Chapter M: P. Huber is the only modern author that appears to have been witness to (17)

The ring was reputed, by some nations, a symbol of liberality, esteem, and friendship, particularly among the Persians, none being permitted to wear any, except given to him from the king himself. This is what may also be remarked in the person of Apollonius Thyaneus, who, as a token of singular esteem and great liberality, received one from the great Jarchas, prince of the gymnosophists, who were the ancient priests of the Indies, and dwelt in forests, as our bards and Druids, where they applied themselves to the study of wisdom, and to the speculation of the heavens and stars. This philosopher, by the means of that ring, learned every day the greatest secrets in nature.

Though the ring found by Gyges, shepherd to the king of Lydia, has more of fable than truth in it, it will not, however, be amiss to relate what is said concerning Herodotus, Cælius after Plato, and Cicero, in the third book of his Offices. This Gyges, after a great flood, passed into a very deep cavity in the earth, where having found, in the belly of a brasen horse, with a large aperture in it, a human body of enormous size, he pulled from off one of the fingers, a ring of surprising virtue; for the stone on the collet rendered him who wore it invisible, when the collet was turned towards the palm of the hand; so that the party could see, without being seen, all manner of persons and things. Gyges, having made trial of its efficacy, bethought himself that it would be a means for ascending the throne of Lydia, and for gaining the queen by it. He succeeded in his designs, having killed Candaules, her husband. The dead body this ring belonged to was that of an ancient Brahmin, who in his time was chief of all. The rings of the ancients often served for seals. Alexander the Great, after the defeat and death of Darius, used his ring for sealing the letters he sent into Asia, and his own for those he sent to Europe. It was customary in Rome for the bridegroom to send the bride, before marriage, a ring of iron, without either stone or collet, to denote how lasting their union ought to be, and the frugality they were to observe together; but luxury herein soon gained ground, and there was a necessity of moderating it. Caius Marius did not wear one of gold till his third consulship: and Tiberius, as Suetonius says, made some regulation in the authority of wearing rings; for besides the liberty of birth, he required a considerable revenue, both on the father and grandfather's side.

In the preceding dissertation we have anticipated the MATRIMONIAL RING, therefore our further observations need be but few.

Swinburne says, the iron ring was adorned with an adamant; the metal hard and durable, signifying the duration and prosperity of the contract. "Howbeit," he says, "it skilleth not at this day what metal the ring be of. The form of it being found, and without end, doth import that their love should circulate and flow continually. The finger on which this ring is to be worn, is the fourth finger on the left hand, next unto the little finger, because there was supposed a vein of blood to pass from thence into the heart."

We shall conclude this chapter with an account of an ancient custom, called HAND-FASTING.

This custom formerly took place at an annual fair, in the parish of Eskdale-muir, in Dumfriesshire, thus described by the Rev. W. Brown, in his Statistical Account of that parish: "At that fair it was the custom for the unmarried persons of both sexes, to choose companions with whom they were to live till that time next year. If they were pleased with each other at that time, then they continued together for life; if not, they separated, and were free to make another choice, as at first. The fruit of their connection, if there were any, was always attached to the disaffected person. A priest, whom they named Book-i'-bosom, (because he carried in his bosom a Bible, or a register of the marriages,) came from time to time to confirm the marriages." Mr. Brown traces this custom from the Romans.--See _Sir J. Sinclair's Statistical Account_, vol. xii. p. 615.

CHAP. LXI.

CURIOSITIES RESPECTING THE CUSTOMS OF MANKIND.--(_Continued._)

_Funeral Ceremonies of the Ancient Ethiopians--Funeral Ceremonies of
the Chinese--Ancient Funeral Ceremonies of the Dajakkese--Ancient
Modes of Mourning--Feasts among the Ancients of various Nations--Feast
of Lanterns._

FUNERAL CEREMONIES OF THE ANCIENT ETHIOPIANS.--The Ethiopians had very particular ceremonies in their funerals. According to Ctesias, after having salted the bodies, they put them into a hollow statue of gold, which resembled the deceased, and are placed in a niche, on a pillar set up for that purpose. The remains of the richest Ethiopians were thus honoured: the bodies of those of the next class were contained in silver statues; the poor were enshrined in statues of earthenware. Herodotus informs us, that the nearest relations of the dead kept the body a year in their houses, and offered sacrifice and first-fruits during that time to their deceased friend; and at the end of the year, they fixed the corpse in a place set apart for the purpose near their town. The inhabitants of the country above Meroè had various methods of paying respect to their deceased friends. Some threw their bodies into the river, thinking that the most honourable sepulchre. Others kept them in their houses in niches, thinking that their children would be stimulated to virtuous deeds by the sight of their ancestors; and that grown people, by the same objects, would retain their parents in their memories. Others put their dead bodies into coffins of earthenware, and buried them near their temples. To swear with their hand laid upon a corpse, was their most sacred and inviolable oath.

