they could to difcourage it ; but in vain, for he ftill found means of indulging it. Claude Henriet, the painter to the court of Lorraine, gave him leflbns, and his fon, Ifrael Henriet, formed for him a boy’s triendlhip. He alfo learnt the elements of * This i^ the d.ate fixed by Meaume, in his excellent w'ork on Callot, entitled “ Rccherches sur la Vie et les Oiivra^cs de Jacques Callot,” 2 tom. 8vo., i860. in Literature and Art. 301 of the art of engraving of Demange Crocq, the engraver to the duke of Lorraine. About this time, the painter Bellange, who had been a pupil of Claude Henriet, returned from Italy, and gave young Callot an exciting account of the wonders of art to be feen in that country j and foon after- wards Claude Henriet dying, his fon Ifrael went to Rome, and his letters from thence had no lefs eftedt on the mind of the young artitt at Nancy, than the converfation of Bellange. Indeed the pallion of the boy for art was fo ftrong, that, finding his parents obftinately oppofed to all his longings in this dirediion, he left his father’s houfe fecretly, and, in the fpring of 1604, when he had only juft entered his thirteenth year, he fet out for Italy on foot, without introdudfions and almoft without money. He was even unacquainted with the road, but after proceeding a ftiort diftance, he fell in with a band of gipfies, and, as they were going to Florence, he joined their company. His life among the gipfies, which lafted feven or eight weeks, appears to have furnilhed food to his love of burlefque and caricature, and he has handed down to us his impreftions, in a feries of four engravings of fcenes in gipfy life, admirably executed at a rather later period of his life, which are full of comic humour. When they arrived at Florence, Jacques Callot parted company with the gipfies, and was fortunate enough to meet with an officer of the grand duke’s houfehold, who liftened to his ftory, and took fo much intereft in him, that he obtained him admiflion to the Audio of Remigio Canta Gallina. This artift gave him inftrudtions in drawing and engraving, and fought to corredt him of his tafte for the grotefque by keeping him employed upon ferious fubjedts. After ftudying for fome months under Canta Gallina, Jacques Callot left Florence, and proceeded to Rome, to feek his old friend Ifrael Henriet ; but he had hardly arrived, when he was recognifed in the ftreets by fome merchants from Nancy, who took him, and in fpite of his tears and refiftance, carried him home to his parents. He was now kept to his ftudies more ftridtly than ever, but nothing could overcome his paflion for art, and, having contrived to lay by fome money, after a Ihort interval he again ran away from home. This time he took the road to Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque 302 to Lyons, and eroded INIont Cenis, and he had reached Turin when he met in the flreet of that city his elder brother Jean, who again carried him home to Nancy. Nothing could now reprefs young Callot’s ardour, and foon after this fecond efcapade, he engraved a copy of a portrait of Charles III., duke of Lorraine, to which he put his name and the date 1607, and which, though it difplays little Ikill in engraving, excited condderable interell at the time. His parents were now perfuaded that it was ufelefs to thwart any longer his natural inclinations, and they not only allowed him to follow them, but they yielded to his with to return to Italy. The circumftances of the moment were efpecially favourable. Charles III., duke of Lorraine, was dead, and his fuccetfor, Henry IL, was preparing to fend an embally to Rome to announce his acceffion. Jean Callot, by his pofuion of herald, had fufficient interell to obtain for his fon an appointment in the amballador’s retinue, and Jacques Callot darted for Rome on the itl of December, 1608, under more favourable aufpices than thofe which had attended his former vilits to Italy. Callot reached Rome at the beginning of the year 1609, and now at length he joined the friend of his childhood, Ifrael Henriet, and began to throw all his energy into his art-labours. It is more than probable that he dudied under Tempeda, with Henriet, who was a pupil of that painter, and another Lorrainer, Claude Dervet. .iVfter a time, Callot began to feel the want of money, and obtained employment of a French engraver, then redding in Rome, named Philippe Thomatlin, with whom he worked nearly three years, and became perfedt in handling the graver. Tov^ards the end of the year 1611, Callot went to Florence, to place himfelf under Julio Parigi, who then flouridied there as a painter and engraver. Tufeany was at this time ruled by its duke Cofmo de’ Medicis, a great lover of the arts, who took Callot under his patronage, giving him the means to advance himfelf. Flitherto his occupation had been prin- cipally copying the works of others, but under Parigi he began to pradife more in original dedgn, and his tade for the grotefque came upon him ftronger than ever. Although Parigi blamed it, he could not help admiring the talent it betrayed. In 1615, the grand duke gave a great entertainment to the prince of Urbino, and Callot was employed to make engravings in Literature and Art. 303 engravings of the feftivities; it was his firft commencement in a clafs of clefigns by which he afterwards attained great celebrity. In the year following, his engagement with Parigi ended, and he became his own mailer. He now came out unfettered in his own originality. The firft fruits were feen in a new kind of defigns, to which he gave the name ot “ Caprices,” a feries of which appeared about the year 1617, under the title of “ Caprici di varie Figure.” Callot re-engraved them at Nancy in later years, and in the new title they were Fated to have been originally engraved in 1616. In a F'lort preface, he fpeaks of thefe as the fi:F of his works on which he fet any value. They now Frike us as lingular No. 163 . yi Crijiple. examples of the fanciful creations of a moF grotefque imagination, but they no doubt preferve many traits of the feFivals, ceremonies, and manners of that land of mafquerade, which muF have been then familial to the Florentines ; and thefe engravings would, doubtlefs, be received by them with abfolute delight. One is copied in our cut No. 163 ; it reprefents a cripple fupporting himfelf on a Ihort crutch, with his right arm in a Fing. Our cut No. 164 is another example from the fame fet, and reprefents a maFced clown, with his left hand on the hilt of his dagger, or perhaps of a wooden fword. From this time, although he was very induFrious and produced much, Callot engraved only his own defigns. While 3°4 liiftory of Caricature and Grotejque While employed for others, Callot had worked chiefly with the graver, but now that he was his own mailer, he laid afide that implement, and devoted himfelf almoft entirely to etching, in which he attained the higheft proficiency. His work is remarkable for the cleannefs and eafe of his lines, and for the life and fpirit he gave to his figures. His talent lay No. 164 . A Grotejque Majker. efpecially in the extraordinary Ikill with which he grouped together great numbers of diminutive figures, each of which preferved its proper and full adlion and effedt. The great annual fair of the Impruneta was held with extraordinary fellivities, and attended by an immenfe concourfe of people of all dalles, on St. Luke’s Da}", the i8th of Odober, in the outlkirts of Florence. Callot engraved a large pidlure of this fair, which is ablblutely wonderful. The pidlure embraces an extenfive fpace of ground, which is covered with hundreds of figures, all occupied, fingly or in groups, in different manners, converfing, mafquerading, buying and felling, playing games, and performing m various ways ; each group or figure in Literature and Art. 305 ligure is a pitture in itfelf. This engraving produced quite a fenfation, and it was followed by other pidtures of fairs^ and, after his final return to Nancy, Callot engraved it anew. It was this talent for grouping large malfes of perfons which caufed the artift to be fo often employed in drawing great public ceremonies, fieges, and other warlike operations. By the duke of Florence, Cofmo II., Callot was liberally patronifed and loaded with benefits, but on his death the government had to be placed in the hands of a regency, and art and literature no longer met with the fame encouragement. In this ftate of things, Callot was found by Charles of Lorraine, afterwards duke Charles IV., and perfuaded to return to his native country. He arrived at Nancy in 1622, and began to work there with greater aftivity even than he had difplayed before. It was not long after this that he produced his fets of grotefques, the Balli (or dancers), the Gobbi (or hunchbacks), and the Beggars. The firfl of thefe fets, called in the title Balli, or Cucurucu,* confifts of twenty-four fmall plates, each of them containing two comic charafters in grotefque attitudes, with groups of fmaller figures in the diftance. Beneath the two prominent figures are their names, now unintelligible, but at that time no doubt well known on the comic flage at Florence. Thus, in the couple given in our cut No. 165, which is taken from the fourth plate of the feries, the perfonage to the left is named Smaraolo Cornuto, which means fimply Smaraolo the cuckold ; and the one on the right is called Ratfa di Boio. In the original the background is occupied by a ftreet, full of fpeftators, looking on at a dance of pantaloons, round one who is mounted on Hilts and playing on the tabour. The couple in our cut No. 166, * Meaume appears to be doubtful of the meaning of thi.s word ; a friend has pointed out to me the correction. It was the title of a song, so called because the burden was an imitation of the crowing of a cock, the singer mimicking also the action of the bird. When Bacchus, in Redi’s “ Bacco in Toscana,” is beginning to feel the exhilarating effects of his critical investigation of the Tuscan wines, he calls upon Ariadne to sing to him “sulla mandola la Cucurucu,” “on the man- dola the Cucurucu.” A note fully explains the word as we have staled it — “ Can- zone cosi detta, perche in esse si replica molte volte la voce del gallo; e cantandola si fanno atti e moti simili a quegli di esso gallo.” H R 3o6 Hiflory of Caricature and Grotejque No. 1 66, reprelents another of Callot’s “ Caprices,” from a fet differing from the hrll “ Caprices,” or the Ealli. Tlie Gobbi, or hunchbacks, form a fet of twenty-one engravings ; and the fet of the Gipfies, already alluded to, which was alfo executed at Nancy, was included in four plates, the No, io6. A Caprice. fubjedfs of which were feverally — i, the gipfies travelling; 2, the avant- guard ; 3, the halt ; and 4, the preparations for the feafi. Nothing could in Literature and Art. 307 be more trutliful, and at the lame time niore comic, than this laft fet of fubjedVs. We give, as an example of the fet of the Baroni, or beggars, Callot’s figure of one of that particular clafs — for beggars and rogues of all kinds were clalfified in thofe days — whofe part it was to appeal to charity by wounds and fores artificially reprefented. In the Englilh Hang of the feventeenth century, thefe artificial fores were called clymcs, and a curious account of the manner in which they were made will be found in that lingular pidture of the vicious claffes of fociety in this country at that period, the “ Englifh Rogue,” by Head and Kirkman. The falfe cripple in our cut is holding up his leg to make a difplay of his pretended infirmity. Callot remained at Nancy, with merely temporary abfences, during the remainder of his life. In 1628, he was employed at Brulfels in drawing and engraving the “ Siege of Breda,” one of the moil finilhed of his works, and he there made the perfonal acquaintance of Vandyck. Early in 308 Hi /lory of Caricature and Grotefque in 1629, he was called to Paris to execute engravings of the fiege of La Rochelle, and of the defence of the I lie of Rhe, but he returned to Nancy in 1630. Three years afterwards his native country was invaded by the armies of Louis XIII., and Nancy furrendered to the French on the 25th of September, 1633. Callot was required to make engravings to celebrate the fall ot his native town ; but, although he is faid to have been threatened with violence, he refufed j and afterwards he com- memorated the evils brought upon his countrj’ by the French invafion in thofe two immortal lets of prints, the lelTer and greater “Miseres de la Guerre.” About two years after this, Callot died, in the prime of life, on the 24th of March, 1635. The fame of Callot was great among his contemporaries, and his name is jutlly refpedled as one of the moft illuflrious in the hiftory of French art. He had, as might be expected, many imitators, and the Caprices, the Balli, and the Gobbi, became verj' favourite fubjedts. Among thefe imitators, the mofi; fuccefsful and the moll diftinguillied was Stephano Della Bella j and, indeed, the only one deferving of particular notice. Della Bella was born at Florence, on the i8th of May, 1610 ;* his father, dying two years afterwards, left him an orphan, and his mother in great poverty. As he grew up, he Ihowed, like Callot himfelf, precocious talents in art, and of the fame kind. He eagerly attended all public feflivals, games, &c., and on his return from them made them the fubjedt of grotefque Iketches. It was remarked of him, efpecially, that he had a curious habit of always beginning to draw a human figure from the feet, and proceeding upwards to the head. He was ftruck at a very early period of his purfuit of art by the ftyle of Callot, of which, at firft, he was a fervile imitator, but he afterwards abandoned fome of its pecu- liarities, and adopted a ftyle which was more his own, though ftill founded upon that of Callot. He almoft rivalled Callot in his fuccefs in grouping multitudes of figures together, and hence he alfo was much employed in producing * The materials for the history of Della Bella and his works, will be found in a caretully compiled volume, by C. A. Jombert, entitled, “ Essai d’un Catalogue de rOeuvie d’Etienne de la Bella.” 8vo., Paris, 1772. in Literature and Art. 309 producing engravings of lieges, feftive entertainments, and fuch elaborate fubjedls. As Callot’s alpirations had been diredled towards Italy, thofe of Della Bella were turned towards France, and when in the latter days of the miniftry of Cardinal Richelieu, the grand duke of Florence fent Alexandra del Nero as his refident ambaflador in Paris, Della Bella was permitted to accompany him. Richelieu was occupied in the liege of Arras, and the engraving of that event was the foundation of Della Bella’s fame in France, where he remained about ten years, frequently employed on limilar fubjefts. He fubfequently vilited Flanders and Holland, and at Amllerdam made the acquaintance of Rembrandt. He returned to Florence in 1650, and died there on the 23rd of July, 1664. While Hill in Florence, Della Bella executed four prints of dwarfs quite in the grotefque llyle of Callot. In 1637, ^^e occalion of the marriage of the grand duke Ferdinand II., Della Bella publifhed engravings of the different fcenes reprefentcd, or performed, on that occalion. Thefe were effedled by very elaborate machinery, and were reprefented in fix engravings, the fifth of which {fcena quinta) reprefents hell {d' Inferno), and is filled with luries, demons, and witches, which might have found a place in Callot’s “ Temptation of St. Anthony.” A fpecimen of thefe is given in our cut No. 168 — a naked witch feated upon a Ikeleton of an animal that might have been borrowed from fome far diftant geological period. In 1642, Della Bella executed a set of fmall “ Caprices,” confilling of thirteen plates, from the eighth of which we take our cut No. 169. It reprefents a beggar-woman, carrying one child on her back, while another is llretched on the ground. In this clafs of fubjefts Della Bella imitated Callot, but the copyift never fuc- ceeded in equalling the original. His beft ftyle, as an original artill of burlefque and caricature, is ihown in a fet of five plates of Death carrying awav Ao. 168. A pykch Mounted. 310 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque away people of different ages, which he executed in 1648. The fourth of this fet is copied in our cut No. 170, and reprefents Death carrying off, on his fhoulder, a young woman, in fpite of her ftruggles to efcape from him. With the clofc of the feventeenth century thefe “ Caprices ” and mafquerade fcenes began to be no longer in vogue, and caricature and burlefque affumed new forms ; but Callot and Della Bella had many followers, and their examples had a lafling influence upon art. We rauft not forget that a celebrated artift, in another country, at the end of the fame century, the well-known Remain de Hooghe, was pro- duced from the fchool of Callot, in which he had learnt, not the arts of burlefque and caricature, but that of skilfully grouping multitudes of figures, efpecially in fubjefts reprefenting epifodes of war, tumults, maffacres, and public proceliions. Of Romain de Hooghe we fliall have to fpeak again in a fubfequent chapter. In his time the art of engraving had made great advance on the Continent, and efpecially in France, where it met with ruore encourage- ment than elfewhere. In England this art had, on the whole, made much lefs progrefs, and was in rather a low condition, one branch only excepted, that of portraits. Of the two diftinguilhed engravers in England during the feventeenth century, Hollar was a Bohemian, and Faithorne, though an in Literature and Art. an Englifhman, learnt his art in France. We only began to have an Englifli fchool when Dutch and French engravers came in with King William to lay the groundwork. 312 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotefque CHAHiER XIX. THE SATIRICAL LITERATURE OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. PASQUIL. MACARONIC POETRY. THE EPISTOLjE OBSURORUM VIRORUM. RABELAIS. COURT OF THE QUEEN OF NAVARRE, AND ITS LITERARY CIRCLE ; BONAVENTURE DES PERIERS.- — HENRI ETIENNE. — THE LIGUE, AND ITS SATIRE : THE “ SATYRE MENIPPEE.” T he fixteenth century, elpecially on the Continent, was a period of that tort of violent agitation which is moft favourable to the growth of fatire. Society was breaking up, and going through a courfe of decom- potition, and it prefented to the view on every fide fpedtacles which pro- voked the mockery, perhaps more than the indignation, of lookers-on. Even the clergy had learnt to laugh at themfelves, and almoft at their own religion ; and people who thought or refledted were gradually feparating into two clalfes — thofe who calf all religion from them, and rulhed into a jeering fcepticifm, and thofe who entered ferioufly and with refolution into the work of reformation. The latter found molf encouragement among the Teutonic nations, while the fceptical element appears to have had its birth in Italy, and even in Rome itfelf, where, among popes and cardinals, religion had degenerated into empty forms. At fome period towards the clofe of the fifteenth century, a mutilated ancient Ifatue was accidentally dug up in Rome, and it was eredfed on a pedelfal in a place not far from the Urfini Palace. Oppofite it Rood the fliop of a flioemaker, named Pafquillo, or Pafquino, the latter being the form moll commonly adopted at a later period. This Pafquillo was notorious as a facetious fellow, and his fliop was ufually crowded by people who went there to tell tales and hear news; and, as no other name had been invented in Literature and Art. 313 invented for the ftatue, people agreed to give it the name of the llioemaker, and they called it Pafquillo. It became a cuftonij at certain feafons, to write on pieces of paper fatirical epigrams, fonnets, and other iliort com- politions in Latin or Italian, moftly of a perfonal charafler, in which the writer declared whatever he had feen or heard to the difcredit of fomebody, and thefe were publilhed by depofiting them with the ftatue, w'hence they were taken and read. One of the Latin epigrams which pleads againft committing thefe ihort perfonal fatires to print, calls the time at which it was ufual to compofe them Pafquil’s feftival : — Jam redit ilia dies in qua Romana ju'ventus Pafquilli fejlum concelcbrabit o-vans, Sed 'verjus imprejjos objecro ut edere omittas^ Ne noceant iterum qua nocuere JcmeL The feftival was evidently a favourite one, and well celebrated. “ The foldiers of Xerxes,” fays another epigram, placed in Pafquil’s mouth, “were not fo plentiful as the paper beftowed upon me 5 I lhall foon become a bookfeller ” — Annigerum Xerxl non copia tanta papyri ^Ipanta mihi : jiam bibliopola ftatim. The name of Pafquil was foon given to the papers which were depofited with the ftatue, and eventually a pafquil, or pafqum, was only another name for a lampoon or libel. Not far from this ftatue ftood another, which was found in the forum of Mars {Martis forum), and was thence popularly called Marforio. Some of thefe fatirical writings were compofed in the form of dialogues between Pafquil and Marforio, or of meflages from one to the other. A colledion of thefe pafquils was publilhed in 1544 in two frnall volumes.* Many of them are extremely clever, and theyare fliarply pointed. The popes are frequent objeds of bittereft fatire. Thus we are reminded in two lines upon pope Alexander VI. {fexlus), the infamous Borgia, that Tarquin had been a Sextus, and Nero alfo, and now another Sextus was at * “ Pasquillorum Tomi duo.” Eleutlieropoli, MDXl.im. s s Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque at the head of the Romans, and told that Rome was always ruined under a Sextus — De Alexandro VI. Pont. Sextus Tarquinius, Sextus Nero, Sextus et ijle ; Semper Jub Sextis perdita Roma fuit. The following is given for an epitaph on Lucretia Borgia, pope Alexander’s profligate daughter : — Hoc tumulo dermit Lucretia nomine, fed re Thais, Alexandri JlUa, fponfa, nurus. In another of a rather later date, Rome, addrefling herfelf to Pafquil, is made to complain of two fucceflive popes, Clement VII. (Julio de Medicis, 1523-1534) and Paul III. (Alexandro Farnefe, 1534-1549), and alfo of Leo X. (1513-1521). “I am,” Rome fays, “ fick enough with the phyfician {Medicus, as a pun on the IMedicis), I was alfo the prey of the lion {Leo), now, Paul, you tear my vitals like a wolf. You, Paul, are not a god to me, as I thought in my folly, but you are a wolf, fince you tear the food from my mouth ” — Sum Medico falls (Bgra^ ful quoque prceda Leonls, Nunc mea dllaceras 'vijcera^ PauIcy lupus. Non esy Paule^ mlhl numen^ ceu Jlulta putabamy Sed lupus eSy quonlam Jubtrahis ore clbum. Another epigram, addrefled to Rome herfelf, involves a pun in Greek (in the words Paulos, Paul, and Phaulos, wicked). “Once, Rome,” it fays, “ lords of lords were thy fubjedts, now thou in thy wretchednels art fubjedl to the ferfs of ferfs ; once you liftened to the oracles of St. Paul, but now you perform the abominable commands of the wicked ” — ^uondamy RomUy tlbi Juberant dcmlnl domlnorumy Ser'vorum fer'uls nunc mlferanda fubcs ,* Audlfti quondam dl'vinl oracula HavXouj At nunc TavX(oy j^ff^ nefanda fads. The idea, of courfe. is the contrail of Rome in her Pagan glory, with Rome in her Chriftian debafement, very much the fame as that which ftruck in Literature and Art. 315 ftruck Gibbon, and gave birth to his great hitlory of Rome's ‘'’decline and The pafqnils formed a body of fatire which ftruck indifcriminately at everybody within its range, but fatirifts were now rifing who took for their fubjedts fpecial cafes of the general diforder. Rotten at the heart, fociety prefented an external gloffinefs, a mixture of pedantry and affecta- tion, which offered fubjedls enough for ridicule in whatever point of view it was taken. The eccleftaftical body was in a ftate of fermentation, out of which new feelings and new dodtrines were about to rife. The old learning and literature of the middle ages remained in form after their fpirit had palled away, and they were now contending clumlily and unfuccefsfully againft new learning and literature of a more refined and healthier charadter. Feudalifm itfelf had fallen, or it was ftruggling vainly againft new political principles, yet the ariflocracy clung to feudal forms and feudal affumptions, with an exaggeration which was meant for an appearance of flrength. Among the literary affedlations of this falfe feudalifm, was the falhion for reading the long, dry, old romances of chivalry j while the churchmen and fchoolmen were cor- rupting the language in which mediaeval learning had been expreffed, into a form the moft barbarous, or introducing words compounded from the later into the vernacular tongue. Thefe peculiarities were among the firft to provoke literary fatire. Italy, where this clafs of fatire originated, gave it its name alfo, though it appears ftill to be a matter of doubt why it was called macaronic, or in its Italian form maccharonea. Some have confidered this name to have been taken from the article of food called macaroni, to which the Italians were, and ftill are, fo much attached; while others pretend that it was derived from an old Italian word macarone, which meant a lubberly fellow. Be this, however, as it may, what is called macaronic compofition, which confifts in giving a Latin * Pa<;quil and Pasquin became, during the latter part of the sixteenth and the whole of the seventeenth centuries, a well-known name in French and English literature. In English popular literature he was turned into a jester, and a hook was published in 1604 under the title “ Pasquil’s Jests; with the Merriments of Mother Bunch. Wittie, pleasant, and dclightfull.” 3 1 6 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque Latin form to words taken from the vulgar tongue, and mixing them with words which are purely Latin, was introduced in Italy at the clofe of the fifteenth century. Four Italian writers in macaronic verfe are known to have lived before the year 1500.* The firft of thefe was named Foffa, and he tells us that he compofed his poem entitled “ Vigonce,” on the fecond day of May, 1494. It was printed in 1502. Baffimo, a native of Mantua, and the author of a macaronic which bears no title, was dead in 1499 5 and another, a Paduan named Fifi degli Odaffi, was born about the year 1450. Giovan Georgio Allione, of Afti, who is believed alfo to have written during the lad ten years of the fifteenth century, is a name better known through the edition of his French works, publilbed by Monfieur J. C. Brunet in 1836. All thefe prefent the fame coarfenefi and vulgarity of fentiment, and the fame licence in language and defcription, which appear to have been taken as necefifary charadlerifiics of macaronic compofition. Odalfi appears to give fupport to the derivation of the name from macaroni, by making the principal charadler of his poem a fabricator of that article in Padua — EJl unus it! Padua natus fpedale cujinus, In maccharonea princcps bonus atpuc magijler. But the great matter of macaronic poetry was Teofilo Folengo, of whofe life we know juft fufficient to give us a notion of the perfonal charadler of thefe old literary caricaturitts. Folengo was defcended from a noble family, which had its feat at the village of Cipada, near Mantua, where he was born on the 8th of November, 1491, and baptifed by the name of Girolamo. He purfued his ftudies, firft in the univerfity of Ferrara, under the profelTor Vifago Cocaio, and afterwards in that of Bologna, under Pietro Pomponiazzo ; or rather, he ought to have purfued them * The great authorit}' on the history' of Macaronic literature is my excellent friend Monsieur Octave Delepierre, and I will simply refer the reader to his two valuable publications, “ Macaroneana, ou Melanges de Litt^rature Macaronique des differents Peuples de I’Europe,” 8vo-, Paris, 185a 5 and “ Macaroneana,” 4to , 1863 ; the latter printed for the Philobiblon Club. m Literature and Art. 3^7 them, for his love of poetry, and his gaiety of charadter, led him to negledt them, and at length his irregularities became fo great, that he was obliged to make a hafty flight from Bologna. He was ill received at home, and he left it alfo, and appears to have fubfequently led a wild life, during part of which he adopted the profeflion of a foldier, until at length he took refuge in a Benedictine convent near Brefcia, in 1507, and became a monk. The difcipline of this houfe had become entirely relaxed, and the monks appear to have lived very licentiouflyj and Folengo, who, on his admiflion to the order, had exchanged his former baptitmal name for Teofilo, readily conformed to their example. Even- tually he abandoned the convent and the habit, ran away with a lady named Girolama Dedia, and for fome years he led a wandering, and, it would feem, very irregular life. Finally, in 1527, he returned to his old profeflion of a monk, and remained in it until his death, in the December of 1544* He is faid to have been extremely vain of his poetical talents, and a ftory is told of him which, even if it were invented, illuf- trates well the charafter which was popularly given to him. It is faid that when young, he afpired to excel in Latin poetry, and that he wrote an epic which he himfelf believed to be fuperior to the .