« AnteriorContinua »
thee of the What, more of the How! Whilst I wander through a piece of the world, I may discover the dot on the i. Then will the great purpose be gained. Such a reward deserves such a striving; gold, honour, fame, healthy long life, knowledge, and virtue also-perhaps. Farewell.
Wagner (troubled). Farewell! This oppresses my heart. I fear that I shall never see thee more.
Mephistopheles. Now, then, fresh down to Peneus : my cousin is not to be despised to the spectators). At the last we depend on creatures that we have made.
(To be continued).
A SKETCH. He was an Italian ;-his eyes, dark and of soft expression, and the whole contour of his face proclaimed the country of his birth, and the rich, warm climate in which his infancy-his happy, because careless, infancy-was passed. “His infancy was passed" - I should have said, his previous life ;--for his modest manners, his almost total ignorance of English, and the foreign mode in which he uttered the few words he did speak in that language, all proved he had not long been wandering in this land-so rough, compared with his own sweet, genial home.
What thoughts arise at the bare mention of that last word! What social comforts, what pure affection, what dear remembrances, does it not call to mind! Blessed home!-those four letters contain as much soothing and melodious music in them, as any in the language-perhaps more, with the exception of one monosyllable, Love ; and, without that, what would Home be, or what the fairest place on earth ? And that Italian-boy had left a home-perchance it was one of comfort and affection. I almost wished that it might not be so—for absence then would be less painful to him.
That short word “home” has to answer for this digression. It entered into my mind, and, by some hidden means, worked its way to the point of the pen, and thence was traced on the paper, where I saw it, before being guilty of this wandering from the subject.
I stood to view the images he had put down, while he rested; and, looking on them and on their owner, I involuntarily felt an interest in them all. They were weak and fragile things, and seemed to depend on him alone for safety. And he-he was a stranger in the land, without a knowledge of its language or its ways, and without friends to succour him in poverty, or even illness. By gesture, rather than words, he showed each portion of his little property. His easy, and often graceful, manners, were pleasing ; but still more interest was excited by the melancholy that sometimes clouded his countenancethough only for a moment, for it abounded usually, after the character of his countrymen, in smiles. But, with a look of peculiar expression,
and great earnestness of manner, he pointed out two little statues of Milton and Shakspere. The former he passed over, after stating he was a “great poet." The latter was a sweet miniature copy of Roubilliac's celebrated figure of the immortal bard.
“'Tis beautiful Shakspere,” exclaimed the owner; and, in the hearty and enthusiastic tone he had been taught beneath the glowing skies, and among the lovely scenes of his own country.
I felt delighted- enraptured, with the expression ; and, after a few words, bought the statue of the poor Italian boy.
“Renowned Poet of Nature (and universally renowned, because the Poet of Nature),” I said, turning away with his image leaning along my arm- his head against my heart; “ and even foreign wanderers know and love thy name! How proud, then, should the country be that gave thee birth, and on whose soil was spent thy blessed life! • Blessed life,' was the expression; and blessed, most blessed, is that occupied (like Shakspere's) in forming works and monuments of mind, that will delight and teach lessons of kindly feeling and morality to millions, when the frail author is gone; and cause his name to be remembered and beloved, when the body that once bore it shall exist no more, but be a part of earth!”
The tribute of the wandering Italian was enthusiastic, and, therefore, delightful; and the appearance of the youth, who rendered it to genius, excited in my heart a feeling of compassion for himself--a stranger in our land, and a poor unknown wanderer from his ownand admiration, almost friendship, from the earnest exclamation of “'Tis beautiful Shakspere!”
J. J. S.
THE ZOOLUS; THEIR EXTRAORDINARY MANNERS, CUSTOMS AND CHARACTER. ACCORDING to our promise, in January, we take up once more the pen, in order to continue our account of the customs and manners of the Zoolus.
I. Government. As in most savage nations, the Zoolu monarch possesses an unlimited jurisdiction over the lives and properties of his subjects. But, although its outline may be thus said to be despotic, the ingredients of which it is composed may not inaptly be termed nondescript.
The throne is apparently neither hereditary nor elective, the succession depending upon the murder of the existing sovereign, which event generally happens when he begins to exhibit wrinkles or grey hairs.
After this the state soon becomes involved in civil disputes, during which the hereditary branch may be cut off, and even another family raised to the throne.
When, however, a new king has firmly established himself, which he seldom can do without a deal of bloodshed, he becomes abolute. “Inguose”-his name is held sacred-adoration is paid to it, and by
it all classes swear. His power is now indisputable and fearful, he can command indiscriminate massacres by his nod, while bis warriors, being always hy him, and reaping the fruits of these executions, he is sure to have his most atrocious commands as faithfully performed as any tyrant could desire.
But, notwithstanding the king is thus all-powerful, a great deal of authority is vested in the two principal “Indoonas ;” or, prime ministers, as we should term them. These two important personages are always consulted upon, and generally supposed to confirm, every important measure of the sovereign. In the native figurative language they are designated as the “ King's eyes and ears.”
Next to the Indoonas, the warriors enjoy a large degree of influence. These consist of about fifteen thousand men, trained to war from their infancy. They exist entirely on plunder; and having been, by Charka, cut off from all social enjoyment, they are a sullen, morose set of savages, only fitted for the devastation of warfare. Dingarn, indeed, having changed the constitution of this force, bas certainly given them opportunity of acquiring subsistence by other means; but they have become so habituated to the battlefield, that it has to them become a gratification rather than a toil.
The warriors are divided into the following orders :-
. . . Younger Soldiers. Amaboodtu, Lads who have not served in war. The two former are distinguished by rings on their heads, the others by not shaving the hair.