FUNERAL CEREMONIES OR THE CHINESE.--The funeral ceremonies are considered by the Chinese as the most important of any. A few moments after a person has expired, he is dressed out in his richest attire, and adorned with every badge of his dignity; after which he is placed in the coffin. The preparation of a coffin, in which his body may be inclosed after death, is one of the chief objects of attention to a Chinese during his life, and great expense is often thrown away upon it; insomuch that the poor will give all they are worth, and the rich expend one thousand crowns; nay, a son will sell himself for a slave, to purchase a coffin for his father. Sometimes the coffin, when purchased with all this labour and expense, will remain twenty years useless in the family; but it is considered as the most valuable piece of furniture in his possession. The manner of interment is as follows:--First, they sprinkle some lime in the bottom of the coffin; then they lay the body in it, taking care to place the head on a pillow, and to add a great deal of cotton, that it may remain steady. The body remains thus exposed seven days; but the time may be reduced to three, if any weighty reason makes it necessary; and, during this interval, all the relations and friends, who are purposely invited, come and pay their respects to the deceased, the nearest relations remaining in the house. The coffin is exposed in the hall of ceremony, which is then hung with white, but some pieces of black or violet-coloured silk are here and there interspersed, as well as some other ornaments of mourning. Before the coffin is placed a table, on which stands the image of the deceased, or a carved ornament inscribed with his name; and these are always accompanied with flowers, perfumes, and lighted wax candles. In the mean time, those who enter the hall salute the deceased, as if still in life. They prostrate themselves before the table, and knock their foreheads several times against the earth; after which they place on the table some perfumes and wax candles. Their salutations are returned by the eldest son, accompanied by his brothers. The latter come forth from behind a curtain, which hangs on one side of the coffin, creeping along the ground until they reach the spot where those stand whom they are going to salute; after which, they return without rising up. The women are also concealed behind the same curtain, from whence they every now and then send forth dismal cries.

The funeral procession at last commences. A troop of men march in a file, carrying different figures made of pasteboard, and representing slaves, lions, tigers, horses, &c. Others follow, marching in two files; some of whom carry standards, some flags, or censers filled with perfumes; while melancholy and plaintive airs are played by others, on musical instruments. These musicians immediately precede the coffin, which is covered with a canopy, in form of a dome, of violet-coloured silk: its four corners are ornamented with tufts of white silk, neatly embroidered, and covered at the top with net-work. The coffin is placed on the bottom of this machine, and is carried by sixty-four men. The eldest son, clothed in a frock of canvass, having his body bent, and leaning on a staff, follows near the coffin; and behind him his brothers and nephews, but none of them clothed in canvass. Then come the relations and friends, all clad in mourning, and followed by a great number of chairs, covered with white stuff, containing the wives and female slaves of the deceased. These make great show of sorrow, by doleful, yet methodical cries. When they arrive at the burying-place, the coffin is deposited in a tomb appropriated for it, not far from which there are tables arranged in different halls, on which the assistants are entertained with great splendour. The entertainment is sometimes followed by fresh marks of homage to the corpse; but these are often changed into thanks to the eldest son, who, however, answers only by signs. But if the deceased was a grandee of the empire, a certain number of his relations do not leave the tomb for a month or two; but reside in apartments provided for them, and every day renew their marks of grief, with the children of the deceased. The magnificence of these funeral ceremonies is proportioned to the wealth or dignity of the deceased. That of one of the brothers of the emperor, was attended by sixteen thousand people, each of whom had a particular office assigned him relating to the ceremony. Mourning continues in China for three years; during all which time they must abstain from flesh and wine, nor can they assist at any entertainment, or attend any public assembly. At first they are not even permitted to go abroad; and when they do so, they are carried in a chair, covered with a white cloth. Sometimes the filial piety of the Chinese is carried to such a length, that they preserve the bodies of their fathers in their houses for three or four years, and impose upon themselves a great number of other duties, using no other seat during the day, but a stool covered with a white serge, and no other bed but a plain mat made of reeds, which is placed near the coffin.

FUNERAL AND MARRIAGE CEREMONIES OF THE DAJAKKESE INHABITANTS OF BORNEO.--The corpse is placed in a coffin, and remains in the house till the son, the father, or the nearest of blood, can procure or purchase a slave, who is beheaded at the time that the corpse is burnt, in order that he may become the slave of the deceased in the next world. The ashes of the deceased are then placed in an earthen urn, on which various figures are exhibited; and the head of the slave is dried, and prepared in a peculiar manner with camphor and drugs, and deposited near it. It is said that this practice often induces them to purchase a slave guilty of some capital crime, at five-fold his value, in order that they may be able to put him to death on such occasions.

_Marriage Ceremonies._--Nobody can be permitted to marry till he can present a human head of some other tribe to his proposed bride, in which case she is not permitted to refuse him. It is not, however, necessary that this should be obtained entirely by his own personal prowess. When a person is determined to go a head-hunting, as it is often a very dangerous service, he consults with his friends and acquaintances, who frequently accompany him, or send their slaves along with him. The head-hunter then proceeds with his party in the most cautious manner to the vicinity of the villages of another tribe, and lies in ambush till they surprise some heedless unsuspecting wretch, who is instantly decapitated. Sometimes, too, they surprise a solitary fisherman in a river, or on the shore, who undergoes the same fate. When the hunter returns, the whole village is filled with joy, and old and young, men and women, hurry out to meet him, and conduct him with the sound of brasen cymbals, dancing in long lines to the house of the female he admires, whose family likewise come out to greet him with dances, provide him a seat, and give him meat and drink. He still holds the bloody head in his hand, and puts part of the food into its mouth, after which, the females of the family receive the head from him, which they hang up to the ceiling over the door.

