Part 13

Though it has often been hastily assumed that the annals of the bow in the northern kingdom would require no more space in the writing than did Olaus Magnus’s famous chapter on the snakes of Iceland, yet this is only true of archery in battle; and it is a curious fact that, though the Scots could never be induced to take to the bow as a military weapon, they became very fond of archery as a pastime, when firearms took the place of bows and arrows as “artilyere,” and there was no further need of statutes forcing the bow into their hands, and forbidding all outdoor amusements that interfered with its practice. It is a curious problem why, in two races so akin as the English and the Lowland Scots, national bent should in this respect take such opposite directions. While the southern yeoman delighted in his long-bow and the sheaf of shafts—“the twelve Scots’ lives” he bore under his girdle—his kinsman foe across the Tweed could never be compelled either by experience or a long series of penal statutes to take to the weapon whose power in skilful hands he had felt on many a bloody field. “Few of thaim was sekyr of archarie,” laments Blind Harry, the minstrel, of Wallace’s followers; and not only was this true of all succeeding Scottish soldiers, but it may be that the same national prejudice can be traced back for centuries before the Blind Minstrel’s time, to the days of the sculptured stones that stud the northeastern districts of Scotland. While on them are many delineations of the hunter aiming his arrow at deer or wild boar, there is only one instance, in all their many scenes of war, in which fighting men are armed with the bow.

When the first James of Scotland returned to his northern kingdom with his “fairest English flower,” Lady Jane Beaufort, he brought back with him from his long captivity a deep impression of the value of the bow. Under the careful instruction of the constable of Pevensey, James had become a fine marksman, and he tried by every means in his power to popularize the exercise at home. He forbade football and other “unprofitable sports;” he ordered every man to shoot at the bow marks near his parish church every Sunday; he chose a bodyguard for himself from among the most skilful archers at the periodical “Wappinshaws;” and in his poem of “Christ’s Kirk on the Green” he published a scathing satire on the clumsiness and inefficiency of his peasantry in archery. What the most energetic of the Stuart kings set his mind to he generally succeeded in; and possibly, if the dagger of “that mischant traitor, Robert Grahame,” had spared his life at Perth, James might have done what so many Scottish kings failed to do; as it was, we see signs of improvement among his people.

The bodyguard that the author of the “King’s Quhair” embodied for himself was the origin of the famous “Royal Company of Archers” that still flourishes vigorously in Edinburgh. So say the present “Bodyguard for Scotland,” though their oldest extant records stop short two centuries and a half of King James’s time.

With James’s assassination at Perth, the new-born zeal for archery seems to have died away; and it is not till we come to the time of James V. that any noteworthy traces of its practice can be found. If we may judge from a story told in Lindsay of Pitscottie’s quaint old chronicle of Scotland, the Commons’ king had some fine archers in his kingdom; for Lindsay tells us how the Scottish marksmen were victorious in what must surely have been the earliest friendly shooting-match between England and Scotland. The occasion of this international match was Henry VIII. sending an embassy with the garter to his nephew, the young King of Scots, in 1534. “In this year,” says Pitscottie, whose spelling we modernize, “came an English ambassador out of England, called Lord William Howard: a bishop and other gentlemen, to the number of three score horse: who were all able wailled [picked] gentlemen for all kinds of pastimes, as shooting, leaping, wrestling, running, and casting of the stone. But they were well essayed in all these before they went home, and that by their own provocation, and they almost ever tint [lost]: while at the last the king’s mother favored the Englishmen, because she was the king of England’s sister; and therefore she took a wager of archery upon the Englishmen’s hands, contrary to the king her son, and any half dozen Scotsmen, either noblemen, gentlemen, or yeomen, that so many Englishmen should shoot against them at ‘rovers,’ ‘butts,’ or ‘prick-bonnet.’ The king hearing of this bonspiel [sporting match] of his mother was well content. So there was laid a hundred crowns, and a tun of wine pandit [staked] on each side. The ground was chosen in St. Andrews. The Scottish archers were three landed gentlemen and three yeomen, to wit: David Wemyss of that ilk, David Arnott of that ilk, and Mr. John Wedderburn, vicar of Dundee. The yeomen were John Thomson in Leith, Steven Tabroner, and Alexander Baillie, who was a piper. [The Scottish archers] shot wondrous near, and won the wager from the Englishmen; and thereafter went into the town, and made a banquet to the queen and the English ambassador, with the whole two hundred crowns and the two tuns of wine.”

