I Jan. 1. Mr. URBAN, SEND you a view of the Church of Stoney Stanton. in Leicestershire (See Plate II.) For the following particulars relating to that parish I am indebted to Mr. Nichols's History of that County, very recently published. The Marmions, a family of great note in the feudal times, were possessed of this Lordship. It afterwards progressively belonged to the Bassets, Motons, Palmers, and Vincents; and the lands and tenements in the parish now belong to John Frewen Turner, esq. M. P. besides no less than 42 other proprietors. The Wake is kept the first Sunday after Old Michaelmas day. The parish contains 1470 acres, of which 30 are in bad roads. The soil consists of clay and iron stone, in due proportion for dairy, tillage, and sheep pasture. Before the inclosure, which took place in 1764, the inhabitants were generally little freeholders, when there was much tillage, little grazing, and no poor-rates, and very few, perhaps not half a dozen, manufacturers; seven cottagers kept cows, and sold milk. Now the rates are nearly 3007. a year; there is less tillage, more fat sheep, more dairies, more manufacturers, and more poor; the number in 1809 being 222. The parish does not grow corn enough for its own consumption. But, obscure as this place is, and barren of whatever may amuse curiosity, it had to boast of a singular character-the Rev. John Bold*, a curate, learned, pious, exemplary who had the care of this parish during the former half of the last century; whose beneficence from his small fund was almost a miracle, like that of the augmentation of the widow's cruse of oil by the Prophet of old. In 1801 Stoney Stanton contained 87 houses, 90 families, and 355 inhabitants; 100 of them were employed in agriculture, and the rest in trade, &c. In 1811, it contained 95 houses, 97 families, and 446 inhabitants; of * Of whom some interesting particulars, drawn up by Dean Nickolls, are given in the "History of Leicestershire," vol. IV. p. 975. GENT. MAG. January, 1912. "Naturam intueamur, hanc sequamur." QUINT. viii. 3. "Follow Nature." WHEN we consider Nature in all her various operations, we shall find her plain, simple, and uniform. She never appears in gaudy: and fantastic ornaments; never enbellished with frivolous or meretricious decorations; her air and attitude are graceful and majestic; her mien is sober, grave, and venerable; her language is easy, familiar, and unaffected; her works are distinguished by their grace, harmony, and proportion; and she never displays any of those fantastic or extravagant images, which frequently characterize the productions of Art. If we cast our eye over those numerous and extensive objects which constitute the great theatre of Nature, we shall find in every one of them a beautiful order and symmetry. The heavens display inimitable examples of magnificence and grandeur, in exact proportion to their real utility. The earth is adorned with an infinite variety of delightful landscapes, and pleasing objects, which charm the eye, and entertain the imagination by that simplicity, which always gratifies a sensible spectator; yet by ten thousand repetitions never creates the least satiety or disgust. We rise from a philosophical view of Nature with perfect satisfaction; and we return to it again with new delight and improvement. We may conclude, therefore, that the best and the noblest pattern of imitation in every department of human life, in every art and science, is Nature. If the author, who writes for the benefit of the present and succeeding generations, would follow this unerring guide, his works would not sink into 4 into oblivion with the frivolous productions of the day, but would remain as the standards of taste and elegance, to succeeding ages. Homer, the plainest and the simplest writer of antiquity, has been admired by every judicious reader, for almost 3000 years, because his characters and descriptions are natural; or, as Dryden says of Chaucer, "because he followed Nature every where, and never went beyond her." It is observed by an eminent poet, that Nature and Ho mer are the same. Modern writers in the epopea have never equalled this admirable poet, because they have never been content to describe the great events, which they have selected for their subjects, with the same plain and majestic simplicity. They have attempted to embellish their poems by extravagant descriptions, incredible wonders, characters which never existed, in language composed of turgid expressions, and