1823.] Journal of a Midshipman in the Mediterranean. tal; but as I have shewn the scarcity JOURNAL OF A MIDSHIPMAN. WE sailed from Naples Bay on the 11th of April. I did not go out on the mountain as I intended; for the last three or four days it blew so hard that no boat could leave the ship, and the mountain was covered with clouds, so as scarcely to be perceptible from the ship. We have been cruizing off and on Elba and adjacent islands. May 26. Fell in with the Admiral's ship, which made signal for us to follow, and we are now on our passage to Leghorn, making all haste, as the Admiral's ship has run us out of sight, and I do not doubt that she is at anchor by this time. After cruizing off the islands of Ponza, &c. for some time, we came to an anchor in Civita Vecchia harbour on the 28th of April. It is a small harbour, just water enough for our ship to lay in. We arrived here on the grand festival, which lasts three days; I believe it was a celebration of the saint of the city. The Governor sent to invite all the officers to his house, as there was to be a brilliant display of fire-works in front of it; the rooms were crowded with nobility from Rome; ices, &c. were handed round, and the crackers made a good report, and every body was pleased. After this we went to the Play, which was very bad; the house not so large as a barn, and of extremely bad form, it being as long as it was broad, and rectangular, and so narrow that a person from the opposite boxes might with a long stick tap you on the head. In all the Italian Theatres there is a small circular box in front of the stage, in which the prompter sits and reads each actor's part so loud as to be very unpleasant to the audience. The country about Civita Vecchia is extremely beautiful. About three miles up the country, going out by the GENT. MAG. September, 1823. 225 old Roman road, there are the remains of some antient warm baths, the spring of which is naturally warm; one only remains with water in it; and I bathed: it is a running stream, and is always clean. In one of the old baths we saw three large snakes, which rose up on making our appearance in these ruins; we of course attacked them, and made them retreat without much trouble; having watched them for a short time, we killed one as he was coming from his hiding-place. The ship was quite a rarity in this place, and was crowded so much, that sentries were placed on each gangway to prevent people from coming on board. There is not such a thing as a large ship belonging to them. The people were surprised, on coming on board, at the cleanliness, the order, and comfort of the ship. We sailed from Civita Vecchia, and anchored off St. Stephano, on the 16th; it is a small village in the Grand Duke of Tuscany's dominions, and very beautifully situated at the foot of high mountains, covered with verdure. Nothing particular is to be said of this place; from whence we sailed for Giglio, a small mountainous island, covered with foliage. The town is situated at the top of the highest mountain, and is fortified; it is governed by an old Irishman, who invited us to visit him, which we did. We had exceedingly hard work to reach the top of the mountain, but were amply rewarded for our trouble, as we spent a very pleasant evening. We are now (June 7) at Leghorn. I am much pleased with this place; it is a clean pleasant little town. There is on the mole a very beautiful monument of four gigantic statues, and an immense marble statue, representing the Grand Duke's son, who was put to death for breaking quarantine. The story is this: A pirate had been very annoying amongst the boats, &c. belonging to the Duke's dominions, and nobody would engage him: the Duke's son being a brave man, manned a boat and went out to meet this common disturber; and after a hard fight, overcame and brought some away prisoners, who of course were put in quarantine, it not being known from whence they came: he was so elated with the victory, that he jumped on shore to tell the news, and thus was put 226 Of the London Theatres, No. XIII. put to death by his father. The four statues represent four black men (a father and three sons) in chains at the foot of a pedestal, on which the statue of the Grand Duke stands. This is said to be the best piece of bronze in the world. I took a ride to the English burying ground; it is really worth seeing; weeping willows and cypresses are scattered about, and flowers growing. round each grave. In this place is the tomb of Smollett. We sail to night, June 7, for Elba. OF THE LONDON THEATRES. No. XIII. Portugal-Row Theatre-Sir William Davenant's Theatre-Duke of York's Theatre-Duke's old Theatre in Lincoln's Inn Fields-New Theatre in Little Lincoln's Inn Fields-Lincoln's Inn Fields Theatre (now Spode's Earthenware Warehouse). UCH are the appellations at various times given to this building; and much confusion has arisen, as well from the near neighbourhood of this Theatre to the