If a man's wife die, he is not permitted to make proposals of marriage to another, till he has provided another head of a different tribe, as if to revenge the death of his deceased wife. The heads procured in this manner, they preserve with great care, and sometimes consult in divination. The religious opinions connected with this practice, are by no means correctly understood. Some assert, that they believe that every person whom a man kills in this world, becomes his slave in the next. The Idaan, it is said, think that the entrance into paradise is over a long tree, which serves for a bridge, over which it is impossible to pass without the assistance of a slave slain in this world.

The practice of stealing heads causes frequent wars among the different tribes of the Idaan. Many persons never can obtain a head, in which case they are generally despised by the warriors and the women. To such a height is it carried, however, that a person who had obtained eleven heads, has been seen by Mr. Burn; and he pointed out his son, a young lad, who had procured three.

ANCIENT MODES OF MOURNING.--Amongst the ancient Jews, on the death of their relations or intimate friends, mourning was expressed by weeping, tearing their clothes, smiting their breasts, or lacerating them with their nails, pulling or cutting off their hair and beards, walking softly, i. e. barefoot, lying upon the ground, fasting, or eating upon the ground. They kept themselves close shut up in their houses, covered their faces, and abstained from all work, even reading the law, and saying their usual prayers. They neither dressed themselves, nor made their beds, nor cut their nails, nor went into the bath, nor saluted any body. The time of mourning was generally seven days, less or more, according to circumstances, but thirty days were thought sufficient upon the severest occasions. The different periods of the time of mourning required different degrees of grief, and different tokens of it.

The Greeks, on the death of their friends, shewed their sorrow by secluding themselves from all gaiety, entertainments, games, public solemnities, wine, and music. They sat in gloomy and solitary places, stripped themselves of all external ornaments, put on a coarse black stuff by way of mourning, tore their hair, shaved their heads, rolled themselves in the dust and mire, sprinkled ashes on their heads, smote their breasts with their palms, tore their faces, and frequently cried out with a lamentable voice and drawling tone. At the funerals of soldiers, their fellow soldiers, as a testimony of their affliction, held their shields, their spears, and the rest of their armour, inverted.

The tokens of private grief among the Romans, were the same as those among the Greeks. Black or dark brown were the colours of the mourning habits worn by the men; they were also common to the women. The mourning of the emperors at first was black. In the time of Augustus, the women wore white veils, and the rest of their dress was black. From the time of Domitian, they wore nothing but white habits, without any ornaments of gold, jewels, or pearls. The men let their hair and beards grow, and wore no wreaths of flowers on their heads, while the days of mourning continued. The longest time of mourning was ten months: this was Numa's establishment, and took in his whole year. For a widow to marry during this time, was infamous. Mourning was not used for children who died under three years of age. From this age to ten, they mourned as many months as the child was years old. A remarkable victory, or other happy event, occasioned the shortening of the time of mourning. The birth of a child, or the attainment of any remarkable honour in the family, certain feasts in honour of the gods, or the consecration of a temple, had the same effect. After the defeat at Cannæ, the commonwealth decreed that mourning should not be worn for more than thirty days, that the loss might be forgot as soon as possible. When public magistrates died, or persons of great note, also when any remarkable calamity happened, all public meetings were intermitted, the schools of exercise, baths, shops, temples, and all places of concourse, were shut up, and the whole city put on a face of sorrow; the senators laid aside the _laticlave_, and the consuls sat in a lower seat than ordinary. This was the custom of Athens also, and was observed upon the death of Socrates, when the fickle Athenians became sensible of the calamity their state had suffered in the loss of that great and virtuous man.

The modes of mourning differ in various countries, as well as the colours used for that end. In Europe, the ordinary colour for mourning is black; in China, it is white; in Turkey, blue or violet; in Egypt, yellow; in Ethiopia, brown. White obtained formerly in Castile, on the death of their princes. Herrera observes, that the last time it was used was in 1498, at the death of prince John. Each people assign their reasons for the particular colour of their mourning: white is supposed to denote purity; yellow, that death is the end of human hopes, in regard that leaves when they fall, and flowers when they fade, become yellow; brown denotes the earth, whither the dead return; black, the privation of light; blue expresses the happiness which it is hoped the deceased does enjoy; and purple or violet, sorrow on the one side, and hope on the other, as being a mixture of black and blue.

FEASTS AMONG THE ANCIENTS OF VARIOUS NATIONS.--All nations, whether savage or civilized, have regarded the pleasures of the table as the occasion of the most agreeable society. This species of enjoyment (abstracted from its susceptibility of abuse) makes but one family of all that it brings together. It levels the distinctions introduced by policy or prejudice, and disposes men to regard one another as brethren. Here people feel the equality established by nature; here they forget the evils of life; extinguish their animosities, and drop their enmities. For this reason Aristotle considers as a breach of the social principle, that custom of the Egyptians of eating apart, and praises the convivial repasts established by Minos and Lycurgus.

We learn from Herodotus, that the ancients had neither cups nor bowls at their feasts, but that they drank out of little horns tipt with silver or gold. The Greeks and Romans kept a domestic, for the purpose of reading during their meals and feasts. Sometimes the chief of the family himself performed the office of reader; and history informs us, that the Emperor Severus often read while his family ate. The time of reading was generally at supper; and guests were invited to a reading as they are now-a-days to play at cards.