^neid. When, however, he had communicated the work to his friend the bifliop of Mantua, and that prelate, intending to compliment him, told him that he had equalled Virgil, he was fo mortified, that he threw the manufcript on the fire, and from that time devoted his talents entirely to the compolition of macaronic verfe. Such was the man who has juftly earned the reputation of being the firll of macaronic poets. When he adopted this branch of literature, while he was in the univerfity of Bologna, he aflumed in writing it the name of Merlinus Cocaius, or Coccaius, probably from the name of his profeflTor at Ferrara. Folengo’s printed poems confift of — t. The Zani- tonella, a paftoral in feven eclogues, defcribing the love of Tonellus for Zanina ; 2, the macaronic romance of Baldus, Folengo’s principal and moft remarkable work ; 3, the Mofchaea, or dreadful battle between the flies and the ants 5 and 4, a book of Epiftles and Epigrams. The firfl edition of the Baldus appeared in 1517. It is a fort of parody 3 1 8 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque parody on the romances of chivalry, and combines a jovial fatire upon everything, which, as has been remarked, fpares neither religion nor politics, fcience nor literature, popes, kings, clergy, nobility, or people. It confifts of twenty-five cantos, or, as they are termed in the original, fihantajicc, fantafies. In the firll we are told of the origin of Baldus. There was at the court of France a famous knight named Guy, defcended from that memorable paladin Renaud of Montauban. The king, who fliowed a particular efteem for Guy, had alfo a daughter of furpaffing beauty, named Balduine, who had fallen in love with Guy, and he was equally amorous of the princels. In the fequel of a grand tournament, at which Guy has diftinguithed himfelf greatly, he carries off Balduine, and the two lovers fly on foot, in the difguife of beggars, reach the Alps in fafety, and crofs them into Italy. At Cipada, in the territory of Brefcia, they are hofpitably entertained by a generous peafant named Berte Panade, M'ith whom the princefs Balduine, who approaches her time of confinement, is left j while her lover goes forth to conquer at leaf! a marquifate for her. After his departure the gives birth to a fine boy, which is named Baldus. Such, as told in the fecond canto, is the origin of Folengo’s hero, who is deftined to perform marvellous adls of chivalry. The peafant Berte Panade has alfo a fon named Zambellus, by a mother who had died in childbirth of him. Baldus paffes for the fon of Berte alfo, fo that the two are fuppofed to be brothers. Baldus is fucceffively led through a feries of extraordinary adventures, fome low and vulgar, others more chivalrous, and fome of them exhibiting a wild fertility of imagination, which are too long to enable me to take my readers through them, until at length he is left by the poet in the country of Falfehood arid Charlatanifm, which is inhabited by aftrologcrs, necromancers, and poets. Tims is the hero Baldus dragged through a great number of marvellous accidents, fome of them vulgar, many of them ridiculous, and fome, again, wildly poetical, but all of them prefenting, in one form or other, an opportunity for fatire upon fome of the follies, or vices, or corruptions of his age. The hybrid language in which the whole is written, gives it a fingularly grotefque appearance ; yet from time to time we have paffages which Ihow that the author was capable of writing true poetry, although in Literature and Art. 319 although it is mixed with a great amount of coarfe and licentious ideas, exprelTed no lefs coarfely and licentioudy. What we may term the filth, indeed, forms a large proportion of the Italian macaronic poetry. The pafioral of Zanitonella prefents, as might be expedted, more poetic beauty than the romance of Balbus. As an example of the language of the latter, and indeed of that of the Italian macaronics in general, I give a few lines of a defcription of a ftorm at fea, from the twelfth canto, with a literal tranflation : — Jam gridor aterias hominum concujjit ahijos, Sentlturque ingens cordarum Jlridor, et ipfe Pcntus hahet paniidos niultus, mortijque colores. Nunc Sirochus habet palmam, nunc Barra fuperchiat ; Irrugit pelagus, tangit quoque JiuBibus ajlra, Fulgure jlammigero crebcr lampescat Olympus ; Vela forata micant crebris lacerata balottis ; Horrendam mortem nautis ea cunEla minaoszant . Nunc Jbalzata rath celfum tangebat Olympum^ Nunc Juhit infernam unda Jbadacchiante paludem. TBiVXSLATlON Now the clamour of the men Jhook the ethereal abyffes, And the mighty crajhing of the ropes is felt, and the •very Sea has pale looks, and the hue of death. Now the Sirocco has the palm, now Eurus exults over it ; The fea roars, and touches the fars with its waives, Olympus continually blazes out with faming thunder. The pierced fails glitter torn with frequent thunderbolts ; All thefe threaten frightful death to the Jailors. Now the foip toffed up touched the top of Olympus, Now, the wa've yawning, h finks into the infernal lake. Teofilo Folengo was followed by a number of imitators, of whom it will be futficient to ftate that he Hands in talent as far above his followers as above thofe who preceded him. One of thefe minor Italian macaronic writers, named Bartolommeo Bolla, of Bergamo, who fiourilhed in the latter half of the fixteenth century, had the vanity to call himfelf, in the title of one of his books, “ the Apollo of poets, and the Cocaius of this age but a modern critic has remarked of him that he is as far removed from 320 Hifiory of Caricature a 72 d Grotejque from his mode] Folengo, as his native town Bergamo is diftant from Siberia. An earlier poet, named Guarino Capella, a native of the town of Sarfina, in the country of Forli, on the borders of Tufcany, approached far nearer in excellence to the prince of macaronic writers. His work alfo is a mock romance, the hiftory of “ Cabrinus, king of Gagamagoga,” in fix books or cantos, which was printed at Arimini in 1526, and is now a book of exceffive rarity. The tafle for macaronics patfed rather early, like all other falhions in that age, from Italy into France, where it firfi brought into literary repu- tation a man who, if he had not the great talent of Folengo, poffeflfed a very confiderable amount of wit and gaiety. Antoine de la Sable, who Latinlfed his name into Antonins de Arena, was born of a highly refpedt- able family at Sobers, in the diocefe of Toulon, about the year 1500, and, being deftined from his youth to follow the profellion of the law, ftudied under the celebrated jurifconfult Alciatus. He had only arrived at the fimple dignity of juge, at St. Remy, in the diocefe of Arles, when he died in the year i_544- Iii f^ft, he appears to have been no very diligent ftudent, and we gather from his own confefiions that his youth had been rather wild. The volume containing his macaronics, the fecond edition of which (as far as the editions are known) was printed in 1529, bears a title which will give fome notion of the charafter of its contents, — “ Provencalis de Iragardifflma villa de Soleriis, ad sms compagnones qui funt de perfona friantes, bajfas danfas et Iranlas prafticantes novellas, de guerr a Rornana, Neapolitana, et Genuenji mandat ; una cum epijlola ad falotijfimarn fuam. garfam, Janam Rofceam, pro paffando tempora ” — {i.e. a ProveiiQal of the rnotl fwaggering town of Sobers, fends this to his companions, w’ho are dainty of their perfons, pradtifing bafle dances and new brawls, concern- ing the war of Rome, Naples, and Genoa 5 -with an epiftle to his moll merry wench. Jeanne Rofee, for paftime). In the firfi of thefe poems Arena traces in his burlefque verfe, which is an imitation of Folengo, his own adventures and fufferings in the war in Italy which led to the fackof Rome, in 1527, and in the fubfequent expeditions to Naples and Genoa. From the pifture of the horrors of war, he palfes very wbllingly to defcribe the jo}'ous manners of the fiudents in Provenqal univerfities, of w'hom he tells in Literature and Art. 321 tells us, that they are all fine gallants, and always in love with the pretty girls. Gentigr.lantes Junt omnes injiudiantez^ Et bellas garjas femper amare foUr.t, He goes on to defcnbe tlie fcholars as great quarrellers, as well as lovers of the other fex, and after dwelling on their gaiety and love of the dance, he proceeds to treat in the fame burlefque ftyle on the fubjedf of dancing ; but I pafs over this to fpeak of Arena’s principal piece, the fatirical defcription of the invafion of Provence by the emperor Charles V. in 1536. This curious poem, which is entitled “ Meygra Enterprifa Cato- loqui imperatoris,” and which extends to upwards of two thoufand lines, opens with a laudatory addrefs to the king of France, Franqois I., and with a fneer at the pride of the emperor, who, believing himfelf to be the mafter of the whole world, had foclillily thought to take away France and the cities of Provence from their rightful monarch. It was Antonio de Leyva, the boafter, who had put this projedf into the emperor’s head, and they had already pillaged and ravaged a good part of Provence, and were dividing the plunder! when, haraffed continually by the peafantry, the invaders were brought to a Hand by the difficulty of fublilting in a devaftated country, and by the difeafes to which this difficulty gave rife. Neverthelefs, the Spaniards and their allies committed terrible devafta- tion, which is defcribed by Arena in ftrong language. He commemorates the valiant refinance of his native town of Sobers, which, however, was taken and Packed, and he loft in it his houfe and property. Arles held the imperialifts at bay, while the French, under the conftable Montmo- rency, eftablifhed themfelves firmly at Avignon. At length difeafe gained poifeffion of Antonio de Leyva himfelf, and the emperor, who had been making an unfuccePful demonftration againft Marfeilles, came to him in his ficknefs. The firft lines of the defcription of this interview, will ferve as a fpecimen of the language of the French macaronics : — Sed de Marjella bragganti quando retornat^ Fort male contentuz^ quando r:poljat eum^ Av.ton'ium Lei'am troba*vit forte maladum^ Cut mors terribihs trljie cubile purat. T T L:h\.a 322 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque Ethica torquet eum per coJlaSy ct dolor ingens : Cum male res •vadit^ njinjere fachat eum. Dixerunt mediciy fperanfa eft nulla Jalutis ; Ethicus in tejia 'vi'vere pauca poteji. Ante Juam mortem njoluit parlare per horam Imperelatoriy confiliumque dare. Scisy Ccsjar^ Jiridie nojiri groppantur amores^ Namque duas animas corpus utrumque tenet ^ Heu ! fuge Pronjenjam fortem^ fuge liltus amarum^ Fac tibi non noceat gloria tanta modo. TRAXSLATIOJf. But lAohtn he returns from boafl.ng MarJeilleSy Very ill content^ that jhe had repuljed him^ He found Antonio de Leynja ntery iil^ For %vhom terrible death is preparing a forronjful bed. Hectic fenjer tortures him in the ribs^ and great pain ; Since things are going ill^ he is %veary of life. Before his death he ivijhed to jpeak an hour To the emperor^ and to gi've him counfeL “ You kno'w^ Ceefar^ our affections are clojely hour.d tegether. For either body holds the two fouls^ Alas ! fy Pro'vence the ftrong^ fy the bitter Jhore^ Take care that your great glory pronje not an injury to you.''' Thus Leyva goes on to perfuade the emperor to abandon his enterprife, and then dies. Arena exults over his death, and over the emperor’s grief for his lofs, and then proceeds to deferibe the difatlrous retreat of the imj)erial army, and the glory of France in her king. Antonius de Arena wrote with vigour and humour, but his verfes are tame in comparifon with his model, Folengo. The tafte for macaronic verfe never took ftrong root in France, and the few obfeure writers who attempted to thine in that kind of compofition are now forgotten, except by the laborious bibliographer. One named Jean Germain, wrote a macaronic hiflory of the invafion of Provence by the imperialitls in rivalry of Arenas. I will not follow the tafte for this clafs of burlefque compofi- tion into Spain or Germany, but merely add that it was not adopted in England until the beginning of the feventeenth century, when feveral authors employed it at about the fame time. The moft perfect: example of thefe early Englilh macaronics is the “ Polemo-Middiana,” i.e. battle of the in Literature and Art. 323 the dunghill, by the talented and elegant-minded Drummond of Haw- thornden. We may take a fingle example of the Engliih macaronic from this poem, which will not need an Englilh tranllation. One of the female charafters in the dunghill war, calls, among others, to her aid— Hunc qui dirtiferas terjit cum dijhclouty dijhras^ Hunc qui grudiai jcinjit bene lickere plettas^ Et faltpannifumos^ et ^idebricatoa fipoeros^ Helleeojque etiam faltercs duxit ah antrh^ Coalheughoi nigri girnantes more dinjelli j Lifeguardamque fibi Jauas 'vocat improba lajj'as., L/laggyam magis doElam milkare co'voeas^ Et doLiam Juepare JiouraSy et Jlernere beddasy E^aque no'vit Jpinnarey et longas ducere threddas ; Nanjyamy cla'vet bene qucB keepa'verat omneSy S^uceque lanam cardare folet greajy-jingria Betty. Perhaps before this was written, the eccentric Thomas Coryat had publilbed in the volume of his Crudities, printed in 1611, a fliort piece of verfe, which is perfed in its macaronic tlyle, but in which Italian and other foreign words are introduced, as well as Englilh. The celebrated comedy of “Ignoramus,” compofed by George Ruggle in i6i^, may alfo be mentioned as containing many excellent examples of Englilli macaronics. While Italy was giving birth to macaronic verfe, the fatire upon the ignorance and bigotry of the clergy was taking another form in Germany, which arofe from fome occurrences which it will be necelfary to relate. In the midtl of the violent religious agitation at the beginning of the (ixteenth century in Germany, there lived a German Jew named Pfefter- corn, who embraced Chriflianity, and to Ihow his zeal for his new faith, he obtained from the emperor an edid ordering the Talmud and all the Jewilli writings which were contrary to the ChriEian faith to be burnt. There lived at the fame time a fcholar of diflindion, and ot more liberal views than molt of the fcholaltics of his time, named John Reuchlin. He was a relative of Melandhon, and was fecretary to the palfgrave, who was tolerant like himfelf. The Jews, as might be expeded, were unwilling to give up their books to be burnt, and Reuchlin wrote in their defence, under the alllimed name of Capnion, which is a Hebrew 324 Hiftory oj Caricative and Grotefqiie Hebrew tranflation of his own name of Reuclilin, meaning fmoke, and urged that it was better to refute the books in quellion than to burn them. The converted Pfetfercorn replied in a book entitled Speculum Manuale,” in anfwer to which Reuchlin wrote his “ Speculum Ocu- lare.” The controverfy had already provoked much bigoted ill-feeling againft Reuchlin. The learned debtors of the univertity of Cologne efpoufed the caufe of Pfeftercorn, and the principal of the univertity, named in Latin Ortuinus Gratius, fupported by the Sorbonne in Paris, lent liimfelf to be the violent organ of the intolerant party. Hard pretPed l)y his bigoted opponents, Reuchlin found good allies, but one of the bell of thefe was a brave baron named Ulric von Hutten, of an old and noble family, born in 1488 in the cattle of Staeckelberg, in Franconia. He had tludied in the fchools at Fulda, Cologne, and Frankfort on the Oder, and diltinguillied himfelf fo much as a fcholar, that he obtained the degree of Mafler of Arts before the ufual age. But Ulric polFelfed an adventurous and chivalrous fpirit, which led him to embrace the profetlion of a foldier, and he ferved in the wars in Italy, where he was ditlinguitlied by his bravery. He was at Rome in 1516, and defended Reuchlin againtt the Dominicans. The fame year appeared the firft edition of that marvellous book, the “ Epistolae Oblcurorum Virorum,” one of the mod remarkable fatires that the world has yet feen. It is believed that this book came entirely from the pen of Ulric von Hutten j and the notion that Reuchlin himfelf, or any others of his friends, had a thare in it appears to be without foundation. Ulric was in the following year made poet-laureat. Neverthelefs, this book greatly incenfed the monks againtt him, and he was often threatened with atlatlination. Yet he boldly advocated the caufe and embraced the opinions of Luther, and was one of the ttaunch fup- porters of Lutheranifm. After a very turbulent life, Ulric von Hutten died in the Auguil of the year 1523. The “ Epittolae Obfeurorum Virorum,” or letters of obfeure men, are fuppofed to be addreffed to Ortuinus Gratius, mentioned above, by various individuals, fome his fcholars, others his friends, but all belonging to the bigoted party oppofed to Reuchlin, and they were detigned to throw ridicule on the ignorance, bigotry, and immorality of the clergy of the Romilh in Literature and Art. 325 Romilli church. The old fcholaftic learning had become debafed into a heavy and barbaroas fyftem of theology, literary compofition confilled in writing a no lefs barbarous Latin, and even the few clallical writers who were admitted into the fchools, were explained and commented upon in a tlrange half-theological falhion. Thefe old fcholaftics were bitterly oppofed to the new learning, which had taken root in Italy, and was fpreading abroad, and they fpoke contemptuoully of it as “ fecular.” The letters of the obfcure individuals relate chiefly to the difpute between Reuchlin and Pfeffercorn, to the rivalry between the old fcholarflhp and the new, and to the low licentious lives of the theologills; and they are written in a ftyle of Latin which is intended for a parody on that of the latter, and which clofely refembles that which we call “ dog-Latin.”* They are full of wit and humour of the moft exquifite defcription, but they too often defcend into details, treated in terms which can only be excufed by the coarfe and licentious charafter of the age. The literary and fcientific queflions difcufled in thefe letters are often very droll. The firll in order of the correfpondents of Ortuinus Gratius, who boafls of the rather formidable name, Thomas Langfchneiderius, and addrelTes matter Ortuinus as “poet, orator, philofopher, and theologift, and more if he would,” propounds to him a difficult queflion : — “ There was here one day an Aristotelian dinner, and doctors, licenciates, and masters too, were very jovial, and I was there too, and we drank at the first course three draughts of Malmsey, . . . and then we had six dishes of flesh and chickens and capons, and one of fish, and as we passed from one dish to another, we continually drunk wine of Kotzburg and the Rhine, and ale of Embeck, and Thurgen, and Neuburg. And the masters were well satisfied, and said that the new masters had acquitted themselves well and with great honour. Then the masters in their hilarity began to talk learnedly on great questions, and one asked whether it were correct * This style differs entirely from the macaronic. It consists merely in using the words of the Latin language with the forms and construction of the vulgar tongue, as illustrated by the directions of the professor who, lecturing in the schools, was interrupted by the entrance of a dog, and shouted out to the doorkeeper, Verte canem ex, meaning thereby that he should “ turn the dog out.” It was perhaps from this, or some similar occurrence, that this barbarous Latin gained the name of dog-Latin. The French call it Latin de cuifine. 326 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque correct to say magijler nojlrandus, or nojier magiflrandus, for a person fit to be made doctor in theology. . . . And immediately Master Warmsemmel, who is a subtle Scotist, and has been master eighteen years, and was in his time twice rejected and thrice delayed for the degree of master, and he went on offering himself, until he was pro- moted for the honour of the university, . . . spoke, and held that we should say nofier magiftrandm. , . . Then Master Andreas Delitsch, who is very subtle, and half poet, half artist (i.e. one who professed in the faculty of arts), physician, and jurist; and now he reads ordinarily ‘ Ovid on the Metamorphoses,’ and expounds all the fables allegorically and literally, and I was his hearer, because he expounds very fundamentally, and he also reads at home Quintillian and Juvencus, and he held the opposite to Master Warmsemmel, and said that we ought to say magtfler nofirandus. For as there is a difference between magifter nofier and nofier magifier^ so also there is a difference between magifier nofirandus and nofier magifirandus ; for a doctor in theology is called magifier nofier^ and it is one word, but nofier magifier are two words, and it is taken for any master; and he quoted Horace in support of this. Then the masters much admired his subtlety, and one drank to him a cup of Neu- burg ale. And he said, ‘ I will wait, but spare me,’ and touched his hat, and laughed heartily, and drank to Ma.ster Warmsemmel, and said, ‘ There, master, don’t think I am an enemy,’ and he drank it off at one draught, and Master Warm- semmel replied to him with a strong draught. And the masters were all merry till the bell rang for Vespers.” Mailer Ortuin is prelTed for his judgment on this weighty quellion. A limilar feene deferibed in another letter ends lefs peacefully. The cor- refpondent on this occafion is Magifter Bornharddus Plumilegus, who addreftes Ortuinus Gratius as follows ; — “ Wretched is the mouse which has only one hole for a refuge ! So also I may say of myself, most venerable sir, for I should be poor if I had only one friend, and when that one should fail me, then I should not have another to treat me with kind- ness. As is the case now with a certain poet here, who is called George Sibutus, and he is one of the secular poets, and reads publicly in poetry, and is in other respects a good fellow {bonus Jocius'), But as you know these poets, when they are not theologists like you, will always reprehend others, and despise the theologists. And once in a drinking party in his house, when we were drinking Thurgen ale, and sat until the hour of tierce, and I was moderately drunk, because that ale rose into my head, then there was one who was not before friendly with me, and I drank to him half a cup, and he accepted it. But afterwards he would not return the compliment. And thrice I cautioned him, and he would not reply, but sat in silence and said nothing. Then I thought to myself. Behold this man treats thee with contempt, and is proud, and always wants to confound you. And I was stirred in my anger, and took the cup, and threw it at his head. Then that poet was angry at me, and said that I had caused a disturbance in his house, and said I should go out of his house in the dcvir.s name. Then I replied, ‘What matter is it if you are my enemy } in Literature and Art. 327 enemy ? 1 have had as bad enemies as you, and yet I have stood in spite of them. What matters it if you are a poet.? I have other poets who are my friends, and they are quite as good as you, ego bene merdarem in veftram poetriam ! Do you think I am a fool, or that I was born under a tree like apples .?’ Then he called me an ass, and said that I never saw a poet. And I said, ‘You arc an ass in your skin, I have seen many more poets than you.’ And I spoke of you. . . . Wherefore I ask you very earnestly to write me one piece of verse, and then I will show it to this poet and others, and I will boast that you are my friend, and you are a much better poet than he.” The war againft the lecular poets, or advocates of the new learning, is kept up with fpirit through this ludicrous correlpondence. One corre- fpondent preffes Ortuinus Gratius to “write to me whether it be necelTary for eternal falvation that fchclars learn grammar from the fecular poets, fuch as Virgil, Tullius, Pliny, and others j for,” he adds, “ it teems to me that this is not a good method of fludying.” “As I have often written to 3 'ou,” fays another, “ I am grieved that this ribaldry {ijia rihaldria), namely, the faculty of poetry, becomes common, and is fpread through all provinces and regions. In my time there was only one poet, who was called Samuel; and now, in this city alone, there are at lead, twenty, and they vex us all who hold with the ancients. Lately 1 thoroughly defeated one, who laid that fcholaris does not lignify a perfon who goes to the fchool for the purpofe of learning ; and I laid, ‘ Als I will you corredt the holy dodtor who expounded this word ? The new learning was, of courfe, identified with ihe fupporters of Reuchlin. “ It is laid here,” continues the fame correfpondent, “ that all the poets will fide with dodlor Reuchlin againft the theologians. I with all the poets were in the place where pepper grows, that they might let us go in peace ! ” Mailer William Lamp, “mailer of arts,” fends to Mailer Ortuinus Gratius, a narrative of his adventures in a journey from Cologne to Rome. Firft he went to Mayence, where his indignation was moved by the open manner in which people fpoke in favour of Reuchlin, and when he hazarded a contrary opinion, he was only laughed at, but he held his tongue, becaufe his opponents all carried arms and looked fierce. “ One of them is a count, and is a long man, and has white hair; and they fay that he takes a man in armour in his hand, and throws him to the ground, and 328 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque and he has a fword as long as a giant; when I law him, then I held my tongue.” At Worms, he found things no better, for the “dodtors” fpoke bitterly againft the theologians, and when he attempted to expoftulate, he got foul words as well as threats, a learned doftor in medicine affirming “ quod, merdaret fuper nos ormies." On leaving Worms, Lamp and his companion, another theologift, fell in with plunderers who made them pay two florins to drink, “ and I laid occulte, Drink what may the devil blefs to you!” Subfequently they fell into low amours at country inns, which are defcribed coarfely, and then they reached Infprucken, where they found the emperor, and his court and army, with whole manners and proceedings Magifter Lamp became forely difgulled. I pals over other adventures till they reach Mantua, the birthplace of Virgil, and of a late mediaeval Latin poet, named from it Baptifta Mantuanus. Lamp, in his hoftile fpirit towards the “ fecular poets,” proceeds, — “ And my companion faid, ' Here Virgil was born.’ I replied, ‘What do I care for that pagan ? We will go to the Carmelites, and fee Baptifta Mantuanus, who is twice as good as Virgil, as I have heard full ten times from Ortuinus ; ’ and I told him how you once reprehended Donatus, when he fays, ‘Virgil was the moft learned of poets, and the heft and you faid, ‘ If Donatus were here, I would tell him to his face that he lies, for Baptifta Mantuanus is above Virgil.’ And when we came to the monaftery of the Carmelites, we were told that Baptifta Mantuanus was dead ; then I faid, ‘ May he reft in peace !’” They continued their journey by Bologna, where they found the inquilitor Jacob de Hochftraten, and Florence, to Siena. “After this there are fmall towns, and one is called Monte-flafcon, where we drunk excellent wine, fuch as I never drank in my life. And I allied the hoft what that wine is called, and he replied that it is lachryma Chrifti. Then faid my companion, ‘1 with Chrift would cry in our country!’ And fo we drank a good bout, and two days after we entered Rome.” In the courfe of thefe letters the theologifts, the poets efpecially, the charadler of the clergy, and particularly Reuchlin and Pfeftercorn, afford continual fubjedls for difpute and pleafantry. The laft mentioned indivi- dual, in the opinion ot fome, had merited hanging for theft, and it was pretended that the Jews had expelled him from their fbciety for his wicked Literature and in Art. 329 wicked courfes. One argued that all Jews dink, and as it was well known that Pfefl'ercorn continued to dink like a Jew, it was quite evident that he could not be a good Chridian. Some of Ortuinus’s correfpondents confult him on difficult theological quedions. Here is an example in a letter from one Henricus Schadiuulius, another of his fcholars who had made the journey to Rome : — “ Since, before I journeyed to the Court, you said to me that I am to write often to you, and that sometimes I am to send you any theological questions, which you will solve for me better than the courtiers of Rome, therefore now I ask your mastership what you hold as to the case when any one on a Friday, or any other fast day, eats an egg, and there is a chicken inside. Because the other day we sat in a tavern in the Campo-flore, and made a collation, and eat eggs, and I, opening an egg, saw that there was a young chicken in it, which I showed to my companion, and then he said, ‘ Eat it quickly before the host sees it, for if he sees it, then you will be obliged to give a carlino or a julio for a hen, because it is the custom here that, when the host places anything on the table, you must pay for it, for they will not take it back. And when he sees there is a young hen in the egg, he will say. Pay me for the hen, because he reckons a small one the same as a large one.’ And I immediately sucked up the egg, and with it the chicken, and afterwards I bethought me that it was Friday, and I said to my companion. ‘ You have caused me to com- mit a mortal sin, in eating flesh on Friday.’ And he said that it is not a mortal sin, nor even a venial sin, because that embryo of a chicken is not reckoned other than an egg till it is born ; and he told me that it is as in cheeses, in which there are sometimes worms, and in cherries, and fresh peas and beans, yet they are eaten on Fridays, and also in the vigils of the apostles. But the hosts are such rogues, that they say that they are flesh, that they may have more money. Then I went away, and thought about it. And, fer Deumt Magister Ortuinus, I am much troubled, and I know not how’ I ought to rule myself. If I went to ask advice of a courtier [of the papal court], I know' that they have not good consciences. It seems to me that these young hens in the eggs are flesh, because the matter is already formed and figured in members and bodies of an animal, and it has life ; it is other- wise wifh worms in cheeses and other things, because worms are reputed for fishes, as I have heard from a physician, who is a very good naturalist. Therefore I ask you very earnestly, that you will give me your reply on this question. Because if you hold that it is a mortal sin, then I will purchase an absolution here, before I return to Germany. Also you must know that our master Jacobus de Hochstraten has obtained a thousand florins from the bank, and I think that with these he will gain his cause, and the devil confound that John Reuchlin, and the other poets and jurists, because they will be against the church of God, that is, against the theologists, in whom is founded the church, as Christ said : Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. And so I commend you to the Lord God. Fare- well. Given from the city of Rome.” While in Italy macaronic literature was reaching itsgreatell perfedion, u u there 330 Hijlory of Ca?^icature and Grotefqiie there arofe in the very centre of France a man of great original genius, who was foot! to attonitli the world by a new form of fatire, more grotefcjne and more comprehenfive than anything that had been feen before. Teofilo Folengo may fairly be conlidered as the precurfor ot Rabelais, who appears to have taken the Italian faririll as his model. What we know of the life of Franjois Rabelais is rather obfcure at bell, and is in fome parts no doubt fabulous. He was born at Chinon in Touraine, either in 1483 or in 1487, for this feems to be a difputed point, and fome doubt has been thrown on the trade or profeflion of his father, but the moll generally received opinion is that he was an apothecary. He is faid to have fliown from his youth a difpofition more inclined to gaiety than to ferious purfuits, yet at an early age he had made great proficiency in learning, and is faid to hav'e acquired a very fufficient knowledge of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, two of which, at leafl, were not popular among the popilh clergy, and not only of the modern lan- guages and literature of Italy, Germany, and Spain, but even of Arabic. Probably this ellimate of his acquirements in learning is rather exaggerated. It is not quite clear where the young Rabelais gained all this knowledge, for he is faid to have been educated in convents and among monks, and to have become at a rather early age a Francifcan friar in the convent of Fontenai-le-Compte, in Lower Poitou, where he became an objedt of jealoufy and ill-feeling to the other friars by his fuperior acquirements. It was a tradition, at lead, that the condudtof Rabelais was not very dridlly conventual, and that he had fo far fliown his contempt for monadic rule, and for the bigotry of the Romiih church, that he was condemned to the jirifon of his monadery, upon a diet of bread and water, which, according to common report, was very uncongenial with the tades of this jovial friar. Out of this didiculty he is faid to have been helped by bis friend the bilhop of Maillezais, who obtained for him the pope’s licence to change the order of St. Francis for the much more eafy and liberal order of St. Benedict, and he became a member of the bifliop’s own chapter in the abbey of IMaillezais. His undeady temper, however, was not long fatisded with this retreat, which he left, and, laying afide the regular habit, alfumed that of a fecular pried. In this charadfer he wandered for fome in Literature and Art. 331 fome timCj and then fettled at Montpellier, where he took a degree as dodor in medicine, and pradiled for fome time with credit. There he publilhed in 1532 a tranflation of fome works of Hippocrates and Galen, which he dedicated to his friend the bilhop of Maillezais. Th’e circum- hances under which he left Montpellier are not known, but he is fup- pofed to have gone to Paris upon fome bufinefs of the univerfity, and to have remained there. He found there a haunch friend in Jean de Bellay, bilhop of Paris, who foon afterwards was raifed to the rank ot cardinal. When the cardinal de Bellay went as ambalTador to Rome from the court of France, Rabelais accompanied him, it is faid in the charader of his private medical advifer, but during his hay in the metropolis of Chrihendom, as Chrihendom was underhood in thole days by the Romilh church, Rabelais obtained, on the 17th of January, 1536, the papal abfolution for all his tranlgrclhons, and licence to return to Maillezais, and pradife medicine there and elfewhere as an ad of charity. Thus he became again a Benedidine monk. He, however, changed again, and became a fecular canon, and hnally fettled down as the cure of Meudon, near Paris, with which he alfo held a fair number of eccleh- ahical benehces. Rabelais died in 1553, according to fome in a very religious manner, but others have given hrange accounts of his lah moments, reprefenting that, even when dying, he converfed in the fame fpirit of mockery, not only of Romilh forms and ceremonies, but of all religions whatever, which was afcribed to him during his life, and which are but too openly manifefted in the extraordinary fatirical romance which has given fo much celebrity to his name. During the greater part of his life, Rabelais was expofed to troubles and perfecutions. Pie was laved from the intrigues of the monks by the friendly influence of popes and cardinals 5 and the favour of two fucceflive kings, Francois I. and Henri II., proteded him againft the ftill more dangerous hollility of the Sorbonne and the parliament of Paris. This high protedion has been advanced as a reafon for rcjeding the anecdotes and accounts which have been commonly received relating to the per- fonal charader of Rabelais, and his irregularities mSy pollibly have been exaggerated by the hatred which he had drawn upon himfelf by his writings. 