an endless variety of inconsistent epithets, and discordant metaphors. These poetical images have no uniform appearance, no natural features; but are monsters, decorated with all the colours of the rainbow. It is no wonder, therefore, that a reader of taste should be fatigued and disgusted with such a profusion of glaring and fantastic portraits. Let any one compare the Jerusalem of Tasso, the Henriade of Voltaire, and the most elaborate productions of some of our English poets, who have attempted the epic poem, with the works of Homer and Virgil; and while he is dazzled with the false brilliancy of the former, he will admire the inimitable ease and simplicity of the latter. We If the Dramatic Writer would follow Nature, he would never introduce his speakers declaiming in a wild, turgid, and poetic language, in their conversation on the stage. should think it extremely unnatural, if a person, in the deepest affliction, should express the anguish of his mind in measured periods, florid similes, and splendid metaphors; and we can see no reason why these things should be thought allowable in scenes of tragical distress. The simile at the end of every act, which was usual with some of our best poets of the last age, has been justly exploded. For the same reason, tragedies in rhime have been condemned as fantastic, grotesque, and affected compositions, If the Historian would follow the plain and simple track which he is di rected to pursue by Nature and the order of things, his narrative would be read with more pleasure and advantage. The reader would be equally delighted and instructed. Instead of which, we have Historians, who have embarrassed their narrative by perplexing digressions, flowery descriptions, and an elaborate, formal, and pedantic diction. Never content with a familiar and easy representation of facts in their proper order, they confound the reader's imagination by an impertinent: display of rhetorical embellishments. Would the speaker on the Stage altentively consider the character he represents, and the passions he wishes to express, he would never 66 overstep," as Shakspeare expresses it," the modesty of Nature;" he would never vociferate in scenes, where the pathos is delineated; he would never rant in the depth of sorrow and affliction, nor ever declaim in a soliloquy, where the hero in a tragedy must be supposed to be in a sedate and contemplative attitude. Nothing can be more shocking to a judicious auditor, than to hear a person, who represented the grave, philosophic Cato, speaking his famous soliloquy, with Plato on the Immortality of the Soul before him, in a loud, fantastic, oratorical tone, pointing at the heavens, while he says, "The stars shall fade away, the sun himself Grow dim with age." If we should hear an Actor, personating Henry VI. on the stage, addressing Cardinal Beaufort in his dying moments, in these words of Shakspeare, "Lord Cardinal, if thou think'st on heaven's bliss, Hold up thy hand; make signal of that hope" and pronouncing them with a violent and rhetorical accent, we should be shocked at his absurdity. Nature tells us, that he should address the dying man in a calm, soft, and sympathizing tone; and that he should wait some time, before he starts back with concern and affliction, and pronounces this awful sentence "He dies, and makes no sign!" Would the speaker in the House condescend to follow the dictates of Nature, 1812.] The English Bible.-Dr. Nature, we should not see so many parliamentary orators assuming a formal aspect, using a vociferous tone, or swinging their arms, like a peasant brandishing his flail. I therefore recommend to every person who either writes for posterity, or speaks in publick, to pay the strictest attention to this excellent maxim: EUSEBIUS*. "Follow Nature." Mr. URBAN, Jan. 6. OXONIENSIS, LXXXI. Part ii. p. 510, offers to your Readers some just remarks on the mode of printing our version of the Bible; where the Italic letter is supposed to imply an "omission in the original, which ought to be added in a translation." But in the second part of his subject, after fairly alluding to the Star Chamber fine on the early Printers for their omission of the word "not" in the seventh Commandment (whilst he discovers one similar in the Oxford octavo edition of 1800) by printing the part quoted wholly in the Italic, he does not distinguish, whether the verb "is" stands, in the Copy then before him, in that letter or not. In one now before me, printed by Basket 