The Greeks, in their flourishing times, did not profane, (according to their own expression) the holiness of the table, but rather adorned it with ingenious and elegant conversation: they proposed moral topics, of which Plutarch has preserved a collection. Heroes rarely assembled convivially, without bringing affairs of consequence into discourse, or deliberating upon those that regarded either present events or future contingencies. The Scythians, while at meat, used to make the strings of their bows resound, lest their warlike virtues might be enfeebled or lost in the season of pleasure. People of rank among the Rhodians, by a fundamental law of the state, were obliged to dine daily with those who had the management of affairs, in order to deliberate with them concerning such things as were necessary or useful for the country; and on this account the principal ministers of the kingdom were obliged to keep open table for all who could be of use to the state. The Persians also generally deliberated on business at table, but never determined, or put their determinations in execution, except in the morning before eating.

Among the Romans, the place where they supped was generally the vestibule, that a more retired part of the house might not encourage licentiousness and disorder. There were several laws that restricted their meals to these vestibules. When luxury reigned in Rome, they had superb halls for their entertainments. Lucullus had many, each of which bore the name of some deity; and this name was a mark which indicated to the servants the expense of the entertainment. The expense of a supper in Lucullus's hall of Apollo, amounted to fifty thousand drachmas. Singers, dancers, musicians, stage-players, jesters, and buffoons, were brought into these halls to amuse the guests.

Plutarch informs us, that Cæsar, after his triumphs, treated the Roman people at twenty-two thousand tables; and by calculation it would seem, that there were at these tables upwards of two hundred thousand persons. The hall in which Nero feasted, by the circular motion of its walls and ceiling, imitated the revolutions of the heavens, and represented the different seasons of the year, changing at every course, and showering down flowers and perfumes on the guests. The Romans did not, as we do, use but one table at their feasts; they had generally two: the first was for the service of animal food, which was afterwards removed, and another introduced with fruits; at this last they sung, and poured out their libations. The Greeks and eastern nations had the same custom, and even the Jews in their solemn feasts, and at sacrifices. The Romans, in the time of Nero, had tables made of citron-wood brought from Mauritania; they were varnished with purple and gold. Dion Cassius affirms, that Seneca had five hundred of these, which he made use of one after another; and Tertullian tells us, that Cicero had but one. The Romans chose the king of the feast by a throw of the dice. At the conclusion of the feast they drank out of a large cup, as often as there were letters in the names of their mistresses.

Feasting seems to have been the chief delight of the Britons, Germans, Gauls, and all the other Celtic nations; in which they indulged themselves to the utmost, as often as they had opportunity. "Among these nations (says M. Pellontier, in his _Hist. Celt._ lib. ii. c. 12. p. 463.) there is no public assembly, either for civil or religious purposes, duly held; no birth-day, marriage, or funeral, properly celebrated; no treaty of peace or alliance rightly cemented,--without a great feast." When the Germans, says Tacitus, wanted to reconcile enemies, to make alliances, to name chiefs, or to treat of war and peace, it was during the repast that they took counsel; a time in which the mind is most open to the impressions of simple truths, or most easily animated to great attempts. These artless people, during the conviviality of the feast, spoke without disguise. Next day they weighed the counsels of the former evening: they deliberated at a time when they were not disposed to feign, and took their resolution when they were least liable to be deceived. It was by frequent entertainments of this kind, that the great men or chieftains gained the affections and rewarded the services of their followers; and those who made the greatest feasts were sure to be most popular, and to have the greatest retinue. These feasts, in which plenty was more regarded than elegance, lasted commonly several days, and the guests seldom retired until they had consumed all the provisions and exhausted all the liquors.

Athenæus describes an entertainment that was given by Arcamnes, a very wealthy prince of Gaul, which continued a whole year without interruption, and at which all the people of Gaul, and even all strangers who passed through that country, were made welcome. At these feasts they sometimes consulted about the most important affairs of state, and formed resolutions relating to peace and war; imagining that men spoke their real sentiments with the greatest freedom, and were apt to form the boldest designs, when their spirits were exhilarated with the pleasures of the table. The conversation at these entertainments very frequently turned on the great exploits, which the guests themselves, or their ancestors, had performed in war; which sometimes occasioned quarrels, and even bloodshed. It was at a feast that the two illustrious British princes, Carbar and Oscar, quarrelled about their own bravery and that of their ancestors, and fell by mutual wounds.--_Ossian_, vol. ii. p. 8, &c.

As to the drink used at those feasts, particularly in Britain, it seems probable, that before the introduction of agriculture into the island, mead, or honey diluted with water, was the only strong liquor known to its inhabitants, as it was to many other ancient nations in the same circumstances. This continued to be a favourite beverage among the ancient Britons and their posterity, long after they had become acquainted with other liquors, (See _Mead_.) After the introduction of agriculture, ale or beer became the most general drink of all the British nations who practised that art, as it had long been of all the Celtic people on the continent, (See _Ale_.) If the Phoenicians or Greeks imported any wine into Britain, it was only in very small quantities; that liquor being very little known in this island before it was conquered by the Romans. The drinking vessels of the Gauls, Britons, and other Celtic nations, were for the most part made of the horns of oxen and other animals; but those of the Caledonians consisted of large shells, which are still used by some of their posterity in the Highlands of Scotland.