Archery from this time became an established pastime in Scotland, amicably sharing men’s leisure with its old enemies golf and football, while with the ladies it took rank as their chief, if not only, outdoor pastime. Queen Margaret herself might possibly have taken her place with credit beside the six Englishmen she backed in this match against her son; for we are told by Leland and others that Henry’s sister was no mean shot, while her unfortunate grandchild, Mary Queen of Scots, was as fond of archery as was her cousin Elizabeth of England and many another lady of that time.

TENNYSON AND MRS. CARLYLE.

Mrs. Carlyle wrote in 1843: “Pickwick, Bulwer Lytton and Alfred Tennyson—the last is the greatest genius, though the vulgar public have not as yet recognized him as such. He is a very handsome man, and a noble-hearted one, with something of the gipsy in his appearance which, for me, is perfectly charming. One night at private theatricals in being escorted through a long dim passage to a private box, I came on a tall man leant to the wall, with his head touching the ceiling, to all appearance asleep, or resolutely trying it under most unfavorable circumstances. ‘Alfred Tennyson!’ I exclaimed in joyful surprise. ‘Well,’ said he, taking the hand I held out to him, and forgetting to let it go again. ‘I did not know you were in town,’ said I. ‘I should like to know who you are,’ said he; ‘I know that I know you, but I can not tell your name.’ And I had actually to name myself to him. Then he woke up in good earnest, and said he had been meaning to come to Chelsea. ‘But Carlyle is in Scotland,’ I told him with due humility. ‘So I heard from Spedding already, but I asked Spedding, would he go with me to see Mrs. Carlyle? and he said he would.’ Last Sunday I was lying on the sofa, headachey, when a cab drove up. Mr. Strachey? No. Alfred Tennyson alone! Actually, by a superhuman effort of volition he had put himself into a cab, nay, brought himself away from a dinner party, and was there to smoke and talk with me!—by myself—me!”

* * * * *

How dear is fatherland to all noble hearts.—_Voltaire._

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF ANIMALS.

By ALFRED NEWTON.

Some facts as to the geographical distribution—whether of plants or animals—have, it is true, been long known, indeed they present themselves on the slightest inquiry. Every one is aware that elephants and tigers do not roam in our woods now-a-days, whatever may have been the case aforetime. Many persons have read that horses were unknown in the New World at the time of its discovery by Europeans, and were subsequently introduced by its Spanish conquerors. Some may even know that humming-birds are not to be found in the Old World, and that (as has been already said) the so-called “marsupial” animals are at the present time, with a few exceptions, confined to Australia, as well as that in that country nothing like vultures or woodpeckers are to be found.

The assemblage of animals which inhabit any portion of the earth’s surface, whether it be land or water, is called its “fauna,” in the same way that the plants of a country are called its “flora.” To be entitled to the former term it is unnecessary that the animals composing the assemblage should not be found anywhere else; it is enough that they occur there and impress upon the district, be it large or small, certain more or less well-marked peculiarities. Nor does it follow because certain kinds of animals are found to inhabit two districts that these two have the same fauna. We have to take the whole assemblage as a whole, and abide by the verdict which the majority of kinds affords us. Now by collecting such facts as those stated in the preceding paragraph, and such facts can be collected by the hundred or the thousand, we are able to get hold of a general idea of the geographical distribution of animals, and when the results of all the knowledge on this subject which we can acquire are brought together, it will appear that the earth may be partitioned into several great zoölogical regions—each separable in subregions, provinces, subprovinces and so on.