1718, it does so stand; but the margin gives a different, and, I think, a better, version; " or our high hand and not the Lord hath done all this." This is precisely the sense of the Septuagint translation, where the Greek article repeated before the adjective is very expressive; it is also adapted to the position, as well as termination, of the Greek adverb there used, meaning "not" as well as more resembling another passage in Deuteronomy, chap. viii. 17: "Thou say in thine heart, my power and the might of my hand hath gotten me this wealth." The Latin version of Tre mellius and Junius, Amsterdam, 1669, has “fuit,” and not in Italics. Not being qualified to enter into per The late Rev. Jos, Robertson. EDIT. 19 Vincent and Bp. Porteus. P. S.-I observe Dr. Vincent addresses his "Defence" to the most Reverend the Lord Bishop of Meath, taking the "superlative" from the title-page of his sermon, and the list of Preachers annexed. It is in deed said, that Meath was once an Arch-bishoprick; so was one at least of our Welsh Bishopricks; but I do not hear of that highest title being in any of them revived. Arch-bishop James Usher, not unacquainted him self with Antiquities, when previously Bishop of Meath, was addressed by Sir Henry Spelman, Mr. John Selden, Sir Robert Cotton, Mr. William Camden, by Statesmen, and his Brethren of the Episcopal Bench, as Right Re verend only. N. B. In Dr. Forteus's" Review of the Life and Character of the Right Reverend Dr. Thomas Secker late Lord. Archbishop of Canterbury," the fifth edition 1797 now before me, the Bishop acknowledged that the mistake was not the Printer's, but his own. J. E. Yours, &c. this verse; as it stands at present, it will not bear the translation given by Oxoniensis; which does not indeed materially differ from the Bible translation. "Their depravity hath corrupted them, who are no more his children." "Corrupit illi filios, non jam suos, ipsorum pravitas." Lowth de sacrâ Poesi Hebræorum, Prælect. 15. Verse 10. "He fed them in a desert land." The verb yn hath sometimes this signification; and the Septuagint and Arabic versions, together with the Chaldee Paraphrase, so understand it in this passage. Aulagnnovis the Greek word. This rendering is likewise confirmed by the Samaritan Penta teuch. Verse 11. "As an Eagle carefully watches over her nest, Broods over her young." shewn to them in the Desert, of the Resurrection of the Dead to come," &c. &c. "In the first place Heaven and Earth are invoked as being incorruptible witnesses that, if the people would worship God as they ought, abundant harvests should follow with plenty of wine and of oil; but, if the Jews rebelled against God, instead of any blessing, Heaven and Earth should inflict a curse, namely, Heaven should withhold its rain, Earth should yield no fruit." Castalio's translation of the 1st verse pleases me most. Attendite, Cæli, dum loquor: audi, Terra, verba oris mei. The last part commands, in character of Lawgiver; whilst the former, in dum loquor, solicits testimony from above. The2d verse is awkward through that sudden repetition of my; and the next word doctrine might easily change its place. Rain occurs twice: Oxoniensis has altered this, but the word showers For this meaning of the verb "being found in two of the lines does see Rosenmuller on the verse. Verse 40. "For I will lift up my hand unto the Heavens, And will say, As I live for ever, I will make mine arrows drunk with blood." Of the propriety of this translation there cannot exist a doubt, as it is the usual form of an oath in the Hebrew language; besides, it adds much to the beauty and sublimity of the passage. Being afraid of occupying too much space in your valuable Repository, I shall not make anyfarther observations at present, but perhaps reserve them for another occasion. Mr. URBAN, W. W. Jan. 7. Bford Scholar of my family should acquire some knowledgeof the Hebrew language, you will oblige a constant Reader by a column of thanks to Oxoniensis, page 511. His subject is grand: an old Commentator calls this Song of Moses" a summary of the whole law; for he speaks of the mighty works of Jehovah, of the world's creation, of worshiping One God, of the race of men at the Deluge, of the confusion of tongues and division of the land, of the Israelites being a chosen people, and of the favours EING very desirous that an Ox not please more. The full meaning of the Hebrew word may perhaps be conveyed in the two first words as follow. Verse 2. Inspired they