Showing 76253 results

Transcript

Trin Coll.
Monday

Sir,

I beg to inform you that you have been elected a member of the Trinity Chess Club subject to the condition imposed by the laws of the club, that every candidate for admission before becoming an actual member, must win one out of three games played with members at a club meeting. The last meeting for the present term will take place at Mr Bone's rooms, Trinity College, on Wednesday evening next.

I am,
Your obedient servant
Alfred L Galabin
Treasurer of Trinity Chess Club

—————

The letter is undated, but since it was probably received by the person who owned the accompanying term-cards, it presumably preceded them, and the term mentioned in it is most likely to be Michaelmas 1867.

The research notes consist of Boughey's notes, letters, and publications from others relating to various aspects of the College's history, as well as the publication of the history. The papers appear disordered from their original state but because there are some runs of like material they have been left as found. Boughey’s note passing them on to R. V. Laurence may be found as item 399, with a covering note and instruction at items 410-411.

The letters are from W. Emery Barnes (items 220-221), W. H. D. Bird (item 415), F. C. Burkitt (item 330), J. W. Clark (items 400-401), C. M. Neale (item 308), John Peile (items 325, 327), Alexander Pulling (item 427), and Alfred E. Stamp (item 372). Letters from Robert Bowes (item 386), J. W. Clark (items 63, 250, 390), F. E. Robinson (items 231, 233, 235, 242-244, 247, 252-253, 383-385, 387, 394) and Hutchinson & Co. (items 224-226, 230, 248-249, 251) concern the publication of the history. These are accompanied by a draft of Boughey’s letter to Hutchinson & Co. (item 245) and Boughey’s original memorandum of agreement with F. E. Robinson dated 4 Nov. 1897 (item 246).

Printed material consists of a card advertising Rouse Ball's History of the First Trinity Boat Club (item 207), five of J. W. Capstick’s halftone photographs of the 1st Eastern General Hospital in Nevile's Court and on the Backs (item 209), G. F. Cobb’s A Brief History of the Organ in the Chapel of Trinity College, Cambridge (item 356), three printed catalogues from F. E. Robinson & Co. dated 1898-1901 and notices by F. E. Robinson from the same period (items 227-230, 232,237, 240-241), The Roof-Climber’s Guide to Trinity (item 366), the first paper of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Undergraduates, February 1838 (item 170), an offprint of Robert Sinker’s The Statue of Byron in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (item 414), and Vincent Henry Stanton’s Some Makers of Trinity College. A Sermon Preached in the Chapel of Trinity College Cambridge, on December 9, 1898 (item 442).

Notes were written on verso of letters, including one from Herbert P. S. Devitt asking for leave (item 19), a letter from W. H. D. Rouse to Mr Stewart dated 3 Oct. 1902 (item 39), a book recommendation ticket for the library (item 38), and a Trinity gate bill sent to the Senior Dean for Monday night Aug. 25, n.y. (item 41). Two unusual items are clipped pieces of an early manuscript (item 406).

Poem on the birthday of Flora M and Alice M Mayor.

Refers to Montagu's telegram of 6 June regarding the Prince of Wales's visit. The non-co-operation agitation is now less active. The recantation of the Ali brothers has, he thinks, had a damping effect on the Khilafat supporters and the Gandhi movement, notwithstanding Mohammed Ali's explanation of his apology. Sapru, Shafi, and Malaviya also think the situation improved. Gandhi is not succeeding in obtaining support and money. Butler is dissatisfied with the position in the United Provinces, and wishes to proceed with prosecutions against the Independent and others; the Government of India will decide on their policy on Friday. Is concerned at the number of youths in gaol for lesser offences, and favours releasing them upon expressions of regret and promises of future good behaviour. So long as Gandhi pursues his present policy of less virulence and refrains from preaching active hatred of the Government, no action should be taken by the Government; but prosecutions should be instituted wherever speeches are made inciting to violence, or whenever the agents of the non-co-operationist movement lie about Government action or preach hatred of it. It is not always easy to distinguish between speeches denouncing Government policy and thus exciting disaffection against it, and speeches containing serious mis-statements, accompanied by incitement to hatred, but he recommends prosecution only in the latter case at present.

(Typed.)