one that stood by Verestreet, already described, as from the circumstance of both respectively being built in Tennis-courts *. This house stood close to, if not partly upon the division of the parishes of St. Giles in the Fields and St. Clement Danes. It fronted towards Little Lincoln's Inn Fields, a plot of ground whereon Carey-street has been since built, which then had a thoroughfare to Chancery lane near Bell-yard, through Jack-anapes-lane and Portugal-row, and formed a path-way from St. Clement's Fields, crossing Thickett's Field, to Chancery-lane. Sir William Davenant built this Theatre for the actors collected on the eve of the Restoration by himself and Rhodes the bookseller, and who performed for a short period at the Cockpit in Drury-lane, and also at the Whitefriars. While this Theatre was building, Davenant prepared and rehearsed both * Davenant, in the comedy of "The Playhouse to be let," written for the above Theatre, makes a Frenchman call his company a troop, which the tire-woman, misconceiving to apply to cavalry, says, "I thought he had ta'en our long Tennisaourt for a stable." [Sept. parts of the "Siege of Rhodes," and the comedy of "The Wits," at Apothecaries' Hall. Whether this was to avoid interrupting the respective performances at the Cockpit or the house at Whitefriars, or that neither house was large enough to admit a rehearsal of the new-invented scenery, is uncertain. In either the month of March or April, 1662, the house was opened with the first part of the " Siege of Rhodes," "having new scenes and decorations, being the first that e'er were introduced in Englandt." And it appears that D'Avenant engaged eight women to join his company, boarding four of them, as principal actresses, in his own house. In June 1665, the breaking out of the plague occasioned a general stop to all dramatic exhibitions. The ravages of that fatal distemper only seemed to decrease in the metropolis in November, and not wholly extinguished until February following, when the public began to cautiously mingle, but it was still considered necessary not to permit the Theatres to open to gather a promiscuous assemblage of persons. Before a licence could be obtained for again commencing performances, the awful Fire of London served to prolong the suspension, and this Theatre was not again opened, until the Christmas holidays of 1666. The production of new pieces, and the revival of several stock plays, including Hamlett, Macbeth, and other confirmed favourites by Shakspeare, with the aid of splendid dresses, and novelty of the scenery, attracted such an uncommon flow of public patronage, that Sir Wm. Davenant, whose superior taste, judgment, and knowledge, in the regulation of a Theatre, was conspicuous on all occasions, planned the erecting another house more commodious for the public, and also more convenient for a display of the improved scenery, and which was to be erected in Dorset Gardens. William Davenant died before the Sir + Downes' Roscius Anglicanus, 1708, p. 201. "Hamlet being performed by Mr. Betterton, Sir William (having seen Mr. Taylor of the Black Fryers Company act it, who being instructed by the author Mr. Shakspeare) taught Mr. Betterton in every artiele of it."-Roscius Ang. p. 21. new 1823.] Portugal-Row Theatre.-Ben Jonson's Grave. new house was finished, the company until November 1671. After that period, the old Duke's Theatre, as it was then called, was re-converted into a Tennis Court, and. probably occupied as such until 1694. In that year the overbearing system of management adopted by the patentees of Drury-lane Theatre, having occasioned a revolt of the principal performers, and the nobility supporting the latter, "a subscription (according to Cibber) was set on foot for building a new Theatre within the walls of the Tennis Court in Lincoln's Inn Fields §." And the same writer says, it was "but small, and poorly fitted up, within the walls of a Tennis Quarrée Court, which is of the lesser sort." This house was called "the new Theatre in Little Lincoln's Inn Fields," and was opened, under a licence granted by King William to Thomas Betterton and others, upon the last day of April, 1695, with Congreve's virgin play of "Love for Love." Two incidental prologues were provided, but neither assist our history ||. The epilogue refers to the asylum afforded to the performers from the Cockpit, and perhaps some other temporary difficulty, in the following lines: "Sure Providence at first design'd this place To be the player's refuge in distress; And another passage shews the reconversion of the premises to a Tennis Court: — our audience which did once resort To shining Theatres to see our sport, Now find us toss'd into a Tennis Court. These walls but t'other day were fill'd with noise, Of roaring gamesters and your Damme boys; Then bounding balls and racquets they encompass'd, And now they're fill'd with jests, and flights, and bombast!" EU. HOOD. (To be continued.) § Cibber's Life. One of them was intended to have been spoken by Mrs. Bracegirdle dressed in men's clothes. 