shall drop like the rain Your Correspondent is over-complaisant in giving us tezeker as Hebrew: the consonants have vowels in plenty according to the points, but not one of them consorted with e. If vowels may be supplied at will, it is not most probable that the world (informed, how bold, sonorous and musical Hebrew was) can be sa 'tisfied with a short ore short. At the same time Welsh boys, or any boys, may be well and wisely enticed to learn by this flattering mode; yet, within sight of Radcliffe's Library can persistence in such curtailment stand uncondemned? What say the examining Masters ? Yours, &c. I P. Jan. 6. Mr. URBAN, SEND you some particulars of a recent invention, which may prove of some importance to the publick, I have for many years experienced the inconvenience of locking waggons and and other carriages going down steep hills; and have, instead of the methods now used, latterly made use of the following expedient, which will be found much better to answer the purpose intended. A wheel and axle of a Carriage may be occasionally locked together as follows: almost close to the box of the wheel let there be a spring, like that in an umbrella, its nib sinking similarly into axle, by a thimble being slided on it. From wheel's box let a short spud project, which shall be stopped (and the wheel with it) by this spring's nib when up, but pass free when nib is sunk into axle: the wheel consequently will be locked to axle by sliding the thimble forward (or towards wheel), and unlocked by drawing back. Such spring and its spud on opposite side (but same end) of axle will make the locking doubly secure, and one thimble will press in both springs; the thimble may be slided to and fro by a handle or spring convenient to a person in the carriage; as I found, when sitting on my reaping machine, while drawn along. This contrivance would be peculiarly useful where the common drag chain would be inapplicable: viz. when horses were running away with a carriage and it would retard them still more if both wheels could be locked so. W. P. N. R. Yorkshire, Mr. URBAN, Nov. 18. Du URING my rambles in a sweet romantic valley in the North of Yorkshire, I arrived at a Church, of which nothing now remains but the white-washed walls, and these will, I am afraid, soon prostrate themselves before all-conquering Time; though possibly, were Time the only enemy, they might for many years raise their humble head, and point out to the passing shepherd where his fathers sleep. Though no civil wars molest its walls, yet its present patron seems desirous to lay its honours in the dust. Though a new Church is building for the parishioners, yet in my opinion, and begging the patron's pardon, he ought to pay some little regard to the feelings of those whose ancestors are buried in the old Church. "For still, beneath the hallow'd soil, The peasant rests him from his toil, And, dying, bids his bones be laid, Where erst his simple fathers pray'd," What man then, who has any regard to the memory of his forefathers, cau pass by without the greatest sorrow, when he beholds their tombs torn up from their foundation, and thrown carelessly aside? What heart would not melt? what eye would not let drop a tear? That this should happen in an age when knowledge is so universally diffused, must add very much to the regret. It is a matter of very great doubt with me, whether a patron or clergyman can remove any tombs from his church, much less destroy them: no, not even if authorized by the mandate of an archdeacon or bishop of the diocese. I write this, Mr. Urban, not as being myself alone deeply concerned, but through pity to those, who behold with heart-felt pain ravages committed, which must enrage not only the parties themselves but every lover of antiquity. Should you, Mr. Urban, be so kind as insert this in your Magazine (as I think the case will touch your tender feelings also), it may put a stop to these wrecks, and very much oblige a number of friends, but most of all, Yours, &c. E. W -N. Mr. URBAN, Conduit-street, Jan. 7. Tvolume, respecting Emanuel Men des da Costa, may in part be answered by the following particulars of his family, drawn up by himself, and taken from MSS. in my possession. He also collected some brief memorials of contemporary Virtuosi, which may not prove uninteresting for some future numbers; and among his loose papers are a few relative to the antiquity of the Jews, which I propose to communicate for the current volume. Yours, &c. J. H. |