6 Duke Street, Adelphi.—Discusses the drafting of a patent for a telegraphic receiving instrument.

—————

Transcript

Decr 18. 1867.
6 Duke St Adelphi.

Dear Thomson

The date by which the ink recording patent must be completed is the 23d of January. but the drawings should be begun at once. We must clearly not trouble Varley any more, I am afraid he really is ill.

I will draw up a short specification of the mirror galvanometer as adapted for a speaking instrument and submit it to your criticism. I do not think the patent need be identical with the Newfoundland patent. I should propose to call the patent an improved form of telegraphic receiving instrument or some such title.

This would leave the use of a reflecting galvanometer quite free—in the States. If we do not do this I fear we may be defeated by the manufacture or import of instruments which we cannot keep out by establishing a custom house service of our own and that when men have once got the patent instmt they will say they may use it as they like and that the instruments are in common use for many purposes besides telegraphy so that even if we did get a verdict it would be for a merely nominal sum.

My idea of the true patent is as if the Morse having been the common telegraphic instmt and galvanometers or detectors in common use for testing, some one has found out that the common detector could be used as a single needle instmt.

We might have drawn up the following laconic patent. “I use the ordinary detector as a receiving instrument, the the letters of the alphabet being indicated by one or more deflections on each side of the zero point”. I apprehend this would have been a valuable and valid patent.

Yrs vy truly
Fleeming Jenkin

Labelled on fore-edge: 'Michaelmas Term 1930. Lent Term 1931. May Term 1931 | Dr. L. Wittgenstein. J. E. King. St. John's. Philosophy'

Duplicated typescript, corrected, with four duplicated maps. A reconstruction of the fields of Grantchester as they were before enclosure.

Arena Stage, 6th & Maine Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20024 - It was good to see him again, thinks he is holding up well, singing some of Steve [Sondheim?]'s more difficult songs.

Autograph hunter.

The Imperial Society of Knights Bachelor, 21 Old Buildings, Lincoln's Inn, London WC2A 3UJ - Describes the Society and invites him to join; with membership form and booklet.

Hopes he is not bored at Westgate; was 'picked up' by a man in London on her way to St Ives, describes people on the train, and bohemian types in St Ives itself.

Concerns 11 Cranley Gardens SW7; encloses a report from C. Crocker of The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Environmental Services concerning the works required.

c/o 11 Cranley Gardens, Flat 7, London - Photocopy of a thank you note for a weekend written in the form of a review of a play.

2 Bankfield Lane, Southport.—Defends her theory that Hamlet contains a reference to Malchus.

—————

Transcript

2 Bankfield Lane, Southport.
28 November 1935

Dear Dr. McKerrow,

Thank you very much for your letter. I’m disappointed not to have convinced you about Malchus {1} as, quite apart from the aptness of the reference, it avoids the necessity for altering the 2Q. and F. readings as well as the awkward conjunction of a verb used only with agent nouns with a concrete noun. I can’t believe that Hamlet was ever intended to reply ‘This is skulking misdeed’ or that the difficulty can be got round by assuming (with Mr. Dover Wilson) {2} that an abstract noun can be substituted for a concrete in this context as there seems no warrant for this in malhecho or any other derivative from malefactum. However, as everyone seems quite satisfied with the emendation and its explanation, perhaps I’m wrong. I havn’t any idea where Shakespeare could have come across Malchus unless it was in Josephus {3} (unlikely I think), a Herod and Antipater play or some collection of exempla (perhaps under ‘revenge’ as the revenge motive enters). I can’t do anything about the last here (except get the L.L. collection of exempla with Sabellicus etc. in) {4} and the only relevant plays I can find in the Elizabethan Stage are too late or academic: {5} but I hope to convince you!

I was interested in what you had to say about dumb shows, but I think that as I know so little about them I had better leave the question to those who know more. I sympathise with your wish not to embroil yourself or the R.E.S. in interminable Hamlet arguments (is Hamlet the editor’s nightmare?). Unfortunately, I can’t resist the challenge of a problem.

Thank you very much for forwarding my enclosure and for bothering to answer my letter when you are so busy.

Yours sincerely,
Alice Walker.

—————

Typed, except the signature.

