Their heads to their foundations,"
appear as if they were yet staggering from the blast of the mine which sprung them from their beds; they lean as if ready to tumble down the steep sides of the hill, and appear as if a child’s finger would roll them headlong. The ruins are in the possession of the family of Bankes.
In a meadow in the vale on the west side, which leads, by the by, to Orchard Farm, is to be seen a curious earthwork, apparently ancient British, which, from its structure, might have been a place of druidical judicature, or for pastimes. This relic has, we believe, escaped the notice of the intelligent Rev. John Clavell of Kimmeridge; and if the public are ever to be favoured with the result of his studies and patient investigations, it will be one of the most extraordinary productions of its kind.
There is a small work on Corfe Castle, published by a very intelligent resident of Wareham; and we are in hopes that the grey and hoary ruins may call forth the muse of J.F. Pennie, who resides on this wild romantic district, and whom we met with pleasure in our rambles.
JAMES SILVESTER, SEN.
NOTES OF A READER
KNOWLEDGE FOR THE PEOPLE; OR, THE PLAIN WHY AND BECAUSE
Part 6.–Sports and Pastimes
We quote the following from HUNTING:
Why is it inferred that hunting was practised by the ancient Britons?
Because Dionysius (who lived 50 B.C.) says, that the inhabitants of the northern part of this island tilled no ground, but lived in great part upon the food they procured by hunting. Strabo (nearly contemporary) also says, that the dogs bred in Britain were highly esteemed upon the continent, on account of their excellent qualities for hunting.
Cæsar tells us, that venison constituted a great portion of their food; and as they had in their possession such dogs as were naturally prone to the chase, there can be little doubt that they would exercise them for procuring their favourite diet; besides, they kept large herds of cattle and flocks of sheep, both of which required protection from the wolves and other ferocious animals that infested the woods and coverts, and must frequently have rendered hunting an act of absolute necessity.—Strutt.
Why is hunting considered more ancient than hawking?
Because, in the earliest ages of the world, hunting was a necessary labour of self-defence, or the first law of nature, rather than a pastime; while hawking could never have been adopted from necessity, or in self-protection.
Why was hunting originally considered a royal and noble sport?
Because, as early as the ninth century, it formed an essential part of the education of a young nobleman. Alfred the Great was an expert and successful hunter before he was twelve years of age. Among the tributes imposed by Athelstan, upon a victory over Constantine, King of Wales, were “hawks and sharp-scented dogs, fit for hunting of wild beasts.” Edward the Confessor “took the greatest delight to follow a pack of swift hounds in pursuit of game, and to cheer them with his voice.”—Malmesbury. Harold, his successor, rarely travelled without his hawk and hounds. William the Norman, and his immediate successors, restricted hunting to themselves and their favourites. King John was particularly attached to field sports, and even treated the animals worse than his subjects. In the reign of Edward II. hunting was reduced to a perfect science, and rules established for its practice; these were afterwards extended by the master of the game belonging to Henry IV., and drawn up for the use of his son, Henry Prince of Wales, in two tracts, which are extant. Edward III., according to Froissart, while at war with France, and resident there, had with him sixty couple of stag-hounds, and as many hare-hounds, and every day hunted or hawked. Gaston, Earl of Foix, a foreign nobleman, contemporary with Edward, also kept six hundred dogs in his castle for hunting. James I. preferred hunting to hawking or shooting; so that it was said of him, “he divided his time betwixt his standish, his bottle, and his hunting; the last had his fair weather, the two former his dull and cloudy.”
Ladies’ hunting-dresses of the 15th century, as figured in Strutt’s Sports, &c., differ but little from the modern riding habit.
Why are greyhounds still petted by ladies?
Because in former times they were considered as valuable presents, especially among the ladies, with whom they appear to have been peculiar favourites. In an ancient metrical romance (Sir Eglamore), a princess tells the knight, that if he was inclined to hunt, she would, as an especial mark of her favour, give him an excellent greyhound, so swift that no deer could escape from his pursuit.—Strutt.
Why were certain forests called royal chases?
Because the privileges of hunting there were confined to the king and his favourites; and, to render these receptacles for the beasts of the chase more capacious, or to make new ones, whole villages were depopulated, and places of divine worship overthrown, not the least regard being paid to the miseries of the suffering inhabitants, or the cause of religion.—Strutt.