227 Aug, 29. whom I was desirous of seeing, HE absence of a friend from home, afforded me a leisure hour this morning at Westminster, which I thought I could not better employ than in visiting the interior of the sublime Abbey Church, a venerable magnificent building, in which I have passed many an hour in contemplating the architecture of its lofty ailes, and in viewing the tombs which adorn, as well as those which disfigure, their design and beauty. I had scarcely entered the usual door of admittance in Poets' Corner, when I was met by an old and particular friend, a member of the Church, with whom I had not long paced the external ailes of the choir, when the hurried step of workmen, and the unusual activity of the Vergers, announced the speedy commencement of some ceremonious spectacle, which we soon ascertained to be the Funeral of Lady Wilson, whose grave was opened in the North aile of the nave opposite the third arch from the West end. But what followed this piece of information engaged my interest, and forms the subject of this Letter. It was no less than a brief account of the discovery of the grave of Ben Jonson, against whose narrow cell the foot of the coffin of the above lady now rests, on its Western side. This description was followed by a promise of a sight of the skeleton; and no sooner was the funeral dirge ended, and the Church cleared of the procession, than I passed with rapid step to the spot where have lain in quiet repose from the period of their deposit, namely, 1637, to the present day, the mortal remains of this distinguished Bard. The spot of his interment is marked by a small stone, inscribed with the following laconic and well-known inscription: "O rare Ben Jonson!" which is repeated on his tomb in the Poet's Corner. The eccentricity of the Bard is acknowledged, and perhaps no one particular instance is better known than the agreement he is said to have made with the reigning Dean of Westminster, about the quantity of ground his body was to occupy within the Abbey after his decease. If this anecdote has gained credit, that which stated him to have been buried 228 Ben Jonson's Grave.-Saxon Chronicle. in an upright posture has been almost universally rejected as ridiculous and improbable; in proof of which I need only refer your readers to the Histories of Westminster Abbey by Malcolm and Brayley: the former says, the story of Jonson having been buried in a piece of ground eighteen inches square, arose from the size of the stone, and "from no other reason." The latter follows the same opinion, and calls it "an absurd tradition." But extraordinary and absurd as it may appear, it is nevertheless true that Ben Jonson's body occupied a space not more capacious than eighteen inches. This doubt set at rest for ever, I proceed to a description of what I saw of his remains. I have already mentioned that the foot of the new grave joined the depository of Ben Jonson, and broke into, if it did not entirely destroy, the side of it. The skeleton then appeared, and was in tolerable preservation; the skull was loose, and on the removal of the earth, the tibia or large bone of both of the lower legs, several ribs, and one piece of the spine, separated from their joints. Every care was taken to prevent the workmen from breaking the skeleton more than was possibly avoidable, or of scattering the fragments which their spades accidentally removed; and so carefully were the injunctions obeyed, although the diggers were ignorant that they had exposed the crumbling remains of an eminent man, that most of the ribs, still clinging to the spine, protruded into the new grave, and were not broken off. It is remarkable_that the back is turned towards the East, and more remarkable still that the corpse was buried with his head downwards, the feet being only a few inches below the pavement of the Church. Ben Jonson was of small stature, and but for a rude interruption, I should have ascertained the exact depth of the cell which the body occupied, and some other particulars which it would have been curious and interesting to have preserved. There were a few small fragments of wood, to show that the body had been enclosed in a coffin or box, but the proof that it was constructed of no very substantial materials, and that it has long been completely destroyed, appears in the condition of the skeleton, the body [Sept. of which was filled with a solid mass of earth, and the cavity where the head had reposed remained a perfect mould of its form. Under the strongest feelings of reverence, and unawed by the curse denounced by Shakspeare, against the violators of his tomb in Stratford Church, I examined the skull and other detached bones, which were firm and perfect, and of the usual dark brown colour. When first exposed, the skull was not entirely deprived of hair, but repeated