{1} Walker’s idea was that the phrase ‘Miching Malicho’ (Hamlet, III. ii. 137, spelt as in F1) refers to Malichus, or Malchus, the poisoner of Antipater, father of Herod the Great. She expounded the theory in the Modern Language Review the following October. It would appear from the present letter that she may previously have offered an article on the subject to the Review of English Studies.

{2} See What Happens in ‘Hamlet’ (1935), pp. 153–63, and the gloss in the New Cambridge Hamlet (1934), p. 277. In The Manuscript of Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’ and the Problems of its Transmission (2 vols., 1932) Dover Wilson was concerned only with the Q2 reading ‘munching’ (pp. 107, 248, 253).

{3} See Jewish War, Book i, sections 220–35 (Loeb ed., Books i–iii (1927), pp. 103–11).

{4} Marcus Antonius Coccius Sabellicus (1436?–1506) was the author of a history of the world entitled Enneades sive rapsodiae historiarum (Venice, 1504), in which the story of Antipater’s poisoning is related, from Josephus (see Ennead vi, Book ix). But the book Walker refers to is the London Library’s (‘L.L.’) copy of the compendium Exempla virtutum et vitiorum (Basel, 1555), compiled by Johannes Heroldt, which contains, among other things, Sabellicus’s Exemplorum libri decem, first published at Strasbourg in 1507. However, there appears to be no mention of Malchus in the latter work; the story certainly does not occur in the section entitled ‘De contemptu religionis et ultione’, where one would expect it to be. Probably Walker knew that Sabellicus had told the story but mistook the work in which it occurred. The only other works by Sabellicus in the London Library are 18th-century editions of books on Italian antiquities, namely De situ urbis Venetae and De vetustate Aquileiae et Fori Julii libri sex, both in Graevius’s Thesaurus antiquitatum et historiarum Italiae (Leiden, 1722), and Historiae rerum Venetarum ab urbe condita libri XVIII in Degl’istorici delle cose Veneziane (Venice, 1718–22). There is a reference to exempla in Walker’s article ‘The Reading of an Elizabethan: Some Sources of the Prose Pamphlets of Thomas Lodge’ (RES, viii. 268).

{5} See E. K Chambers, The Elizabethan Stage, 4 vols. (1923). The plays to which Walker refers probably include the academic play Herodes (iv. 375).

Trinity College, Cambridge.—Refers to the subject of marriage. Is annoyed at having to write testimonials. Presents a Latin credo in honour of the goddess Liberty.

—————

Transcript

Trin. Coll. Camb.

Dear Fred

Here, until the 12th. It is ordained for the procreation of children, and for a godly and wholesome discipline. {1}

Oh, I am mad!—mad!

x x x

17 people have written to ask me for prescriptions, I mean testimonials. They know that writing matrimonials drives me mad, that every testimony takes me a week to do, that it sears my conscience and sores my brain, that—why are people such fiends? They only does it to annoy, because they knows it teases. {2}

Therefore pity & forgive me, and persuade others to do the like.

I have killed 9 establishments and 4 baptists with Moss’s story about the cockatoo who letusprayed.

Make somebody put music to this

Credo in deam solam libertatem Matrem vitæ
Matrem viventium omnium Inscriptæ legis
fontem Humani generis totam gloriam {3}

or do you put it into latin with additions or subtractions.

Thine
(I will write a testimonial for the rest this evening)
W.K.C.

—————

{1} The first phrase comes from the marriage service in the Prayer Book; the second appears to be Clifford’s own invention, though the phrase ‘godly and wholesome Doctrine’ occurs in the thirty-fifth of the Thirty-Nine Articles (‘On the Homilies’).

{2} An adaptation of verses in Alice in Wonderland (1865):

Speak roughly to your little boy,
And beat him when he sneezes:
He only does it to annoy,
Because he knows it teases.

{3} ‘I believe in the only goddess Liberty, mother of life, mother of all living things, source of the written law, the whole glory of the human race.’

The contents are as follows:

‘Pythian II.’ Notes relating to a lecture on Pindar’s second Pythian Ode, with an incomplete annotated translation.

‘Plato & Co(pe).’ Notes relating to a lecture on Plato’s Phaedrus.

Notes on precession and nutation, the motion of the earth, etc., relating to lectures by [E. J.] Routh.

‘Hamilton’s Principle.’

‘Hayward’s Planetary Theory.’

‘On a Geometrical Theory applicable to Floating Bodies. (Metacenter.)’

