Somerleaze, January 22, 1880.

I don't know Laud's line very minutely, but I have had occasion to look at some of the documents, and I have often thought about it. Whether one admires or condemns him, Macaulay's mere contempt is certainly out of place. Remember, in his main ritual point he succeeded. For two hundred years every English church has been arranged as he would have it, no party objecting, and that though the rubric still allows the other arrangement. Also, as you say, there was a liberal side to him. I suspect that he was much less strait-laced about pure dogma than either his supporters or his enemies. His notion of Church and State would suit no side now, it seems to have been the Byzantine notion of making the sovereign the chief power within the Church, not without it. But there must have been some special twist in him. People hated the man himself, beyond anything that he said or did. He seems to have had an unpleasant way of doing everything, which offended people more than the things which were done. For instance, how he bothered everybody to give to St. Paul's. Set on the other hand a patronage of learning the most ready and enlightened going at the time. Depend upon it, he is a complex study, with many sides to him—not to be daubed off in a hurry by either friend or foe. You know Mozley's essay on himit is Mozley's surely, but I have it only in an old Christian Remembrancer', strongly of course on Laud's side; but bringing out many points very forcibly.




[merged small][ocr errors]

February 8, 1880.

I have got further with the debates, but they have moved to Ireland. I must plead guilty to a certain tenderness for the Home Rulers. I cry out for free Bulgaria, and free everything else, and I have certain notions about Sicily; and I cannot help seeing that geographical reasons alone will

January, 1845. Since published in Essays, Historical and Theological, by J. B. Mozley, D.D., vol. i.

always hinder Ireland from being joined to Great Britain in the way that the three parts of Great Britain are joined together. I only ask that Great Britain be not made a dependency of Ireland, which some of the schemes amount to. I am again full of Byzantine map-making. It is a wonderfully instructive process. I mark the Turk black, and it is cheering to see how much less there is of him than there was, 200, 100, 50, 5, years back.



February 22, 1880.

Your scheme seems very pretty, as far as I can understand it. But, if you are for me, will you do a very daring thing? Spin your yarn in plain English. As one of the vulgar public, I welcome the Stone Age and the Flint Folk. As having learned the Greek tongue I may take a shot at Neolithia; but how for Parker, C. B. and others who have not learned the Greek tongue? Tertiary makes me guess that two things went afore it; if so, Third would be plainer. But what is Pleistocene? A great lot of something doubtless; but is it mud or suppers or communes or what? Pray don't give us such words as that; they are not canny. Leave them to Dizzy and G. S. Venables, Daily Telegraph and such like, or let all that have any 'solidarity' with them go and 'take a prudent attitude in an autonomous province.' If you don't get rid of them, I shall 'vituperate you monotonously and reiteratively like the sentimental and irresponsible chatterer' that I am.

You know I make it a great point to insist on your matters being branches of history, not of hard names and bother, and I shall be delighted to have the chance of such an one in my


... I don't wonder at your being 'knocked up,' when you gad about like a canon of 'Poules' and write letters in trains. Don't get knocked down, which is much worse. I am getting mighty sprack, and live as it were with clenched fists at Jews and Turks, at by no means all infidels-for some be just men— still less at heretics, for without the British Nonconformist what could we do?


Somerleaze, February 29, 1880.

I am glad you are safe back again. I saw you had been a long way off catching Hittites. Now as to Hittites-as also Hivites, Perizzites, any of them-the case for me, as a parochial European is this. As long as they stayed at Carchemish and such places, they come under my rule- Let the potsherds',' &c. But, if they ventured to come to the coasts of the Aegaean on Agamemnones dagum þæs caseres or any other time, then I must (March 7) know about them. I know that some wise men, your neighbours, are a good bit exercised in mind about these same Hittites. I am myself rather inclinable to them— as far as one can be inclinable to any non-Aryan creatures, because, several years back, before they became famous, I had something revealed to me in a dream about them, which seemed to show that Hittite would some day be a great name.