America is divided into two regions—the “Nearctic” and the “Neotropical,” which meet in Mexico at about the 22d parallel of north latitude:—

(1) The Nearctic Region (that is the Northern part of the New World) includes the Aleutian Islands, besides Greenland and the Bermudas with all of what is generally called North America.

(2) The Neotropical Region (that is the tropical part of the New World) comprises the West India Islands, the Galapagos, and the whole of South and Central America.

Passing to the Old World, it is separable, as may be seen, into four regions.

(3) The Palæarctic Region (or Northern part of the Old World) including that portion of Africa which lies to the northward of the Great Desert, the Atlantic Islands (Madeiras, Canaries, and Azores), the whole of Europe from Iceland to Greece, besides Asia Minor, Palestine, Persia, probably Afghanistan, the whole of Northern, Central and Eastern Asia, lying to the northward of the Himalaya Mountains and of China proper, as well as Japan.

(4) The Ethiopian Region consists of Africa, excepting Morocco and Algeria (which, as already stated, belong to the preceding region), as well as of Arabia and of course the adjacent islands from those off the Cape Verd to Madagascar and Socotra.

(5) The Indian Region includes possibly Beloochistan, all British India, Burmah, China proper (that is, without Chinese Tartary), Cochin China, the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, Java, Bali, Borneo, and the Philippine Islands.

(6) The Australian Region is very trenchantly divided from the Indian at the Straits of Macassar, and, beginning with the islands of Celebes and Lombok, comprises all the groups between them and Papua or New Guinea, as well as Australia, Tasmania, New Zealand, and, generally, all the islands of the Pacific Ocean, except those already otherwise appropriated—as Japan, the Aleutian Islands and the Galapagos.

It may be added that though the preceding outlines of geographical distribution were first laid down with reference to the most vagrant class of animals in creation—namely birds—their truth has since been in the main confirmed by nearly all those zoölogists who have studied the subject in reference to particular classes in the knowledge of which they themselves stand preëminent.

Yet it may not be unreasonably expected of these six zoögeographical regions, that they are not all equally distinct, and it is quite possible that future researches may show that their boundaries require some rectification.

The study of the geographical distribution of animals furnishes us with facts of much importance in the history of the earth. For example: It has been stated, and that on the very best authority, that the marine faunas of the two coasts of the Isthmus of Panama, which joins the two continents of North and South America, have but thirty per cent. of species in common. Now what does this show? No doubt the very considerable antiquity of the barrier which exists between the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans—for if, in anything like recent times, there had been a break in this barrier, within the tropics where the sea is warm, then assuredly we should have had a very much larger interchange of the species which inhabit its two sides, or perhaps we should even find precisely the same fishes, the same shells, the same crabs and the same corals in the harbor of Colon on the one side and that of Panama on the other. As it is we have corals on the Atlantic coast of the isthmus and on the Pacific none whatever, while, as before said, of the rest of the marine fauna (the fishes especially) not more than thirty per cent. are common to both. It is moreover particularly to be noted that there seems to be no other reason than the one here assigned for this difference. Very many sorts of fishes and of shells which occur on one side so much resemble those found on the other that the distinction between them is only such as can be recognized by expert zoölogists, yet this distinction is constantly to be observed—they form what are called “Representative Species,” that is, one kind of fish or shell on one side is exactly represented by another kind of fish or shell on the other.

But this difference between the marine faunas of the two coasts of the Isthmus of Panama not only proves its long duration as a barrier of dry land, but some other deductions follow naturally enough. It is also tolerably clear that the Gulf Stream must have been running pretty much the same course that it runs now so long as the barrier presented by the Isthmus of Panama has existed. If it were not for that barrier the current would have continued its westerly flow onward to the Pacific Ocean. Now we have seen that the difference between the marine faunas of the two sides of the isthmus proves its long duration. Hence we may fairly conclude that for so long has the Gulf stream been flowing and helping to soften what would otherwise have been the rigorous climate of Ireland and Scotland, thereby materially affecting their fauna.