‘Adams on Secular Acc[eleratio]n of [the Moon]’s Mean Motion.’

‘Rotation of the Moon. (Stuart, fr[om] Laplace)’

‘Theory of Jupiter’s Satellites. (Laplace).’

‘Inspiration.’

‘Enlightened Tolerance.’ First paragraph of a paper later entitled ‘On Toleration and Free Thought’ (see below).

‘Πειθω.’ A poem.

‘A Treatise on the Bottom of the Sea; to which are added Reflexions on the Interpretation of Prophecy.’ Draft of a paper (read before the Parallelepiped Society, 11 May 1865).

‘Τροτηρής, or On Style.’

‘The Mystery of Melancholy.’

‘On Toleration and Free Thought.’ Partial draft of a paper (read before the Parallelepiped Society, 9 Nov. 1865).

‘Of Cowper.’

Untitled essay on the relation between science and theology.

Notes on the question ‘Is the notion of obligation an essential part of morality?’

Notes on the question ‘Why is there so much more difference between man & anthropoid apes than the physical organisms seem to account for?’

‘How definitions are a source of ignorance.’

Notes on the question ‘Can the doctrine of Final Causes be reconciled with Religion?’

‘Eirenicon Magnum.’ Syllabus and draft of a paper (apparently intended to be read before the Parallelepiped Society).

—————

Transcript of ff. A1–A17

A Treatise on the Bottom of the Sea; | to which are added | Reflexions on the Interpretation of Prophecy.

It will be at once perceived that the subject of this paper is twofold. The twin themes, however, which are mentioned in the Title, will not be treated separately, one after the other; but on account of their intimate connection will walk on hand in hand, as dear children; while the author, like some breezy nursemaid, will follow with the perambulator, flirting with the casual policeman, nor, for all that, untouched by the glory of our national defences. He thinks, at the same time, that it would not ill become him to give some account of the reasons which have induced him to bring these two subjects in particular before the notice of the Parallelepiped. And to begin with the Bottom of the Sea. It is evidently unnecessary that he should speak of the mysterious interest of this subject considered in itself; of the vast fleets of Tarshish that lie there in silence, each with its Jonah on board, holding their secrets quietly, undisturbed by the distant murmur of supernal storms; of the home of the great sea-serpent, whose nose, we hope, is soon to be put out of joint by a snake of more slender construction; of all those awful monsters, which, by a long process of emigration have finally been sent to the only place where their existence cannot be disproved. It was indeed a priori obvious that the subject of the Bottom of the Sea was one of the deepest interest. But, apart from the subject considered merely by itself, the author proposes here to treat of all those connected fields of inquiry which arise naturally from such consideration of it. For instance: the use of Poetry in Education; the Present Position of the Parallelepiped; the Attic Orator and the English Sermonizer compared & contrasted; Fiction; Reviews; Mendelssohn; and the Philosophy of Discovery. It is much to be regretted that want of time and material rendered it impossible to add a projected Appendix on the Doctrine of Limits. If it were possible to add anything to the intense interest of the theme, this Appendix would have done so; and its loss is the more to be regretted, as the preceding list will doubtless have created in the mind of my audience the most lively curiosity in respect of everything connected with the Bottom of the Sea. And indeed if the mere consideration of this mysterious subject can solve all the knotty points that have been raised in the discussion of the matters just mentioned, with far greater ease than a Davenport brother can slip out of the toils of the half-hitch; surely then it may be allowed to blow its own trumpet in the face of the Parallelepiped, nor can anybody complain if the whole thing is done in the dark.

These then are some of the reasons which have induced me to treat of the Bottom of the Sea; but why, it may be asked, should I talk about the Interpretation of Prophecy also? The answer is easy. The two subjects are so closely connected, that it is impossible to speak of one without speaking also of the other. This will be obvious to anyone who remembers what was said about Jonah, Sea-serpent, Electric Telegraph, and Ships of Tarshish. I dash therefore in medias res; that is to say, I go down the Maëlstrom strapped to an empty cask; come on, who’s afraid?

The use of Poetry in Education is the first field that opens before us. Man has been defined as the animal that beats its young systematically for educational ends. From this it might be argued, and justly, that the educational ends of men correspond to that portion of the sea of which I am treating. This I mention quite by the way, and merely to show the connected nature of my argument.