332 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque writings. But nobody, I think, who knows the charadler of fociety at that time, who compares what we know of the lives of the other fatirifts, and who has read the hiftory of Gargantna and Pantagruel, will confider fuch an argument of much weight againft the deliberate ftatements of thofe who were his contemporaries, or be inclined to doubt that the writer of this hidory was a man of jovial charadter, who loved a good bottle and a broad joke, and perhaps other things that were equally objedtionable. His books prefent a fort of wild riotous orgy, without much order or plan, except the mere outline of the ftory, in which is dif- played an extraordinary extent of reading in all clalTes of literature, from the moll: learned to the molf popular, with a wonderful command of lan- guage, great imagination, and fome poetry, intermixed with a per- haps larger amount of downright obfcene ribaldry, than can be found in the macaronics of Folengo, in the “Epiftolae Obfcurorum Virorum,” or in the woi-ks of any of the other fatirifts who had preceded him, or were his contemporaries. It is a broad caricature, poor enough in its ftory, but enriched with details, which are brilliant with imagery, though generally coarfe, and which are made the occafions for turning to ridicule everything that exifted. The five books of this romance were publilhed feparately and at different periods, apparently without any fixed intention of con- tinuing them. The earlier editions of the firft part were publilhed without date, but the earlielt editions with dates belong to the year 153^, when it was feveral times reprinted. It appeared as the life of Gar- gantua. This hero is fuppofed to have flourilhed in the firft half of the fifteenth century, and to have been the fon of Grandgoufier, king of Utopia, a country which lay fomewhere in the diredtion of Chinon, a prince of an ancient dynafty, but a jovial fellow, who loved good eating and drinking better than anything elfe. Grandgoufier married Garga- melle, daughter of the king of the Parpaillos, who became the mother of Gargantua. The firft chapters relate rather minutely how the child was born, and came out at its mother’s ear, why it was called Gargantua, how it was drelfed and treated in infancy, what were its amufements and difpofition, and how Gargantua was put to learning under the fophifts, and made no progrefs. Thereupon Grandgoufier fent his fon to Paris, to feek in Literature and Art. 333 feek inflru6tioii there, and he proceeds thither mounted on an imme.nfe mare, which had been fent as a prefent by the king of Numidia — it muft be borne in mind that the royal race of Utopia were all giants. At Paris the populace alfembled tumultuoully to gratify their curiofity in looking at this new fcholar ; but Gargantua, belides treating them in a very contemptuous manner, carried olf the great bells of Notre Dame to fufpend at the neck of his mare. Great was the indignation caufed by this theft. “ All the city was rifen up in fedition, they being, as you know, upon any flight occalions, fo ready to uproars and infurredions, that foreign nations wonder at the patience of the kings of France, who do not by good jullice reftrain them from fuch tumultuous courfes.” The citizens take counfel, and refolve on fending one of the great orators of the univerfity, Mafter Janotus de Bragmardo, to expoftulate with Gargantua, and obtain the relloration of the bells. The fpeech which this worthy addrefles to Gargantua, in fulfilment of his million, is an amufing parody on the pedantic ftyle of Parifian oratory. The bells, however, are re- covered, and Gargantua, under Ikilful inllrudors, purfues his ftudies with credit, until he is fuddenly called home by a letter from his father. In fad, Grandgoufier was fuddenly involved in a war with his neighbour Picrocole, king of Lerne, caufed by a quarrel about cakes between fome cake-makers of Lerne and Grandgoufier’s Ihepherds, in confequence of which Picrocole had invaded the dominions of Grandgoufier, and was plundering and ravaging them. His warlike humour is ftirred up by the counfels of his three lieutenants, who perfuade him that he is going to become a great conqueror, and that they will make him mafter of the whole world. It is not difticult to fee, in the circumftances of the time, the general aim of the fatire contained in the hiftory of this war. It ends in the entire defeat and difappearance of king Picrocole. A fenfual and jovial monk namc'd brother Jean des Entommeurs, who has firft diftin- guilhed himfelf by his prowefs and ftrength in defending his own abbey againft the invaders, contributes largely to the viblory gained by Gargantua againft his father’s enemies, and Gargantua rewards him by founding for him that pleafant abbey of 'I'heleme, a grand eftablilhment, ftored with everything which could contribute to terreftrial happinefs, from which all 334 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotejque all hypocrites and bigots were to be excluded, and the rule of which was comprifed in the four fimple words, “ Do as you like.” Such is the hillory of Gargantua, which was afterwards formed by Rabelais into the tirft book of his great comic romance. It was pub- liflied anonymoully, the author merely defcribing himfelf as “ I’abftrafteur de quinte ellence ; ” but he afterwards adopted the pfeudonyme oi Alcofribas Nalier, which is merely an anagram of his own name, Francois Rabelais. A very improbable ftory has been handed down to us relating to this book. It is pretended that, having publiflied a book of medical fcience which had no fale, and the publillrer complaining that he had loti money by it, Rabelais promifed to make amends for his lofs, and immediately wrote the hittory of Gargantua, by which the fame book- feller made his fortune. There can be no doubt that this remarkable fatire had a deeper origin than any cafual accident like this; but it was exadtly fuited to the tafte and temper of the age. It was quite original in its form and tlyle, and it met with immediate and great fuccefs. Numerous editions followed each other rapidly, and its author, encouraged by its popularity, very foon afterwards produced a fecond romance, in continuation, to which he gave the title of Pantagruel. The caricature in this fecond romance is bolder even than in the firft, the humour broader, and the frtire more pungent. Grandgoufier has difappeared from the fcene, and his fon, Gargantua, is king, and has a fon named Pantagruel, wdiofe kingdom is that of the Dipfodes. The firtl part of this new romance is occupied chiefly wdth PantagruePs youth and education, and is a fatire on the univerfity and on the lawyers, in which the parodies on their ftyle of pleading as then pradlifed is admirable. In the latter part, Pantagruel, like his father Gargantua, is engaged in great w'ars. It w'as perhaps the continued fuccefs of this new produdlion of his pen wdiich led Rabelais to go on with it, and form the defign of making thefe tw'o books part only of a more extenfive romance. During his ftudies in Paris, Pantagruel has made the acquaintance of a Angular individual named Panurge, who becomes his attached friend and conftant companion, holding fomewhat the pofition of brother Jean in the firli book, but far more crafty and verfatile. The whole flabjeft of the third book in Literature and Art. 335 book arifes out of Panfagreul’s defire to marry, and its various amuling epifodes defcribe the ditferent expedients which, at the fuggefiion of Panurge, he adopts to arrive at a folution of the queftion whether his marriage would be fortunate or not. In publilhing his fourth book, Rabelais complains that his writings had railed him enemies, and that he was accufed of having at leall written hereiy. In fa6I, he had bitterly provoked both the monks and the univerfity and parliament; and, as the increafing readlion of P..omanifm in France gave more power of perfecution to the two latter, he was not writing without fome degree of danger, yet the fatire of each fucceffive book became bolder and more direft. The fifth, which was left unfinifhed at his death, and which was publilhed potihumoully, was the motl fevere of them all. The charadfer of Gargantua, indeed, was almotl forgotten in that of Pan- tagruel, and Pantagruelifm became an accepted name for the fort of gay, recklets fatire of which he was looked upon as the model. He deferibed it hioifelt as a certaine gaiete d efprit cciifite en mepris des chafes forluites, in fa£t, neither Romanifm nor Protetlantifm, but limply a jovial kind of Epicurianifm. All the gay wits of the time afpired to be Plantagrueliffs, and the remainder of the fixteenth century abounded in wretched imita- tions of the ftyle of Rabelais, which are now configned as mere rarities to the fhelves of the bihliophililt. Among the dangers which began to threaten them in France in the earlier part of the fixteenth century, liberal opinions found an afylum at the court of a princefs who was equally ditlinguithed by her beauty, by her talents and noble fentiments, and by her accomplilhments. Mar- guerite d’Angouleme, queen of Navarre, was the only tiller of Franfols I., who was her junior by two years, and was afl'ettionately attached to her. She was born on the nth of April, 1492. She had married, firll, that unfortunate duke d’Alengon, whofe mifcondu6l at Pavia was the caufe ol the difaflrous defeat of the French, and the captivity of their king. The duke died, it was faid of grief at his misfortune, in 1525 ; and two years afterwards, on the 24th of Jatiuary, 1527, fhe married Henri d’Albret, king of Navarre. I'heir daughter, Jeanne d'Albret, carried this petty royalty to the houfe of Bourbon, and was the mother of Henri IV. Marguerite 336 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque Marguerite held her court in true princely manner in the caflle of Pan or at Nerac, and die loved to furround herfelf with a circle of men remarkable for their charafter and talents, and ladies diflinguiflied by beauty and accomplifliments, which made it rival in brilliance even that of her brother Franpois. She placed neareft to her perfon, under the charafter of her valets-de-chamhre, the principal poets and beaux-ef[)rits of her time, fuch as Clement Marot, Bonaventure des Periers, Claude Gruget, Antoine du Moulin, and Jean de la Haye, and admitted them to Inch a tender familiarity of intercourfe, as to excite the jealoufy of the king her hufband, from whole ill-treatment Ihe was only protedled by her brother’s interference. The poets called her chamber a “veritable Parnaflus.” Hers was certainly a great mind, greedy of knowledge, dilfatisfied with what was, and eager for novelties, and therefore die encouraged all who fought for them. It was in this fpirit, combined with her earned love for letters, that Ihe threw her proteftion over both the fceptics and the religious reformers. At the beginning of the perfecutions, as early as 1523, die openly declared herfelf the advocate of the Protedants. When Clement Marot was arrefted by order of the Sorbonne and the Inquidtor on the charge of having eaten bacon in Lent, Marguerite caufed him to be liberated from prifon, in defiance of his perfecutors. Some of the pured and ableft of the early French reformers, fuch as Roudel and Le Fevre d’Etaples, and Calvin himfelf, found a fafe afylum from danger in her dominions. As might be fuppofed, the bigoted party were bitterly incenfed againd the queen of Navarre, and were not backward in taking advantage of an opportunity for Ihowing it. A moral treatife, entitled “ Le Miroir de I’Ame PecherelTe,” of which Marguerite was the author, was condemned by the Sorbonne in 1533, but the king compelled the univerfity, in the perfon of its re6Ior, Nicolas Cop, to difavow publicly the cenfure. This was followed by a dill greater a6t of infolence, for, at the indigation of fome of the more bigoted papids, the fcholars of the college of Navarre, in concert with their regents, performed a farce in which Marguerite was transformed into a fury of hell. Franpois L, greatly indignant, fent his a.rchers to arred the od’enders, who further provoked his anger by refidance in Literature and Art. 337 refiftance, and only obtained their pardon through the generous inter- celfion of the princefs whom they had fo groffly intuited. Marguerite was herfelf a poetefs, and die loved above all things thofe gay, and feldom very delicate, dories, the telling of which was at that time one of the favourite amufements of the evening, and one in which Ihe was known to excel. Her poetical writings were collefted and printed, under her own authority, in 1547, by her then valet- de-chamlre, Jean de la Haye, who dedicated the volume to her daughter. They are all graceful, and tome of them worthy of the bed poets of her time. The title of this colleftion was, punning upon her name, which means a peail, “ Marguerites de la Marguerite des princelfes, tres illudre reyne de Navarre.” Marguerite’s dories (?iouvelles) w^ere more celebrated than her verfes, and are faid to have been committed to writing under her own didation. All the ladies of her court podeded copies of them in writing. It is underdood to have been her intention to form them into ten days’ tales, of ten in each day, fo as to refemble the “Decameron ” of Boccaccio, but only eight days were dnitlied at the time of her death, and the imperfed work was publilhed podhumoudy by her valet-de- chamhre, Claude Gruget, under the title of “ L’Heptameron, ou Hidoire des Amants Fortunes.” It is by far the bed colledion of dories of the dxteenth century. They are told charmingly, in language which is a perfed model of French compodtion of that age, but they are all tales of gallantry fuch as could only be repeated in polite fociety in an age which was edentially licentious. Queen Marguerite died on the 2 id of December, 1549, and was buried in the cathedral of Pau. Her death was a fubjed of regret to all that was good and all that was poetic, not only in France, but in Europe, which had been accudomcd to look upon her as the tentli Mufe and the fourth Grace : — Mujarum decirr.a et Charitum quarta.^ inclyta regum Et foror et conjux^ Marguaris ilia jacet. Before Marguerite’s death, her literary circle had been broken up by the hatred of religious perfecutors. Already, m 1536, the imprudent boldnets of Marot had rendered it impodible to proted him any longer, X X and Htjiory of Caricature a?id Grotefque and he had been obliged to retire to a place of concealment, from whence he fometimes paid a ftealthy vifit to her court. His place of valet-de-chamlre was given to a man of talents, even more remarkable, and who lhared equally the perfonal elteem of the queen of Navarre, Bonaventure des Periers. Marot’s fuccelfor paid a graceful compliment to him in a Ihort poem entitled “ L’Apologie de Marot abfent,” publilhed in 1537. The earlier part of the year following witneffed the publication of the inofl remarkable work of Bonaventure des Periers, the “ Cymbalum Mundi,” concerning the real charafter of which writers are dill divided in opinion. In it Des Periers introduced a new form of fatire, imitated from the dialogues of Lucian. The book confifts of four dialogues, written in language wdiich forms a model of French compo- fition, the perfonagas introduced in them intended evidently to reprefent living charafters, whofe names are concealed in anagrams and other devices, among whom was Clement Marot. It was the bolded declara- tion of fcepticifm which had yet ilfued from the Epicurean fchool repre- fented by Rabelais. The author fneers at the Romidi church as an impodure, ridicules the Protedants as feekers after the philofopher’s done, and d’ows difrefpedl to Chridianity itfelf. Such a book could hardly be publidied in Paris with impunity, yet it was printed there, fecretly, it is faid, by a well-known bookfeller, Jean Morin, in the Rue St. Jacques, and therefore in the immediate vicinity of the perfecuting Sorbonne. Private information had been given of the charadter of this work, podibly by the printer himfelf or by one of his men, and on the 6th of March, 1538, when it was on the eve of publication, the whole impredion was feized at the printer's, and Morin himfelf was arreded and thrown into prifon. He w'as treated rigoroudy, and is underdood to have efcaped only by difavowing all knowledge of the charafter of the book, and giving up the name of the author. The drd edition of the “ Cymbalum Mundi ” was burnt, and Bonaventure des Periers, alarmed by the perfonal dangers in which he was thus involved, retired from the court of the queen of Navarre, and took refuge in the city of Lyons, where liberal opinions at that time found a greater degree of tolerance tlian elfewhere. There he printed a fecond edition of the “ Cymbalum Mundi,” which alfo in Literature and Art. 339 alfo was burnt, and copies of either edition are now exceffively rare.* Bonaventure des Periers felt fo much the weight of the perfecution in which he had now involved himfelf, that, in the year i539> 3® 3s can be afcertained, he put an end to his own exiftence. This event call a gloom over the court of the queen of Navarre, from which it feems never to have entirely recovered. The fchool of fcepticifm to which Des Periers belonged had now fallen into equal difcredit with Catholics and Proteflants, and the latter looked upon Marguerite herfelf, who had latterly conformed outwardly with Romanifm, as an apollate from their caufe. Henri Eflienne, in his “ Apologie pour Herodote,” fpeaks of the “ Cymbalum Mundi ” as an infamous book. Bonaventure des Periers left behind him another work more amullng to us at the prefent day, and more charafteriftic of the literary tafles of the court of Marguerite of Navarre. This is a colledlion of facetious ftories, which w.as publiflied feveral years after the death of its author, under the title of “ Les Contes, ou Les Nouvelles Recreations et Joyeux Devis de Bonaventure des Periers.” They have fome refemblance in ftyle to the llories of the Heptameron, but are Ihorter, and rather more facetious, and are charafterifed by their bitter fpirit of fatire againli the monks and popilh clergy. Some of thefe dories remind us, in their peculiar charadter and tone, of the “ Epidolae Obfeurorum Virorum,” as, for an example, the following, which is given as an anecdote of the cure de Brou : — “ This cure had a way ot his own to chant the different offices of the church, and above all he disliked the way of saying the Passion in the manner it was ordi- narily said in churches, and he chanted it quite differently. For when our Lord said anything to the Jews, or to Pilate, he made him talk high and loud, so that everybody could hear him, and when it was the Jews or somebody else who spoke, he spoke so low that he could hardly be heard at all. It happened that a lady ot rank and importance, on her way to Cliateaudun, to keep there the festival of Easter, passed through Brou on Good Friday, about ten o’clock in the morning, and, * A cheap and convenient edition of the “Cymbalum Mundi,” edited by the Bibliophile Jacob (Paul Lacroix), was published in Paris in 1841. I may here state that similar editions ot the principal French satirists of the sixteenth century have been printed during the last twenty- five years. 340 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque and, wishing to hear service, she went to the church where the cure was officiating. When it came to the Passion, he said it in his own manner, and made the whole church ring again when he said Cluem quterith ? But when it came to the reply, Jefum Na^arenum, he spoke as low as he possibly could. And in this manner he continued the Passion. The lady, who was very devout, and, for a woman, well intormed in the holy scriptures, and attentive to the ecclesiastical ceremonies, felt scandalised at this mode of chanting, and wished she had never entered the church. She had a mind to speak to the cure, and tell him what she thought of it; and for this purpose sent for him to come to her after the service. When he came, she said to him,' Monsieur le Cure, I don’t know where you learnt to officiate on a day like this, when the people ought to be all humility ; but to hear you perform the service, is enough to drive away anybody’s devotion.’ ‘ How so, madame.?’ said the cure. ‘ How so.?’ said she, ‘ you have said a Passion contrary to all rules of decency. When our Lord speaks, you cry as if you were in the town-hall ; and when it is a Caiaphas, or Pilate, or the Jews, you speak softly like a young bride. Is this becoming in one like you ? are you fit to be a cure.? If you had what you deserve, you would be turned out of your benefice, and then you would be made to know your fault ! ’ When the cure had very attentively listened to her, he said, ‘ Is this what you had to say to me, madame .? By my soul ! it is very true, what they say; and the truth is, that there are many people who talk of things which they do not understand. Madame, I believe that I know my office as well as another, and I beg all the world to know that God is as well served in this parish, according to its condition, as in any place within a hundred leagues of it. I know very well that the other cures chant the Passion quite differently; I could easily chant it like them it I would ; but they do not understand their business at all. I should like to know if it becomes those rogues of Jews to speak as loud as our Lord ! No, no, madame ; rest assured that in my parish it is my will that God be the master, and He shall be as long as I live ; and let the others do in their parishes according to their understanding.’” Another ftory, equally worthy of Ulric von Hutten, is fatirical enough on prieffly pedantry : — “ There was a priest of a village who was as proud as might be, because he had seen a little more than his Cato ; for he had read De Syntaxi, and his Faujie precor gelida [the first eclogue of Baptista Mantuanus]. And thi,s made him set up his feathers, and talk very grand, using words that filled his mouth, in order to make people think him a great doctor. Even at confession, he made use of terms which astonished the poor people. One day he was confessing a poor working man, of whom he asked, ‘Here, now’, my friend, tell me, art thou ambitious?’ The poor man said ‘ No,’ thinking this was a word which belonged to great lords, and almost lepented of having come to confess to this priest ; for he had already heard that he was such a great clerk, and that he spoke so grandly, that nobody understood him, which he now knew by this word ; for although he might have heard it somewhere, yet he did not know at all what it w’as. The priest went on to ask, ‘ Art thou not a fornicator .?’ ‘ No,’ said the labourer, who understood as little as before. in Literature and Art. 341 before. ‘Art thou not a gourmand?’ said the priest. ‘No.’ ‘Art thou not superbe [/>rW] ?’ ‘No.’ ‘Art thou not iracund ?’ ‘No.’ The priest seeing the man answer always ‘No,’ was somewhat surprised. ‘ Artthou not concupiscent?’ ‘ No.’ ‘ And what art thou, then ?’ said the priest. ‘ I am,’ said he, ‘a mason ; here is my trowel ! ’ ” At this time “ Pantagruelifm ” had mixed itfelf more or lets largely in all the fatirical literature of France. It is very apparent in the writings of Bonaventure des Periers, and in a confiderable number of fatirical pub- lications which now ilFued, many of them anonyraoufly, or under the then falliionable form of anagrams, from the prefs in France. Among thefe writers were a few who, though far inferior to Rabelais, maybe confidered as not unequal to Des Periers himfelf. One of the mod: remarkable of thefe was a gentleman of Britany, Noel du Fail, lord of La HerilFaye, who was, like fo many of thefe fatirifts, a lawyer, and who died, apparently at an advanced age, at the end of 158^, or beginning of 1586. In his publications, according to the falhion of that age, he concealed his name under an anagram, and called himfelf Leon Ladulfil (doubling the I in the name Fail). Noel du Fail has been called the ape of Rabelais, though the mere imitation is not very apparent. He publilhed (as far as has been afcertained), in 1548, his “ Difcours d’aucuns propos ruftiques facetieux, et de finguliere recreation.” 'Ihis was followed immediately by a work entitled “ Baliverneries, ou Contes Nouveaux d’Eutrapel but his laft, and mod celebrated book, the “ Contes et Difcours d’Eutrapel,” was not printed until 1586, after the death of its author. The writings of Noel du Fail are full of charming piftures of rural life in the fix- teenth century, and, though fufficiently free, they prefent lefs than mod dmilar books of that period of the coarfenefs of Rabelais. I cannot fay the fame of a book which is much more celebrated than either of thefe, and the hidory of which is dill enveloped in obfcurity. I mean the “ Moyen de Parvenir.” This book, which is full of wit and humour, but the licentioufnefs of which is carried to a degree which renders it unreadable at the prefent day, is now afcribed by bibliographers, in its prefent form, to Beroalde de Verville, a gentleman of a Protedant family who had embraced Catholicifm, and obtained advancements in the church, and it was not printed until 1610, but it is fuppofed that in its prefent form 342 Tliftory of Caricature and Grotefque form it is only a revifion of an earlier compofition, perhaps even an unacknowledged work of Rabelais himfelf, which had been preferred in manufcript in Beroald’s family. I’antagruelifm, or, if you like, Rabelaifm, did not, during thefixteenlh century, make much progrels beyond the limits of France. In the Teutonic countries of Europe, and in England, the fceptical fentiment was I'mall in comparifon with the religious feeling, and the only fatirical work at all refembling thofe we have been defcribing, was the “ Utopia ” of Sir Thomas More, a work comparatively fpiritlels, and which produced a very llight fenfation. In Spain, the ftate of focial feeling was flill lefi favourable to the writings of Rabelais, vet he had there a worthy and true reprefentative in the author of Don Quixote. It was only in the feveu- teentlt centurj' that the works of Rabelais were tranflated into Englilh ; but we muft not forget that our latirifts of the laft century, fuch as Swift and Sterne, derived their infpiration chiefly from Rabelais, and from the I’antagrueliftic writers of the latter half of the fixteenth century^ Thefe latter were moll ot them poor imitators of their original, and, like all poor imitators, purfued to exaggeration his lead; worthy chara6feriflics. 'I'here is ftill fome humour in the writings of Tabourot, the fieur des Accords, cfpecially in his “ Bigarrures,” but the later produttions, which appeared under fuch names as Brufcambille and Tabarin, fink into mere dull ribaldry. 'I’here had arifen, however, by' the fide of this fatire which fmelt fomewhat too much of the tavern, another fatire, more ferious, which flill contained a little of the ftyle of Rabelais. The French Proteflants at firfl looked upon Rabelais as one of their towers of ftrength, and embraced with gratitude the powerful protedfion they received from the graceful queen of Xavarre ; but their gratitude failed them, xvhen Marguerite, though the never ceafed to give them her protedtion, conformed out- wardly, from attachment to her brother, to the forms of the Catholic faith, and they' rejedted the fchool of Rabelais as a mere fchool of Atheifls. Among them arofe another fchool of fatire, a fort of branch from the other, which was reprefented in its infancy by the celebrated fcholar and printer, Henri Eftienne, better known among us as Henry' Stephens. The in Literature and Art. 343 The remarkable book called an “Apologie pour Herodote,” arofe out of an attack upon its writer by the Romanifts. Henri Etiienne, who was known as a ftaunch Proteftant, publiihed, at great expenfe, an edition ot Herodotus in Greek and Latin, and the zealous Catholics, out of fpite to the editor, decried his author, and fpoke of Herodotus as a mere colledfor of monflrous and incredible tales. Eftienne, in revenge, publiihed what, under the form of an apology for Herodotus, was really a violent attack on the Romilh church. His argument is that all hillorians muft relate tranf- aftions which appear to many incredible, and that the events of modern times were much more incredible, if they were not known to be true, than anything which is recorded by the hillorian of antiquity. After an intro- dudtory differtation on the light in which we ought to regard the fable of the Golden Age, and on the moral charadler of the ancient peoples, he goes on to Ihow that their depravity was much lefs than that of the middle ages and of his own time, indeed of all periods during which people w^ere governed by the Church of Rome. Not only did this diffolutenels ot morals pervade lay fociety, but the clergy were more vicious even than the people, to whom they ought to ferve as an example. A large part of the book is filled with anecdotes of the immoral lives of the popilh clergy of the fixteenth century, and of their ignorance and bigotry 5 and he defcribes in detail the methods employed by the Romilh church to keep the mafs of the people in ignorance, and to reprefs all attem.pts at inquiry. Out of all this, he fays, had rifen a fchool of atheifis and fcofiers, reprefented by Rabelais and Bonaventure des Periers, both of whom he mentions by name. As we approach the end of the fixteenth century, the ftruggle of parties became more political than religious, but not lefs bitter than before. The literature of the age of that celebrated “ Ligue,” which feemed at one time deftined to overthrow the ancient royalty of France, confifled chiefly of libellous and abufive pamphlets, but in the midft of them there appeared a work far fuperior to any purely political fatire which had yet been feen, and the fame of which has never palled away. Its objedt was to turn to ridicule the meeting of the Eftates of France, convoked by the duke of Mayenne, as leader of the Ligue, and held at Paris 344 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque Paris on the loth of February, 1503. The grand objedt of this meeting was to exclude Henri fV. from the throne; and the Spanifh party pro- pofed to abolilh the Salic law, and proclaim the infanta of Spain queen of France. The French ligueurs propofed plans hardly lefs unpatriotic, and the duke of Mayenne, indignant at the fmall account made of his owm perfonal pretentions, prorogued the meeting, and perfuaded the two parties to hold what proved a fruitlefs conference at Surefne. It was the meeting of the Ellates in Paris which gave rife to that celebrated Satyre Memppee, of which it was faid, that it ferved the caufe of Henri IV. as much as the battle of Ivry itfelf. This latire originated among a party of friends, of men dillinguillied by learning, wit, and talent, though moft of their names are obfcure, who ufed to meet in an evening in the hofpitable houfe of one of them, Jacques Gillot, on the Quai des Orfevres in Paris, and there talk fatirically over the violence and infolence of the ligueurs. They all belonged either to the bar or to the univerfity, or to the church. Gillot himfelf, a Burgundian, born about the year 1560, had been a dean in the church of Langres, and afterwards canon of the Sainte Chapelle in Paris, and was at this time confeiller-clerc to the parliament of Paris. In 1589 he was committed to the Baftille, but was foon afterwards liberated. Nicolas Rapin, one of his friends, was born in 1535, and was faid to have been the fon of a priell, and therefore illegitimate. He was a lawyer, a poet, and a foldier, for he fought bravely in the ranks of Henri IV. at Ivry, and his devotion to that prince was fo well known, that he was banilhed from Paris by the ligueurs, but had returned thither before the meeting of the Ellates in 1593. Jean PalPerat, born in 1534, was alfo a poet, and a profelfor in the College Royal. Florent Chrftien, born at Orleans in 1540, had been the tutor of Henri IV., and was well known as a man of found learning. The moft learned of the party was Pierre Pithou, born at Troyes in 1539, who had abjured Calvinifm to return to Romanifm, and who held a diftinguilhed pofttion at the French bar. The laft of this little party of men of letters was a canon of Rouen named Pierre le Roy, a patriotic ecclefiaftic, who held the office of almoner to the cardinal de Bourbon. It was Le Roy who drew up the firft fketch of the “ Satyre in Literature a?id Art. 345 “ Satyre Menippee,” each of the others executed his part in the compofi- tion, and Pithou finally revifed it. For feveral years this remarkable fatire circulated only fecretly, and in manufcript^ and it was not printed until Henri IV. was eflabliihed on the throne. The fatire opens with an account of the virtues of the “ Catholicon,” or notlrum for curing all political difeafes, or the higuiero d'inficrno, which had been lb effeftive in the hands of the Spaniards, who invented it. Some of thefe are extraordinary enough. If, we are told, the lieutenant of Don Philip “ have fome of this Catholicon on his flags, he will enter without a blow into an enemy’s country, and they will meet him with crolfes and banners, legates and primates ■, and though he ruin, ravage, ufurp, malfacre, and lack everything, and carry away, ravilh, burn, and reduce everything to a defert, the people of the country will fay, ‘ Thefe are our friends, they are good Catholics j they do it for our peace, and for our mother holy church.’ ” “If an indolent king amufe himfelf with reflning this drug in his efcurial, let him write a word into Flanders to Father Ignatius, fealed with the Catholicon, he will find him a man who {falva con- fcientia) will alfaflinate his enemy whom he has not been able to conquer by arms in twenty years.” This, of courfe, is an allufion to the murder of the prince of Orange. “ If this king propofes to aflfure his eftates to his children after his death, and to invade another’s kingdom at little expenfe, let him write a word to Mendoza, his ambaffador, or to Father Commelet (one of the moft feditious orators of the Ligue), and if he write with the higuiero del infierno, at the bottom of his letter, the words Yo el Rey, they will furnilh him with an apoftate monk, who will go under a fair femblance, like a Judas, and alfaflinate in cold blood a great king of France, his brother-in-law, in the middle of his camp, without fear of God or men ; they will do more, they will canonife the murderer, and place this Judas above St. Peter, and baptife this prodigious and horrible crime with the name of a providential event, of which the god- fathers will be cardinals, legates, and primates.” The allufion here is to the alfaflination of Henri HI. by Jacques Clement. Thefe are but a few of the marvellous properties of the political drug, after the enumera- tion of which the report of the meeting of the Eflates is introduced by a Y Y burlefque 346 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque burlefque defcription of the grand proceffion which preceded it. Then we are introduced to the hall of alVenibly, and ditferent fubjedls piftured on the tapellries which cover its walls, all having reference to the politics of the Ligue, are defcribed fully. Then we come to the report of the meeting, and to the fpeeches of the ditferent fpeakers, each of which is a model of latire. It is not known which of the little club of fatirills wrote the open fpeech of the duke of Mayenne, but that of the Roman legate is known to be the work of Gillot, and that of the cardinal de Pelve, a mallerpiece of Latin in the llyle of the “ Epiltolae Obfcurorum Virorum,” was written by Florent Chreftien. Nicolas Rapin compofed the “harangue” placed in the mouth of the archbilhop of Lyons, as well as that of Rcfe, the rector of the univerlity; and the long fpeech of Claude d’Aubray was by Pithou. Palferat compofed moll of the verfes which are fcattered through the book, and it is underftood that Pithon finally revifed the whole. This mock report of the meeting of the Eftates elefes with a defcription of a feries of political pidlures which are arranged on the wall of the llaircale of the hall. Thefe pidtures, as well as thofe on the tapellries of the hall of meeting, are limply lb many caricatures, and the fame may be faid of another fet of piiStures, of which a defcription is given in one of the fatirical pieces which followed the “ Satyre Alenippee,” on the fame fide, entitled, “ Hiltoire des Singeries de la Ligue.” It was amid the political turmoil of the lixtcenth century in France that modern political caricature took its rife. in Literature and Art, 347 CHAPTER XX. POLITICAL CARICATURE IN ITS INFANCY. THE REFERS DU JEU DES SUYSSES. CARICATURE IN FRANCE. THE THREE ORDERS. — PERIOD OF THE LEAGUE ; CARICATURES AGAINST HENRI III. CARICATURES AGAINST THE LEAGUE. CARICATURE IN FRANCE IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURV. GENERAL GALAS. THE QUARREL OF AMBASSADORS. CARI- CATURE AGAINST LOUIS XIV.; WILLIAM OF FDRSTEMBERG. It has been already remarked that political caricature, in the modern fenfe of the word, or even perfonal caricature, was inconfiftent with the ftate of things in the middle ages, until the arts of engraving and printing became fufficiently developed, becaufe it requires the facility of quick and extenfive circulation. The political or fatirical fong was carried everywhere by the minftrel, but the fatirical pifture, reprefented only in fome folitary fculpture or illumination, could hardly be finilhed before it had become ufelefs even in the fmall fphere of its influence, and then remained for ages a ftrange figure, with no meaning that could be under- flood. No fooner, however, was the art of printing introduced, than the importance of political caricature was underftood and turned to account. We have feen what a powerful agent it became in the Reformation, which in fpirit was no lefs political than religious ; but even before the great religious movement had begun, this agent had been brought into adtivity. One of the earlieft engravings which can be called a caricature — perhaps the oldeft of our modern caricatures known — is reprefented in our cut No. 171, is no doubt French, and belongs to the year 1499. It is fufficiently explained by the hiftory of the time. At the date juft mentioned, Louis XII. of France, who had been king lefs than twelve months, was newly married to Anne of Britany, and had refolved upon an expedition into Italy, to unite the crown of Naples with 34 ^ liijiory of Caricature and Grotefque witli that of France. Such an expedition aftedted many political interefts, and Louis had to employ a certain amount of diplomacy with his neigh- bours, feveral of whom were Ifrongly oppofed to his projedts of ambition, and among thofe who adted moft openly were the Swifs, who were No. 171 . The Political Game of Cards. believed to have been fecretly fupported by England and the Netherlands. Louis, however, overcame their oppofition, and obtained a renewal of tue alliance which had expired with his predecelLor Charles VIII. This temporar}' difficulty with the Swifs is the fubjedf of our caricature, the original of which bears tlie title “ Le Revers du Jeu des Suylfes ” (the defeat of the game of the Swils). The princes moft interefted are aftembled round a card-table, at which are feated the king of France to the right, oppofite him the Swifs, and in front the doge of Venice, who was in Literature and Art. 349 was in alliance with the French againft Milan. At the moment repre- fented, the king of France is announcing that he has a flulh of cards, the Swifs acknowledges the weaknefs of his hand, and the doge lays down his cards — in fad, Louis XII. has won the game. But the point of the caricature lies principally in the group around. To the extreme right the king of England, Henry VIE, dillinguilhed by his three armorial lions, and the king of Spain, are engaged in earneft converfation. Behind the former Bands the infanta Margarita, who is evidently winking at the Swifs to give him information of the Bate of the cards of his opponents. At her Bde Bands the duke of Wirtemberg, and juB before him the pope, the infamous Alexander VI. (Borgia), who, though in alliance with Louis, is not able, with all his eBorts, to read the king’s game, and looks on with evident anxiety. Behind the doge of Venice Bands the Italian refugee, Trivulci, an able warrior, devoted to the intereBs of France ; and at the doge’s right hand, the emperor, holding in his hands another pack of cards, and apparently exulting in the belief that he has thrown confufion into the king of France’s game. In the background to the left are feen the count Palatine and the marquis of Montferrat, who allb look uncertain about the refult; and below the former appears the duke of Savoy, who was giving afliBance to the French defigns. The duke of Lorraine is ferving drink to the gamblers, while the duke of Milan, who was at this time playing rather a double part, is gathering up the cards which have fallen to the ground, in order to make a game for himfelf. Louis XII. carried his defigns into execution; the duke of Milan, Ludovico Sforza, nick-named the Moor, played his cards badly, loB his duchy, and died in prifon. Such is this carliefl of political caricatures — and in this cafe it was purely political — but the queBion of religion foon began not only to mix itfelf up with the political queBion, but almoB to abforb it, as we have feen in the review of the hiBory of caricature under the Reformation. Before this period, indeed, political caricature was only an affair between crowned heads, or between kings and their nobles, but the religious agita- tion had originated a vatt focial movement, which brought into play popular feelings and paBions : thefi^ gave caricature a totally new value. Its 350 Hi/lory of Caricature and Grotefque Its power was greateft on the middle and lower clalTes of fociety, that is, on the people, the tiers etat, which was now thrown prominently forward. The new focial theory is proclaimed in a print, of which a fac-fimile will be found in the “ Mufee de la Caricature,” by E. J. Jaime, and which, from the ftyle and cotlnme, appears to be German. The three orders, the church, the lord of the land, and the people, reprefented refpedtively by a bilhop, a knight, and a cultivator, Hand upon the globe in an honour- able equality, each receiving diredt from heaven the emblems or imple- ments of his duties. To the bifhop is delivered his bible, to the hulband- man his mattock, and to the knight the fword with which he is to protea and defend the others. This print— fee cut No. 172— which bears the title, in Latin, “ Quis te praetulit ? ” (Who chofe thee ?) belongs probably to the earlier half of the fixteenth century. A painting in the Hotel de Ville of Aix, in Provence, reprefents the fame fubjed much more latirically, intending to delineate the three orders as thej were, and not in Literature and Art. 351 not as they ought to be. The divine hand is letting down from heaven an immenfe frame in the form of a heart, in which is a pidture repre- fenting a king kneeling before the crofs, intimating that the civil power was to be fnbordinate to the ecclefiaftical. The three orders are repre- fented by a cardinal, a noble, and a peafant, the latter of whom is bending under the burthen of the heart, the whole of which is thrown upon his ihoulders, while the cardinal and the noble, the latter drelfed in the falhionable attire of the court minions of the day, are placing one hand to the heart on each fide, in a manner which Ihows that they fupport none of the weight. Amid the fierce agitation which fell upon France in the lixteenth century, for a while we find but few traces of the employment of caricature by either party. The religious reformation there was rather ariflocratic than popular, and the reformers fought lefs to excite the feelings of the multitude, which, indeed, went generally in the contrary diredfion. There was, moreover, a charadter of gloom in the religion of Calvin, which contrafted ftrongly with the joyoufnefs of that of the followers of Luther; and the fadlions in France fought to daughter, rather than to laugh at, each other. The few caricatures of this period which are known, are very bitter and coarfe. As far as I am aware, no early Huguenot caricatures are known, but there are a few diredled againft the Huguenots. L was, however, with the rife of the Ligue that the tafie for political caricature may be faid to have taken root in France, and in that country it long continued to fiourilh more than anywhere elie. The firfl; caricatures of the ligueurs were diredted againft the perfonof the king,, Henri de Valois, and poffefs a brutality almoft beyond defcription. It was now an objedt to keep up the bitternefs of fpirit of the fanatical multitude. In one of thefe caricatures a demon is reprefented waiting on the king to fummon him to a meeting of the “ Eftates ” in hell ; and in the diftance we fee another demon flying away with him. Another relates to the murder of the Guifes, in 1588, which the ligueurs profefted to afcribe to the councils of M. d’Epernon, one of his favourites, on whom they looked with great hatred. It is entitled, “ Soufllement et Conleil diabolicjue de d’Epernon a Henri de Valois pour faccager les Catholiques.” In 352 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque In the middle of the pi6lure Hands the king, and befide him D’Epernon, who is blowing into his ear with a bellows. On the ground before them lie the headlefs corpfes of the deux freres Catholiques, the duke of Guife, and his brother the cardinal, while the executioner of royal vengeance is holding up their heads by the hair. In the ditlance is feen the caftle of Elois, in which this tragedy took place ; and on the left of the pidlure appear the cardinal de Bourbon, the archbilliop of Blois, and other friends of the Guifes, expreffing their horror at the deed. Henri III. was himfelf murdered in the year following, and the caricatures againtl him became Hill more brutal during the period in which the ligueurs tried to let up a king of their own in his place. In one caricature, which has more of an emblematical chara6ler than molt of the others, he is piftured as “ Henri le Monfirueux and in others, entitled “Les Hermaphro- dites,” he is exhibited under forms which point at the infamous vices with which he was charged. The tide of caricature, howev'er, foon turned in the contrary direftion, and the coarfe, unprincipled abufe employed by the ligueurs found a favourable contrail in the powerful wit and talent of the fatirills and caricaturills who now took up pen and pencil in the caufe of Henri IV. The former was, on the whole, the more formidable weapon, but the latter reprefented to fome eyes more vividly in pi6lure what had already been done in type. This was the cafe on both tides ; the caricature lafl mentioned was founded upon a veiy libellous fatirical pamphlet againfl Henri HI., entitled “L’lfle des Hermaphrodites.” It is the cafe alfo with the hrll caricatures againtl the ligueurs, which I have to mention. The EHates held in Paris by the duke of Mayenne and the ligueurs for the purpofe of eledling a new king in oppolition to Henri of Navarre, were made the fnbjedl of the celebrated “Satyre Menippee,” in which the pro- ceedings of thefe Ellates were turned to ridicule in the moll admirable manner. Four large editions were fold in lefs than as many montlrs. Several caricatures arofe out of or accompanied this remarkable book. One of thefe is a rather large print, entitled “La Singerie des Ellats de la Ligue, Pan 1593,” in wdiich the members of the Ellates and the ligueurs are pidlured with the heads of monkeys. The central part reprefents the meeting in Literature and Art. 353 meeting of the Eftates, at which the lieutenant-general of the kingdom, the duke of Mayenne, feated on the throne, prefides. Above him is fufpended a large portrait of the infanta of Spain, L' Efpoufee de la Ligue, as Ihe is called in the fatire, ready to marry any one whom the Eftates lhall declare king of Erance. In chairs, on each fide of Mayenne, are the two “ladies of honour” of the faid future fpoufe. To the left are feated in a row the celebrated council of fixteen {les feize), reduced at this time to twelve, becaufe the duke of Mayenne, to check their turbulence, had caufed four of them to be hanged. They wear the favours of the future fpoufe. Oppofite to them are the reprefentatives of the three orders, all, we are told, devoted to the fervice of “ the faid lady.” Before the throne z z are r 354 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque are the two nuificians of the Ligue, one defcribed as Phelipottin, the blind performer on the viel, or hurdy-gurdy, to the Ligue, and his fubordinate, the player on the triangle, kept at the expenfe of the future fpoufe.” Thefe were to entertain the all'embly during the paufes between the orations of the various fpeakers. All this is a fatire on the efforts of the king of Spain to eflablilh a monarch of his own choice. On the bench behind the nuificians fit the deputies from Lyons, Poitiers, Orleans, and Rheims, cities where the influence of the Ligue was ftroiig, difcuffing the queffion as to who Ihould be king. Thus much of this pidture is repre- fented in our cut No. 173. There are other groups of figures in the reprefentation of the affemblyof the Eftates ; and there are two fide com- partments — that on the left reprefenting a forge, on which the fragments of a broken king are laid to be refounded, and a multitude of apes, with hammers and an anvil, ready to work him into a new king ; the other fide of the pidlure reprefents the circumftances of a then well-known ad of tyranny perpetrated by the Eftates of the Ligue. Another large and well-executed engraving, publilhed at Paris in 1594, immediately after Henri IV. had obtained polTeffion of his capital, alfo reprefents the grand proceifion of the Ligue as defcribed at the commencement of the Satyre IMenippee,’’ and was intended to hold up to ridicule the warlike temper of the P'rench Catholic clergy. It is entitled, “La Proceifion de la Ligue." Henri's triumph over the Ligue was made the fubjed of a feries of three caricatures, or perhaps, more corredly, of a caricature in three di\ ifions. The firft is entitled the “ NailTance de la Ligue,” and repre- fents it under the form of a monller with three heads, feverally thofc of a wolf, a fox, and a ferpent, ilfuing from hell-mouth. Under it are the following lines : — Ifcnfcr^ pour ajjer'vir fouls fes loix tout le monde. Vomit ce monjire hideux^ fait (T un loup ra'viffeur^ D un renard enveilly, et d"un ferpent immot.de^ Affuhlc d"un manteau propre a toute couleur. The fecond divifion, the “ Declin de la Ligue," reprefenting its downfall. IS in Literature and Art. 355 is copied in our cut No. 174. Henri of Navarre, in the form of a lion, has pounced fiercely upon it, and not too foon, for it had already feized the crown and fceptre. In the diftance, the fun of national profperlty is feen riling over the country. The third picture, the “ Effets de la Ligue,” reprefents the deftru6tion of the kingdom and the flaughter of the people, of which the Ligue had been the caufe. The caricatures in France became more numerous during the feven- teenth century, but they are either fo elaborate or fo obfcure, that each j I requires almofl a differtation to explain it, and they often relate to I queftions or events which have little intereft for us at the prefent day. j Several rather fpirited ones appeared at the time of the difgrace of the I marefchal d’Aucre and his wife ; and the inglorious war with the i' Netherlands, in 1635, furnifhed the occalion for others, for the French, :! as ufual, could make merry in their reverfes as well as in their fuccelfes. '\ The imperialift general Galas infli6ted ferious defeat on the French -! armies, and compelled them to a very difaflrous retreat from the countries ]} they had invaded, and they tried to amufe themfelves at the expenfe of j! their conqueror. Galas was rather remarkable for obefity, and the French I caricaturilis Hijlory oj Caricature and Grotefque caricaturifls of the day made this circumllaiice a fubjeft for their fatire. Our cut No. 175 is copied from a print in which the magnitude of the llomach of General Galas is certainly fomewhat exaggerated. He is No. 175 . General Galas. reprefented, not apparently with any good reafon, as puffed up with his own importance, which is evaporating in fmoke ; and along with the fmoke thus ilfuing from his mouth, he is made to proclaim his greatnefs in the following rather doggrel verfes ; — o 00 Je Juis ce grand Galas^ autrefois dans V armee ha gloire de hE/pagne et de mes compagnons ; Maintenant je ne fuis qu'un corps plein de fumce^ Pour avoir trap mange de raves et d'oignons. Gnrgantua jamaii n"eut unc telle panje^ ^c. Caricatures in Literature and Art, 357 Caricatures in France began to be tolerably abundant dnring the middle ot the feventeenth century, but under the crulhing tyranny of Lonis XIV., the freedom of the prefs, in all its forms, ceafed to exitl, and caricatures relating to France, unlefs they came from the court party, had to be publiflied in other countries, efpecially in Holland. It will be fufficient to give two examples from the reign of Louis XIV. In the year i66i, a difpute arofe in London between the ambatfador of France, M. D’Eftrades, and the Spanilh amballador, the baron de Batteville, on the queftion of precedence, which was carried fo far as to give rife to a tumnlt in the ftreets of the Englilh capital. At this very moment, a new Spanilh ambatfador, the marquis de Fuentes, was on his way to Paris, but Louis, indignant at Batteville’s behaviour in London, fent orders to flop Fuentes on the frontier, and forbid his further advance into his kingdom. The king of Spain difavowed the att of his ambatfador in England, who was recalled, and Fuentes received orders to make an apology 358 Hijlory of Caricature a?id Grotefque apology to king Louis. This event was made the fubjedt of a rather boafting caricature, the greater portion of which is given in our cut No. 176. It is entitled “ Batteville vient adorer le Solid ” (Batteville comes to worlhip the fun). In the original the fun is feen lliining in the upper corner of the pidture to the right, and prefenting the juvenile face of Louis XIV., but the caricaturift appears to have fubflituted Batteville in the place of Puentes. Beneath the whole are the following boaftful lines ; — On ne nja plus a Romey on 'vient de Rome cn France^ Meriter le pardon de quelque grande offence, L." It dl\e tout entiere ejl foumife d ces loix ; Un Efpagnol ffoppoje d ce droit de nos rois. Mats un Fran^ais puiffant joua des bajionnades, Et punit rinfolent de fes rodomontades. Prom this time there fprung up many caricatures againft the Spaniards; but the moll ferocious caricature, or rather book of caricatures, of the reign of Louis XIV., came from without, and was diredled againfl the king and his minifters and courtiers. The revocation of the edidt of Nantes took place in Odiober, 1^85, and was preceded and followed by frightful perfecutions of the Protellants, which drove away in thoufands the earnetl, intelligent, and induftrious part of the population of Prance. They carried with them a deep hatred to their oppreffors, and fought refuge efpecially in the countries moll hoflile to Louis XIV. — England and Plolland. The latter country, where they then enjoyed the greatell freedom of adlion, foon fent forth numerous fatirical books and prints againll the Prench king and his minifters, of which the book juft alluded to was one of the moft remarkable. It is entitled “ Les Heros de la Ligue, ou la Proceffion Monacale conduite par Louis XIV. pour la Con- verfion des Proteftans de fon Royaume,” and confills of a series of twenty- four moft grotefque faces, intended to reprefent the minifters and courtiers of the “ grand roi ” moft odious to the Calvinifts. It muft have provoked their wrath exceedingly. I give one example, and as it is difficult to feleft, I take the firft in the lift, which reprefents William of Piirftemberg, one of the German princes devoted to Louis XIV., who, by his intrigues, had forced him into the archbilliopric of Cologne, by which he became an in Literature and Art. 359 an eledtor of the empire. For many reafons William of Fiirftemberg was hated by the French Proteftants, but it is not quite clear why he is here reprefented in the charadter of one of the low merchants of the Halles. Ko, 177 . lyiliiam of Fufjicmbi.rg, Over the pitture, in the original, we read, Guillaume de Furjtemberg, crie, ite, mijja eft, and beneath are the four lines : — J'ay quitte mon pah pour ferntir a la France^ Soit par ma irahifon^ Joit par ma lachete ; J'ay trouble let e'tats par ma me'chancete^ Unc abbaye eji ma recompcnfe. 360 Hijlory of Caricature aiid Grotefque CHAPTER XXL EARLY rOLITICAL CARICATURE IN ENGLAND. THE SATIRICAL WRITINGS AND PICTURES OF THE COMMONWEALTH PERIOD. SATIRES AGAINST THE BISHOPS; BISHOP WILLIAMS. CARICATURES ON THE CAVALIERS; SIR JOHN SUCKLING. THE ROARING BOYS ; VIOLENCE OF THE ROYALIST SOLDIERS. CONTEST BETWEEN THE PRESBYTERIANS AND INDEPENDENTS. GRINDING THE KING’s NOSE. PLAYING-CARDS USED AS THE MEDIUM FOR CARICATURE ; HASELRIGGE AND LAMBERT. SHROVETIDE. D uring the fixteenth century caricature can hardly be Paid to have exifted in England, and it did not come much into falhion, until the approach of the great ftruggle which convulfed our country in the century following. The popular reformers have always been the tirfl to appreciate the value of pidlorial fatire as an oft'enfive weapon. Such was the cafe with the German reformers in the age of Luther ; as it was again with the Englifh reformers in the days of Charles L, a period which we may juftly coniider as that of the birth of Englifli political caricature. From 1640 to 1661 the prefs launched forth an abfolute deluge of political pamphlets, many of which were of a fatirical charadler, fcurrilous in form and language, and, on whatever fide they were written, very unfcrupulous in regard to the truth of their ftatements. Among them appeared a not unfrequent engraving, feldom well executed, whether on copper or wood, but difplaying a coarfe and pungent wit that mufl; have told with great etfedl: on thofe for whom it was intended. The firfl objedts of attack in thefe caricatures were the Epifcopalian party in the church and the profinenefs and infolence of the cavaliers. The Puritans or Pretbyterians who took the lead in, and at firft diredled, the great political movement, looked upon Epifcopalianifm as differing in little from popery, and, at all events, as leading diredt to it. Arminianifm was with them only another name in Literature and Art. name for the (lime thing, and was equally detefted. In a caricature publillied in 1641, Arminius is reprefented fupported on one fide by Herefy, wearing the triple crown, while on the other fide Truth is turning away from him, and carrying with her the Bible. It was the indifcreet zeal of archbilbop Laud which led to the triumph of the Puritan party, and the downfall of the epifcopal church government, and Laud became the butt for attacks of all defcriptions, in pamphlets, fongs, and fatirical prints, the latter ufually figuring in the titles of the pam- phlets. Laud was efpecially obnoxious to the Puritans for the bitternefs with which he had perfecuted them. In 1640 Laud was committed to the Tower, an event which was hailed as the firfi grand ftep towards the overthrow of the billiops. As an example of the feeling of exultation difplayed on this occafion by his enemies, we may quote a few lines from a fatirical fong, publilhed in 1641, and entitled “The Organs Eccho. To the Tune of the Cathedrall Service.” It is a general attack on the prelacy, and opens with a cry of triumph over the fall of William Laud, of whom the fong fiiys — Wren, bilLop of Ely, was another of the more obnoxious of the prelates, and there was hardly lefs joy among the popular party when he was committed to the Tower in the courfe of the year 1641. Another As he 'ivas in his bra'veric, And thought to bring us all in fla'verie., The parliament found out his knanjerie ; And fo fell William. Alas ! poore William ! His pope-like domineering.^ And fome other tricks appearings Pronjok'd Sir Edivard Peering To blame the old prelate Alas ! poore prelate ! Some Jay he %vas in hope To bring England againe to th"' pope ; But noTJ he is in danger of an aye or a rope. Farewells old Canttrbury. Alas ! poore Canterbury I 3 A fong. 362 Hiflory of Caricature and Grotefcjue fong, in verl'e limilar to the lah, contains a general review of the demerits of the members of the prelac}', under the title of “ The Biihops Laft Good-night.” At the head of the broadfide on which it is printed hand two fatirical woodcuts, but it mulf be confelfed that the words of the fong are better than the engraving. The bilhop of Ely, we are told, had jult gone to join his friend Laud in the Tower — thou hafl al'way to thy po'wer Left the church naked in a Jlorme and foozure^ yind now Jor '/ thou tnuji to thy old friend f th' Tower. To the Tower muft Ely ; Come away-, Ely* A third obnoxious prelate was bilhop Williams. Williams was a Wellhman who had been high in favour with James I., but he had given otfence to the government of Charles I., and been imprifoned in the Tower during the earlier part of that king’s reign. He was releafed by the parliament in 1640, and fo far regained the favour of king Charles, that he was railed to the archbilhopric of York in the year following. When the civil war began, he retired into Wales, and garrifoned Conway for the king. Williams’s warlike behaviour was the fource of much mirth among the Roundheads. In 1642 was publilhed a large caricature on the three clalfes to whom the parliamentarians were efpecially hoftile — the royalill judges, the prelates, and the ruffling cavaliers j reprefented here, as we are told in writing in the copy among the king’s pamphlets, by judge Mallet, bifflop Williams, and colonel Lunsford. Thefe three tigures are placed in as many compartments with doggrel verfes under each. That of bilhop Williams is copied in our cut No. 178. The bilhop is armed cap-Ypie, and in the dillance behind him are feen on one lide his cathedral church, and on the other his war-horfe. The verfes beneath it contain an allufion to this prelate’s Wellh extradtion in the orthography of fome of the words : — Oh,Jir, I'me ready, did you never heere Honu for-ward I have byn t'is many a year e, T'cppofe the praBice dat is nov) on foote, Mr hick plucks my brethren up both pranch and roote ? My jjoJlure and my hart toth ’well agree To Jight ; now plud is up : come, follow mee. The in Literature and Art. 363 The country liad now begun to experience the miferies of war, and to fmart under them ; and the cavaliers were efpecially reproached for the cruelty with which they plundered and ill-treated people whenever they gained the maftery. Colonel Lunsford was efpecially notorious for the barbarities committed by himfelf and his men to Inch a degree that he was popularly accufed of eating children, a charge which is frequently alluded to in the popular fongs of the time, 'dims one of thete fongs couples him with two other obnoxious royalifls : Fr(m Fielding, and from Fa-vajour, Both ill-affeaed men. From Lunsford eke deliver us. Who eateth up children. Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque In the third compartment of the caricature juft mentioned, we fee in the background of the pitture, behind colonel Lunsford, his foldiers occu- pied in burning towns, and maffacring women and children. The model of the gay cavalier of the earlier period of this great revolution, before the war had broken out in its intenfity, was the courtly Sir John Suckling, the poet of the drawing-room and tavern, the admired of “ roaring boys,” and the hated of rigid Puritans. Sir John outdid his companions in extravagance in every thing which was falhionable, and the ditj^lay of his zeal in the caufe of royalty was not calculated to conciliate the reformers. When m Literature and Art. When the king led an army againft the Scottilli Covenanters in 1639, Suckling raifed a troop of a hundred horfe at his own expenfe ; but they gained more reputation by their extraordinary drefs than by their courage, and the whole affair was made a fubjefl: of ridicule. From this time the name of Suckling became identified with that gay and profligate clafs who, difgufted by the outward flrow of fandity which the Puritans affedfed, rulhed into the other extreme, and became notorious for their profanenefs, their libertinifm, and their indulgence in vice, which threw a certain degree of difcredit upon the royalift party. There is a large broadfide among the King’s Pamphlets in the Britilli Mufeum, entitled, “The Sucklington Fa6tion ; or (Sucklings) Roaring Boys.” It is one of thofe fatirical compofitions which were then falhionable under the title of “ Charaffers,” and is illuftrated by an engraving, from which our cut No. 179 is copied. This engraving, which from its luperior ftyle is perhaps the work of a foreign artifl, reprefents the interior of a chamber, in which two of the Roaring Boys are engaged in drinking and fmoking, and forms a curious pi6ture of contemporary manners. Underneath the engraving we read the following lines: — D/luch mcate doth gluttony produce^ And makes (i man a Ji.uinc ; But hee ’i a temperate man indeed That ivith a leafe can dine, Hee needes no napkin for hh handet^ His fngers for to %vipe ,• He hath his kitchin in a bcx^ His roafi meate in a pipe. When the war fpread itfelf over the country, many of thefe Roaring Boys became foldiers, and difgraced the profeflion by rapacity and cruelty. The pamphlets of the parliamentarians abound with complaints of the outrages perpetrated by the Cavaliers, and the evil appears to have been increafed by the ill-condu6l of the auxiliaries brought over from Ireland to ferve the king, who were efpecially obje6fs of hatred to the Puritans. A broadfide among the king’s pamphlets is adorned by a fatirical pidture of “The Englilh Irilh Souldier, with his new difcipline, new armes, old flomacke, 366 Hijlory of Caricature ajid Grotefque llomacke, and new taken pillage; who had rather eat than fight.” It was publilhed in 1642. The Englilh Irifh foldier is, as may be I'uppofed, heavily laden with plunder. In 1646 appeared another caricature, which is copied in our cut No. 180. It reprefents “ England’s Wolfe with Eagles clawes : the cruell impieties of bloud-thirfty royalifts and blaf- phemous anti-parliamentarian.s, under the command of that inhumane prince Rupert, Digby, and the reft, wherein the barbarous crueltie of our civill uncivill warres is briefly difcovered.” England’s wolf, as will be fecn, is drelTed in the high fafhion of the gay courtiers of the time. A few large caricatures, embodying fatire of a more comprehenfive defcription, appeared from time to time, during this troubled age. Such is a large emblematical piifture, publiflied on the 9th of November, 1642, and in Literature and Art. 367 and entitled “ Heraclitus’ Dream,” for the fcene is fuppofed to be mani- felled to the philofopher in a vificn. In the middle of the pidure the Iheep are feen Ihearing their Ihepherd ; while one cuts his hair, another treats his beard in the fame manner. Under the pidure we read the couplet — The Jiocke that ^uas wont to he (home by the herdy Now polleth the Jhepherd in jp 'ght of his beard. On the 19th of January, 1647, a caricature appeared under the title “ An Embleme of the Times.” On one fide War, reprefented as a giant in armour, is feen flanding upon a heap of dead and mutilated bodies, while Hypocrify, in the form of a woman with two faces, is flying towards a diflant city. “ Libertines,” “ anti-fabbatarians,” and others, are hafien- ing in the fame diredion ; and the ang(d of peftilence, hovering over the city, is ready to pounce upon it. The party of the parliament was now triuniphant, and the queftion of religion again became the fubjed of difpute. The Pretbyterians had been eflablilhing a fort of tyranny over men’s minds, and fought to pro- fcribe all other feds, till tlieir intolerance gradually raifed up a ftrong and general 368 Hljlory of Caricature and Grotejcjue general feeling of refilbnce. Since 1643 a brifk war of political pam- phlets had been carried on between the Pretbyterians and their opponents, when, in 1647, the Independents, whofe caufe had been efpoufed by the army, gained the maftery. “ Sir John Prelbyter ” or to ufe the more familiar phrafe, “Jack Prefbyter,” furnilhed a fubjeft for frequent fatire, and the Pretbyterians were not How in returning the blow. In the collefbon in the Britilh Mufeum we find a caricature which mufl: have come from the Pretbyterian party, entitled “ Reall Perfecution, or the Foundation of a general Toleration, ditplaied and portrayed by a proper emblem, and adorned with the fame flowers wherewith the fcoffers of this lafl age have ftrowed their libellous pamphlets.” The group which occupies the middle part of this broadfide, is copied in our cut No. [81. It has its feparate title, “The Pitiure of an Englifli Perfecutor, or a foole- ridden ante-Prelbeterian feflary.” (I give the fpelling as in the original.) Folly is riding on the fedlarian, whom he holds with a bridle, the feftarian having the ears of an afs. I'he following homely rhymes are placed in the mouth of Folly, — Bthould my habity like my ^vitty Equalh his on ardcnnez moi. Bayes obferves that he makes the two kings talk French in order “ to (how their breeding.” In the third aft, Bayes introduces a new charafter, prince Prettyman, a parody upon the charafter of Leonidas, in Dryden’s “ Marriage-a-la-Mode.” The prince falls afleep, and then his beloved Cloris comes in, and is furprifed, upon which Bayes remarks, “ Now, here (he muft make a fimile.” “ Where’s the necellity of that, Mr. Bayes ? ” alks the critical Mr. Smith. “ Oh,” replies Bayes, “ becaufe (he’s furprifed. That’s a general rule. You muft ever make a fimile when in Literature and Art. 391 when you are furpriled ; ’tis a new way of writing.” Now we have another parody upon one of Dryden’s fimiles. In the fourth fceue, the Gentleman-Ufher and Phyfician appear again, difculling the quellion whether their whifpers had been heard or not, a difcullion which they conclude by feizing on the two thrones, and occupying them with their drawn fwords in their hands. Then they march out to raile their forces, and a battle to mufic takes place, four foldiers on each fide, who are all killed. Next we have a fcene between prince Prettyman and his tailor, Tom Thimble, which involves a joke upon the princely principle of non-payment. A fcene or two follows in a fimilar tone, without at all advancing the plot ; although it appears that another prince, Volfcius, who, we are to fuppofe, fnpports the old dynafly of Brentford, lias made his efcape to Piccadilly, while the army which he is to lead has alPembled, and is concealed, at Knightlbridge. This incident produces a difculfion between Mr. Bayes and his friends : — Smith . — But pray, Mr. Bayes, is not this a little difficult, that you were saying e’en now, to keep an army thus concealed in Knights- bridge I Bayes . — In Knightsbndge ? — stay. JohriJon. — No, not it inn- keepers be his friends.