The dishes in which the meat was served up were either of wood or earthenware, or a kind of baskets made of osiers. These last were most used by the Britons, as they very much excelled in the art of making them, both for their own use and for exportation. The guests sat in a circle upon the ground, with a little hay, grass, or the skin of some animal, under them. A low table or stool was set before each person, with the portion of meat allotted to him upon it. In this distribution, they never neglected to set the largest and best pieces before those who were most distinguished for their rank, their exploits, or their riches. Every guest took the meat set before him in his hands, and, tearing it with his teeth, fed upon it in the best manner he could. If any one found difficulty in separating any part of his meat with his hands and teeth, he made use of a large knife, that lay in a particular place for the benefit of the whole company. Servants, or young boys and girls, the children of the family, stood behind the guests, ready to help them to drink, or any thing they wanted.

As the ancient Britons greatly excelled, and very much delighted in, music, all their feasts were accompanied with the joys of song, and the music of harps. In the words of Ossian, (vol. ii. p. 9, &c.) "whenever the feast of shells is prepared, the songs of bards arise. The voice of sprightly mirth is heard. The trembling harps of joy are strung. They sing the battles of heroes, or the heaving breasts of love." Some of the poems of that illustrious British bard appear to have been composed in order to be sung by the hundred bards of Fingal, at the feasts of Selma, (see vol. i. p. 87, 209.) Many of the songs of the bards, which were sung and played at the feasts of the ancient Britons, were of a grave and solemn strain, celebrating the brave actions of the guests, or of the heroes of other times; but these were sometimes intermixed with sprightly and cheerful airs, to which the youth of both sexes danced. It has been observed by some authors, that no nation comes near the English in the magnificence of their feasts. Those made at our coronations, instalments, consecrations, &c. transcend the belief of foreigners; and yet it is doubted whether those now in use are comparable to the feasts of former ages.

William the Conqueror, after he was peaceably settled on the throne of England, sent agents into different countries, to collect the most admired and rare dishes for his table; by which means, says John of Salisbury, this island, which is naturally productive of plenty and variety of provisions, was overflowed with every thing that could inflame a luxurious appetite. The same writer tells us, that he was present at an entertainment which lasted from three P. M. to midnight, at which delicacies were served up, which had been brought from Constantinople, Babylon, Alexandria, Palestine, Tripoli, Syria, and Phoenicia. These delicacies were doubtless very expensive. Thomas Becket (says his historian Fitz-Stephen) gave £5, equivalent to £75 at present, for one dish of eels. The sumptuous entertainments which the kings of England gave to their nobles and prelates, at the festivals of Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide, in which they spent a great part of their revenues, contributed very much to diffuse a taste for profuse and expensive banqueting. It was natural for a proud and wealthy baron to imitate, in his own castle, the entertainments he had seen in the palace of his prince. Many of the clergy, too, both seculars and regulars, being very rich, kept excellent tables.

The monks of St. Swithin's, at Winchester, made a formal complaint to Henry II. against their abbot, for taking away three of the 13 dishes they used to have every day at dinner. The monks of Canterbury were still more luxurious: for they had at least 17 dishes every day, besides a dessert; and these dishes were dressed with spiceries and sauces, which excited the appetite as well as pleased the taste. Great men had some kinds of provisions at their tables, that are not now to be found in Britain.

When Henry II. entertained his own court, the great officers of his army, with all the kings and great men of Ireland, in Dublin, at the feast of Christmas, A. D. 1171, the Irish princes and chieftains were quite astonished at the profusion and variety of provisions which they beheld, and were with difficulty prevailed upon by Henry to eat the flesh of cranes, a kind of food to which they had not been accustomed. In the remaining monuments of this period, we meet with the names of several dishes, as _dellegrout_, _maupigyrnum_, _karumpie_, &c. the composition of which is now unknown.

The coronation feast of Edward III. cost £2835. 18s. 2d. equivalent to about £40,000 of our money. At the installation of Ralph, abbot of St. Augustine, Canterbury, A. D. 1309, 6000 guests were entertained with a dinner, consisting of 3000 dishes, which cost £287. 5s. equal in value to £4300 in our times. "It would require a long treatise (says Matthew Paris) to describe the astonishing splendour, magnificence, and festivity, with which the nuptials of Richard Earl of Cornwall, and Cincia daughter of Raymund Earl of Provence, were celebrated at London, A. D. 1243. To give the reader some idea of it, in a few words, above 30,000 dishes were served up at the marriage dinner."

The nuptials of Alexander III. of Scotland, and the princess Margaret of England, were solemnized at York, A. D. 1251, with still greater pomp and profusion. "If I attempted (says M. Paris) to display all the grandeur of this solemnity,--the numbers of the noble and illustrious guests,--the richness and variety of the dresses,--the sumptuousness of the feasts,--the multitudes of the minstrels, mimics, and others whose business it was to amuse and divert the company, those of my readers who were not present, would imagine that I was imposing upon their credulity. The following particular will enable them to form a judgment of the whole. The archbishop of York made the King of England a present of 60 fat oxen; which made only one article of provision for the marriage feast, and were all consumed at that entertainment. The marriage feast of Henry IV. and his queen, Jane of Navarre, consisted of six courses; three of flesh and fowl, and three of fish. All these courses were accompanied and adorned with _suttleties_, as they were called. These suttleties were figures in pastry, of men, women, beasts, birds, &c. placed on the table, to be admired, but not touched. Each figure had a label affixed to it, containing some wise or witty saying, suited to the occasion of the feast, which was the reason they were called suttleties."