Education, then, is a beating. And this truth is not confined to the Education of the young, teste Tennyson:—

“At the last arose the man,
⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕
To shape and use.”

Now that which is beaten, is beaten that it may go. I know indeed that a far different philosophy is taught by the nameless Homer of English nursery rhyme, when he says:—

“If I had a donkey and he wouldn’t go,
Wouldn’t I wollop him? no, no, no!”

But I think it will be apparent to every reflecting mind that in this place the poet has fallen into the error of those who mistake indulgence for benevolence, and drop substantial justice to grasp at the shadow of generosity. He was doubtless an advocate for the abolition of capital punishment, and would have turned a deaf ear to the confession of Constance Kent.

I have also to refute another school of philosophers, who say that education is not the making of a man to go, but the development of that which is in him; just as a gardener attends to the development of a plant, seeing that it fulfils in every respect the law of its nature, and does not get crooked. This they say is the education of the plant; like to this is the education of a man. And they support their pernicious view by arguments based on the derivation of the word itself. But this ground I can easily cut away from under them. For I hold it an axiom far too sublime for proof, that every really useful word in the English Language was at some time or other the last new piece of University Slang. And this being so, who shall say that this word Education was not coined and invented by a Mathematical man ignorant of Latin Prepositions? Therefore the education of man is rather like unto that care of the gardener which through bitter discipline of hothouse, and pruning-knife, and tobacco-smoke, transforms the dog-rose of the hedges into damask and cloth of gold. Q:E:D:. We have then arrived at the following definition:—

“Education is that kind of beating which makes men go.”

I am too sleepy to take every point in the order in which I mentioned it before. As my state is immediately and forcibly suggestive of sermons, I will proceed at once with that subject.

⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕

Dear me! I am awake again, and will narrate my dream, as it was apropos of the present discussion.

Methought that I stood in the midst among many people; and it was indeed Saint Bartholomew’s Fair. Then I held up on high a prize to be contended for; it was a garment of white stuff, very pure and precious, and the sleeves and the collar thereof were edged with curious workmanship. So I swore that I would give it to what noble knight soever should win it in fair rivalry; not indeed for himself, but to present unto his ladie love. And the manner of contending should be this; each one should bring a donkey, and call him by his own name; then each should ride on other’s donkey, and the donkey that came in last should win for his owner the prize. So they came together to contend. And I saw in my dream how they did smite the asses, some upon the head, and some upon the neck, and some upon the back; and others did prog† them with the ends of their sticks. But for all this the asses would not move but a small space, and one moved not at all. He that rode thereon so flourished his stick with grace and precision that he caused among many that were looking on great admiration and fluttering of heart, so that the very ass himself seemed not insensible to the charms of the Sublime and Beautiful; yet for all this he would not stir. And This† ass was the one that won the prize at the last. Then I saw in my dream, and one of the riders did lean forward and whisper into the ear of his ass; and he said “Beans.” He did likewise bite the ear. Then did the beast in a great fury run forward, and became a pulpit cushion; so I awoke, and remembered that saying of Tully’s, that one orator will persuade men, while another will make a neat and appropriate speech.

COR: 1. Oratory is a certain kind of beating which makes men go.
COR: 2. Therefore Oratory may be a part of Education.

I have thus connected Sermons with Education and therefore with the Bottom of the Sea. But their sphere of connection has really a far larger radius. There are certain things, viz: Music, Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, which we are wont to class with Oratory & Poetry under the common name of Art. With these we ought also to put all that kind of Prose which lives; this term suffices to exclude Literary Criticism, of which I promise to speak presently. Now, what is the common property which causes all these things to be grouped together? why are they one? The answer to this question will constitute a definition of Art. There are some, indeed, who doubt altogether whether these things have any common property; the end of such men is destruction. Again there are those who assert that the common property consists in their being all the domain of taste and appealing to our notions of the Sublime and Beautiful. All I have to say to the Parallelepiped about these men is a word of solemn warning against their impious and heretical doctrines. Art is that by which one man persuades another. To illustrate in some measure this sublime and incontrovertible truth, I will quote from another poet.

“But I think, when years have floated onward
⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕ ⁕
Left a message for his weary soul.”