* Bayes . — His friends .? Ay, sir, his intimate acquaintance ; or else, indeed, I grant it could not be. Smith. — Yes, faith, so it might be very easy. Bayes . — Nay, if I don’t make all things easy, ’egad. I’ll give ’em leave to hang me. Now you would think that he is going out of town ; but you will see how prettily I have contrived to stop him, presently. Accordingly, prince Volfcius yields to the influence of a fair demoifdle, who bears the claflical name of Parthenope, and after various exhibitions of hefitation, he does not leave town. Another fcene or two, with little meaning, but full of clever parodies on the plays of Dryden, the Howards, and their contemporaries. The firft fcene of the fourth a6t opens with a funeral. * Knightsbridge, as the princip:il entrance to London from the west, w-as full of inns. 392 Hi/lory of Caricature and Grotefque funeral, a parody upon colonel Henry Howard’s play of the “United Kingdoms.” Pallas interferes, brings the lady who is to be buried to life, gets up a dance, and furnillies a very extempore feaft. The princes Prettyman and Volfcius difpute about their fweethearts. At the com- mencement of the fifth a6t the two ufurping kings appear in ftate, attended by four cardinals, the two princes, all the lady-loves, heralds, and fergeants-at-arms, Ac. In the middle of all this ftate, “ the two right kings of Brentford defcend in the clouds, tinging, in white garments, and three fiddlers fitting before them in green.” “ Now,” fays Bayes to his friends, “ becaufe the two right kings defcend from above, I make ’em ling to the tune and fiyle of our modern fpirits.” And accordingly they proceeded in a continuous parody: — \ft King . — Haste, brother king, wc are sent from above. znd King . — Let ns move, let us move ; Move, to remove the fate Of Brentfoi'd’s long united state. ift King. — Tara, tan, tara ! — full east and by south. znJ King ,. — We sail with thunder in our mouth. In scorching noon-day, whilst the traveller stay's. Busy, busy, busy, busy, we bustle along. Mounted upon warm Phoebus’s rays. Through the heavenly throng, Hasting to those Who will feast us at night with a pig’s pettytoes. \Ji King . — And we’ll fall with our plate In ?n oho of hate 2nd King —But, now supper’s done, the servitors try. Like soldiers, to storm a whole half-moon pie. iji King — They gather, they gather, hot custards in spoons: But, alas ! I must leave these half-moons. And repair to my trusty dragoons. 2nd King . — O stay ! tor you need not as yet go astray ; The tide, like a friend, has brought ships in our way. And on their high ropes we will play ; Like maggots in filberts, we’ll snug in our shell. We’ll frisk in our shell. We’ll firk in our shell. And farewell. ijl King . — But the ladies have all inclination to dance. And the green frogs croak out a coranto of France. All in Literature and Art. 393 All this is quite Ariftophanic. It is interrupted by a difcuffion between Bayes and his vilitors on the mufic and the dance, and then the two kings continue : — ind King . — Now mortals, that hear H ow we tilt and career, With wonder, will fear The event of such things as shall never appear. !_/? King. — Stay you to fulfil what the gods have decreed. 2nd King . — Then call me to help you, if there shall be need. ifi King. — So firmly resolved is a true Brentford king. To save the distressed, and help to ’em bring, That, ere a full pot of good ale you can swallow, He’s here with a whoop, and gone with a halloo. The rather too inquifitive Smith wonders at all this, and complains that, to him, the fenfe of this is “ not very plain.” “ Plain !” exclaims Bayes, “ why, did you ever hear any people in the clouds fpeak plain ? They mufl: be all for flight of fancy, at its full range, without the leaf! check or control upon it. When once you tie up fprites and people in clouds to fpeak plain, you fpoil all.” The two kings of Brentford now “light out of the clouds, and ftep into the throne,” continuing the fame dignified converfation : — \fi King. — Come, now to serious council we’ll advance. 2nd King . — I do agree; but first, let’s have a dance. This confidence of the two kings of Brentford is fuddenly difiurbed by the found of war. Two heralds announce that the army, that of Knightf- bridge, had come to protebf them, and that it had come in difgnife, an arrangement which puzzles the author’s two vifitors : — ift King . — What saucy groom molests our privacies ? I/? Herald. — The army’s at the door, and, in disguise, Desires a word with both your majesties. 2nd Herald. — Having from Knightsbridge hither march’d by steallh. 2nd King. — Bid ’em attend a while, and drink our health. Smith.— Ylo'/y , Mr. Bayes? The army in di.^guise ! Bayes. — Ay, sir, tor tear the usurpers might discover them, that went out but just now. 3 E War 394 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque War itfelf follows, and the commanders of the two armies, the general and the lieutenant-general, appear upon the tlage in another parody upon the opening fcenes of Drj den’s “ Siege of Rhodes — Enter, at federal doors, the GENERAL and LiEUTENANT-GeNERAL, armed cap-a-pie, ivith each a lute in his hand, and his Jword dra wn, and hung •with a fcarlet riband at the wriji. Lieut. -Gen. — Villain, thou liest. Gen. — Arm, arm, Gonsalvo, arm. What ! ho ! The lie no flesh can brook, I trow. Lieut. -Gen. — Advance from Acton with the musqueteer.s. Gen. — Draw down the Chelsea cuirassiers. Lieut. -Gen. — The band you boast of, Chelsea cuirassiers. Shall in my Putney pikes now meet their peers. Gen. — Chiswickians, aged, and renowned in fight. Join with the Hammersmith brigade. Lieut.-Gen . — You’ll find my Mortlake boys will do them right. Unless by Fulham numbers over-laid. Gen . — Let the left wing of Twick’n’am foot advance. And line that eastern hedge. Lieut.-Gen. — The horse I raised in Petty France Shall try their chance. And scour the meadows, overgrown with sedge. Gen. — Stand : give the word. Lieut.-Gen. — Bright sword. Gen. — That may be thine. But ’tis not mine. Lieut.-Gen.— Givt fire, give fire, at once give fire. And let those recreant troops perceive mine ire. Gen. — Pursue, pursue ; they fly. That first did give the lie 1 [Exeunt. Thus the battle is carried on in talk between two individuals. Bayes alleges, as an excufe for introducing thefe trivial names of places, that “ the fpedlators know all thefe towns, and may eafily conceive them to be within the dominions of the two kings of Brentford.” The battle is finally flopped by an eclipfe, and three perfonages, reprefenting the fun, moon, and earth, advance upon the flage, and by dint of finging and manoeuvring, one gets in a line between the other two, and this, accord- ing to the ftridt rules of aftronomy, conftituted the eclipfe. The eclipfe is followed by another battle of a more defperate charafter, to which a flop is in Ijiterature and Art. 395 is put in an equally extraordinary manner, by the entrance of the furious hero Drawcanfir, who flays all the combatants on both fides. The marriage of prince Prettyman was to form the fubjeft of the fifth a6l, but while Bayes, Johnfon, and Smith withdraw temporarily, all the players, in difguft, run away to their dinners, and thus ends “ The Rehearfal ” of Mr. Bayes’s play. The epilogue returns to the moral which the play was defigned to inculcate : — The play is at an end, but where'' s the plot f That circumftance the poet Bayes forgot. And we can boafi, though 'tis a plotting age, No place is freer from it than the ftage. Formerly people fought to write fo that they might be underllood, but “ this new way of wit ” was altogether incomprehenfible : — Wherefore, for ours, and for the k'lngdom'' s peace, May this prodigious way of writing ceafe ,* Lefs have, at leaf once in our lives, a time When we may hear fome reafon, not all rhyme. We have this ten years felt its infuence; Pray let this prove a year of profe and fenfe, Englilh comedy was certainly greatly reformed, in fome fenfes of the word reform, during the period which followed the publication of “ The Rehearfal,” and, in the hands of writers like Wycherley, Shadwell, Congreve, and D’Urfey, the dulnefs of the Howards was exchanged for an extreme degree of vivacity. The plot was as little confidered as ever — it was a mere peg on which to hang fcenes brilliant with wit and repartee. The fmall intrigue is often but a frame for a great pitfure of fociety in its forms then moft open to caricature, with all the petty intrigues infeparable from it. “ Epfom Wells,” one of Shadwell’s earlier comedies, and perhaps his bell, will bear comparifon with Jonfon’s “ Bartholomew Fair.” I’lie perfonages reprefented in it are exadfly thofe which then flione in fuch fociety — three “ men of wit and pleafure,” one of the clafs of country fquires whom the wits of London loved to laugh at, and who is defcribed as “a country juflice, a public fpirited, politick, difcontented 396 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefqiie difccntented fop, an immoderate hater of London, and a lover of the country above meafure, a hearty true Englilh coxcomb.” Then we have “ two cheating, iharking, cowardly bullies.” The citizens of London are reprefented by Bilket, “a comfit-maker, a quiet, humble, civil cuckold, governed by his wife, whom he very much fears and loves at the fame time, and is very proud of,” and Fribble, “a haberdalher, a furly cuckold, very conceited, and proud of his wife, but pretends to govern and keep her under,” and their wives, the iirfl “ an impertinent, imperious ftrumpet,” and the other, “ an humble, fubmitting wife, who jilts her hulband that way, a very ” One or two other characters of the fame fiamp, with “ two young ladies of wit, beauty, and fortune,” who behave them- felves not much better than the others, and a full allowance of “ parfons, heCtors, conftable.s, watchmen, and fiddlers,” complete the dramatis perfonce of“Epfom Wells.” With fuch materials anybody will under- fiand the character of the piece, wdiich was brought out on the ftage in 1672. “The Squire of Alfatia,” by the fame author, brought upon the ftage in the eventful year 1688, is a vivid picture of one of the wildeft phafes of London life in thofe ftill rather primitive times. Alfatia, as every reader of Walter Scott knows, was a cant name for the White Friars, in London, a locality which, at that time, was beyond the reach of the law and its officers, a refuge for thieves and rogues, and efpecially for debtors, where they could either refift with no great fear of being over- come, or, when refiftance was no longer poffible, efcape with eafe. With fuch a fcene, and fuch people for characters, we are not furprifed that the printed edition of this play is prefaced by a vocabulary of the cant words employed in it. The principal characters in the play are of the fame clafs with thofe which form the ftaple of all thefe old comedies. Firfl there is a country father or uncle, who is rich and fevere upon the vices of youth, or arbitrary, or avaricious. He is here reprefented by lir William Belfond, “a gentleman of about s^sooo per annum, who in his youth had been a fpark of the town j but married and retired into the country, w'here he turned to the other extreme — rigid, morofe, mod; fordidly covetous, clowniffi, obftinate, pofitive, and forward.” He muft have a London brother, or near relative, endowed with exaCHy contrary qualities, here reprefented by 171 Literature uTid Art. 397 by fir Edward Belfond, fir William’s brother, “ a merchant, who by lucky hits had gotten a great eftate, lives tingle with eate and pleafure, realbnably and virtuoully, a man of great humanity and gentlenefs and companion towards mankind, well read in good books, polfeffed with all gentlemanlike qualities.” Sir William Belfond has two fons. Belfond fenior, the eldefl, is “bred after his father’s ruftic, fwinilh manner, with great rigour and feverity, upon whom his father’s efiate is entailed, the confidence of which makes him break out into open rebellion to his father, and become lewd, abominably vicious, ttubborn, and obllinate.” The younger Belfond, Sir William’s fecond ton, had been “ adopted by Sir Edward, and bred from his childhood by him, with all the tendernefs and familiarity, and bounty, and liberty that can be;” he was “inftru6led in all the liberal fciences, and in all gentleman-like education; fonjewhat given to women, and now and then to good fellowlhip ; but an ingenious, well-accompllfhed gentleman ; a man of honour, and of excellent difpo- fition and temper.” Then we have fome of the leading heroes of Alfatia, and firfl; Cheatly, who is defcribed as “ a rafcal, who by reafon of debts, dares not flir out of Whitefryers, but there inveigles young heirs in tail ; and helps ’em to goods and money upon great difadvantages ; is bound for them, and flaares with them, till he undoes them; a lewd, impudent, debauched fellow, very expert in the cant about the town.” Shamwell is “coufin to the Belfonds, an heir, who, being ruined by Cheatly, is made a decoy-duck for others ; not daring to ftay out of Alfatia, where he lives; is bound with Cheatly for heirs, and lives upon them, a dilTolute, debauch’d life.” Another of thefe charadters is captain Hackum, “a. block-headed bully of Alfatia; a cowardly, impudent, bluilering fellow ; formerly a fergeant in Flanders, run from his colours, retreating into Whitefryers for a very fmall debt; where by the Alfatians he is dubb’d a captain ; marries one that lets lodgings, fells cherry-brandy, and is a bawd.” Nor is Alfatia without a reprefentative of the Puritanical part of fociety, in Scrapeall, “ a hypocritical, repeating, praying, pfalm- finging, precife fellow, pretending to great piety ; a godly knave, who joins with Cheatly, and fupplies young heirs with goods and money.” A rather large number of inferior charadters fill up the canvas ; and the females Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque females, with two exceptions, belong to the fame clafs. The plot of this play is very fimple. The elder fon of fir William Belfond has taken to Alfatia, but fir William, on his return from abroad, hearing talk of the fame of a fquire Belfond among the Alfatians, imagines that it is his younger fon, and out of this miftake a confiderable amount of mifunder- Itanding arifes. At lafi; fir William difcovers his error, and finds his eldeft fon in Whitefryers, but the youth fets him at defiance. The father, in great anger, brings tipfiaff conftables, to take away his fon by force j but the Alfatians rife in force, the officers of the law are beaten, and fir William himfelf taken prifoner. He is refcued by the younger Belfond, and in the conclufion the elder brother becomes penitent, and is reconciled with his father. There is an underplot, far from moral in its charader, wdiich ends in the marriage of Belfond junior. It is a bufy, noify play, and was a great favourite on the llage ; but it is now chiefly interefling as a vivid pidure of London life in the latter half of the feventeenth century. “Bury Fair,” by Shadwell, is another comedy of the fame defcription ; with little intereft in the plot, but full of life and movement. If “ The Squire of Alfatia ” was noify, “ The Scowrers,” another comedy by the fame author, flrft brought on the flage in tbpi, was ftill more fo. The wild and riotous gallants who, in former times of inefficient police regulation, infefted the ftreets at night, and committed all forts of outrages, were known at different periods by a variety of names. In the reign of James I. and Charles I. they were the “ roaring boys j” in the time of Shadwell, they were called the “ fcowrers,” becaufe they fcowered the ftreets at night, and rather roughly cleared them of all paflengers j a few years later they took the name of Mohocks, or Mohawks. During the night London lay at the mercy of thefe riotous clalfes, and the ftreets witnelfed feenes of brutal violence, which, at the prefent day, we can hardly imagine. This ftate of things is pitlured in Shadwell’s comedy. Sir William Rant, Wildfire, and Tope, are noted fcowrers, well known in the town, whofe fame has excited emulation in men of lefs diftindion in their way, Whachum, “a city wit and fcowrer, imitator of fir William,” and “ two fcoundrells,” his companions. Bluffer and Dingboy. Great enmity arifes between the two in Literature and Art. 399 two parties of rival fcowrers. The more ferious charafters in the play are Mr. Rant, fir William Rant’s father, and fir Richard Maggot, “a foolifii Jacobite alderman ” (it muft be remembered that we are now in the reign of king William). Sir Richard’s wife, lady Maggot, like the citizen’s wives of the comedy of the Relloration generally, is a lady rather wanting in virtue, ambitious of mixing with the gay and fafhionable world, and fomewhat of a tyrant over her hutband. She has two hand- fome daughters, whom the feeks to keep confined from the world, left they fhould become her rivals. There are low charadlers of both fexes, who need not be enumerated. Much of the play is taken up with ftreet rows, capital fatirical pidlures of London life. The play ends with marriages, and with the reconciliation of fir William Rant with his father, the ferious old gentleman of the play. Shadwell excelled in thefe buly comedies. One of the nearefl; approaches to him is Mountfort’s comedy of “ Greenwich Park,” which is another ftriking fatire on the loofenefs of London life at that time. As in the others, the plot is fimply nothing. The play confifts of a number of intrigues, fuch as may be imagined, at a time when morality was little refpedled, in places of falhionable refort like Greenwich Park and Deptford Wells. An element of fatire was now introduced into Englilh comedy which docs not appear to have belonged to it before— this was mimicry. Although the principal charaders in the play bore conventional names, they appear often to have been intended to reprefent individuals then well known in fociety, and thefe individuals were caricatured in their drefs, and mimicked in their language and manners. We are told that this mimicry contributed greatly to the fuccefs of “The Rehearfal,” the duke of Buckingham having taken incredible pains to make Lacy, who aded the part of Bayes, perfed in imitating the voice and manner of Dryden, whofe drefs and gait were minutely copied. This perfonal fatire was not always performed with impunity. On the ifi: of February, 1669, Pepys went to the Theatre Royal to fee the performance of “The Heirets,’’ in which it appears that fir Charles Sedley was perfonally caricatured, and the fecretary of king Charles’s admiralty has left in his diary the following entry; — “To the king’s houfe, thinking to have feen the 400 H’flory of Caricature and Grotefque the HeyrelVe, rirll acled on Saturday, but when we come thither we find no play there j Kynalton, that did aft a part therein in abufe to fir Charles Sedley, being laft night exceedingly beaten with flicks by two or three that laluted him, lb as he is mightily bruil’ed, and forced to keep his bed." It is laid that Dryden's comedy of “ Limberham,” brought on the flage in 1678, was prohibited after the firlt night, becaufe the charafter of Limberham was ccnfldered to be too open a fatire on the duke of Lauderdale. Another peculiarity in the comedies of the age of the Refloration w'as their extraordinary indelicacy. The writers feemed to emulate each other in prefenling upon the Itage fccnes and language which no modeft ear or pure mind could fupport. In the earlier period coarfenels in con- verfation was characderiflic of an unpolilhed age — the language put in the mouths of the actors, as remarked before, fmelt of the tavern j but under Charles II. the tone of falhionable fociety, as reprefented on the Itage, is modelled upon that of the brothel. Even the veiled allufion is no longer reforted to, broad and direft language is fubflituted in its place. This open profligacy of the Itage reached its greateft height between the years 1670 and 16S0. The ftaple material of this comedy may be con- (idered to be the commilfion of adultery, which is prefented as one of the principal ornaments in the charafter of the well-bred gentleman, varied with the feducing of other men's miflrefles, for the keeping of miftrefles appears as the rule of focial life. The “ Country Wife,” one of ^^'ycherley's comedies, which is fuppofed to have been brought on the Itage perhaps as early as 1672, is a mals of grofi indecency from beginning to end. It involves two principal plots, that of a voluptuary who feigns himfelf incapable of love and infenfible to the other fex, in order to purfue his intrigues with greater liberty ; and that of a citizen who takes to his wife a filly and innocent countr}' girl, whofe ignorance he believes will be a proteftion to her virtue, but the very means he takes to prevent her, lead to her fall. The “ Parfon’s Wedding,” by Thomas Killigrew, firll; afted in 1673, is equally licentious. The fame at leaf! maybe faid of Dryden’s “ Limberham, or the Kind Keeper,” firft performed in 1678, which, according to the author's own ftatement, was prohibited on account of m Literature and Art. 401 ot its freeiiefs, but more probably becaufe the charafter of Limberbam was believed to be intended for a perfonal fatire on the unpopular earl of Lauderdale. Its plot is fimple enough ; it is the llory of a debauched Old gentleman, named Aldo, whofe fon, after a rather long abfence on the Continent, returns to England, and alLumes the name of Woodall, in order to enjoy treely the pleafures of London life before he makes himfelf known to his friends. He takes a lodging in a houfe occupied by fome loofe women, and there meets with his father, but, as the latter does not recognife his fon, they become friends, and live together licentioully fo long, that when the fon at length difeovers himfelf, the old man is obliged to overlook his vices. Otway’s comedy of “Friendfhip in Fafhion,” performed the fame year, was not a whit more moral. But all thefe are far outdone by Ravenferoft’s comedy of “The London Cuckolds,” firft brought out in 1682, which, neverthelefs, continued to be adled until late in the lafl: century. It is a clever comedy, full of aftion, and confiding of a great number of different incidents, feledfed from the lefs moral tales of the old flory-tellers as they appear in the “Decameron” of Boccaccio, among which that of the ignorant and uneducated young wife, fimilar to the plot of Wycherley’s “Country Wife,” is again introduced. The corruption of morals had become fo great, that when women took up the pen, they exceeded in licentioufnefs even the other fex, as was the cafe with Mrs. Behn. Aphra Behn is underftood to have been born at Canterbury, but to have paffed fome part of her youth in the colony of Surinam, of which her father was governor. She evidently polfelfed a difpofition for intrigue, and Ihe was employed by the Englifh govern- ment, a few years after the Refioration, as a political fpy at Antwerp. She fubfequently fettled in London, and gained a living by her pen, which was very prolific in novels, poems, and plays. It would be difficult to point out in any other works fuch feenes of open profligacy as thofe pre- fented in Mrs. Behn’s two comedies of “ Sir Patient Fancy” and “The City Heirefs, or Sir Timothy Treat-all,” which appeared in 1678 and 1681. Concealment of the flighteft kind is avoided, and even that which cannot be expofed to view, is tolerably broadly deferibed. It appears that the performance of the “ London Cuckolds ” had 3 F been 402 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque been the caufe of fome fcandal, and there were, even among play-goers, Ibme who took offence at fuch outrages on the ordinary feelings of modefty. The excefs of the evil had begun to produce a readtion. Ravenfcroft, the author of that comedy, produced on the ftage, in 1684, a comedy, entitled “ Dame Dobfon, or the Cunning Woman,” which was intended to be a modelt play, but it was unceremonioully “ damned ” by the aiidience. The prologue to this new comedy intimates that the “ London Cuckolds ” had pleafed the town and diverted the court, but that fome “ fqueamilh females ” had taken offence at it, and that he had now written a “ dull, civill ” play to make amends. They are addrefl'ed, therefore, in fuch terms as thefe: — In you, ckajie ladies, then we k'pc to-day, Tkis is the poet's recantation play. Come often to 't, that ke at length may fee ’ Tis more than a pretended modefly. Stick by him now, for if he finds you falter^ He quickly will his way of writing alter ; And every play jhall fend you blujhing home. For, though you rail, yet then we're Jure you'll come. And it is further intimated, - A naughty play was never counted dull — Nor mode]} comedy e'er pleafed you mueh. “I remember," fays Colley Cibber in his “Apology,” looking back to thefe times, “I remember the ladies were then obferved to be decently afraid of venturing bare-faced to a new comedy, till they had been alTured they might do it without the rilk of an infult to their modefty; or if their curiolity were too ftrong for their patience, they took care at leaft to fave appearances, and rarely came upon the firft days of adling but in matks (then daily worn, and admitted in the pit, the tide boxes, and gallery), which cuftom, however, had lb many ill confequences attending it, that it has been abolilhed thefe many years.” According to the SpeSiator, ladies began now to defert the theatre when comedies were brought out, except thofe who “ never mifs the firft day of a new play, left it fliould prove too lufeious to admit of their going with any countenance to the fecond.” In m Literature and Art, 403 In the midft of this abufe, there fuddenly appeared a book which created at the time a great fenfation. The comedies of the latter half of the feventeenth century were not only indecent, but they were filled with profane language, and contained fcenes in which religion itfelf was treated with contempt. At that time there lived a divine of the Church of England, celebrated for his Jacobitil'm — for I am now fpeaking of the reign of king William — for his talents as a controverfial writer, and for his zeal in any caufe which he undertook. This was Jeremy Collier, the author of feveral books of fome merit, which are feldom read now, and who fuffered for his zeal in the caufe of king James, and for his refufal to take the oath of allegiance to king William. In the year 1698 Collier publithed his “ Short View of the Immorality and Profanenefs of the Englifh ftage,” in which he boldly attacked the licentioufnefs of the Englilh comedy. Perhaps Collier’s zeal carried him a little too far j but he had offended the wits, and efpecially the dramatic poets, on all fides, and he was expofed to attacks from all quarters, in which Dryden himfelf took an adlive part. Collier fhowed himfelf fully capable of dealing with his opponents, and the controverfy had the eftedt of calling attention to the immoralities of the ftage, and certainly contributed mudi towards reforming them. They were become much lefs frequent and lefs grofs at the opening of the eighteenth century. Towards the end of the reign of king Charles II., the ftage was more largely employed as a political agent, and under his fuccelfor, James II., the Puritans and the Whigs were conftantly held up to fcorn. After the Revolution, the tables were turned, and the fatire of the ftage was often aimed at Tories and Non-jurors. “The Non-juror,” by Colley Cibber, which appeared in 1717, at a very opportune moment, gained for its author a penfion and the office of poet-laureate. It was founded upon the “Tartuft'e” of Moliere, for the Englifli comedy writers borrowed much from the foreign ftage. A difguifed prleft, who pafles under the name of Dr. Wolf, and who had been engaged in the rebellion of 1715, has in- finuated himfelf into the houfehold of a gentleman of fortune, of not very ftrong judgment, Sir John Woodvil, whom, under the title of a Non-juror, he has not only induced to become an abettor of rebels, but he has perfuaded Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefqiie 404 perlluded him to dilinherit his Ion, and he labours to feduce his wife and to deceive his daugliter. His bafenefs is expofed only juft foon enough to defeat his defigns. Such a produ(ftion as this could not fail to give great offence to all the Jacobite party, of whatever lhade, who were then rather numerous in London, and Cibber allures us that his reward was a con- (iderable amount of adverfe criticifm in every quarter where the Tory inriuence reached. His comedies were inferior in brilliance of dialogue to thofe of the previous age, but the plots were well imagined and conduifted, and they are generally good a6ling plays. To Samuel Foote, born in 1722, we owe the laft change in the form and charatler of Englifti comedy. A man of infinite wit and humour, and poll'elllil of extraordinary talent as a mimic, Foote made mimicry the principal inltrument of his fuccefs on the flage. His pla)'s are above all light and amulingj he reduced the old comedy of five a£ls to three ads, and his plots were ufually fimple, the dialogue full of wit and humour; but their peculiar charaderiftic was their open boldnefs of per- fonal fatire. It is entirely a comedy of his own. He fought to dired his wit againft all the vices of focietj', but this he did by holding up to ridicule and fcorn the individuals who had in fome way or other made themfelves notorious by the pradice of them. All his principal charaders were real charaders, who were more or lefs known to the public, and who were fo perfedly mimicked on the ftage in their drefs, gait, and fpeech, that it was' impollible to miftake them. Thus, in “ The Devil upon Two Sticks,” which is a general fatire on the low condition to which the pradice of medicine had then fallen, the perfonages introduced in it all reprefented quacks well known about the town. “The Maid of Bath” dragged upon the ftage fcandals which were then the talk of Bath fociety. The nabob of the comedy which bears that title, had alfo his model in real life. “The Bankrupt ” may be confidered as a general fatire on the bafenefs of the newfpaper preL of that day, which was made the means of propagating private fcandals and libellous acculations in order to extort money, yet the charaders introduced are faid to have been all portraits from the life ; and the fame ftatement is made with regard to the comedy of “ The Author.” It in Literature and Art. 405 It is evident that a drama of (his inquifitorial charafter is a dangerous thing, and that it could hardly be allowed to exit! where the rights of fociety are properly defined ; and we are not furprifed if Foote provoked a hoft of bitter enemies. But in fome cafes the author met with punith- ment of a heavier and more fubflantial defcription. One of the individuals introduced into “The Maid of Bath,” extorted damages to the amount of .