The installation feast of George Neville, archbishop of York, and chancellor of England, exceeded all others in splendour and expense, and in the number and quality of the guests. The reader may form some idea of this enormous feast, from the following list of provisions prepared for it. In wheat, 300 quarters; in ale, 300 tuns; in wine, 100 tuns; in ypocrasse pipes, 1; in oxen, 104; in wild bulls, 6; in muttons, 1000; in veals, 304; in porks, 304; in swans, 400; in geese, 2000; in capons, 1000; in pigs, 2000; in plovers, 400; in quails, 1200; in fowls called rees, 2400; in peacocks, 104; in mallards and teals, 4000; in cranes, 204; in kids, 204; in chickens, 2000; in pigeons, 2000; in conies, 4000; in bitterns, 204; in heronshaws, 400; in pheasants, 200; in partridges, 500; in woodcocks, 400; in curlews, 100; in egritis, 1000; in stags, bucks, and roes, 500 and more; in pasties of venison, cold, 4000; in parted dishes of jellies, 1000; in plain dishes of jellies, 3000; in cold tarts, baked, 4000; in cold custards, baked, 3000; in hot pasties of venison, 1500; in hot custards, 2000; in pikes and breams, 308; in porpoises and seals, 12: spices, sugared delicates, and wafers, plenty. No turkeys are mentioned in this enormous bill of fare, because they were not then known in England. Cranes, heronshaws, porpoises, and seals, are seldom seen at modern entertainments. One of the most expensive singularities attending the royal feasts in those days, consisted in what they called _Intermeats_. These were representations of battles, sieges, &c. introduced between the courses, for the amusement of the guests. The French excelled in exhibitions of this kind. At a dinner given by Charles V. of France to the emperor Charles IV. A. D. 1378, the following intermeat was exhibited: a ship, with masts, sails, and rigging, was seen first; she had for colours the arms of the city of Jerusalem: Godfrey of Bouillon appeared upon deck, accompanied by several knights armed cap-a-pié: the ship advanced into the middle of the hall, without the machine which moved it being perceptible. Then the city of Jerusalem appeared, with all its towers lined with Saracens. The ship approached the city; the Christians landed, and began to assault, while the besieged made a good defence: several scaling-ladders were thrown down; but at length the city was taken. Intermeats at ordinary banquets consisted of certain delicate dishes, introduced between the courses, and designed rather for gratifying the taste, than for satisfying hunger. At those feasts, besides ale and cider, there were great quantities of wine of various kinds. Of these, a poet who wrote in the fourteenth century, gives an ample enumeration; wherein he mentions ypocrasse, malespine, algrade, garnade, and other kinds now hardly known. Some of these liquors, as ypocrasse, pyment, and claret, were compounded of wine, honey, and spices, of different kinds, and in different proportions.

The chapter concludes with the FEAST OF LANTERNS.--In China, this is a celebrated festival, held from the thirteenth to the sixteenth day of the first month; so called from the immense number of lanterns hung out of the houses and streets; which, it is said, is no less than two hundred millions. On this day are exposed lanterns of all prices, whereof some are said to cost two thousand crowns. Some of their grandees retrench somewhat every day out of the regular expenses of their table, dress, equipage, &c. to appear the more magnificent in their lanterns. They are adorned with gilding, sculpture, painting, japanning, &c. and their size is extravagant; some being from twenty-five to thirty feet diameter, representing halls and chambers. Two or three such machines together would make handsome houses; so that in China they are able to eat, lodge, receive visits, hold balls, and act plays, in a lantern. To illuminate them, they light up in them an incredible number of torches or lamps, which at a distance have a beautiful effect. In these they exhibit various kinds of shows, to divert the people. Besides these enormous lanterns, there is a multitude of smaller ones, each about four feet high, and one and a half broad.

CHAP. LXII.

CURIOSITIES RESPECTING THE CUSTOMS OF MANKIND.--(_Continued._)

_Origin of the Sheriff's counting Hobnails--Origin of the Order of the
Garter--Origin and History of the Claim and Allowance of the 'Benefit
of Clergy' in Criminal Convictions--Curious Tenures--The Origin of May
Poles and Garlands--Curious Custom at Oakham--Curious Practice in
North Holland._

ORIGIN OF THE SHERIFF'S COUNTING HOBNAILS.--This is not an absurd custom of antiquity, such as nobody knows when it begun, or why it is continued; but it originated from the following circumstances:--

In former times, when money was very scarce, and when we had no larger coin than a penny, the reserved rents or grants of lands or tenements, especially small ones, were usually paid in something that had a reference to the nature of the thing granted, or the occupation of the grantee.

The two following extracts from records in the Exchequer, with the translation, will clear up the point.