Everyone knows the old legend of St. Patrick, and how he is said to have banished all noxious reptiles from his favorite island. As a matter of fact only one kind of reptile proper is found in Ireland. This is the viviparous lizard, a harmless little animal which also occurs in Great Britain and generally throughout the continent of Europe. But in England we have besides a second kind of lizard, commonly known as the sand-lizard, and this also is spread over the Continent, where they have in addition, even in Northern France, a third kind, the green lizard, which does not inhabit any part of Great Britain or much less of Ireland. It is therefore a not very unlikely deduction from these facts that the viviparous lizard had made its appearance in this part of the world at an epoch when Ireland was joined to England by dry land, and England was in like manner connected with France, and that that epoch was earlier than the time when the sand-lizard appeared, for if the latter had then occurred it would in all likelihood have spread to Ireland. But if we suppose, and geologists tell us we may do so, St. George’s Channel to have been formed before the English Channel was, then it is plain that a reptile extending its range from the middle of Europe would have been able to get into England, but not into Ireland; and this supposition would account for the limited distribution of the sand-lizard. While again a third reptile, like the green lizard, coming at a subsequent period, after the straits of Dover were formed, would find them before him and be unable to set his foot off the continent.

Thus in whatever way we regard them, the not unreasonable deductions afforded by the facts which a study of the geographical distribution of animals makes known to us are of very great importance. We may of course be wrong in some of our inferences, we very likely shall err, as some of our predecessors have done, but the facts remain whatever construction we put upon them, and, as they go on accumulating, we may be sure that errors by degrees will be swept away, and perhaps the genius of man by this means alone may explain one of the mysteries of creation.

C. L. S. C. READINGS FOR 1883-84.

HISTORY.

Readings in Roman, French, German, and American history in THE CHAUTAUQUAN.

History of Greece, by Timayenis, volume two, parts seventh, eighth, tenth, eleventh. (Students of the Class of 1887, not having read volume one of Timayenis’ History of Greece, will not be required to read volume two, but will take “Chapters from Greek History,” instead of volumes one and two of Timayenis.)

Stories in English History, by the great historians, edited by C. E. Bishop, Esq.

Chautauqua Text-books, No. 16, “Roman History:” No. 21, “American History.”

LITERATURE.

Preparatory Latin Course in English, by Dr. Wilkinson.

“English Literature,” Chautauqua Text-book, No. 22, by Prof. J. H. Gilmore.

Primer of American Literature, by Richardson.

SCIENCE.

How to Get Strong, and How to Stay So, by W. Blaikie.

Readings in Botany, by Dr. J. H. Wythe.

Chautauqua Text-book, No. 22, “Biology.”

Readings in Physical Science, in THE CHAUTAUQUAN.

RELIGION.

Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation, by Rev. J. B. Walker.

Sunday Readings in THE CHAUTAUQUAN, selected by Dr. Vincent.

Chautauqua Text-books, No. 18, “Christian Evidences;” No. 39, “Sunday-school Normal Class Work.”

GENERAL.

Biographical Stories, by Nathaniel Hawthorne. Price, 15c. Published by Houghton, Mifflin & Co.

Readings in THE CHAUTAUQUAN about the Arts, Artists, and their Master-pieces; about Commercial Law and Political Economy.

C. L. S. C. WORK.

By J. H. VINCENT, D. D., SUPERINTENDENT OF INSTRUCTION, C. L. S. C.

Before the July CHAUTAUQUAN reaches members of the C. L. S. C., the envelopes containing memoranda, etc., will have been mailed from the Plainfield office. Any members who do not receive them by that time should write to the office of the C. L. S. C.

* * * * *

Members of the Class of 1883 will notice on the second page of Memoranda 16, over the questions in regard to the White Seal Course, the words, “not for graduates.” This refers to graduates of the Class of 1882 _only_—_not_ to those who expect to graduate with the Class of 1883. We make this explanation so there may be no misunderstanding, as the reading of the books there mentioned entitles all members of the Class of 1883 to the white seal for their fourth year, 1882-3.