And again:—

“I struck one chord of music
Like the sound of a great Amen.
… It linked all perplexed meanings
into one perfect peace
and trembled away into silence
as if it were loth to cease.”

But this theory of Art can do more than support itself; it can take us in safety to the Bottom of the Sea. For I apprehend that this question “what is the origin of our belief?” is about as near to the Bottom of the Sea as any question can be. Now of all our ideas, and beliefs, and theories, one of two things must be predicable; either they were born with us, or we have acquired them since. And the ideas which we have acquired since may again be subdivided into two classes; those which we found out for ourselves, so to speak; and those of which we have been persuaded by our fellow-men. There remaineth therefore these three, Birth, Sight, {1} and Persuasion; and the greatest of these is Persuasion. Trust me, Opinion is a stormy sea; but Persuasion is at the Bottom of it. There sits Πειθω, on a throne of pearls and coral, far down in the blue depths beyond the ken of men; and all things do obeisance to her.

But I pass on to speak of Prophecy. It is indeed a comfort, to one entering upon a theme like this, to know that religious discussions are not tabooed in our society; nay rather, have received the especial patronage and protection of our revered Founder. I will therefore discourse diligently and without fear.

A prophet, I take it, is one inspired. This does not mean that he is infallible; on the contrary his very inspiration shews where his faults are. If the Sun gave no light, what should we know of Solar Spots? Further; the Spirits of the prophets are subject unto the prophets; Inspiration is a thing perceptible to its subject, and controlled by him. Again, a prophet knows not the interpretation of his prophecy; this is the office of other men. To some are given divers kinds of tongues; to others the interpretation of tongues. And lastly, which tallies well with the third, to those that have ears to hear, the words of the prophet are clearer and more precise than those of ordinary men. This is all I can say without divulging in some measure what my paper is about. And (which is lucky) this is just all which it is necessary to believe concerning prophecy. If any receive not these doctrines, let him bethink himself of the Acherontic Combustion of the Sempiternal Tartarus, and pause ere it be too late.

Whosoever can persuade men is a prophet. Carlyle assents. All Art is talismanic and thaumaturgic, for it can persuade men.

“Trust me, no new skill of subtle tracery
No mere practice of a dexterous hand
Will suffice, without a hidden spirit
That we may, or may not, understand.”

It is necessary, before all things, to believe in the Divinity of Πειθω.

But specially, the poet is a prophet.

“I told
a prophecy; poetic numbers came
spontaneously to clothe in priestly robe
a renovated spirit singled out,
such hope was mine, for holy services.”

Now, it was not long ago that I asked the question, whether Tennyson would live? And I was answered “Not among vulgar minds, perhaps; but he will always be a favourite with men of taste.” In the name of poetic inspiration I denounce this doctrine. A poet is the Persuader of men, the favourite of heaven; his office is to feed a hungry multitude, not to tickle the palates of the Epicurean Few. If it does chance that the heavenly manna is in taste like unto coriander seed, exceeding sweet and pleasant: still it is the food of the people, and not a relish for the dessert of Dives. Far be it from poetry to become an allegory of French Chocolate. {2}

Just because he is specially inspired, the Poet is specially Ποιητης. He above all artists has that creative power which alone can work miracles. And observe what he creates; not poems or stories or ideas that exist in themselves, but the minds of men. Cut him off from this his influence, you cut off the air he breathes; it is a King dethroned with a pension of five thousand a-year. He must persuade, or he is no poet.

Nor is he bound to understand his own prophecy. Therefore to one who says that Shakespeare wrote a Trilogy of Roman History, it is no answer that “he could not possibly have meant to”; because that has nothing to do with the matter. And if my Conception of “the Voyage” seems totally different from yours, it is only because the poet used a language far more perfect than the one in which we tell our thoughts to each other. Depend upon it, the latter is in fault; that prophecy is perfectly definite & clear; I have read it exactly as you have. Nay more; it has given you a far clearer notion of the periodicity of History than I possibly can:—

“The world is round
and we may sail for ever more”

and, where Argument failed, “the Brook” has convinced you of the permanence of human nature:—

“For men may come, and men may go,
But I go on for ever.”

Songs without Words have all the clearer meaning; for it is in the Words of our description, and not in the notes, that the ambiguity lies. Surely the authority of Mendelssohn will suffice to establish this point.