"Walter de Brun Mareschallus, de Stranda, redit compotum de sex femis equorum, pro habenda quadam placea in Parochia St. Clementis, ad fabrica quam ibidem locandam."--_Mag. Rot. 19. Henry III._

"Walter Mareschallus, ad Crucem Lapideam, redit sex ferra equorum cum clavibus, pro quadam fabrica quam de Rege tenet in capite ex opposito crucis lapidea."--_Memor. 1. Edward I._

"Walter le Brun, Mareshall, or farrier, of the Strand, renders six horse-shoes, to have a certain place in the parish of St. Clement's, to build a forge there."--_Great Rolls of the 19th Henry III._

"Walter Mareshall, or the farrier at the Stone Cross, renders six horse-shoes with their nails, for (or as a reserved rent) a certain forge, opposite to the stone cross, which he holds of the king in capite."--_Memoranda Rolls in the Exchequer of the first year of King Edward the First._

The first of these points out the beginning, as well as the reason, of the payment of these horse-shoes and nails; for it was to have a piece of ground to build a forge on, therefore that must be the first payment. The nineteenth year of Henry the Third falls in with 1234, now five hundred and eighty-eight years ago. In process of time, this piece of ground, and buildings on it, came to the mayor and citizens of London; and they, by the sheriffs, have continued to render them into the Exchequer annually to this day.

The spot where the stone cross once stood had afterwards a Maypole erected on it, which many now living can well remember.

ORIGIN OF THE ORDER OF THE GARTER.--This is variously related by historians. The common and not improbable account is, that the Countess of Salisbury, happening at a ball to drop her garter, the King took it up, and presented it to her in these words, "_Honi soit qui mal y pense_;" i. e. Evil to him that evil thinks. This accident gave rise to the order and the motto; it being the spirit of the times to mix love and war together. In the original statutes, however, there is not the least hint of allusion to such a circumstance, farther than is conveyed in the motto.--Camden, Fern, &c. take the order to have been instituted on occasion of the victory obtained by Edward over the French, at the battle of Cressy. That prince, says some historians, ordered his garter to be displayed as a signal of battle; in commemoration whereof, he made a garter the principal ornament of the order erected in memory of this signal victory, and the symbol of this indissoluble union of the knights. And they account for the motto, that king Edward having laid claim to the kingdom of France, denounced shame and defiance upon him that should dare to _think amiss_ of the just enterprise he had undertaken for recovering his lawful rights to that crown; and that the bravery of those knights whom he had elected into this order was such as would enable him to maintain the quarrel against those that thought ill of it. This interpretation, however, appears to be rather forced.--A still more ancient origin of this order is given in Rostel's Chronicle, lib. vi. quoted by Granger, in the Supplement to his Biographical History: viz. that it was devised by Richard I. at the siege of Acre, when he caused twenty-six knights, who firmly stood by him, to wear thongs of blue leather about their legs; and that it was revived and perfected in the nineteenth year of Edward III.

ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE CLAIM AND ALLOWANCE OF THE 'BENEFIT OF CLERGY' IN CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS.

The following learned dissertation is extracted from 'Chitty's Practical Treatise on the Criminal Law.'

"By far the most important circumstance intervening between conviction and judgment, is the claim and allowance of the _Benefit of Clergy_, in those cases where it is by law to be granted. It is of course claimed immediately before judgment at the assizes. This is one of the most singular relics of old superstition, and certainly the most important. That, by a mere form, without the shadow of existing reason to support it, the severity of the common law should be tempered, may seem strange to those who have been accustomed to regard our criminal law as a regular fabric, not only attaining great practical benefit, but built upon solid and consistent principles. The _Benefit of Clergy_ is, no doubt, of great practical advantage, compared to the dreadful list of offences which would otherwise be punished as capital; but it would be well worthy of an enlightened age to forsake such a subterfuge, and at once, without resorting to it, to apportion the degree of suffering to the atrocity and the danger of the crimes.

"The history of this singular mode of pardon, if so it can be termed, is both curious and instructive. In the early periods of European civilization, after the final destruction of the Roman empire, the church obtained an influence in the political affairs of nations, which threw a peculiar colouring over their original institutions. Monarchs who were desirous of atoning for atrocious offences, or of obtaining the sanction of heaven to their projects of ambition, were easily persuaded to confer immunities on the clergy, whom they regarded as the vicegerents of God. Presuming on these favours, that aspiring body soon began to claim as a right what had been originally conferred as a boon, and to found their demand to civil exemptions on a divine and indefeasible charter, derived from the text of scripture, "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm." It need exceed no surprise that they were anxious to take advantage of their dominion over the conscience, to exempt themselves from the usual consequences of crime. To the priests, impunity was a privilege of no inconsiderable value. And so successful was the pious zeal to shield those who were dedicated to religion from the consequences of any breach of temporal enactments, that in several countries they obtained complete exemption from all civil liabilities, and declared themselves responsible only to the pope and his ecclesiastical ministers. They erected themselves into an independent community, and even laid the temporal authorities under subjection. Nobles were intimidated into vast pecuniary benefactions, and princes trembled at the terrors of spiritual denunciation. In England, however, this authority was always comparatively feeble. The complete exemption of the clergy from secular punishments, though often claimed, was never universally admitted: for repeated objections were made to the demand of the bishop and ordinary to have the clerks remitted to them as soon as they were indicted. At length, however, it was finally settled in the reign of Henry VI. that the prisoner should first be arraigned and might then claim the _Benefit of the Clergy_ as an excuse for pleading, or might demand it after conviction: and the latter of these courses has been almost invariably adopted, to allow the prisoner the chance of a verdict of acquittal.