I lived through the winter fairly enough in parallels of latitude ranging from Montfort l'Amaury to Liverpool. The traces of the latter you have seen; the former will come in the William Rufus book. I withstood all threats of doctors to lay me in the Red Sea as a ghost, or otherwise dispose of me in Egyptian quarters. Yet I should like to go some day, specially to make out whether those columns at Beni-Hassan (I think it is) really have anything to do with our Doric. Mere likeness does not prove it; or one might fancy that the columns of the Mykenaian Treasury were set up by Bishop Roger of Salisbury, or that the little columns had been carried off bodily from the slype at Worcester ".


'Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth,' Isaiah xlv. 9. A favourite quotation of the writer in reference to nations or people of no historical interest or importance.

2 'In the days of Agamemnon the Emperor.'

A lecture delivered at the Liverpool Institute entitled 'How the Study of History is let and hindered.'

Vol. ii. 251-254.

An arched passage in the east walk of the cloisters which divides the Chapter-house from the south wall of the great transept.

6 In a letter to Freeman, dated September 3, 1883, Mr. Sayce pro

Yes-I can fancy that feeling about age and youth. "EXλnves dei maîdes—but what bairns! For I deem the young barbarian,' &c., and if it was not exactly a Christian child, it was so in posse. I am somewhat eclectic among Aryan creeds, and if a Hittite should touch any land from Rhodes to Iceland, I am prepared to curse him in the joint names of Zeus, Woden, and St. Thomas of Canterbury.

Do I wish to be called Dr.? Alderman certainly of the two? Have you really been imposed on by some impudent impostor who advertises a 'Political Catechism by Dr. Freeman'?

... I hope you will soon repeat your pleasant visit of last Easter-tide. How I did chatter. Rhys the Briton has just left me.


[ocr errors]


Somerleaze, March 7, 1880.

Somebody has been putting out, 'A Political Catechism by Doctor Freeman.' Whether there is such a man I know not; but it is clearly meant to be, and has been, taken for mine. Yet I certainly should not teach any man that the three estates of the Realm are King, Lords, and Commons'. Nor should I describe myself as 'Doctor,' though many people have a fancy for calling me so. I always ask them whether they talk of 'Dr. Gladstone,' or talked of 'Doctor Disraeli' before his earldom. I know one who calls the Protector 'Dr. Cromwell,' arguing that his protectorship might be called in question, that his military commission might be called in question, but that his degree was good anyhow.

nounces very positively against any connexion between the pillars of the tombs of Beni-Hassan and Doric.

1 See his book on The Growth of the English Constitution, pp. 97, 98, where the proper meaning of the phrase is defined to be Lords, Commons, and Clergy, and it is explained that the incorrect application of the expression arose from the fact that the Clergy in England did not, as in France, ever become a distinct Estate of the Legislature.

[ocr errors]


March 7, 1880.

'Tis pity you are ganging after rites and ceremonies when you might catch a castle or two with me. Unless they have mended their ways at Laon since 1869, you will hear the shabbiest of Masses there. You go to Rheims at the wrong time-you should go October 1. Remigius' mæssedæg. I saw this in the mickle minster. . . . There were brought unto them from the shrine of St. Remigius handkerchiefs and aprons; and I hope the evil spirits departed from them, but that I could not see. But I wish you would find out about a dogge who made his way into the crowded choir, and, as far as I could see, never came out again, so I fancied that the Archbishop, who was there a-blessing of the human folk, had done by the dogge as his predecessor did by his neighbour the daw. But in the metropolitan church a little afore sunset, you will see the finest lights coming in by the west window that are to be seen anywhere save at St. Mark's.


Somerleaze, March 8, 1880. I believe I hate the British army more than any institution in being. My loathing for it is in exact proportion to my admiration for the men who fought at Senlac and Muratovizza. Forwhy, if you have conscription or landwehr, a man simply obeys the law; if the war is unjust, it is simply like obeying or enforcing any bad law. (I hate the game-laws; yet I fine poachers.) The fault rests not with him, but with those who send him. But in our army every man, officer and private, is there by his own choice. He is not consulted about that particular war; but he chose the man-slaying trade, when he might have chosen some other; so he is, what the conscript or landwehr man is not, responsible for being there. I grant that this is rather ideal; and, as circumstances go I don't rate the responsibility very high, if they only keep quiet. But when they came back, strutting and swaggering, talking as if they had done something to be proud of instead of ashamed, I hold that they made themselves accomplices with the Jew in the

« ForrigeFortsett »