^■'3,000. One of the perfons who figured in “The Author,” obtained an order from the lord chamberlain for putting a flop to the performance after it had had a thort run ; and the confequences of “ The Trip to Calais,” were fiill more difaftrous. It is well known that the character of lady Kitty Crocodile in that play was a broad caricature on the notorious duchefs of Kingfton. Through the treachery of fome of the people employed by Foote, the duchefs obtained information of the nature of this play before it was ready for reprefentation, and fhe had fufficient influence to obtain the lord chamberlain’s prohibition for bringing it on the flage. Nor was this all, for as the play was printed, if not aded,- — and it was fubfequently brought out in a modified form, with omiflion of the part of lady Kitty Crocodile, though the charaders of fome of her agents were ftill retained, — infamous charges were got up againfl Foote, in retaliation, which caufed him fo much trouble and grief, that they are faid to have fhortened his days. The drama which Samuel Foote had invented did not outlive him ; its caricature was itfelf transferred to the caricature of the print-fhop. 40 6 Hiftory of Caricature and Grotejque CHAPTER XXIII. CARICATURE IN HOLLAND. ROMAIN DE HOOGHE. THE ENGLISH REVOLUTION. CARICATURES ON LOUIS XIV. AND JAMES II. DR. SA- CHEVERELL. CARICATURE BROUGHT FROM HOLLAND TO ENGLAND. ORIGIN OF THE AA'ORD “CARICATURE.” MISSISSIPPI AND THE SOUTH SEA; THE YEAR OF BUBBLES. ODERN political caricature, born, as we have feen, in France, may be conlidered to have had its cradle in Holland. The pofition of that country, and its greater degree of freedom, made it, in the feven- teenth century, the general place of refuge to the political difcon- tents of other lands, and efpecially to the French who fled from the tyranny of Louis XIV. It polfelfed at that time fome of the moft Iki'.ful artifts and beft engravers in Europe, and it became the central fpot from which w'ere launched a multitude of fatirical prints againft that monarch’s policy, and againft himfelf and his favourites and minifters. lifts was in a great meafure the caufe of the bitter hatred which Louis always difplayed towards that country. He feared the caricatures of the Dutch more than their arms, and the pencil and graver of Romain de Hooghe were among the moft eftedive weapons employed by William of The marriage of William with Mary, daughter of the duke of York, in 1677, naturally gave the Dutch a greater intereft than they could have felt before in the doraeftic affairs of Great Britain, and a new ftimulus to their zeal againft Louis of France, or, vhich was the fame thing, againft arbitrary power and Popery, both of which had been rendered odious under his name. The acceflion of James H. to the throne of England, and his attempt to re-eftablifli Popery, added religious as well as political fuel to thefe feelings, for ever)’body underftood that James W'as ading NalTau. under in Literature and Art. 407 under the protedlion of the king of France. The very year of king James’s acceffion, in 168^5, the caricature appeared vidiich we have copied in our cut No. 186, and which, although the infcription is in Englilh, appears to have been the work of a foreign artill. It was probably intended to reprefent Mary of Modena, the queen of James II., and her rather famous confelfor, father Petre, the latter under the charatder of the wolf among the flieep. Its aim is fufficiently evident to need no expla- nation. At the top, in the original, are the Latin words, Convcrte Angliam, “ convert England,” and beneath, in Englilh, “ It is a foolilh Iheep that makes the wolf her confelfor.” The period during which the Dutch fchool of caricature flouriflied, extended through the reign of Louis XIV., and into the regency in France, and two great events, the revolution of 1688 in England, and the wild money fpeculations of the year 1720, exercifed efpecially the pencils of 40 8 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque of its caricaturUls. The tirll of thefe events belongs almoft entirely to Romain de Hooghe. Very little is known of the perfonal hilfory of this remarkable artill, but he is believed to have been born towards the middle of the feventeenth century, and to have died in the earlier years of the eighteenth century. The older French writers on art, who were pre- judiced againft Romain de Hooghe for his bitter holiiliry to Louis XIV., inform us that in his youth he employed his graver on obfeene fubjedfs, and led a life lb openly licentious, that he was banilhed from his native town of Amfterdam, and went to live at Haerlem. He gained celebrity bv the feries of plates, e.xecuted in 1672, which reprefented the horrible atrocities committed in Holland by the French troops, and which raifed againft Louis XIV. the indignation of all Europe. It is faid that the prince of Orange (William HI. of England), appreciating the value of his fatire as a political weapon, fecured it in his own interefts by liberally patroniling the caricaturlft j and we owe to Romain de Hooghe a fuccef- lion of large prints in which the king of France, his piotege James II., and the adherents of the latter, are covered with ridicule. One, publiihed in 16SS, and entitled “ Les Monarches Tombants," commemorates the flight of the royal family from England. Another, which appeared at the fame date, is entitled, in French, “Arlequin fur rhypogr)'phe a la croifade Loiolille," and in Dutch, “ Armee van de Heylige League voor der Jefuiten Monarchy'' {i.e. "the army of the holy league for eftablilhing the monarchv of the Jefuits ’’). Louis XIV. and James II. were reprefented under the characters of Arlequin and Panurge, who are feated on the animal here called a “ hypogri phe," but which is really a wild afs. The two kings have their heads joined together under one Jefuit’s cap. Other figures, forming part of this army of Jefuitifm, are diftributed over the field, the moft grotefque of which is that given in our cut No. 187. Two perfonages introduced in fome ridiculous pofition or other, in moft of thefe caricatures, are father Petre, the Jefuit, and the infant prince of Wales, afterwards the old Pretender. It was pretended that this infant was in fad the child of a miller, fecretly introduced into the queen’s bed concealed in a warming-pan ; and that this ingenious plot was contrived by father Petre. Hence the boy was popularly called Peterkin, or Perkin, in Literature and Art. 409 Perkin, i.e. little Peter, which was the name given afterwards to the Pretender in longs and fatires at the time of his rebellion ; and in the prints a windmill was ufually given to the child as a fign of its father’s trade. In the group reprefented in our cut, father Petre, with the child in his arms, is feated on a rather lingular Heed, a loblfer. The- young prince here carries the windmill on his head. On the lobfter’s back, behind the Jefuit, are carried the papal crown, furmounted by a fleur-de- lis, with a bundle of relics, indulgences, &c., and it has feized in one claw the Englilh church fervice book, and in the other the book of the laws of England. In the Dutch defcription of this print, the child is called “the new born Antichrift.” Another of Romain de Hooghe’s prints, entitled “ Pariurge feconde par Arlequin Deodaat a la croifade d'lrlande, 1689,” is a fatire on king James’s expedition to Ireland, which led to the memo- rable battle of the Boyne. James and his friends are proceeding to the place of embarkation, and, as reprefented in our cut No. 188, father Petre marches in front, carrying the infant prince in his arms. The drawing of Romain de Hooghe is not always corredi, efpecially in his larger fubjedts, which perhaps may be afcribed to his hafty and carelefs manner of working ; but he difplays great Ikill in grouping his ligures, and great power in inveiling them with a large amount of fatirical 3 G humour. Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque 4 1 o humour. Moti of the ether caricatures of the time are poor both in clelign and execution. Such is the cafe with a vulgar fatirical print which was publilhed in France in the autumn of 1690, on the arrival of a talle rumour that king William had been killed in Ireland. In the iVj. iSS. C)ff ti Ireland. Held of the piidure the corpfe of the king is followed by a procelTion con- lifting of lii> queen and the principal fupporters of his caufe. The lower corner on the left hand is occupied by a view of the interior of the infernal regions, and king William introduced in the place allotted to him among the Hames. In dill'erent parts of the pidture there are feveral inferip- tions, all breathing a fpirit of very infolent exultation. One of them is the — Billet d' EnUrreir.cnt, Voiis cstes priez d'assister au convoy, service, et enterrement du tres haut, tres grand, et tres intame Prince infernal, grand stadouter, des Arm6s diaboliques de la ligue d'Ausbourg, et insigne usiirpateur des Royaumes d’Angleterre, d’Eccosse, et d'lrlande, decide dans ITrlande au mois d’Aoust 1690, qni se fera le dit mois,dans sa paroisse infernale, ou assistcront Dame Proserpine, Radamonte, et les Ligueurs. Les Dames lui diront s’il leur plaist des injures. The prints executed in England at this time were, if poffible, worfe than thofe publilhed in France. Almoft the only contemporary caricature on the downfall of the Stuarts that I know, is an ill-executed print, pub- lilhed in Literature and Art. 41 1 lifliecl immediately after the acceffion of William III., under the title, “ England’s Memorial of its wonderful deliverance from French Tyranny and Popifli Opprellion.” The middle of the pidture is occupied by “the royal orange tree,” which flouriflies in fpite of all the attempts to deftroy it. At the upper corner, on the left fide, is a reprefentation of the French king’s “ council,” confifiing of an equal number of Jefuits and devils, feated alternately at a round table. The circumftance that the titles and infcriptions of nearly all thefe caricatures are in Dutch, feems to Ihow that their influence was intended to be exercifed in Holland rather than elfewhere. In two or three only of them thefe defcriptions were accompanied with tranflations in Englilh or French ; and after a time, copies of them began to be made in England, accompanied with Englilh defcriptions. A curious example of this is given in the fourth volume of the “ Poems on State Affairs,” printed m 1707. In the preface to this volume the editor takes occafion to inform the reader — “That having procur’d from beyond fea a Colledtion ot Satyrical Prints done in Holland and elfewhere, by Rom. de Hoog, and other the beft mailers, relating to the French King and his Adherents, fince he unjuflly begun this war, I have perfuaded the Bookfeller to be at the expenfe of ingraving feveral of them.; to each of w'hich I have given the Explanation in Englilh verfe, they being in Dutch, French, or Latin in the originals.” Copies of feven of thefe caricatures are accordingly given at the end of the volume, which are certainly inferior in every refpetl to thofe of the belt period of Romain de Hooghe. One of them commemorates the eclipfe of the fun on the 12th of May, 1706. I'he fun, as it might be conjedtured, is Louis XIV., eclipfed by queen Anne, whofe face occupies the place of the moon. In the foreground of the pidture, juft under the eclipfe, the queen is feated on her throne under a canopy, furrounded by her counfellors and generals. With her left arm flie holds down the Gallic cock, while with the other hand flie clips one of its wdngs (fee our cut No. 189). In the upper corner on the right, is inferted a pidture of the battle of Ramillies, and in the lower corner on the left, a fea-fight under admiral Leake, both vidtories gained in that year. Another of thefe copies of foreign prints is given in our cut No. 190 412 Hifiory of Caricature and Grotefque Xo. 190. We are told that “ thefe figures reprefent a French trumpet and drum, fent by Louis le Grand to enquire news of feveral citys loft by the Mighty Monarch laft campaign." The trumpeter holds in his hand a lift of loft towns, and another is pinned to the breaft of the drummer; the former lift is headed by the names of “ Gaunt, Bruftels, Antw'erp, Bruges, " the latter by " Barcelona.” The firft remarkable outburft of caricatures in England was caufed by the proceedings agaiuft the notorious Dr. Sacheverell in 1710. It is fomewhat curious that Sacheverell's partifans fpeak of caricatures as things brought recently from Holland, and new in England, and afcribe the ufe of them as peculiar to the Whig parly. The writer of a pamphlet, entitled “The Pidture of Malice, or a true Account of Dr. Sacheverell’s Enemies, and their behaviour with regard to him,” informs us that “ the chief means by which all the lower order of that fort of men call'd Whigs, ftiall ever be found to a£f for the ruin of a potent adverfar}', are the following three — by the Print, the Canto or Doggrell Poem, and by the Libell, grave, calm, and cool, as the author of the ' True Anfwer ’ defcribes it. Thefe are not all employed at the fame time in Literature and Art. 413 time, any more than the Ixm and arierban of a kingdom is raifed, unlefs to make fare work, or in cafes of great exigency and imminent danger.” “The Print,” he goes on to fay, “is originally a Dutch talifman (be- queathed to tlie ancient Batavians by a certain Chinefe necromancer and A'c. 190. Trumpet and Drufn. painter), with a virtue far exceeding that of the Palladium, not only of guarding their cities and provinces, but alfo of annoying their enemies, and preferving a due balance amongfi: the neighbouring powers around. This writer warms up fo much in his indignation againft this new weapon of the Whigs, that he breaks out in blank verfe to tell us how even the myfterious power of the magician did not deftroy its vittims — ■ Swifter than heretofore the Print effac'd The pomp of mightieft monarch;, and dethron'd The dread idea of royal majefty ; Dwindling the prince below the pigmy fize. Wum Js 4 1 4 Hi /lory oj Caricature and Grotefque irUmfs the cnee Great Lcuh in ycathfal fride, And Charles cf haf-f^y days, who both confe£'d The magic ycrzucr of mesozctinto * fiade. And form grotefque, in manifejices loud Denouncing death to boor and burgcmafter . UOtneJs, ye facred popes with triple crown, U'ho JHczuije welims felt to hideous print. Spurn'd by the populace who whi/cme lay J'nJIrate, and eni n adored before your thrones. W'e are then told that “this, if not the hrft, has yet been the chief machine which his enemies have employ’d againlf the doctor; they have expofed him in the fame piece with the pope and the devil, and who now could imagine that any fimple prieft fliould be able to ftand before a power which had levelled popes and monarchs ? ’’ At leaft one copy of the caricature here alluded to is preferved, although a great rarity, and it is reprefented in our cut Xo. 191. Two of the party remained long affociated * The method of engraving called mezzotinto was very generally adopted in England in the earlier part of the last century for prints and caricatures. It was continued to rather a late period by the publishing house of Carrington Bowles. in Literature and Art. 415 allbciated together in the popular outcry, and as the name of the third fell into contempt and oblivion, the dodtor’s place in this alfociation was taken by a new caufe of alarm, the Pretender, the child whom we have juft feen fo joyoutly brandilhing his windmill. It is evident, however, that this caricature greatly exalperated Sacheverell and the party which fupported him. It will have been noticed that the writer juft quoted, in ufing the term 'Sprint,” ignores altogether that of caricature, which, however, was about this time beginning to come into ufe, although it is not found in the didtionaries, I believe, until the appearance of that of Dr. Johnfon, in 1755. Caricature is, of courfe, an Italian word, derived from the verb caricare, to charge or load ; and therefore, it means a pidlure which is charged, or exaggerated (the old French didtionaries fay, “ c’eji la merne chafe que charge en peinture ”). The word appears not to have come into ufe in Italy until the latter half of the feventeenth century, and the earlieft inftance I know of its employment by an Englilh writer is that quoted by Johnfon from the “ Chriftian Morals ” of Sir Thomas Brown, who died in 1682, but it was one of his lateft writings, and was not printed till long after his death : — “ Expofe not thyfelf by four-footed manners unto monftrous draughts (i.e. drawings) and caricatura reprefen- tations.” This very quaint writer, who had palfed tome time in Italy, evidently ufes it as an exotic word. We find it next employed by the writer of the ElTay No. ,537, of the “ Spedlator,” who, fpeaking of the way in which different people were led by feelings of jealoufy and preju- dice to detradt from the charadlers of others, goes on to fay, “ From all thefe hands we have fuch draughts of mankind as are reprefented in thofe burlefque pidlures which the Italians call caricaturas, where the art confifts in preferving, amidft diftorted proportions and aggravated features, fome dillinguilhing likenefs of the perfon, but in fuch a manner as to transform the moft agreeable beauty into the moft odious monfter.” The word was not fully eftablilhed in our language in its Englilh form of caricature until late in the laft century. The fubjedi of agitation which produced a greater number of carica- tures than any previous event was the wild financial fcheme introduced into 41 6 Hijlory of Caricature a fid Grotefque into France by the Scottifl) adventurer. Law, and imitated in England in the great South Sea Bubble. It would be impollible here, within our necellary limits, to attempt to trace the hiltory of thel'e bubbles, which all burlt in the courle of the year ijao; and, in fadt, it is a hillor)' of which tew are ignorant. On this, as on former occalions, the great mafs of the caricatures, efpecially thofe againft the Millillippi fcheme, were executed in 1 lolland, but they are much inferior to the works of Romain de Hooghe. In fadt, fo great was the demand for thefe caricatures, that the publilhers, in their eagemefs for gain, not only deluged the world with plates by artifts of no talent, which were without point or intereft, but they took old plates of any fubjedf in which there was a multitude of figures, put new titles to them, and publiilied them as fatires on the Mifliflippi fcheme ; for people were ready to take anything which reprefented a crowd as a fatire on the eagernefs with which Frenchmen rulhed into the Ibare-market. m Literature a?id Art. 417 ihare-market. One or two curious inftances of this deception might be pointed out. Thus, an old pidture, evidently intended to reprefent the meeting of a king and a nobleman, in the court of a palace, furrounded by a crowd of courtiers, in the coftume probably of the time of Henri IV., was republilhed as a pidture of people crowding to the grand fcene of ftock-jobbing in Paris, the Rue Quinquenpoix ; and the old pidture of the battle between Carnival and Lent came out again, a little re-touched, under the Dutch title, “ Stryd tufzen de fmullende Bubbel-Heeren en de aanftaande Arraoede,” i.e., “ The battle between the good-living bubble- lords and approaching poverty.” Betides being ilPued fingly, a confiderable number of thefe prints were colledted and publilhed in a volume, which is Bill met with not unfre- quently, under the title “ Het groote Tafereel der Dwaaflieid,” “The great pidture of folly.” One of this fet of prints reprefents a multitude of perfons, of all ages and fexes, adting the part of Atlas in fupporting on their backs globes, which, though made only of paper, had become, through the agitation of the Bock exchange, heavier than gold. Law himfelf (fee our cut No. 192) Bands foremoB, and requires the afliflance of Hercules to fupport his enormous burthen. In the French verfes accompanying this print, the writer fays — Ami Alas, on volt (fans center vous et mol') Faire P Atlas partout des divers perjonnages. Riche, pauvre, homme, femme, et fot et quaji-jage. Valet, et paifan, le gueux J'eleve en roi. Another of thefe caricatures reprefents Law in the charadler of Don Quixote, riding upon Sandro’s donkey. He is haBening to his Dulcinia, who waits for him in the aSiie hub (adtion or fhare-houfe), towards which people are dragging the animal on which he is seated. The devil (fee our cut No. 193), fits behind Law, and holds up the afs’s tail, while a Brower of paper, in the form of fhares in companies, is fcattered around, and fcrambled for by the eager aSlionnaires. In front, the animal is laden with the money into which this paper has been turned, — the box bears the infeription, “ Bomlarioos Geldkiji, 1720,” “ Bombario’s (Law’s) gold cheB ; ” and the flag bears the infeription, “ Ik hoom, ik koom, Dul- 3 H cinia 4i8 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotefque cinia," “ I come. I come, Dulcinia." The belt, perhaps, of this lot of caricatures is a large engraving by the well-known Picart, inferted among the Dutch collc6tion with explanations in Dutch and French, and which svas re-engraved in London, with Englilh defcriptions and applications. iVi. 195. Tiic ^uixcic of finaKiC. It is a general fa'ire on the madnefs of the memorable year 1720. Folly appears as the charioteer of Fortune, whofe car is drawn by the reprefen- tatives of the numerous companies which had fprung up at this time, molt of which appear to be more or lels unfound. Many of thefe agents have the tails of foxes, “ to Ihow their policy and cunning,” as the explana- tion informs us. The devil is feen in the clouds above, blowing bubbles of foap, which mix with the paper which Fortune is diftributing to the crowd. The picture is crowded with figures, fcattered in groups, who are employed in a variety of occupations connefted with the great folly of the dav, one of which, as an example, is given in our cut No. 194. It is a transfer of ftock, made through the medium of a Jew broker. It in Literature and Art. 419 It was in tliis bubble agitation that theEnglilli I'chool of caricature began, and a few fpecimens are preferved, though others which are advertifed in the new'fpapers of that day, feem to be entirely loft. In fatt, a very confiderable portion of the caricature literature of a period fo compara- tively recent as the firft half of the laft century, appears to have perilhed ; for the intereft of thefe prints was in general fo entirely temporary that few people took any care to preferve them, and few of them were very attraftive as piftures. As yet, indeed, thefe Englifti prints are but poor imitations of the works of Picart and other continental artifts. A pair of Englilh prints, entitled “The Bubbler’s Mirrour,” reprefents, one a head joyful at the rife in the value of ftock, the other, a fimilar head forrowful at its fall, furrounded in each cafe with lifts of companies and epigrams upon them. They are engraved in mezzotinto, a ftyle of art fuppofed to have been invented in England — its invention was afcribed to Prince Rupert — and at this time very popular. In the imprint of thefe laft- mentioned plates, we are informed that they were “ Printed for Carington Bowles, next y' Chapter Houfe, in St. Paul’s Ch. Yard, London,” a well- known name informer years, and even now one quite familiar to.col- leftors, of this clafs of prints, efpecially. Of Carington Bowles we lhall have more to fay in the next chapter. With him begins the long lift of celebrated Englilh printfellers. (1 Ao. 194. runsfer of Slock, i 420 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotejque CHAPTER XXIV. ENGLISH CAIUCATUKE IN THE AGE OF GEOEGE II. ENGLISH PRINT- SELLEEs. AUTISTS E.MPLOVEI) BY THEM. SIR ROBERT WALPOLe's LONG .MINISTRY. THE MAR WITH ERANCE. THE NEWCASTLE AD- •MINISTR ATION. OPERA INTRIGL’ES. ACCESSION OF GEORGE III., AND LORD BUTE IN POWER. ^^^ITII ilie acccllioii of George II., the talle for political caricatures ’ * increafLil greatly, aiul they had become almoli a iiecellity ol focial life. At this time, too, a diliiiict Englilh fchool of political caricature had been eftablilhed, and the print-fellers became more numerous, and took a higher polition in the commerce of literature and art. Among the carliell of thefe printfellcrs the name of Bowles hands efpecially con- fpicuous. Hogarth's burlefque on the Beggar’s Opera, publillied in 1728, was " printed for John Bowles, at the Black Horfe, in Cornhill." Some copies of “ King Henr)' the Eighth and Anna Bullen,” engraved by the fame great artih in the following year, bear the imprint of John Bowles; and others were “ printed for Robert Wilkinfon, Cornhill, Carington Bowles, in St. Paul's Church Yard, and R. Sayer, in Fleet Street.” Hogarth’s “ Humours of Southwark Fair ” was all'o publilhed, in 1733, by Carington and John Bowles. This Carington Bowles was, perhaps, dead in 1755, for in that year the caricature entitled “ Britilli Refentment ” bears the imprint, “ Printed for T. Bowles, in St. Paul’s Church Yard, and Jno. Bowles & Son, in Cornhill.” John Bowdes appears to have been the brother of the firit Carington Bow les in St. Paul’s Churchyard, and a fon named Carington fucceeded to that bufinels, which, under him and his fon Carington, and then as the eftablilhment of Bowdes and Carver, has continued to exift within the memor)- of the prefent generation. Another very celebrated printthop was eftablilhed in Fleet Street by Thomas Overton. in Literature and Art. 42 1 Overton, probably as far back as the clofe of the feventeenth century. On his death his bufinefs was purchafed by Robert Sayers, a mezzotinto engraver of merit, whofe name appears as joint publilher of a print by Hogarth in 1729. Overton is faid to have been a perfonal friend of Hogarth. Sayers was fucceeded in the bufinefs by his pupil in mezzo- tinto engraving, named Laurie, from whom it defcended to his fon, Robert H. Laurie, known in city politics, and it became fubfequently the firm of Laurie and Whittle. This bufinefs fiill exifis at 53, Fleet Street, the oldefl: ettablilhment in London for the publication of maps and prints. During the reign of the fecond George, the number of publifiiers of caricatures increafed confiderably, and among others, we meet with the names of J. Smith, “ at Hogarth’s Head, Cheapfide,” attached to a caricature publilhed Auguft, 1736^ Edwards and Darly, “at the Golden Acorn, facing Hungerford, Strand,” who alfo publilhed caricatures during the years 1756-7; caricatures and burlefque prints were publilhed by G. Bickham, May’s Buildings, Covent Garden, and one, diredted againfi the employment of foreign troops, and entitled “ A Nurfe for the Hefiians,” is ftated to have been “ fold in May’s Buildings, Covent Garden, where is 50 more;’’ “The Raree Show,” publilhed in 1762, was “ fold at Sumpter’s Political Print-fiiop, Fleet Street,” and many carica- tures on contemporary coftume, efpecially on the Macaronis, about the year 1772, were “publilhed by T. Bowen, oppofite the Haymarket, Piccadilly.” Sledge, “ printfeller, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden,” is alfo met with about the middle of the lafi: century. Among other burlelque prints, Bickham, of May’s Buildings, ilTued a feries of figures reprefenting the various trades, made up of the different tools, &c., ufed by each. The houfe of Carington Bowles, in St. Paul’s Churchyard, produced an immenfe number of caricatures, during the laid century and the prefent, and of the moft varied charafter, but they confifted more of comic fcenes of fociety than of political fubjedts, and many of them were engraved in mezzotinto, and rather highly coloured. Among them were caricatures on the falliions and foibles of the day, amufing accidents and incidents, common occurrences of life, charadters, &:c., and they are frequently aimed at lawyers and priefts, and efpecially at monks and friars. 422 Hljtory of Caricature and Grotejque tViars, for the anti-Catholic feeling was Itrong in the lalt centurj'. J. Brotherton, at Xo. 132, New Bond Street, publilhed many of Bun- bury's caricatures; while the houfe of Laurie and Whittle gave employ- ment el’pecially to the Cruiklhanks. But perhaps the moll extenlive publiBier of caricatures of them all was S. W'. Fores, who dwelt firll at Xo. 3, Piccadilly, but afterwards eftablilhed himfelf at Xo. 50, the corner of Sackville Street, where the name ftill remains. Fores feems to have been molt fertile in ingenious expedients for the extenfion of his bufinels. He formed a fort of library of caricatures and other prints, and charged for admilhon to look at them ; and he afterwards adopted a fyllem of lending them out in portfolios for evening parties, at which thefe port- folios of cMricatures became a very falhionable amufement in the latter part of the lalt century. At times, fome remarkable curiofity w'as em- ployed to add to the attractions of his ihop. Thus, on caricatures pub- lilhed in 1790, we rind the Itatement that, “In Fores’ Caricature Mufeum is the completell collection in the kingdom. Allb the head and hand of Count Strucmce. Admittance, is.’’ Caricatures againll the French revolutionills, publilhed in 1793, bear imprints Hating that they were “ publilhed by S. Fores, Xo. 3, Piccadilly, where may be feen a complete Model of the Guillotine — admittance, one fliilling.’’ In fome this model is laid to be fix feet high. Among the artills employed by the print-publiflters of the age of George II., we Itill rind a certain number of foreigners. Coypel, w'ho caricatured the opera in the da)s of Farinelli, and pirated Hogarth, belonged to a diltinguilhed family of French painters. Goupy, who allb caricatured the artyies of the opera (in 1727), and Boitard, who worked aiflively for Carington Bowles from 1750 to 1770, were alfo Frenchmen. Liolard, another caricaturift of the time of George II., w'as a native of Geneva. The names of two others, Vandergucht and V^anderbank, pro- claim them Dutchmen. Among the Englilh caricaturifls who worked for the houfe of Bowles, were George Bickham, the brother of the print- feller, John Collet, and Robert Dighton, with others of lefe repute. R. Attwold, who publilhed caricatures againll admiral Byng in 1750, was an imitator of Hogarth. Among the more obfcnre caricaturills of the latter hi Literature and Art. 423 latter part of the half-century, were MacArdell — whofe print of “The Park Shower," reprefenting the confufion raifed among the fathionable company in the Mall in St. James’s Park by a fudden fall of rain, is fo well known — and Darley. Paul Sandby, who was patronifed by the duke of Cumberland, executed caricatures upon Hogarth. Many of thefe artifis of the earlier period of the Englilli fchool of caricature appear to have been very ill paid — the firll of the family of Bowles is faid to have boalled that he bought many of the plates for little more than their value as metal. The growing tafle for caricature had alio brought forward a number of amateurs, among whom were the countefs of Burlington, and general, afterwards marquis, Townfliend. The former, who was the lady of that earl who built Burlington Houfe, in Piccadilly, was the leader of one of the fadtions in the opera difputes at the dole of the reign of George I., and is underftood to have defigned the well-known caricature upon Cuzzoni, Farinelli, and Heidegger, which was etched by Goupy, whom Ihe patronifed. It muft not be forgotten that Bunbury himfelf^ as well as Sayers, were amateurs ; and among other amateurs I may name captain Minlliull, captain Baillie, and John Nixon. The tirft of thefe publilhed caricatures againft the Macaronis (as the dandies of the earlier part of the reign of George HI. were called), one of which, entitled “The Macaroni Dreliing-Room,” was efpecially popular. Englilh political caricature came into its full adivity with the minillry of fir Robert Walpole, which, beginning in 1721, lafied through the long period of twenty years. In the previous period the Whigs were acculed of having invented caricature, but now the Tories certainly took the utmofl; advantage of the invention, for, during feveral years, the greater number of the caricatures which were publilhed were aimed againft the Whig minillry. It is allb a rather remarkable charaderiftic of fociety at this period, that the ladies took fo great an intereft in politics, that the caricatures were largely introduced upon fans, as well as upon other objeds of an equally perfonal charader. Moreover, the popular notion of what conftituted a caricature was ftill fo little fixed, that they were ufually called hieroglyphics, a term, indeed, which was not ill applied, for they were fo elaborate, and fo filled with myftical allufions, that now it is by no Hifiory of Caricature and Grotefque 424 no means eal'y to underttand or appreciate them. Towards the year 1739, there w.as a marked improvement in the political caricatures — they were better defigned, and dilplayed more talent, but Hill they required rather long detcriptions to render them intelligible. One of the moft celebrated was produced by the motion in the Houfe of Commons, Feb. 13, 1741, againll the minifter Walpole. It was entitled “The Motion,” and was a Whig fatire upon the oppofition, who are reprefented as driving fo hurriedly and inconfiderately to obtain places, that they are overthrown before they reach their objedl. The party of the oppofition retaliated by a counter-caricature, entitled, “The Reafon,” which was in fonie refpedls a parody upon the other, to which it was inferior in point and fpirit. At the fame time appeared another caricature againft the miniftry, under the title of “ The Motive.” Thefe provoked another, entitled. Kc. 195 . A Party cf M. turners. in Literature and Art. 425 entitled, “ A Conlequence of the Motion which was followed the day after its publication by another caricature upon the oppofition, entitled, “ The Political Libertines 5 or, Motion upon Motion while the oppo- nents of the government alfo brought out a caricature, entitled, "The Grounds,” a violent and rather grofs attack upon the Whigs. Among other caricatures publilhied on this occafion, one of the bed was entitled, “The Funeral of Faftion,” and bears the date of March 26, 1741. Beneath it are the words, “Funerals performed by Squire S s,” allud- ing to Sandys, who was the motion-maker in the Houle of Commons, and who thus brought on his party a lignal defeat. Among the chief mourners on this occalion are feen the oppofition journals. The Craftsman, the creation of Bolingbroke and Pulteney, the ftill more Icurrilous Champion, The Daily Poji, The London and Evening Pof, and The Common Senfe Journal. This mournful group is reproduced in our cut No. 195. From this time there was no falling off in the fupply of caricatures, which, on the contrary, feemed to increafe every year, until the adtivity of the pidtorial fatirifls was roufed anew by the hoftilities with France in 3 I 17.15. 426 Hi ftory of Caricature and Grotefcjiie 1755, and the minifterial intrigues of the two following years. The w'ar, accepted by the Englilh government reluctantly, and ill prepared for, was the fubyeCt of much difcontent, although at rirlt hojies were given of great fuccels. One of the caricatures, publilhed in the middle of thefe early hopes, at a time when an Englilh fleet lay before Louilbourg, in Canada, is entitled, “ Britilh Refentment, or the French fairly coop'd at Louif- boLirg,” and came from the pencil of the French artill Boitard. One of its groups, reprefenting the courageous Englifli failor and the defpairing Frenchman, is given in our cut No. 196, and may ferve as an example of Boitard’s ftyle of drawing. It became now' the falhion to print political caricatures, in a diminiflied form, on cards, and feventy-flve of thefe were formed into a fmall volume, under the title of “ A Political and Satirical Miltorv of the years \ and i;,';;. In a feries of feventy- flve humorous and entertaining Prints, containing all the moft remarkable Tranfadions, Characters, and Caricaturas of thofc two memorable years. . . . London : printed for E. Morris, near St. Paul’s.” The im- prints of the plates, which bear the dates of their feveral publications, inform us that they came from the w'ell-known (hop of “Darly and Edwards, at the Acorn, facing Hungerford, Strand.” Thefe caricatures begin with our foreign relations, and exprefs the belief that the minifters were facriliciug Englilh interefls to French influence. In one of them (our m Literature and Art. 427 (our cut No. 197), entitled, “England made odious, or the French DrelFers,” the minider, Newcaftle, in the garb of a woman, and his colleague. Fox, have drelFed Britannia in a new French robe, which does not tit her. She exclaims, “ Let me have my own cloathes. I cannot ftir my arms in thefe 5 betides, everybody laughs at me.” Newcaftle replies, rather imperioutly, “ Fluli}’, be quiet, you have no need to ftir your arms — why, lure! what’s here to do?” While Fox, in a more inlinuating tone, ofters her a fleur-de-lis, and fays, “ Here, madam, flick this m your bofom, next your heart.” The two pidtures which adorn the walls of the room reprefent an axe and a halter j and underneath we read the lines, — And (hall the fubjlitutes of po^ver Our genius thus bedeck ? Let them remember there' s an hour Of quittance — then., ivare neck. In another print of this feries, this laft idea is illuftrated more fully. It is aimed at the minifters, who were believed to be enriching themfelves at the expenfe of the nation, and is entitled, “ The Devil turned Bird- catcher.” On one fide, while Fox is greedily fcrambling for the gold, the fiend has caught him in a halter fufpended to the gallows; on the other fide another demon is letting down the fatal axe on Newcaftle, who is fimilarly employed. The latter (fee our cut No. 198) is defcribed as 428 Hijiory oj Caricature and Grotejque as a “ Noddy catching at the bait, wliile tlie bird-catcher lets drop an axe. ’ 'Ihis implement ot e.xecution is a perfect pitlure of a guillotine, long before it was fo notorioully in ufe in France. Ihe third example ot thefe caricatures which I lhall quote is entitled “ 1 he Idol,” and has for its fubjecl the extravagancies and perfonal jealou- lies connected with the Italian opera. The rivalrv between Mingotti and \ annelchi was now making as much noife there as that of Cuzzoni and Fauftina fome years before. The former afted arbitrarily and capricioutly, and could with difficulty be bound to ting a few times during the feafon for a high falar)’ : it is faid, £ 2,000 for the feafon. In the caricature to which I allude, this lady appears raifed upon a ftool, infcribed “.