disinterments in the space of a few hours, or, what is equally probable, the fingers of the curious, had not left a single thread of this natural covering for me to see. All the bones were again buried with the most scrupulous care, the new grave was speedily closed up, and the remains of the learned Dramatist sheltered, perhaps for ever, from further disturbance, or the gaze of the curious. Yours, &c. J.C.B. I Mr. URBAN, Aug. 12. RELY on our long acquaintance, and your known impartiality, for the insertion of the following remarks on the Review, as it is called, of the new edition of the Saxon Chronicle, p. 45. My task is somewhat arduous, considering the variety of topics in which the Reviewer has indulged; but I shall endeavour to confine myself to the two points more immediately at issue, the defence of the Chronicle, and of myself. The Reviewer commences the article by admitting, that "the Saxon Chronicle is justly considered to be our only authentic code of Fasti," &c. These "Fasti," according to the Reviewer, are the bulletins of public events sent by Government to various great monasteries, "in some instances fortunately preserved." In short, the Chronicle is extolled by the Reviewer as "the record of the day-the venerable record-to which the historian refers for authenticity." It is a "dictionary of reference, as to the veracity of events," &c.; nay, it is "the Bible of early English history!"-"In speaking thus of the venerable record," observes the Reviewer, "we may be supposed not to have a proper literary and archæological feeling; but Mr. Ingram has forced it (i.e. the feeling) upon us.' Perhaps the negative here is an error دو of 1823.] Saxon Chronicle.-Roman Candelabrum. of the press for the writer appears a warm convert to the Saxon Archæology. But how, Mr. Urban, are we to account for the extraordinary anticlimax into which he is afterwards 66 229 says the Reviewer, "turns only upon points of manners." That difference, I hope, will always remain, unless the Reviewer considerably improves his own. On this subject I say little, lest betrayed? This "venerable record," I should say too much. Of Englishthis authentic code of Fasti,"-of men the Reviewer elegantly observes, "Government bulletins,"-by a me- "All of the breed express themselves tamorphosis as wonderful and surpris- strongly and concisely;" and so will ing as any produced by Harlequin on the Editor of the Saxon Chronicle, the Stage, becomes at once "a mile- when the time arrives. The elegance stone-an almanack-a parish-register and accuracy of the Reviewer's "lite-a nest of weights, without either ral verbal translation,"-his new " "bypounds, half-pounds, or ounces,-a pothesis,"-"the there earth," - the calendar, though a Bible,-contain-horrible at first struggle," &c. &c. ing uncommon trash-legendary and I have not time, nor you space, Mr. silly trash!" Urban, to discuss, with a critic, who, according to his own account, "has construed and parsed every word in [Bishop] Gibson's Saxon Chronicle." I add the prefix with pleasure; not plain Gibson, as the Reviewer (see page 47). J. INGRAM. When the Reviewer condemned in the Chronicle as trash the derivation of the Britons from Armenia, he was not aware, perhaps, that Sir William Jones has deliberately stated the same .fact. The legendary tale respecting the head of John the Baptist, as the Reviewer should in common justice have told his readers, is found only in one manuscript, and is therefore imprisoned within brackets in the new Height 5 inches and 1-8th; diameter of the edition; the utmost liberty I considered myself justified in taking. What -would be thought, in these days, of an editor, who undertook to omit as trash -whatever happened not to suit his own taste and opinions? Yet this is the method of publishing nine original ma-nuscripts, which the Reviewer gravely recommends to "Government!"* The "compression," of which the Reviewer accuses me, I beg leave to state, is not, as he concludes, "alteration of the text, or omission," as far as - relates to the Saxon materials. The biography of Lanfranc (I beg pardonArchbishop Lanfranc) is excluded, not because it was considered trash, but because it was written by some Nor-man scribe in barbarous Latin. "Our difference with Mr. Ingram," ROMAN CANDELABRUM FOUND AT base about 2 inches. Sept. 4. Mr. URBAN, This plan of the Reviewer is totally a hasty sketch of an elegant Can impracticable, to its fullest extent; as of the "nine original manuscripts," two are not known to exist at present. No. IV. in the Synopsis is concluded to have been destroyed in the fire of 1731; and No. VII. is only known from the collations of Josselyn. These facts the Reviewer ought to have known. The publication of the Benet MS. as the foundation of all, the Editor of the Saxon Chronicle has already recommended to the gentleman so properly selected to carry the design of Government into effect. delabrum of Roman workmanship in A more |