If the artist’s work were his own, it would be good to publish all that remains of a great man. But because his greatness is not of himself, it is not always with him, he does not always obey it; and then he fails. He learns only by degrees and in a long time to put quiet confidence in his own inspiration; by this growing faith he is gradually justified and made perfect. “Non nobis, Domine!” is the final attainment of a perfect soul. We can trace the approach to it in many a lofty life. Some wear Saul’s armour all their time, and will not see the smooth pebbles that are waiting for them in the brook. So Goliath goes on, and defies the armies of Israel. “I cannot wear these, for I have not proved them”; this is what the hero says, when you talk to him about the via media, and dangerous extremes. So says also the poet, when you bid him be careful of his style. “My clothes shall be made to fit me; here, Snip, take my measure.”

But though the poet is not infallible, yet is he trustworthy. For his reason he may be adduced as inspired testimony in all questions of this sort; for if what he says is a part of his message, it is true. Only on this principle can I justify the overwhelming number of quotations in this paper. To each of them belongs this preface: γεγραπται. {3}

I have spoken at this length of poetry, because it is the clearest instance of a theory which applies to all kinds of Art. All is inspired; all persuades men. But see, if this be so, how utilitarian Art becomes. It is no longer a thing of taste, meant to give a refined pleasure to those whose education fits them to appreciate it; Art is the Educator itself; the heavenly motive power that makes men go. Here is a most neat and commodious building; it accomodates† twenty thousand people, and seats them all in the sublimest comfort; everybody can hear, and it only cost. … Well, here again is a small Church, which cost five or six times the money, and won’t hold nearly as many people; and when they are there, they will be sitting on benches, or kneeling on knife-boards, or standing on Minton’s Tiles, and getting sore-throats. But did your commodious galleries ever raise a high and a holy thought in those who looked round upon the stuccoed lies of that whited sepulchre? Did the Mother-Maid over the altar ever look down with loving eyes upon the orphan, to teach him that he had two Mothers in Heaven? Ah! if that fresco cost more than all your fine house put together, it was worth fifty times the money, only for doing so much for the little ones. True Art is true utility for ever.

The various forms of Art are only the different tongues of the dwellers at Jerusalem; devout men out of every nation under Heaven. But as each prophet has his special gift of inspiration, so each hearer his special appreciation. Nor was Plato wrong, who saw many steps, as the nails hang in order from a magnet. The nail next in contact is the Critic. His office also is made for him, and he for it; the censer is holy, but men fill it with unhallowed fire. No prophecy of Art is of any private interpretation; He Who sent the prophet, sent also his true expounders, the false Critic only proves the existence of the true.

Once more. Archimedes, like Socrates, has his Dæmon. Science also is Art, and falls from heaven. The two great ideas that have transformed geometry came, not to the savant surrounded by all the resources of analysis and well up in all the discoveries of his day, but to the captive who drew figures on the walls of his Russian Prison. All your Novum Organon, your Methods of Discovery, nay even the great Induction itself, are but as the chariots and the horses of Egypt. Science is only divine. But it is also human. Bear a little with my idealism when I say that we all see through a glass darkly, through the glass of our own nature; and the universe that we look at seems to partake of the colour of the glass. Your theory of nature, to be true to humanity, must also be coloured as the glass; it must persuade men. Nay farther; all you have to do is to wipe each man’s glass for him. Truly Science is a very human thing.

I have been to the Bottom of the Sea of Art; I have made it out to be a Prophecy that Persuades Men. This is all that my paper is about; so we have got back to the surface, away from the Policemen and the Parks, at the End of the Donkey-race. May nobody ever get to the bottom of the Parallelepiped; but may each succeeding Thursday see the bottom of the well-drained Pewter.

—————

This paper was read before the Parallelepiped Society on 11 May 1865, and the text was copied by Clifford, with a few variations, into the Society’s Minute Book (O.11.6, vol. ii, ff. 56-68), the spelling of ‘Reflexions’ in the title being changed to ‘Reflections’.

{1} Commas supplied after ‘Birth’ and ‘Sight’. Both are in the Minute Book version.

{2} ‘Its greatest good is to be wholesome and nutritious.’ struck through.

{3} On the facing page is written in pencil: ‘Plat: Lys: 214 A’.