^2,000 per annum,” and is receiving the worlhip of her admirers. Immediately before her an ecclefiaftic is feen on his knees, exclaiming, “Unto thee be praife now and for evermore !” In the background a lady appears, hold- ing up her pug-dog, then the falhionable pet, and addreffing the opera favourite, “ ’Tis only pug and you I love.” Other men are on their knees behind the ecclefiallic, all perfons of diftin( 9 :ion ; and laft comes a nobleman and his lady, the fomier holding in his hand an order for .^^2,000, his fubfcription to the opera, and remarking, “We ffiall have but twelve in Literature and Art. 429 twelve tongs for all this money.” The lady replies, with an air of con- tempt, “Well, and enough too, for the paltry trifle.” The idol, in return for all this homage, fings rather contemptuoully — Ra, ru, ra, rot ye. My ttjme is Mingotti, If you ’worlhip me notn. Ton pall all go to potti. The clofing years of the reign of George II., under the vigorous adrainiftration of the firft William Pitt, witnelTed a calm in the domeftic politics of the country, which prefented a ftrange contraft to the agita- tion of the previous period. Fadlion feemed to have hidden its head, and there was comparatively little employment for the caricaturifl. But this calm lafted only a fhort time after that king’s death, and the new reign was ufhered in by indications of approaching political agitation of the moil violent deferip- tion, in which fatirills who had hitherto con- tented themfelves wdth other fubjedls were tempted to embark in the ftrife of politics. Among thefe w'as Hogarth, whole difeom- forts as a political caricaturifl we fliall have to deferibe in our next chapter. Perhaps no name ever provoked a greater amount of caricature and fatirical abufe than that of Lord Bute, who, through the favour of the Princefs of Wales, ruled fupreme at court during the firfl period of the reign ot George III. Bute had taken into the miniflry, as his confidential colleague. Fox — the Henry Fox who became fubfequently the firfl Lord Holland, a man who had en- riched himfelf enormoufiy wdth the money ot the nation, and thefe two appeared to be aiming at the eflablifhment of arbitrary power in the place of conflitutional government. Fox was ufually reprefented in the No. 200 Fox on Boots, 430 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque the caricatures with the head and tail of the animal reprefented by his name rather ftrongly developed ; while Bute was drawn, as a very bad pun upon his name, in the garb of a Scotchman, wearing two large boots, or fometirnes a lingle boot of tlill greater magnitude. In thefe caricatures Bute and To-X are generally coupled together. Thus, a little before the refigna- tion of the duke of Xewcallle in t 762, there appeared a caricature entitled “ 'I'he State Xurfery,” in which the various iiiembers of the miniftry, as it was then formed under Lord Bute's inriuence, are reprefented as engaged in childilh games. Fo.\, ns the whipper-in of parliamentary majorities, is riding, armed with his whip, on Bute's ihoulders (fee our cut No. 200), while the duke of Xewcallle performs the more menial fervice of rocking the cradle. In the rhymes which accompany this caricature, the firrt of thefe groups is defcribed as follows (Fox was commonly fpoken of in fatire by the title of \'olpone) — yirj} j:i, Jre clJ jh RiJing cr th€ (biulden hrmvry Of xkt r-.uctlc Jjvsurire &rwr;y ; DxJh, dicJU, Jm. The number of caricatures publilhed at this period was very great, and they were almoft all aimed in one direSion, againft Bute and Fox, the Princefs of Wales, and the government they diretSled. Caricature, at this time, ran into the leaft difguifed licence, and the coarfeft allufions were made to the fuppofed fecrct intercourfe between the minifter and the Princefs of Wales, of which perhaps the mod harmlefs w'as the addi- tion ot a petticoat to the boot, as a fj'mbol of the influence under w'hich the countrv’ was governed. In mock proceflions and ceremonies a Scotchman was generally introduced carrving the ftandard of the boot and petticoat. Lord Bute, frightened at the amount of odium which was thus heaped upon him. fought to ftem the torrent by employing fatirills to defend the government, and it is hardly neceflar}' to ftate that among thefe mercenary auxiliaries was the great Hogarth himfelf, who accepted a penfion, and publilhed bis caricature entitled, “The Times, Xov. I," in the month of September, 1762. Hogarth did not excel in political caricature, and there was little in this print to diftinguifli it above the 1 in Liter atiire and Art, 43 ^ I the ordinary publications of a fimilar charatfer. It was the moment of negotiations for Lord Bute’s unpopular peace, and Hogarth’s falire is diredled againll the foreign policy of the great ex-miniller Pitt. It reprefents Europe in a Hate of general conflagration, and the flames already communicating to Great Britain. Wliile Pitt is blowing the fire, Bute, with a party of foldiers and tailors zealoufty allifled by his favourite Scotchmen, is labouring to extinguifli it. In this he is impeded by the interference of the duke of Newcaflle, who brings a wheelbarroA^ full of Monituri, and North Britons, the violent oppofition journals, to feed the Ko. 201 . FdTiatkifm in another Shape. flames. The advocacy of Bute’s mercenaries, whether literary or artiftic, did little fervice to the government, for they only provoked increated adtivity among its opponents. Hogarth’s caricature of “ The Times, drew feveral anfwers, one of the befl of which was a large print entitled “The Raree Show: a political contrail to the print of ‘ The Times,’ by William Hogarth.’’ It is the houfe of John Bull which is here on fire, and the Scots are dancing and exulting at it. In the centre of the pidure appears a great adors’ barn, from an upper window ot which Fox thrufts out his head and points to the fign, reprefenting HLneas and Dido entering 432 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque entering the cave together, as the performance which was adting within. It is an allufion to the fcandal in general circulation relating to Bute and the princels, who, of courfe, were the yEneas and Dido of the piece, and appear in thofe character, on the fcatfold in front, with two of Bute’s mercenary writers, Smollett, who edited the Briton, and Murphy, who wrote in the Auditor, one blowing the trumpet and the other beating the drum. Among the dirt'erent groups which till the pidture, one, behind the adors’ barn (fee our cut Xo. 20 j), is evidently intended for a fatire on the fpirit of religious fanaticifm which was at this lime fpreading through the country. .\n open-air preacher, mounted on a ftool, is addrelling a not very intelledual-looking audience, while his inl'piralion is conveyed to him in a rather vulgar manner by the fpirit, net of good, but of evil. 'I'he violence of this political warfare at length drove Lord Bute from at lead oftenlible power. He religned on the 6th of April, 1763. One of the popular favourites at this time was the duke of Cumberland, the hero of Culloden, who was regarded as the leader of the oppofition in the Houle of Lords. People now believed that it was the duke of Cumber- land who had overthrown “ the boot," and his popularity increafed on a fudden. The triumph was commemorated in fevc-ral caricatures. One of thefe is entitled, “The .Tack-Boot kick'd down, or Englilh Will triumphant : a Dream." The duke of Cumberland, whip in hand, has kicked the boot out of the houfe, exclaiming to a young man in failor’s garb who follows him, “ Let me alone, Xed ; I know how to deal with Scotfmen. Remember Culloden." The youth replies, “ Kick hard, uncle, keep him down. Let me have a kick too.” Nearly the fame group, uling limilar language, is introduced into a caricature of the fame date, entitled, “ The Boot and the Blockhead.” The youthful perfonage is no doubt intended for Cumberland's nephew, Edward, duke of York, \\ ho was a failor, and was railed to the rank of rear-admiral, and w'ho appears to have joined his uncle in his oppoliticn to Lord Bute. The “ boot,” as feen in our cut No. 202, is encircled with Hogarth’s celebrated “ line of beauty,” of which I llvall have to fpeak more at length in the next chapter. With in Literature and Art. 433 ' With the overthrow of Bute’s miniftry, we may confider the Englilh fchool of caricature as completely formed and fully eflablillied. From this time the names of the caricaturills are better known, and we (bail have to confider them in their individual charadlers. One ol thefe, William Hogarth, had rifen in fame far above the group of the ordinary men by whom he was furrounded. 3 434 Hijiory of Caricature and Grotejqiie CHAPTER XXV. HOGARTH. HIS EARLY HISTORY’. HIS SETS OF PICTURES. THE HAR- LOt’s progress. THE RAKe’s PROGRESS. THE MARRIAGE A LA MODE. HIS OTHER PRINTS. THE ANALYSIS OF BEAUTY, AND THE PERSECUTION ARISING OUT OF IT. HIS PATRONAGE BY LORD BUTE. CARICATURE OF THE TI.MES. ATTACKS TO WHICH HE WAS EX- POSED BY IT, AND WHICH HASTENED HIS DEATH. X" the loth of November, 1697, William Hogarth was born in the city of London. His father, Richard Hogarth, was a London fchoolmafter, who laboured to increafe the income derived from his fcholars by compiling books, but with no great fuccels. From his child- hood, as he tells us in his “Anecdotes” of himfelf, the young Hogarth difplayed a tafte for drawing, and efpecially for caricature; and, out of fchool, he appears to have been feldom without a pencil in his hand. The limited means of Richard Hogarth compelled him to take the boy from fchool at an early age, and bind him apprentice to a fteel-plate engraver. But this occupation proved little to the tafte of one whofe ambition rofe much higher; and when the term of his apprenticelhip had expired, he applied himfelf to engraving on copper; and, fetting up on his own account, did confiderable amount of work, firft in engraving arms and fhop-bills, and afterwards in defigning and engraving book illullrations, none of which difplayed any fuperiority over the ordinary run of fuch produdtions. Towards 1728 Hogarth began to pradtife as a painter, and he fubfequently attended the academy of fir James Thornhill, in Covent Garden, where he became acquainted with that painter’s only daughter, Jane. The refult was a clandeftine marriage in 1730, which met the difapproval and provoked the anger of the lady’s father. Subfequently, however, fir James became convinced of the genius of his fon-in-law, and a reconciliation was effedted through the medium of lady Thornhill. At in Literature and Art, 435 At this time Hogarth had already commenced that new ftyle of defign which was deftined to raife him foon to a degree of fame as an artift few men have ever attained. In his “Anecdotes ” of himfelf, the painter has given us an interefting account of the motives by which he was guided. “ The reafons,” lie fays, “ which induced me to adopt this mode of defigning were, that I thought both writers and painters had, in the hillorical ftyle, totally overlooked that intermediate fpecies of fubjedts which may be placed between the fublime and the grotefque. I there- fore wiftied to compofe pidfures on canvas fimilar to reprefentations on the ftage ; and further hope that they will be tried by the fame teft, and criticifed by the fame criterion. Let it be obferved, that I mean to fpeak only of thofe fcenes where the human fpecies are adfors, and thefe, I think, have not often been delineated in a way of wdiich they are worthy and capable. In thefe compofitioris, thofe fubjedts that wdll both entertain and improve the mind bid fair to be of the greateft public utility, and muft therefore be entitled to rank in the higheft clafs. If the execution is difficult (though that is but a fecondary merit), the author has claim to a higher degree of praife. If this be admitted, comedy, in painting as well as writing, ought to be allotted the ftrft place, though the fullirne, as it is called, has been oppofed to it. Ocular demonftration will carry more convidtion to the mind of a fenfible man than all he would ftnd in a thoufand volumes, and this has been attempted in the prints I have compofed. Let the decifion be left to every unprejudiced eye ; let the ftgures in either pidlures or prints be confidered as players drelLed either for the fublime, for genteel comedy or farce, for high or low life. I have endeavoured to treat my fubjedts as a dramatic writer : my pidture is my ftage, and men and women my players, who, by means of certain adlions and geftures, are to exhibit a dumh-fhow.” The great feries of pidtures, indeed, which form the principal founda- tion of Hogarth’s fame, are comedies rather than caricatures, and noble comedies they are. Like comedies, they are arranged, by a feries of fuc- celfive plates, in adts and fcenes ; and they reprefent contemporary fociety pidtorially, juft as it had been and was reprefented on the ftage in Englilh comedy. It is not by delicacy or excellence of drawing that Hogarth excels. 43 ^ Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque excels, tor he often draws incorreftly; but it is by his extraordinary and minute delineation of chara6ter, and by his wonderful Ikill in telling a llory thoroughly. In each of his plates we fee a whole a£t of a play, in which nothing is loll, nothing gloffed over, and, I may add, nothing exaggerated. The moll trilling objecl introduced into the pi6lure is made to have fuch an intimate relationlhip w ith the whole, that it feems as it it would be imperfe6l without it. The art of producing this effe£l was that in which Hogarth excelled. The tirll of Hogarth’s great fuites ot prints was “The Harlot’s Progrefs,” which was the work of the years 1733 and 1734. It tells a ftory which was then common in London, and was adled more openly in the broad tace of fociety than at the prefent day; and therefore the elfec^ and confequent fuccefs were almoll inftan- taneous. It had novelty, as well as excellence, to recommend it. This teries of plates was followed, in 1 735, by another, under the title of “ The Lake’s Progrefs.” In the former, Hogarth depidled the lhame and ruin which attended a life of prollitution ; in this, he reprefented the timilar confequences which a life of profligacy entailed on the other fex. In many refpetls it is fuperior to the “ Harlot’s Progrefs,” and its details come more home to the feelings of people in general, becaufe thefe of the proftitute’s hiftory are more veiled from the public gaze. The progrefs of the fpendthrift in ditlipation and riot, from the moment he becomes potletled of the fruits of paternal avarice, until his career ends in priibn and madnefs, forms a manellous drama, in which evet^' incident prefents itfelf, and ever}' agent performs his part, fo naturally, that it leems almoll beyond the power of adling. Perhaps no one ever pi6lured defpair with greater perfedlion than it is fliown in the face and bearing of the unhappy hero of this hiflor}', in the lafl plate but one of the feries, w here, thrown into prifon for debt, he receives from the manager of a theatre the announcement that the play which he had written in the hope of retrieving fomewhat of his pofition — his laft refource — has been refufed. The returned manufeript and the manager’s letter lie on the wretched table (cut Xo. 203) ; while on the one fide his wife reproaches him heartleflly with the deprivations and fufferings which he has brought upon her, and on the other the jailer is reminding him of the fa6t that the in Literature and Art. 437 the fees exafted for the flight indulgence he has obtained in prifon are unpaid, and even the pot-boy refufes to deliver him hi-, beer without firll receiving his money. It is but a Hep further to Bedlam, which, in the next plate, clofes his unblelTed career. Ten years almoll from this time had pafled away before Hogarth gave to the world his next grand feries of what he called his “ modern moral fubjedts.” This was “ The Marriage a la 7 tiode” which was publillied in fix plates in 174/5, and which fully fuftained the reputation built upon the “ Harlot’s Progrefs ” and the “ Rake’s Progrefs.” Perhaps the bell plate of the “Marriage a, la mode," is the fourth — the mufic fcene — in which one principal group of figures efpecially arrells the attention. It is repre- fented in our cut No. 304. William Hazlitt has jufily remarked upon it that, “ the prepofterous, overftrained admiration of the lady of quality ; the fentimental, infipid, patient delight of the man with his hair in papers, and fipping his tea the pert, fmirking, conceited, half-diftorted approbation of the figure next to him ; the tranfition to the total infenfi- bility of the round face in profile, and then to the wonder of the negro boy at the rapture of his mifirefs, form a perfedl whole.” In 43 ^ Hijlory of Caricature and Grotejque In the intenal between thel'e three great monuments of his talent, llogartli had publilhed various other plates, belonging to much tlie fame dafs of fubjeds, and difplaying did'erent degrees of excellence. His engraving of “ Southwark Fair," publilhed in 1733, which immediately preceded the “ Harlot's Progrefs,” may be regarded almoft as an attempt to rival the fairs of Callot. “ The Midnight Modern Converfation ” appeared in Literature and Art. 439 appeared in the interval between the “Harlot’s Progrefs” and the “ Rake’s Progrefs ;’’ and three years after the feries latl mentioned, in 1738, the engraving, remarkable equally in defign and execution, of the “ Strolling AdtrelPes in a Barn,” and the four plates of “ Morning,” “Noon,” “Evening,” and “Night,” all full of choicell bits of humour. Such is the group of the old maid and her footboy in the firll; of this feries (cut No. 205) — the former (liff and prudiih, whofe religion is evidently not that of charity; while the latter crawls after, Ihrinking at the fame time under the effedts of cold and hunger, which he fuftains in confequence of the hard, niggardly temper of his miftrefs. Among No. 206 . Lo[i and Gain. the humorous events which fill the plate of “ Noon,” we may point to the difaller of the boy who has been fent to the baker’s to fetch home the family dinner, and who, as reprefented in our cut No. 206, has broken his pie-dilh, and fpilt its contents on the ground; and it is diffi- cult to fay which is exprelTed with moft fidelity to nature — the terror and ffiame of the unfortunate lad, or the feeling of enjoyment in the face of the little girl who is feafling on the fragments of the fcattered meal. In 1 741 appeared the plate of “ The Enraged Mufician.” During this period Hogarth appears to have been hefitating between two fubjedts for his third grand pidloHal drama. Some unfinilhed Iketches have been found, from 440 Hiflory of Caricature and Grotefque from wliich it would fecm that, after depidting the miferies of a life of iiilIij)ation in either fex, he intended to reprefent the domeftic happinefs which refulted from a prudent and well-ali'orted marriage; but for fome reafon or other he abandoned this delign, and gave the picture of wedlock in a lets amiable light, in his “ Marriage d la mode.” The title was pro- bably taken from that of Dryden's comedy. In 1750 appeared “The March to Finchley," in many refpedts one of Hogarth’s belt works. It is a ftriking expofure of the want of difcipline, and the low morale of the Knglilh army under George II. Many amufmg groups fill this pidture, the fcene of which is laid in Tottenham Court Road, along which the guards are I'uppofetl to be marching to encamp at Finchley, in confequence of rumours of the approach of the Pretender's army in the Rebellion of '47. The foldiers in front are moving on with fome degree of order, but in the rear we fee nothing but confufion, fome reeling about under the effects of liquor, and confounded by the cries of women and children, camp-followers, ballad-fingers, plunderers, and the like. One of the latter, as reprefented in our cut No. 207, is aflifting a fallen foldier with an additional dofe of liquor, while his pilfering propenfities are betrayed by the hen fereaming from his wallet, and by the chickens following dif- tradtedly the cries of their parent. Hogarth prefents a fingular example of a fatirift who fufFered under the in Literature and Art. 441 the very punilhment which he inflicted on others. He made many perf’onal enemies in the courfe of Ins labours. He had begun his career with a well-known perfonal fatire, entitled “The Man of Tafte,” which was a caricature on Pope, and the poet is laid never to have forgiven it. Although the fatire in his more celebrated works appears to us general, it told upon his contemporaries perfonally ; for the figures which aft their parts in them were fo many portraits of individuals who moved in contemporary fociety, and who were known to everybody, and thus he provoked a hofi: of enemies. It was like Foote’s mimicry. He was to an extraordinary degree vain of his own talent, and jealous of that of others in the fame profellion j and he fpoke in terms of undifguifed contempt of almoft all artilis, paft or prefent. Thus, the painter intro- duced into the print of “ Beer Street,” is faid to be a caricature upon John Stephen Liotard, one of the artifts mentioned in the lafi chapter. He thus provoked the hollility of the greatell part of his contemporaries in his own profelhon, and in the fequel had to fupport the full weight of their anger. When George H., who had more tafte for foldiers than piiftures, faw the painting of the “ hlarch to Finchley,” inftead of admir- ing it as a work of art, he is faid to have exprelfed himfelf with anger at the infult which he believed was offered to his army ; and Hogarth not only revenged himfelf by dedicating his print to the king of Pruilia, by which it did become a fatire on the Britilh army, but he threw himfelf into the fadtion of the prince of Wales at Leicefter Houfe. The firft occafion for the difplay of all thefe animofities was given in the year 1753, at the clofe of which he publilhed his “ Analyfis of Beauty.” Though far from being himfelf a fuccefsful painter of beauty, Hogarth under- took in this work to inveftigate its principles, which he referred to a waving or ferpentine line, and this he termed the “ line of beauty.” In 1745 Hogarth had publilhed his own portrait as the frontifpiece to a volume of his colledted works, and in one corner of the plate he introduced a painter’s palette, on which was this waving line, infcribed “ The line of beauty.” For feveral years the meaning of this remained either quite a myftery, or was only known to a few of Hogarth’s acquaintances, until the appearance of the book juft mentioned. Hogarth’s manufcript was 3 L rcvifed Hijiory oj Caricature and Grotefque reviled by his friend. Dr. Morell, the compiler of the “ Thefaurus," whole name became thus alVociated with the book. This work expofed its author to a holt of violent attacks, and to unbounded ridicule, efpe- cially from the whole tribe of otf'ended artilts. A great number of cari- catures upon Hogarth and his line of beauty appeared during the year 17^4, which fliow the bitternels of the hatred he had provoked; and to hold Itill further their terror over his head, molf of them are inferibed with the words, “ To be continued." Among the ariills who efpecially lignalifed themfelves by their zeal againft him, was Paul Sandby, to whom we owe forae of the bell of thefe anti-Hogarthian caricatures. One of thefe is entitled, “ A Xew’ Dunciad, done with a view of [fixing] the flutluating ideas of talle.” In the principal group (w'hich is given in our cut Xo. 208), Hogarth is reprefented playing with a pantin, or figure which was moved into aiSlivity by pulling a firing. The firing takes ibmewhat the form of the line of beauty, which is alfo drawn upon his palette. This figure is deferibed underneath the pi< 9 ^ure as “ a painter at in Literature ami Art. 443 at the proper exercife of his tahe.” To his breatl is attached a card (the knave of hearts), which is defcribed by a very bad pun as “ the fool ot arts.” On one fide “ his genius ” is reprefented in the form of a black harlequin; while behind a]ipears a rather jolly perfonage (intended, perhaps, for Dr. Morell), who, we are told, is one of his admirers. On the table are the foundations, or the remains, of “ a houfe of cards.” Near him is Hogarth’s favourite dog, named Trump, which always accompanies him in ihefe caricatures. Another caricature which appeared at this time reprefents Hogarth on the ftage as a quack dodor, holding in his hand the line of beauty, and recommending its extraordinary qualities. This print is entitled “ A Mountebank Painter demonfirating to his admirers and fubfcribers that crookednefs is y' moft beautifull.” Lord Bute, whofe patronage at Leicefter Houfe Hogarth now enjoyed, is reprefented fiddling, and the black harlequin ferves as “ his puff.” In the front a crowd of deformed and hump-backed people are preffing forwards (lee our cut No. 209), and the line of beauty fits them all admirably. Much as this famous line of 'oeauty was ridiculed, Hogarth was not allowed to retain the fmall honour which feemed to arife from it undif- puted. It was faid that he had ftolen the idea from an Italian writer named Lomazzo, Latinlled into Lomatius, who had enounced it in a treat! lb 444 Hijiory of Caricature a?id Grotefque treatil'e on tLe Fine Arts, publilhed in the fixteenth century.* In another caricature by Paul Sandby, with a vulgar title which I will not repeat, Flogarth is vifited, in the midft of his glory, by the ghoft of Lomazzo, carrying in one hand his treatife on the arts, and with his other holding up to view the line of beauty itfelf. In the infcriptions on the plate, the principal figure is defcribed as “An author finking under the weight of his faturnine analyfis and, indeed, Hogarth’s terror is broadly painted, while the volume of his analyfis is refting heavily upon “a ftrong fupport bent in the line of beauty by the mighty load upon it.” Befide Hogarth ftands “his faithful pug,” and behind him “a friend of the author endeavouring to prevent his finking to his natural lownefs.” On the * It was translated into English by Richard Haydocke, under the title of “ The Artes of Curious Paintinge, Carvinge, Buildinge,” fol. 1598. This is one of the earliest works on art in the English language. in Literature and Art. 445 the other fide flands Dr. Morell, or, perhaps, Mr. Townley, the mafter of Merchant Taylors’ School, who continued his fervice in preparing the book for the prefs after Morell’s death, defcribed as “ the author’s friend and corredor,” aftonilhed at the fight of the ghofl:. The ugly figure on the left hand of the pidure is described as “ Deformity weeping at the condition of her darling fon,’’ while the dog is “ a greyhound bemoaning his friend’s condition.” This group is reprefented in our cut No. 210. The other caricatures which appeared at this time were two numerou,s to allow us to give a particular defcription of them. The artifi is ufaally reprefented, under the influence of his line of beauty, painting ugly pidures from deformed models, or attempting hiftorical pidures in a ftyle bordering on caricature, or, on one occafion, as locked up in a mad-houfe, and allowed only to exercife his Ikill upon the bare walls. One of thefe caricatures is entitled, in allufion to the title of one of his mofl; popular prints, “The Painter’s March through Finchley, dedicated to the king of the gipfies, as an encourager of arts, &c.” Hogarth appears in full flight through the village, clofely purfued by women and children, and animals in great variety, and defended only by his favourite dog. With the “ Marriage a lamode," Hogarth may be confidered as having reached his highefl: point of excellence. The let of “Induflry and Idle- nefs ” tells a good and ufeful moral flory, but difplays inferior talent in defign. “Beer Street” and “Gin Lane” difguil us by their vulgarity, and the “ Four Stages of Cruelty ” are equally repullive to our feelings by the unveiled horrors of the fceqes which are too coarfely depidted in them. In the four prints of the proceedings at an eleftion, which are the lafl: of his pictures of this defcription, publiflied in 1754, Hogarth rifes again, and approaches in fome degree to his former elevation. In 17,77, death of his brother-in-law, John Thornhill, the office of fergeant-painter of all his Majefly's works became vacant, and it was bellowed upon Hogarth, who, according to his own account, received from it an income of about 38200 a-year, This appointment caufed another difplay of hoftility towards him, and his enemies called him jeeringly the king’s chief panel painter. It was at this moment that a plan for the eflablilhment of an academy of the fine arts was agitated, which, 446 Hi /lory of Caricature and Grotefque which, a few years later, came into exiftence under the title of the Royal Academy, and Hogarth proclaimed fo loud an oppofition to this projedt, that the old cry was raifed anew, that he was jealous and envious of all his profeffion, and that he fought to (land alone as fuperior to them all. It was the fignal for a new onilaught of caricatures upon himfelf and his line of beauty. Hitherto his alTailants had been found chiefly among the artifls, but the time was now approaching when he was deflined to thruft himfelf into the midfl of a political flruggle, where the attacks of a new clafs of enemies carried with them a more bitter fling, George II. died on the tyth of Odtober, 1760, and his grandfon fucceeded him to the throne as George HI. It appears evident that before this time Hogarth had gained the favour of lord Bute, who, by his intereft with the princefs of Wales, was all-powerful in the houfehold of the young prince. The painter had hitherto kept tolerably clear of politics in his prints, but now, unluckily for himfelf, he fuddenly ruflied into the arena of political caricature. It was generally laid that Hogarth’s objett was, by difplaying his zeal in the caufe of his patron, lord Bute, to obtain an increafe in his penfion ; and he acknowledges himfelf that his objett was gain. “This," he fays, “being a period when war abroad and contention at home engrolfed every one’s mind, prints were thrown into the background ; and the ftagnation rendered it necelfary that I Ihould do fome timed thing [the italics are Hogarth’s] to recover my loft time, and Hop a gap in my income.” Accordingly he determined to attack the great minifter, Pitt, who had then recently been compelled to refign his ortice, and had gone over to the oppofition. It is laid that John Wilkes, who had previoufly been Hogarth's friend, having been privately informed of his delign, went to the painter, expoftulated with him, and, as he continued obltinate, threatened him with retaliation. In Sep- tember, 1 752, appeared the print entitled “ The Times, No. i,’’ indicating that it was to be followed by a fecond caricature. The principal features of the pidure are thefe : Europe is reprefented in flames, which are communicating to Great Britain, but lord Bute, with foldiers and bailors, and the alliftance of Highlanders, is labouring to extinguilh them, while Pitt is blowing the fire, and the duke of Newcaftle brings a barrowful ot Monitor in Literature and Art. 447 Monitors and North Britons, the violent journals of the popular party, to feed it. There is much detail in the print which it is not necelfary to defcribe. In fulfilment of his threat, Wilkes, in the number of the North Briton publilhed on the Saturday immediately following the pub- lication of this print, attacked Hogarth with extraordinary bitternefs, calling cruel relledtions upon his domellic as well as his profellional charaeler. Hogarth, Hung to the quick, retaliated by publilhing the well- known caricature of Wilkes. Thereupon Churchill, the poet, Wilkes’s Iriend, and formerly the friend of Hogarth alfo, publilhed a bitter invedtive in verfe againli the painter, under the title of an “ Epiftle to William Hogarth.” Hogarth retaliated again : “ Having an old plate by me,” he tells us, “with fome parts ready, fuch as a background and a dog, I began to conlider how I could turn lb much work laid afide to fome account, fo patched up a print of Mailer Churchill in the charadter of a bear.” The unfinilhed pidture was intended to be a portrait of Hogarth himfelf; the canonical bear, which reprefented Churchill, held a pot of No. ail. An Indejjenacm Draughtjmun. [)orter 44 ^ Hijtory of Caricature and Grotefque porter in one hand, and In the other a knotted club, each knot labelled “lie I,” “lie 2,” &c. The painter, in his “Anecdotes,” exults over the pecuniary profit he derived from the extenfive fale of thefe two prints. The virulence of the caricaturills againll Hogarth became on this occafion greater than ever. Parodies on his own works, fneers at his perfonal appearance and manners, reflexions upon his charaXer, were all embodied in prints which bore fuch names as Hogg-afs, Hoggart, O’Garth, &rc. Our cut No. 211 reprefents one of the caricature portraits of the artift. It is entitled “ Wm. Hogarth, Efq., drawn from the Life.” Hogarth wears the thiflle on his hat, as the fign of his dependence on lord Bute. At his breafl hangs his palette, with the line of beauty infcribed upon it. He holds behind his back a roll of paper infcribed “ Burlefque on L — d B — t.” In his right hand he prefents to view two piXures, “The Times,” and the “Portrait of Wilkes.” At the upper corner to the left is the figure of Bute, offering him in a bag a penfion of “^^300 per aim.” Some of the allufions in this piXure are now obfcure, but they no doubt relate to anecdotes well known at the time. They receive fome light from the following mock letters which are written at the foot of the plate ; — “ Copy of a Letter from Mr. Hog-garth to Lord Mucklcmon, ivtki his Lordjhip's airfwcr. “ My Lord, — The enclosed is a design I intend to publish 5 you are sensible it will not redound to your honour, as it will expose you to all the world in your proper colours. You likewise know what induced me to do this 5 but it is in y' power to prevent it from appearing in publick, which I would have you do immediately. “WiLL“ Hog-garth. “ Mais^ Hog-garth, — By my saul, mon, I am sare troobled for what I have done; I did na ken y’’ muckle merit till noow ; say na mair aboot it; I’ll mak au things easy to you, & gie you bock your Pension. “Sawney Mucklemon.” In an etching without a title, publifhed at this time, and copied in our cut No. 212, the Hogarthian dog is reprefented barking from a cautious diflance at the canonical bear, who appears to be meditating further mifehief. Pugg ftands upon his mafter’s palette and the line of beauty, while Bruin refts upon the “ Epiftle to Wra. Hogarth,” with the pen f in Literature and Art. 449 pen and ink by its fide. On the left, behind the dog, is a large frame, with the words “ Pannel Painting ” infcribed upon it. The article by Wilkes in the North Briton, and Churchill’s metrical epiftle, irritated Hogarth more than all the hollile caricatures, and were generally believed to have broken his heart. He died on the 26th of Odlober, 1764, little more than a year after the appearance of the attack by Wilkes, and with the taunts of his political as well as his profeffionai enemies (till ringing in his ears. 450 HiJio7~y of Caricature a?ui Grotefque CHAPTER XXVI. THE LESSER CARICATURISTS OF THE REIGN OF GEORGE III. PAUL SANDBY. COLLET; THE DISASTER, AND FATHER PAUL IN HIS CUPS. JAMES SAVER ; HIS CARICATURES IN SUPPORT OF PITT, AND HIS REWARD. — CARLO KHAn’s TRIUMPH. BUNBURY ; HIS CARICATURES ON HORSEMANSHIP. WOODWARD ; GENERAL COMPLAINT. ROWLANDSOn’s INFLUENCE ON THE STYLE OF THOSE WHOSE DESIGNS HE ETCHED. JOHN KAY OF EDINBURGH : LOOKING A ROCK IN THE FACE. T he Ichoolof caricature which had grown amid the political agitation of the reigns of the two firfl Georges, gave birth to a number of men of greater talent in the fame branch of art, who carried it to its highell degree of perfeblion during that of George HI. Among them are the three great names of Gillraj', Rowlandfon, and Cruiklhank, and a few who, though fecond in rank to thefe, are Hill well remembered for the talent difplayed in their works, or with the effebt they produced on contemporaries. Among thefe the principal were Paul Sandby, John Collet, Sayer, Bunbury, and Woodward. Sandby has been fpoken of in the lad chapter. He was not by pro- fellion a caricaturill, but he was one of thofe rifing artids who were odended by the fneering terms in which Hogarth fpoke of all artids but himfelf, and he was foremod among thofe who turned their fatire againd him. Examples of his caricatures upon Hogarth have already been given, fufficient to Ihow that they difplay Ikill in compodtion as well as a large amount of wit and humour. After his death, they were republidied collectively, under the title, “ RetrofpeCtive Art, from the Collection of the late Paul Sandby, Efq., R.A.” Sandby was, indeed, one of the original members of the Royal Academy. He was an artid much in Literature and ylrt. 451 much admired in his time, but is now chiefly remembered as a topo- graphical dranghtfman. He was a native of Nottingham, where he was born in 172 5,* and he died on the 7th of November, 1809. f John Collet, who alfo has been mentioned in a previous chapter, was born in London in 1725, and died there in 1780. Collet is laid to have been a pupil of Hogarth, and there is a large amount of Hogarthian cha- radfer in all his deligns. Few artifts have been more induftrious and produced a greater number of engravings. He worked chiefly for Carrington Bowles, in St. Paul’s Churchyard, and for Robert Sayers, at 53, Fleet Street. His prints publilhed by Bowles were engraved generally in mezzotinto, * His death is usually placed, but erroneously, in 1732. f Sandby etched landscapes on steel, and in aqiiatinta, the latter by a method peculiarly his own, besides painting in oil and opaque colours. But his fame rests mainly on being the founder of the English school of iva'er-cclour painting, since he was the first to show the capability of that material to pr rduce finished picrurcs, and to lead the way to the perfection in effect and colour to which that branch of art has since attained. 