A certain number of each class are formed into regiments of from six hundred to about one thousand strong, and distributed throughout the country, in the rekanda," or barrack towns. Each regiment is commanded by from two to tep Indoonas ; of whom one is considered as the commandant, and the others have the charge of different sections.
As we have before stated, during Charka's reign, no soldier was permitted to marry, Although Dingarn has abolished this ordinance, the king's consent must still be obtained previous to their contracting any nuptial alliance, which consent is seldom granted to any but the Umpagati.
It is no unusual thing, however, for the king, on great occasions, to order a whole regiment to marry. Those, however, who are deprived of this indulgence, are permitted to keep as many concubines as they please.
It is only from the warriors that the king fears opposition to his measures. From his civil subjects he apprehends no danger. The warriors are the only check to his power. These he is ever fearful of offending; and he always conciliates their favor by conceding to them all they may command.
II. Crimes and Punishments. The Zoolus are far from being of a vindictive disposition; and were it not from the decrees of the king, murders would not be of frequent occurrence. Their little private differences are always adjusted by the chief of the kraal in which they live; and his award is, in general, satisfactory to all parties. The common people, namely, those whose occupation is not war, live in a state of very good fellowship with each other.
Rapes, murders, deserting, treason, cowardice and espial are capital crimes, and, as such, judged alone by the king. These are all punished either by stoning, strangling, twisting the neck, or beating with clubs.
Lying, stealing, disrespect, errors in judgment, mistakes in delivering messages, violating laws or customs, want of attention in dancing, are punished according to the monarch's whim or fancy.
Coughing, spitting, belching, swearing, blowing the nose, &c. while the king is eating are also considered as crimes, and punishable with death; but generally the king's servants bear the offending parties away. If a chief of a kraal has committed any of these breaches of politeness, it would not be safe for him again to appear in the royal presence, without having sent his "schlowoola," or peace offering, before him; when he may consider himself in favour again.
To partake of new corn, before the king has issued his permission so to do, is, also, a crime punishable with death.
The execution of all sentences follows the award so quick, that often ten minutes are not permitted to elapse between time and eternity. The bodies of criminals are left to be devoured by wild animals.
On glancing over the above list of crimes and penalties, it strikes us, that though the Zoolus are in such a rude state of society, they seldom award death for any crimes that would not be considered worthy of the same punishment in a more civilized community. They are apt, however, to administer justice in excess.
We have in our former article (“Charka, the Napoleon of the Zoolus") made some remarks upon the massacres allowed and enjoined by the criminal code of the Zoolus, and shall therefore refrain from enlarging much upon the subject in this place. We cannot, however, resist the temptation of here making a few additional observations on the subject, which space prevented us from recording in that paper.
We have there declared that as the custom was universal, it must have originated in some universally felt necessity. But may we not advance a step further? May not the custom lave taken its rise from a deep-rooted feeling of justice in the human breast?From a righteous, although furious indignation against the perpetrators of such “deeds of darkness ?” When we have once arrived at the conclusion that a person who can commit such a crime is not fit to live, how easy is the transition, to a yet further point.—How natural is it that, pushing our ideas of justice to a yet higher standard, we should declare that the family who numbered among its members a person so depraved, ought not to be allowed any longer to encumber the earth /
Doubtless this is running into excess, pushing a commendable feeling beyond its due limits; but still it is an excess into which an unsophisticated people, with no other guide to direct them, than that so potent notion of right and wrong which is implanted in every
human breast whether savage or civilized, would be likely to run into. The indignation engendered by finding the social compact violated, and the instinct of self-preservation, would soon drive them on thus far, yea—and perhaps even further, and instead of single families, whole districts and villages would suffer for the crime of one individual.
III. Religion, Witchcraft, &c. &c.—The Zoolus have suffered their religion to sink into such gross superstition, that some travellers have declared (not taking the trouble to look beyond the surface) that they are without any religious belief. But this position is untenable, being disproved by the documents which these said travellers themselves afford us in their works.
It is, however, evident, that with them the seat of religion is now usurped by superstition. But we would ask, could superstition exist without religion-or rather may it not be more correctly considered, as the lowest manifestation of religious sentiment?
To what can we attribute their fear of enchantments—their dread of the mysterious powers supposed by them to be possessed by witches, but to our innate consciousness that their exists a spiritual influence bearing rule over the universe, and whose favour it is proper to propitiate. From what other source could these “ superstitions” have sprung, than from an innate feeling of the insufficiency of human aid, than from a longing for something strongerfor something surer to rest upon than that help which man can afford to man? Yea, and so strong is this idea, that in the absence of a better guide, will man endue each tree, each hill, with some superintending deity to whom he can address his prayers and offer up his supplications! Hence the origin of idolatry. But we are wandering from the point. Soon shall we treat this subject more at large, in an article which even now lies mellowing within the book and tablet of the brain.”
But to say that the Zoolus have no religion, is absurd, on far other grounds than those we have above adduced. Their customs plainly testify to the prevalence of the religious spirit among them.
Most evident it is, that they believe in the great doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and the existence of another and better world, in which the spirits of the departed “ booser" or enjoy themselves without fear of interruption.
Else why do they make it one of their first cares, when commencing a new undertaking ;-first to propitiate the “spirit of their fathers;" and why, in the case of any untoward occurrence do they uniformly attribute it to (the spirit's) mal-influence ?
If they are ill they lay their sickness to the charge of these said spirits, and immediately send for the inyanger or doctor, who kills a cow and makes a set speech, invoking the spirits to relieve the patient.
And yet, although these are common practices of the natives, they have, forsooth, as we are informed by Mr. Isaacs, a traveller, whose books are now before us, “no knowledge of a future state !" But this is not the best of it, for in the very same sentence