"But if the privileges of the church were less dangerous in England than on the continent, they soon became more extensive. They not only embraced every order of clergymen, but were claimed for every subordinate officer of religious houses, with the numerous classes of their retainers. And so liberal was the application of these dangerous benefits, that, at length, every one who in those days of ignorance was able to read, though not even initiated in holy orders, began to demand them, such reading being deemed evidence of his clerical profession. The privileges of the clergy were recognized and confirmed by statute in the reign of Edward the Third. It was then enacted, that all manner of clerks, secular as well as religious, should enjoy the privileges of holy church for all treasons or felonies except those immediately affecting his majesty. To the advantage of this provision, all who could read were admitted. But as learning became more common, this extensive interpretation was found so injurious to the security of social life, that the legislature, notwithstanding the opposition of the church, were compelled to afford a partial remedy.

"In the reign of Henry the Seventh, a distinction was drawn between persons actually in holy orders, and those who, in other respects secular, were able to read; by which the latter were only allowed the benefit of their learning once, and, on receiving it, to be branded in the left thumb with a hot iron, in order to afford evidence against them on any future occasion. The church seems to have lost ground in the succeeding reign, probably in consequence of the separation of England from the sway of the Roman pontiff; for all persons, though actually in orders, were rendered liable to be branded, in the same way as the learned class of laymen. But, in the time of Edward the Sixth, the clergy were restored to all the rights of which they were deprived by his predecessor, except as to certain atrocious crimes, which it became necessary more uniformly to punish. At the same time, some of the more enormous evils attendant on this general impunity were done away. Murder, poisoning, burglary, highway-robbery, and sacrilege, were excepted from all that privilege which was confirmed as to inferior offences. But peers of the realm, for the first offence were to be discharged, in every case, except murder and poisoning, even though unable to read.

"But here we must pause, before we proceed to follow the gradual improvement of this privilege, to inquire what was originally done with an offender to whom it was allowed by those ecclesiastical authorities who claimed the right of judging him, and in what manner the power of the church in this respect was ultimately destroyed. It appears, that after a layman was burnt in the hand, a clerk discharged on reading, or a peer without either burning or penalty, he was delivered to the ordinary, to be dealt with according to the ecclesiastical canons. Upon this, the clerical authorities instituted a kind of purgation, the real object of which was to make him appear innocent, who had already been shewn to be guilty, and to restore him to all those capacities of which his conviction had deprived him. To effect this, the party himself was required to make oath of his innocence, though before he might have confessed himself guilty. Then twelve compurgators were called to testify their belief in the falsehood of the charges. Afterwards he brought forward witnesses completely to establish that innocence, of which he had induced so weighty a presumption. Finally, it was the office of the jury to acquit him; and they seldom failed in their duty. If, however, from any singular circumstance, they agreed in the justice of the conviction, the culprit was degraded, and compelled to do penance. As this seldom occurred, and the most daring perjuries were thus perpetually committed, the courts of common law were soon aroused to abridge the power of these clerical tribunals. They, therefore, sometimes delivered over the privileged of felony, when his guilt was very atrocious, without allowing him to make purgation; the effect of which proceedings was, his perpetual imprisonment, and incapacity to acquire personal or to enjoy real estate, unless released by his majesty's pardon. But the severity of this proceeding almost rendered it useless; and it became absolutely necessary for the legislature to interfere, in order to prevent the contemptible perjuries which this absurd ceremony produced under the sanction and pretence of religion. This desirable object was effected in the reign of Elizabeth; and the party, after being allowed his clergy, and burnt in the hand, was to be discharged without any interference of the church to annul his conviction.

"The clerical process being thus abolished, it was thought proper, at the same time, to empower the temporal judges to inflict a further punishment where they should regard it as proper. The eighteenth Elizabeth, c. vii. empowered them, therefore, to direct the convict to be imprisoned for a year or any shorter period. But the law on this subject was still in many respects imperfect. Females were still liable to the punishment of death, without any exemption, in all cases of simple felony; because, being never eligible to the clerical office, they were not included in any of the extensions of the _Benefit of Clergy_. No other proof need be adduced to shew the absurdity of the very foundations of the system. At length it was enacted that women convicted of simple larcenies under the value 10s. should be punished with burning in the hand and whipping, exposure in the stocks, or imprisonment for any period less than a year. And in the reign of William and Mary they were admitted to all the privileges of men, in clergiable felonies, on praying the benefit of the statute; though they can only once be allowed this means of escaping. In the same reign, the punishment of burning in the hand was changed for a more visible stigma on the cheek, but was soon afterwards brought back to the original practice.

"Hitherto all laymen except peers, who, on their conviction, were found unable to read, were liable to suffer death for every clergiable felony. But it was at length discovered, that ignorance, instead of an aggravation, was an excuse for guilt, and that the ability to read was no extenuation of crime; and, therefore, by fifth Ann, c. vi. the idle ceremony of reading was abolished, and all those who were before entitled to clergy on reading, were now to be admitted without any such form to its benefits. At the same time it was sensibly felt that the branding, which had dwindled into a mere form, and the year's imprisonment which the judges were empowered to inflict, were very inadequate punishments for many clergiable offences; and, therefore, the court were authorized to commit the offenders to the house of correction for any time not less than six months nor exceeding two years, and to double it in case of escaping.