Why were lands first imparked?
Because their owners might still more effectually preserve deer and other animals for hunting.
A recent French newspaper gave notice of an association for the purpose of enabling persons of all ranks to enjoy the pleasures of the chase. A park of great extent is to be taken on lease near Paris; its extent is about six thousand acres, partly arable, and partly forest ground. The plan is, to open it to subscribers during six months—viz. from September 1 to March 1, an ample stock of game being secured in preserves.
Why were parks and inclosures usually attached to priories?
Because they were receptacles of game for the clergy of rank, who at all times had the privilege of hunting in their own possessions. At the time of the Reformation, the see of Norwich only was in the possession of no less than thirteen parks, well stocked with deer and other animals for the chase.—Spelman.
The eagerness of the clergy for hunting is described as irrepressible. Prohibitions of councils produced little effect. In some instances a particular monastery obtained a dispensation. Thus, that of St. Denis, in 774, represented to Charlemagne that the flesh of hunted animals was salutary for sick monks, and that their skins would serve to bind books in the library. Alexander III., by a letter to the clergy of Berkshire, dispenses with their keeping the archdeacon in dogs and hawks during his visitation.—Rymer. An archbishop of York, in 1321, carried a train of two hundred persons, who were maintained at the expense of the abbeys on his road, and who hunted with a pack of hounds from parish to parish!—Whitaker’s Hist. of Craven, quoted in Hallam’s Hist. Middle Ages.
Why was hunting formerly a very convenient resource for the wholesomeness, as well as luxury, of the table?
Because the natural pastures being then unimproved, and few kinds of fodder for cattle discovered, it was impossible to maintain the summer stock during the cold season. Hence a portion of it was regularly slaughtered and salted for winter provision. We may suppose, therefore, that when no alternative was offered but these salt meats, even the leanest venison was devoured with relish.—Hallam’s Hist. Middle Ages.
Why were all the great forests pierced by those long rectilinear alleys which appear in old prints, and are mentioned in old books?
Because the avenues were particularly necessary for those large parties, resembling our modern battues, where the honoured guests being stationed in fit standings, had an opportunity of displaying their skill in venery by selecting the buck which was in season, and their dexterity at bringing him down with the cross-bow or long-bow.
Why should a deer-park exhibit but little artificial arrangement in its disposal?
Because the stag, by nature one of the freest denizens of the forest, can only be kept even under comparative restraint, by taking care that all around him intimates a complete state of forest and wilderness. Thus, there ought to be a variety of broken ground, of copse-wood, and of growing timber—of land, and of water. The soil and herbage must be left in its natural state; the long fern, amongst which the fawns delight to repose, must not be destroyed.
Why did the common people formerly call the forest “good,” and the greenwood “merry?”
Because of the pleasure they took in the scenes themselves, as well as in the pastimes which they afforded.
Why is a short gallop called a canter?
Because of its abbreviation from Canterbury, the name of the pace used by the monks in going to that city.
Why was a certain noise called the “hunt’s-up?”
Because it was made to rouse a person in a morning; originally a tune played to wake the sportsmen, and call them together, the purport of which was, The hunt is up! which was the subject of hunting ballads also.
This expression is common among the older poets. One Gray, it is said, grew into good estimation with Henry VIII. and the Duke of Somerset, “for making certaine merry ballades, whereof one chiefly was, the hunte is up! the hunte is up!” Shakspeare has—
Since arm from arm that voice doth us affray,
Hunting thee hence with hunts-up to the day.
Romeo and Juliet.
Again, in Drayton’s Polyolbion—
No sooner doth the earth her flow’ry bosom brave,
At such time as the year brings on the pleasant spring,
But hunts-up to the morn the feather’d sylvans sing.
Why is a small hunting horn called a bugle?
Because of its origin from bugill, which means a buffalo, or perhaps any horned cattle. In the Scottish dialect it was bogle, or bowgill. Buffe, bugle, and buffalo, are all given by Barrett, as synonimous for the wild ox.—Nares’ Glossary.
Why is the stirrup so called?
Because of its origin from stigh-rope, from stigan ascendere, to mount; and thus termed by our Saxon ancestors, from a rope being used for mounting when stirrups began to be used in this island. It is evident, from various monuments of antiquity, that, at first, horsemen rode without either saddles or stirrups.
Why are sportsmen said to hunt counter?