452 HJiory of Caricature and Grotefcjue mezzotinto, and highly coloured for falej while thofe publiflied by Sayers were ufually line engravings, and fonietimes remarkably well executed. Collet chofe for hi.s held of labour that to which Hogarth had given the title of comedy in art, but he did not polfefs Hogarth's posver of delineat- ing whole adls and fcenes in one picture, and he contented himfelf with bits of detail and groups of charaders only. His caricatures are rarely poli- tical — they are aimed at focial manners and focial vanities and weaknelfes, and altogether they form a hngularly curious picture of fociety during an important period of the laft century. The hrli example I give (No. 213) is taken from a line engraving, publilhed by Sayers in i 77 < 5 . At this time the natural adornments of the perfon in both I'exes had fo far yielded to artihcial ornametif, that even women cut olV their own hair in order to reitlace it by an ornamental pcruque, fupporting a head-drefs, which varied tVom time to time in form and in extravagance. Collet has here intro- iluced to us a lady who, encountering a fudden and violent wind, has loft all her upper coverings, and wig, cap, and hat are caught by her footman behind. The lady is evidently fuft'ering under the feeling of ftiame ; and hard by, a cottager atid his wife, at their door, are laughing at her dif- comfnure. A bill fixed againfi a neighbouring wall announces “A LeHure upon Heads." At this time the “ no-poperj’ " feeling ran very high. Four years afterwards it broke out violently in the celebrated lord Gordon riots. It was this feeling which contributed greatly to the fuccefs of Sheridan's comedy of “ The Duenna,” brought out in 1775. Collet drew feveral pictures founded upon fcenes in this play, one of which is given in our cut No. 214. It forms one of Carington Bowles's rather numerous feries of prints from defigns by Collet, and reprefents the well-known drinking feene in the convent, in the fifth feene of the third a6t of “The Duenna." The feene, it will be remembered, is “a room in the priorj',” and the excited monks are toafting, among other objedts of devotion, the abbefs of St. Urfuline and the blue-eyed nun of St. Catherine’s. The “ blue- eyed nun ” is, perhaps, the lady feen through the window, and the patron faint of her convent is reprefented in one of the pidtures on the wall. There is great fpirit in this piAure, which is entitled “ Father Paul in his Cups in Literature and Art. 453 Cups, or the Private Devotions of a Convent.” It is accompanied with the following lines : — See 'zvith thefe friars hoiv religion thrh^es^ Who lo've good linjing better than good linjes ; Pauly the Juperior fat her y rules the roafy His god 's the glafy the blue-eyed nun his toaf^^ Thus priefts conjume luhat fearful fools beflonv. jdnd faints"' donations make the bumpers fo'zv. The butler feeps — the cellar door is free — This is a modern cloifePs piety. From Collet to Sayer we rufh into the heat — I may fay into the bitternefs — of politics, for James Sayer is known, with very trifling ex- ceptions, as a political caricaturitl. FTe was the fon ot a captain of a merchant fliip at Great Yarmouth, but was himfelf put to the profef- fion of an attorney. As, however, he was poflefled of a moderate inde- pendence, and appears to have had no great tafte for the law, he neglefted his bufinefs, and, with confiderable talent for fatire and caricature, ho threw himfelf into the political tlrife of the day. Sayer was a bad draughtfman. 454 Hijlory of Caricature and Grotefque draughtfman, and his pidtures are produced more by labour than by ikill in drawing, but they poUels a confiderable amount of humour, and were fufficiently fevere to obtain popularity at a time when this latter charadter excufed worfe drawing even than that of Sayer. He made the acquaint- ance and gained the favour of the younger William Pitt, when that liatefman was alpiring to power, and he began his career as a caricaturift by attacking the Rockingham minilir}" in 1782 — of courfe in the intereft ot Pitt. Sayer’s earliell productions which are now known, are a feries of caricature portraits of the Rockingham adminillration, that appear to have been given to the public in inttalments, at the leveral dales of April 6, May 14, June 17, and July 3, 1782, and bear the name of C. Bretherton as publither. He publithed his firft veritable caricature on the occafion of the minilterial changes which followed the death of lord Rockingham, when lord Shelburne was placed at the head of the cabinet, and Fox and Burke retired, while Pitt became chancellor of the exchequer. This caricature, which bears the title of “ Paradife Loft,” and is, in fa6t, a parody upon Milton, reprefents the once happy pair. Fox and Burke, turned out of their paradife, the Treafury, the arch of the gate of which is ornamented wdth the heads of Shelburne, the prime minifter, and Dunning and Barre, two of his ftaunch fupporters, w'ho were confidered to be efj)ecially obnoxious to Fox and Burke. Between thefe three heads appear the faces of two mocking ftends, and groups of piftols, daggers, and fwords. Beneath are infcribed the well-known lines of Milton — To the eajiern Jide Of Paradife, Jo late their happy feat, li^a'ved crver by that faming brand ,* the gate IPith dreadful faces thronged and fiery arms ! Some natural tears they dropt, but *wiped them foon. The uoorld %vas all before them, nuhere to choofe Their place of refl, and pro'vidence their guide. They, arm in arm, 'with 'wand'ring fieps, and flow, Thro"* Eden took their JoUtary arately — Fait 1. Soils, Manures, aod Crops. 2s. Fart 2. Faiiulog Economy, llUbTlcal aid Practical. 3s, Part 3. Cati e, dlieep, and llors-a. 2s. ed. Part 4. I 'airy. Figs, and Poultry. 2s. Part 6. Utilisation of Town Sewage, Irrigation, and Reclamation of Waste Land. 2s. 6d. A HANDY BOOK ON THE LAW OF FRIENDLY, INDUS- TRIAL A.NU FKOVIUE.NT, BUILUING, A.NU LOAN SOCIETIES. With Copious Notes. By NmnasiaL Wtirra, Esq. 12mo., la. PRACTICAL HINTS FOR INVESTING MONEY: with an Explanation of the .Mode of Transacting Business on the SU'Clt Exchange. By l-a>hcte FLxxroED, Sworn Broker. Third Edition, revised and cor- rected. 12mo., Is. A TREATISE ON LOGIC, By S. II. Emmexs, Esq. 12mo., Is. THE STEEPING STONE TO ARITHMETIC. ByA.ARMxx. Is. KEY, is. ELEMENTARY TREATISE ON S.VILS AND SAIL- M.AKINU; with Draughting, and the Centre of Effort of the Sails. Also, Weights and aixes of Ko|ies ; Ma-ting, Rigging, and 8atls of Steam Ves^els, Ac. By ItoaitBT Kipitno, N.A., Sallmaker, Quayside, Newcastle, Author of“ Ticatise on Mast .Making and Rigging of Ships," &c. Seventh Edition, enlarged. Illustrated. 2s. 6d. ART-JOURNAL (The), Monthly, price 2s. 6d. ; and in Yearly Voluu'es. cl Ih, 31s. 6d. each. No.'l. of a New Series was commenced in January, 1S6'L VERNON GALLERY. Series 1849 to 18.i4. ROYAL GALLERY. Series 1855 to 1861. TURNER GALLERY. Series 1862-1863. ILLUSTRATED CATALOGUE OF THE GRE.VT INDUSTRIAL EXHIBITION OF l-Sl, containing upwards of 1,400 Engravings on Wood, and Frontispiece on Steel. 4to. cl., gilt ^ges, 2ls. INTERN.\TIONAL EXHIBITION OF 1862. Illustrated with nearly l,SfXi Engravings on Wood, and 12 on Steel. Royal 4t>. cloth gilt, gilt edges, 21s. ACKWORTH VOCABULARY, or English Spelling-Book ; with the Meaning atuched to each Word. Compiled for the use of Ackworth School. Ismo. cloth. Is. 6d. ADAMS’ (W. H. D.) SCENES FROM THE DRAMA OF EUROPEAN HISTORY. Post evo. cloth, 6s. AIKEN (Dr.) and BARBAULD (Mrs.), EVENINGS AT HOME. New Edition. With Illustrations by Haavar. Fcap. cloth, 3s. 6d. PUBLISHED BY YIKTUE BflOTHEKS AND CO. 3 ALFKED DUDLEY. 16mo. cloth gilt, 2s. 6d. ANALYSIS AND SUMMARY OF OLD TESTAMENT HIS- TORY AND THE LAWS OF MOSES, with a connection between the Old and New Testaments, an Introductory Outline of the Geography, Political History, &c. By J. T. Wheelek, F.E.G.S. Ninth Edition, post 8vo. cloth, red edges, 5s. 6d. NEW TESTAMENT HIS- TORY; including, 1. The Four Gospels harmonised into one continuous Narrative. 2. The Acts of the Apostles, and continuous History of St. Paul. 3. An Analysis of the Epistles and Book of Revelation. 4. An Introductory Outline of the Geography, Critical Histnry, Authenticity, Credibility, and Inspiration of the New Testament. The whole Illustrated by copious Historical, Geographical, and Antiquarian Notes, Chronological Tables, &c. Seventh Edition, revised. Post 8vo. cloth, red edges, 6s. 6d. A POPULAR abridg- ment OF OLD AND NEW .TESTAMENT HISTORY, for Schools, Families, and General Reading. Explained by Historical and Geographical Illustrations, and numerous Map Diagrams. 2 Vols. ISmo. cloth, 2s. each. — WHEELER’S HISTO- RICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS. Illustrated with Five coloured Maps, and large View of Jerusalem, with a Plan of the Ancient City. Folio, cloth, 7s. 6d. ASBURY (F.), THE PIONEER BISHOP, LIFE OF, by Stkickland. Post 8V0. cloth, 2s. BARBAULD’S (Mrs.) LECONS POUR DES ENFANTS, depiiis Page de Deux Ans jusqu'a Cinq. Avec une Interpretation Anglaise. New Edition. ISmo. cloth, 2s. HYMNES EN PROSE, pour les Enfans, traduites • de I'Anglaise par M. Clemence. l8mo. limp cloth. Is. BARCLAY’S UNIVERSAL ENGLISH DICTIONARY. New Edition. By B. B. Woodwaud. Numerous Engravings and Maps. 4to.cl., 32s. BARNES’ NOTES ON THE NEW TESTAMENT, Critical and Explanatory. With Introduction by the Rev. H. Stebbing. Steel En- gravings. 2 Vols., 4to. cloth, £2 8s. BARTLETT'S (W. H.) FOOTSTEPS OF OUR LORD AND IJIS APOtiTL.ES. Royal 8vo., cloth gilt, 10s. 6d. FORTY DAYS IN THE DESERT. Royal 8vo., cloth gilt, lOs. 6d. GLEANINGS ON THE OVERLAND ROUTE. Royal 8vo. cloth gilt, lOs. 6d. JERUSALEM REVISITED. Royal 8vo. cloth gilt, 10s. 6d. NILE-BOAT. Royal 8vo. cloth gilt, 10s. 6d. PICTURES FROM SICILY, Royal 8vo. cloth gilt, 10s. 6d. PILGRIM FATHERS. Royal 8vo. cl. gilt, 10s. 6d. 4 CATALOGUE OF WOKKS BARTLETT'S SCRIPTURE SITES AKD SCENES. 12mo. cluth, gilt edges, 4s. WALKS ABOUT JERUSALEM. Royal 8vo. clulli gilt, 10s. 6d. Basket of flowers ; or, Piety and 'Truth Triumphant. A Tale for the Young. 32mo. cloUi, gilt edges. Is. BEA'TTIE’S (W.) CASTLES AND ABBEYS OF ENGLAND. Illustrated by Bartlett. 2 Vols. royal fevo. cloth, each 2Gs, BELLENGER’S ONE HUNDRfiD CHOICE FABLES, in French, Imitated from I.a F’oktaike. With IIictiokaey of Words and Idiomatic I’hrases, Grammatically Explalued. New Edition, revised by C. J. Delillk. 12mo.cluth, Is. 6d. BELI.EW’S (Rev. J. C. M.) SHAKESPERE’S HOME AT NEW I'LACE, Stratford-upon-Avon. Illustrated. Post Oro.clotii, gilt top, I2s. BIBLE, BROWN S SELF INTERPRETING. With Plates. lloyal 4to. cloth, £2 2s. AVith Matthew IIexra's Commentary. Edited and Abridged by Rev. E. ULOouneLD. lilostrated. 2 Vols. 4to. cloth, £2 16s. With Commentary by Rev. T. Scott. Unabridged. 3 Vols. royal 4to. cloth, £4 4s. THE DOUAY (Roman Catholic) TRANSLATION. Edited by F. C. Husenbeth. 62 Plates. 2 Vols. 4to. cloth, £3. BLYTHE HOUSE. By R. F. II. Crown 8vo. cloth, 6s. BOOK OF BRITISH SONG. With Pianoforte Accompaniments. By IIOOAKTO. 2 Vols. folio, cloth, each 21s. BREN AN’S (JcsTiN) COMPOSITION AND PUNCTUATION, familiarly explained for those who have neglected the Study of Grammar. Twelfth Edition, 12mo.. limp cloth, It. BROWN S (J.) DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE, 2 Vols. Svo. cloth, 22s. BROWN’S (R.) TREATISE ON DOMESTIC ARCHITEC- TURE. 4to. cloth, £2 2s. BROWN’S (T.) MANUAL OF MODERN FARRIERY. 8vo. cloth, 13s. 6d. With Instructions in Hunting, Fishing, and Field Sports. Svo. cloth, 20s. BUNYAN'S PILGRIM'S PROGRESS, Pictorial Edition. Illus- trated by 97 fine Engravings on Wood. Also many Engravings on Steel, with a Portrait and Pacsimlle of John Banyan's Will. Royal fevo. cl., 18s. HOLY W AE. Uniform with the above. Numerous lllnstrations. Royal 8vo. cloth, I2s. ENTIRE WORKS. Edited, with Original Intro- dactions. Notes, and Memoir, by the Rev. H. Stbbbisg. Illustrations on Steel and Wood. 4 Vols. large 8vo., £2 l2s. PUBLISHED BY TIETDE BEOTHEES AND CO, 5 BURN’S (Robert Scott) OUTLINES OF MODERN FARMING. Vol. I. — Soils, Manures, and Crops. 12mo. limp cloth. Illustrated. 2s. Vol. II. Farming Economy, Historical and Practical. 12mo. limp cloth. Illustrated. 3s. Vol. III. Stock— Cattle, Sheep, and Horses. 12mo. limp cloth. Illustrated. 2s. 6d. Vol. IV. Management of the Dairy — Pigs — Poultry. 12mo. limp cloth. Illustrated. 2s. Vol. V. Utilisation of Town Sewage — Irrigation — Reclamation of Waste Land. I2mo. limp cloth. Illustrated. 2s. 6d. ■ The above 5 vols. bound in 2, cloth boards, 14s. BURNET’S (John) LANDSCAPE PAINTING IN OIL- COLOUES EXPLAINED. With Examples. Re-edited by II. Murbay. 4to. cloth, 12s. PRACTICAL HINTS ON PORTRAIT-PAINTING, illustrated with E-xamples. Re-edited by H. Mokray. 4to. cloth, 12s. BURNS’ COMPLETE WORKS. With Notes and Life, by Allan Conningham ; ard a copious Glossary. Illustrated by 33 Engravings (or 61 Engravings), and Portrait. Royal 8vo. cloth, gilt edges, 18s,; or with Supplement, £1 4s. BUTLER’S (Alban) LIVES OF THE SAINTS. Edited by HusbNBETH. 2 Vols. TOyal 8vo. cloth, £2 5s. BYRON’S POETICAL WORKS (Pictorial Edition). Eine Engravings. Royal 8vo, cloth, £1 3s. CAMPBELL’S (Colonel Walter) OLD FOREST RANGER; or. Wild Sports of India on the Neilgherry Hills, the Jungles, and the Plains. New Edition, with Illustrations on Steel. Small bvo. cloth, 8s. (Isabella), MEMOIR OF ; or. Peace in Believing. 18mo. cloth, 2s. 6d. CAMPION COURT. A Tale of the Days of the Ejectment Two Hundred Years Ago. By E. J. Worboise, Author of “Lottie Lonsdale,” “ The Lillingstones,” &c. Second Edition. Fcap. cloth, 6s. CANADIAN CRUSOES; a Tale of the Rice Lake Plains. By Mrs. Traill, authoress of “ Tire Backwoods of Canada,” cap. doth, 5s. DAls'lKL. Ecap. cloth, 3s. KINGS. Fcap. cloth, 4s. 6d. SALVATION. Sermon before the Queen. Sewed, 6d. SIGNS OF THE TIMES. Fcap. cloth, 3s. 6d. TENT AND THE ALTAR. Cheap Edition. Fcap. cloth, 3s. 6d. THINGS HARD TO BE UNDERSTOOD. Fcap. cloth, 7s. THY WORD IS TRUTH. Fcap. cloth, 6s. WAR AND ITS ISSUES. Fcap. cloth. Is. Gd. WELLINGTON. Fcap. cloth. Is. 6d. DALTON (Wm.), THE TIGER PRINCE ; or, Adventures in the Wilds of Abyssinia. With 8 Illustrations. Post 8vo. cloth, 5s. DAETON’S (J. M.) FAMOUS GIELS WHO HAVE BECOME ILLUSTRIOUS WOMEN ; forming Models of Imitation to the Young Ladies of England. Fcap. cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. With illustrations, 6s. BARTON (Margaret E.), THE EARTH AND ITS INHABI- TAFi rs. With Frontispiece. Second Edition, crown 8vo. cloth, 6s. DAVIS’S (Rev. N.) EVENINGS IN MY TENT ; or, Wanderings in the African Sahara. With Illustrations. 2 Vols., post 8vo. cloth, 24s. DECOY (The) ; or, An Agreeable Method of Teaching Children the Elementary Parts of English Grammar. 18mo., 6d. 8 CATALOGUE OP WOHKS DESLYON’S FRENCH DIALOGUES, to enable aU Persons at once to practise Conversing in French ; with Familiar Letters in French and English. 12dio. cloih, 2s. 6d. TUTOR ; or, Exposition of the best French Grammarians, with Exercises and Questions on every Rule, for Examination and Repetition. 12mo. cloth, 4s. DICKSEE’S (J. R.) SCHOOL PERSPECTIVE. A Progressive Course of Instruction in Linear Perspective. 8vo. cloth, 5s. DOCTOR’S LITTLE DAUGHTER (The). The Story of a Child’s Life amidst the Woods and Hills. By Eliza Meteyard, With numerous Illustrations by Harvey. Fcap. cloth, gilt edges, 6s. DRESSER’S (C.) RUDIMENTS OE BOTANY, Structural and Physiological. Being an Introduction to the Study of the Vegetable Kingdom. 8vo. cloth, 15s. UNITY IN VARIETY, as Deduced from the Vege- table Kingdom. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d. DYING COMMAND OF CHRIST (The) ; or, the Duty of Believers to Celebrate Weekly the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. By the Author of “ God is Love,” “ Our Heavenly Home,” &c. Fcap. cl., 2s. 6d. EDGEWORTH’S (Maeia) MORAL TALES. Fcap. cloth, 3s. 6d. POPULAR TALES. Ecap. cloth, 3s. 6d. EARLY LESSONS. Ecap. cloth, 3s. 6d. 4 Vols. 18mo. cloth, 10s. PARENT’S ASSISTANT. Ecap. cloth, 3s. 6d. HARRY AND LUCY. 3 Vols. fcap. cl. 10s. 6d. From “Early Lessons.” 18mo. cloth, 2s. 6d. ROSAMURD. From “ Early Lessons.” 18mo. cloth, 2s. 6d. FRANK. From “ Early Lessons.” 18mo. cloth, 2s. 6d. EAIRHOLT’S (P. W.) DICTIONARY OF TERMS IN ART. Numerous Woodcuts. Post 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d. FLEETWOOD’S (Rev. J., d.d.) LIFE OF CHRIST. With an Essay by Rev. H. Stebbing. With 58 Steel Engravings. 4to., cloth, £1 9s. FLETCHER’S (Rev. Alexander, d.d.) GUIDE TO FAMILY DEVOTION. Portrait, and 24 Engravings. 4to., cloth, gilt edges, £1 6s. NEW EDITION, with Portrait aud 25 Plates. Royal 4to., cloth, gilt edges, £1 8s. CLOSET DEVOTIONAL EXERCISES FOR THE YOUNG, from Ten Years Old and upwards. Post 8vo. cloth, 5s. SCRIPTURE HISTORY. For the Improvement of Youth. With 241 Engravings on Steel. 2 Vols. 16mo., cloth gilt, 18s. PUBLISHED BY TIETUE BEOTHEES AND CO. 9 FLETCHEE’S SCEIPTURE NATURAL HISTORY. 256 En- graviDgs od Steel. 2 Vols., 16mo. cloth, 20s. ASSEMBLY'S CATECHISM. Divided into 52 Lessons. 12mo. sewed, 8d. SCRIPTURE TEXTS. 12mo. sewed, 6d. BOOK OF PROVERBS. 12mo. sewed, 6d. HYMNS. 24mo. roan, 3s. FRANK FAIRLEGH ; or. Scenes from the Life of a Private Pupil. By F. E. Smedley, Esq. Cheap Edition, boards, 2s. 6d. ; cloth, 3s. 6d., or with 30 Illustrations by George Croikshank, 8vo. cloth, 16s. FRANKLIN’S (Benjamin) WORKS AND LIFE. 8vo. cloth, 8s. FULLER’S (Andeew) WORKS AND LIFE. Edited by his Son. Eoyal 8vo. cloth, 24s. GEMS OF EUROPEAN ART. Edited by Mrs. S. C. Hall. 96 Steel Plates. 2 Vols., folio cloth gilt, £5. GIBBON’S DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. With Memoir, and Additional Notes, from the French of M. Goizot. Numerous Engravings and Maps. 2 Vols. super-royal 8vo. cloth, ^1 16s. GILES’S (James) ENGLISH PARSING. Improved Edition. 12mo. cloth, 2s. GILFILLAN’S THE MARTYRS, HEROES, AND BARDS OF THE SCOTTISH COVENANT. Fcap. cloth, 2s. 6d. GOING TO THE DOGS; or, the Adventures of Frank. Show- ing how he was brought up to follow neither Trade nor Profession, and what his very genteel bringing up brought him to. By C. G. Kowe, Author of “ What put my Pipe out ; or, Incidents in the Life of a Clergy- man," &c. Fcap. cloth, 3s. 6d. HACK’S (Maria) STOKIES OF ANIMALS. Adapted for Children from Three to Ten Years of Age. 16mo. cloth, Is. Od. WINTER EVENINGS ; or. Tales of Travellers. With 8 Illustrations by Gilbert and Harvey. New Edition. Fcap. cloth, 3s. 6d. HALL’S (Mr. and Mrs. S. C.), IRELAND ; its Scenery, Cha- racter, Ac. 48 Steel Plates and 600 Woodcuts. 3 Vols. royal 8vo. cl., £3 3s. WEEK AT KILLARNEY. Illustrated with Woodcuts. Royal 8vo. cloth, 8s. HANDBOOK FOR IRELAND. Post 8vo. cloth, 8s. BOOK OF SOUTH WALES ; THE WYE, AND THE COAST. Numerous Engravings. Fcap. 4to. cloth gilt, 15s. BOOK OF THE THAMES, FROM ITS RISE TO ITS FALL. With numerous Engravings. Fcap. 4to. cloth gilt, 15s. 10 CATALOGUE OF WOBKS HAPPY TRANSrOEJIATION ; or, History of a London Ap- ]irentlce. With Preface by Bev. J. A. Jamks. Ismo. cloth, 6d. HARRY COVERDALE S COURTSHIP, AND WHAT CAME OK IT, By Fhank E. Smkplkt. Post 8vu. bds., 2s. 6d. ; clolh, 3s. 6cL or, with Illustrations by IL&blot K. Brownb, 8vo. clutli, 16s. HENDRY’S IIISTOllY OF GREECE. In Easy Lessons. Fur Children of Six to Ten Years of Age. Willi Illustratious. ismo. cl., 2s. HISTORY OF ROME. In Easy Lessons. For Children of Six to Ten Years of Age. With lilustraiiona. lenio. cloth, 2s. HENRY’S (JIattiiew) C0:^IMENTARY ON THE HOLY IlillLE. Abridged by the Bev. E. Buiufiku). With 60 Engrariogs. 2 Vols. 4to. cloth, £2 16s. HISTORY OF ENGLAND DURING THE REIGN OF GEullGE III. Ity Juu.s G.orqk PuiuJHoBK, Q.C. Vol. I. sro. cl., lei. HOOPER’S fMns.) RECOLLECTIONS OF JIRS. ANDER- SUN'S SCllUUL. Mew Edition, wiui 4 Illustrations. Fcap. cloth, 3s. fid. HOPKINS’ ORTHOGRAPHICAL EXERCISES. New E-lition. Ifimo. cloth. Is. fid. HOW TO WIN LO V E ; or, Rhoda’s Lesson. A Story Book for the Young. By tlie Author of “.Michael liie Miner," “ Cola Monti,” Ac. Wltli Illustrations on Steel. Mew Edition, Ifimo. cloth, gilt edges, 2s. fid. HOWITT’S (Willt.vm) A BOY’S ADVENTURES IN THE Wll.DS OF AUSTBALI.V. Cut. by HxKVar. F'cap. cloth gilt, 4s.; Cheap Edition, without Illustrati ins, 2s. HUME AND SMOLLETTS HISTORY OF ENGLAND. M ith a Continuation to the Year leSU, by Ur. E. H. Noi.aa. lue Plates and Maps, engrared on Steel. 3 Vols. im|>erial firo., cloth gilt, £3 3s. M^ith Continuation by Fsrb to the Year 1346. 3 Vols., royal firo. cloth, £2 12$. fid. JERDAN’S (W.) AUTOBIOGRAPHY. 4 Vols. PostSvo.cl., 21s. JOBSON'S (F. J.) AMERICA AND AMERICAN METHO- DISM. Post 8vo. cloth, Ts. fid. JOSEPHUS (The Works of). With Essay by Rev. H. Stebbimo. so Woodents, and 46 Steel Engrarings. Royal Sru., cloth gilt. £1 Ss. L.VUREE (James),— TABLES OF SDIPLE INTEREST FOR EVERY DAY IN THE YEAR, at S, 4j, 4, 3i. 3, and 2{ per cent, per annntn. from £1 to £lbO, &c. Twenty-seventh Edition, 800 pp. 8vo. cloth, strongly bound, £1 Is.; or in calf, £l 6s. TABLES OF SIMPLE INTEREST, at 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 9} per cent, per annom, from 1 day to 100 days. Eighth Edition, 8vo. cloth, Ts. PTJBLISHED BY VIRTUE BEOTUERS AND CO. 11 LAUEIE’S UNIVEESAL EXCIiAJSTGE TABLES, stowing the value of the coins of every country interchanged with each other, at ali rates of exchange, from One Coin to One Million Coins. 8vo. cioth, £1. TABLES OF EXCHANGE between Paris, Bordeaux, Marseilles, Havre, Lyons, Brussels, Ghent, Bruges, Antwerp, Genoa, and London. 8vo., bound in calf, il. MADEIRA EXCHANGE TABLES. Being Portu- guese and British Money reduced into each other. 8vo. cloth, 6s. ■ MANUAL OF FOEEIGN EXCHANGES. Being British Coins reduced into Twenty-eight of tiie Principal Countries of the World, &c.; also from One to One Million Coins of these countries in decimals of the £, with French and Turkish exchanges. 4th Edition, 32mo. 9d. EXPOSITOR OE FOREIGN EXCHANGES. Being British Coins reduced into Twenty-four of the Principal Countries of the World; in parallel columns, . ; or separately, as Psalm Tunes, Secular Music, and Saci ed Mu-^ic, 12s. each. PHILLIMORE (John GEOitGE),— HISTORY OF ENGLAND DUKING THE KEIGN OF GEOilGE THE THUIU. Vol. I. 8vo. cloth, 18s. REPLY TO THE MISREPRESENTATIONS OF THE EDINBUEGU KEVIEW, October, 1853. 8vo. sewed, 2s. 16 CATALOGUE OF WORKS PICTORIAL SPELLING-BOOK; or, Lessons on Facts and Objects. With 130 Illustrations. New Edition. 12mo. cloth, Is. 6d, PLEASANT PASTIME ; or, Drawing-room Dramas for Private Representation by the Young. With Cuts. 16mo. cloth, gilt edges, 2s. 6d. POOLE’S (Matthew) DIALOGUES BETWEEN A POPISH PRIEST AND AN ENGLISH PROTESTANT. By Rev. John Gumming, D.D. 18mo. cloth. Is. 6d. PRINCE OF THE HOUSE OF DAVID ; or, Three Years in the Holy City. With Illustrations. Fcap. cloth, 3s. 6d. REMBRANDT AND HIS WORKS. Illustrated with Examples, by J. Burnet. Re-edited by H. Murray. 4to. cloth, 12s. RHYMES FOR THE NURSERY. By the Authors of “ Original Poems.” ISmo. cloth. Is. 6d. • Illustrated Edition, in large type. With 16 Designs by Gilbert. 16mo. cloth, 2s. 6d. RIPPON’S (Dr.) selection OF HYMNS FROM THE BEST AUTHORS, including a great number of Originals, intended as an Appendix to Dr. Watts’s Psalms and Hymns. New Editions. Xonpareil Z2mo. s. d. Roan ... 1 6 , gilt edges 2 0 Morocco . . .60 Long Primer 2imo. s. d. Roan . . . .26 , gilt edges 3 0 Morocco. . .60 Large Type. s. d. Sheep . . .50 Roan, gilt edges 6 0 Morocco . .90 ROBINSON CRUSOE. With Illustrations. 18mo. cloth, 2s. ROWE’S (C. G.) GOING TO THE DOGS; or, the Adventures of Frank. Showing how he was brought up to follow neither Trade nor Profession, and what his very genteel bringing up brought him to. Fcap. cloth, 3s. 6d. [Just Publislted, ROLLIN’ S ANCIENT HISTORY. 2 Vols. 8vo. cloth, 21s. ROWBOTHAM'S (J., f.r.s.a.) DERIVATIVE SPELLING- BOOK. 12mo. cloth. Is. 6d. GUIDE TO THE EEENCH LANGUAGE AND CONVERSATION; consisting of Modern French Dialogues, with the Pronunciation. New Edition, by De La. Vote. 18mo, bound, 2s. 6d, ROYAL GEMS FROM THE GALLERIES OF EUROPE; with Descriptions by S. C. Hall. 2 Vols. Elephant folio cloth, £5. RURAL SCENES ; or, a Peep into the Coimtry. A New and Revised Edition, with 88 Cuts. 18mo. cloth, 2s. RUTTER'S (Roman Catholic) LIFE OF CHRIST. Edited hy F. C. Husenbeth. Plates. 4to. cloth, 28s. RY ALL’S PORTRAITS OF EMINENT CONSERVATIVES. 72 Plates, 2 Vols , folio cloth, £6, SANDEORD AND MERTON. With Cuts. 18mo. cloth, 2s. PUBLISHED BY VTBTUE BEOTHEES AND CO. 17 SCOFFERN’S (Dr.) CHEMISTRY NO MYSTERY. Illus- trated. Fcap. cloth, 2s. 6d. SCOTLAND (The Pictorial History of). Edited ty the Rev. J. Tatlor, D.D. Illustrated with 79 Engravings on Steel, from Drawings by W. H. Bartlett, and other Artists. 2 Vols., imperial 8vo., £2 6s. SCOTT (Rev. T.), — HOLY BIBLE, witF Readings, an Abridged Commentary, and 28 Engravings. 16mo. roan, embossed, 6s. 6d. ; morocco, 7s.; elegant, 7s. 6d. SCULPTURE (Gallery of Modern). 80 Steel Plates. With Descriptions. Folio, cloth gilt, j£3 3s. SHAKESPERE’S COMPLETE WORKS. With Notes and Introductiou by H. Stebbing. With Illustrations. Royal 8vo. cloth, 25s. SHARPE’S NEW TESTAMENT. Translated from Griesbach’s Test. Fourth Edition. Fcap. cloth. Is. 6d. SHELMERDINE’S SELECTION OF THE PSALMS and other Portions of Scripture, arranged and marked for Chanting. Fcap. cloth, Is. ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY CHANTS, Selected from the most famous composers. Crown 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d. By FRANK E. SMEDLEY. FRANK EAIRLEGH. Crown 8vo. boards, 2s. 6d. ; cloth, 3s. 6d. ; or with 30 Illustrations by George Crdikshank, 8vo. cloth, I6s. HARRY COYERD ALE’S COURTSHIP. Crown 8 vo. hoards, 2s. 6d. ; cl., 3s. 6d. ; or, with Illustrations by H. K. Browne, 8vo. cl., 16s. LEWIS ARUNDEL. Crown 8vo. 3s. boards ; cloth, 4s. ; or with Illustrations by H. K. Browne (Phiz), 8vo. cloth, 22s. THE COLVILLE FAMILY. Frontispiece and Vignette Title by Phiz. Fcap. boards. Is. 6d. ; cloth, 2s. 6d. SEAMEN TALES BY SEVEN AUTHORS. Edited by the Author of “ Frank Fairlegh.” Fcap. 2s. boards ; 2s. 6d. cloth. SMITH (C. M.), THE LITTLE WORLD OF LONDON. Post 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. THE DEAD LOCK. A Story in Eleven Chapters. Also, TALES OF ADVENTUKE. Post 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. SPURGEON (Rev. C.H.),— THE SAINT AND HIS SAVIOUR; or, The Progress of the Soul in the Knowledge of Jesus. With Portrait. Fcap. cloth gilt, 6s. STEPS AND STAGES ON THE ROAD TO GLORY. By the Author of “ Our Heavenly Home,” &c. Fcap. cloth, 6s. STORY OF A FAMILY. By S. M. Leap, cloth, 2s. Cd. 18 CATAIOGtTE OF WOEKS STOEY WITHOUT AN END. Translated from the German by Sarah Austin. Illustrated by Harv'ey. New Edition. 16mo. cioth, bevelled boards, 2s. 6d. SWAIN’S (Charles, Author of “ The Mind,” “ English Melo- dies,” Ac.) ART AND FASHION; with other Sketches, Songs, and Poems. Post 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d. TATE’S ELEMENTS OE COMMERCIAL ARITHMETIC, Fifth Edition. 12mo. cloth, 2s. 6d. KEY, 3s. 6d. TAYLOR’S (James) PICTORIAL HISTORY OF SCOTLAND, from the Roman Invasion to the Close of the Jacobite Rebellion, a.d. 79 — 1746. 2 Vols. royal 8vo. cloth, £2 5s. TAYLOR’S (Bp.) LIFE OF CHRIST. Edited hy Philip. 4to. cloth, 10s. 6d. THOMSON’S (A.) CONSOLATIONS FOR CHRISTIAN MOURNERS. 8vo. cloth, 12s. ; ]2mo. cloth, 5s. TOMLINSON’S (Chas.) EXPERIMENTAL ESSAYS. 1. On the Motions of Camphor on the Surface of Water. 2. On the Motion of Camphor towards the Light. 3. History of the Modern Theory of Dew. With Illustrations. 12mo. limp cloth. Is. CYCLOPHIDIA OF USEFUL ARTS, Mechanical and Chemical, Manufactures, Mining, and Engineering. Illus- trated by upwards of 2,500 Engravings on Steel and Wood. 2 Vols. Royal 8vo. cloth, £2 5s. TRAILL’S (Mrs.) LADY MARY AND HER NURSE; or, a Peep into the Canadian Forest. Fcap, cloth, 2s. 6d. TREASURE-SEEKER’S DAUGHTER. 12mo. Ids., Is. TREDGOLD ON THE STEAM ENGINE. In Two Sections : 1. Marine Engines. 2. Locomotive and Stationary Engines. 1000 pages of Text, and upwards of 220 Engravings. Also 160 Woodcuts and Diagrams. 3 Vols. royal 4to. cloth, £4 14s. 6d. By MARTIN F. TTIPPER, D.C.L., F.R.S. CITHARA ; a Selection from tie Lyrical Writings of M. E. Tapper. Post 8vo. cloth, gilt edges, 5s. KING ALFRED’S POEMS. Fcap. cloth, 3s. THE CROCK OF GOLD, THE TWINS, AND HEART. Post 8vo. 2s. 6d. boards ; or separately. Is. 6d. each, cloth. PROVERBIAL PHILOSOPHY. Translated into French. Portrait. Fcap. cloth, 2s. 6d. TURNER AND HIS WORKS. Illustrated with Examples from his Pictures, and Remarks by J. Burnet, and Memoir by P. Cun- ningham. Re-edited by H. Murray. 4to. cloth, 12s. TWICE LOST. A Novel in One Yohune. By the Author of “ Story of a Family,” “ Queen Isabel,” d. 16. HEEODOTUS, v. vi. vii., by T. H. L. Leary . . Is. ^d. 17. HEEODOTUS, viii. ix., and Index, by T. H. L. Leary Is. 6d. 18. SOPHOCLES; CEdipus Tyrranus, bv H. Young . . Is. 20. SOPHOCLES ; Antigone, by J. Milier . . . .2s. 23. ELTEIPIDES ; Hecuba and Medea, by W. B. Smith . Is. 6d. 26. EURIPIDES; Alcestis, by J. Milner . . . ■ . Is. 30. HSSCHYLUS; Prometheus Vinctus, by J. Davies . . Is. 32. HSSCHYLUS ; Septem contra Thebas, by J. Davies . . Is. 40. ARISTOPHANES ; Acharnians, by C. S. D. Townsend Is. 6d. 41. THUCYDIDES, i., by H. Young Is. Prejiarinff for Press. 19. SOPHOCLES; GEdipus Co- loiUEUS. 21. SOPHOCLES ; Ajax. 22. SOPHOCLES; Philoctetes. 25. EURIPIDES ; Hippolytus. 27. EURIPIDES ; Orestes. 28. EURIPIDES. Extracts from the remaining plays. 29. SOPHOCLES. Extracts from the remaining plays. 31. AESCHYLUS; Persa;. 33. .^SCHYLUS ; Choephorae. 34. .®SCHYLUS ; Eumenides. 35. jESCHYLUS; Agamemnon. 36. AESCHYLUS ; SuppHces. 37. PLUTARCH ; Select Lives. 38. ARISTOPHANES; Clouds. 39. ARISTOPHANES ; Frogs. 42. THUCYDIDES, ii. 43. THEOCRITUS; Select Idyls. 44. PIND.AE. 45. ISOCRATES. 46. HESIOD. VIRTUE BROTHERS & CO., 1, AMEN CORNER. Q r^^oR nnnQ7