* * * * *

Sunday, July 8, is a Memorial Day. Appointed reading: I Cor., xiii.

* * * * *

Let our students understand that there is no additional fee required for the pure white seal.

* * * * *

One of the lonely ones, cut off from the privileges of local circles, writes us: “I have met with many discouragements since my connection with the C. L. S. C., sickness and pressure of business leaving me barely time to accomplish the work, which I am sure is very poorly done—quite different from what I supposed at the beginning. I have studied alone, with only such help as the books of the course and a few old school books have afforded—with no one interested in the books to talk them over with, and help me fix the events in my memory. I have only one satisfaction: of doing my best under the circumstances.”

* * * * *

The Chautauqua Text-book on English Literature, by Prof. J. H. Gilmore, to be used in 1883-84, is No. 23, instead of No. 22.

* * * * *

July 13 is the C. L. S. C. Commencement Day at Monterey, California. Salutations from thirty-five thousand members to the glorious band on the Pacific Coast!

* * * * *

A cultured lady of Connecticut writes: “I don’t know as excuses are required in the People’s College; however, I think this will be in order: Owing to sickness lasting four months of last year, I have not been able to complete the reading and memoranda until now. I am happy to say that I’ve accomplished this without neglecting the reading of the present year, so I expect to be ready on time with my next memoranda. I am delighted with the course of study, and should feel lost without it now.”

* * * * *

“Where could I purchase a telescope to assist me in the study of astronomy?” Answer: James W. Queen & Co., 924 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, are practical and scientific opticians. They manufacture telescopes. The mention of Bishop Henry W. Warren’s name and that of the C. L. S. C. will insure attention and low prices.

C. L. S. C. SONGS.

HYMN OF GREETING.

MARY A. LATHBURY. (CHAUTAUQUA, 1875.) _German Air._

1 The flush of morn—the setting suns Have told their glories o’er and o’er; One rounded year, since, heart to heart, We stood with Jesus by the door.

2 We heard his wond’rous voice; we touched His garment’s hem with reverent hand; Then at his word went forth to preach His coming kingdom in the land.

3 And following him, some willing feet The way to Emmaus have trod; And some stand on the Orient plains; And some upon the mount of God!

4 While over all, and under all, The Master’s eye, the Master’s arm, Have led in paths we have not known, Yet kept us from the touch of harm.

5 One year of golden days and deeds Of gracious growth, of service sweet; And now, beside the shore again, We gather at the Master’s feet.

6 “Blest be the tie that binds,” we sing; Yet to the bending blue above We look, beyond the face of friends, To mark the coming of the Dove.

7 Descend upon us as we wait With open heart—with open word Breathe on us, mystic Paraclete! Breathe on us, Spirit of the Lord!

Copyright by J. H. Vincent.

BREAK THOU THE BREAD OF LIFE.

MARY A. LATHBURY. (STUDY SONG.) WM. F. SHERWIN, 1877, by per.

1 Break Thou the bread of life, dear Lord, to me, As Thou didst break the loaves beside the sea. Beyond the sacred page I seek Thee, Lord; My spirit pants for Thee, O living Word!

2 Bless Thou the truth, dear Lord, To me, to me, As Thou didst bless the bread by Galilee; Then shall all bondage cease, All fetters fall, An I shall find my peace, My All in All!

Copyright, 1877, by J. H. Vincent.

* * * * *

A member of the Circle suggests that local circles should occasionally hold an evening of song, making use of the “Chautauqua Songs” which have been sent to all members. By doing this in advance of the several Assembly meetings the coming season, they would be prepared to enjoy a general service of song on the C. L. S. C. days.

* * * * *

A lady holding a lucrative position in a Boston printing room writes: “All that the C. L. S. C. has done for me it is impossible to tell. It has helped me to become better acquainted with my Maker and his wonderful works; the history of nations and individuals; created a greater love for solid, instructive reading; better fitted me for teaching in the Sunday-school, and opened avenues for thought, study, and usefulness which, I trust, will make life more successful and useful.”

* * * * *