



Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive)





[Illustration: The Historical Department.]

       *       *       *       *       *

                                  THE
                            MUSEUM GAZETTE.

                 NO. 2.      JUNE, 1906.      VOL. 1.

       *       *       *       *       *

OUR HISTORY ROOM. (_See Frontispiece._)

A department of our Museum to which, as regards its educational
usefulness, we attach very great importance, is that which attempts the
illustration of Human History. It is displayed in a separate division
of the main building, and is arranged, as far as possible, on “the
space-for-time method.” This method, which, following the pattern of
an ordinary diary, allots to every period of time the same amount of
space, is, of course, possible only where the time-periods and dates
are fairly well established. It is not well adapted, excepting as
a sort of open and, to some extent speculative, framework for the
illustration of prehistoric times. A courageous example of such use of
it we ventured to offer in our last number in reference to prehistoric
man in Britain. It was not history in any other sense than that the
periods of time were real; the events assigned to them were largely
conjectural. In the Museum itself we do not attempt to deal with very
remote periods in this manner. Our space-for-time arrangement begins
only with 2000 B.C. It might now, perhaps, fairly begin with 4000 B.C.,
but, unfortunately, we have not space enough. In this Schedule, which
occupies the whole of one side of a long room (70 feet), a measured
space on the wall, of nearly two feet, is allotted to each century.
The centuries are marked out by strong black lines, drawn vertically
from roof to the table-shelf below. This table-shelf is 18 inches wide,
and runs the whole length of the room. It is upon it that the busts
shown in our frontispiece are standing. Each bust is supposed to be in
its appropriate century, and with it are placed any other illustrative
objects belonging to the period--medals, coins, small architectural
models (when we have them), and the like. For instance, a model of
Stonehenge stands in the century in which it seems probable that that
most remarkable structure was built, and portions of Roman pavement
and other relics mark the period of the Italian occupation of Britain.
Upon the wall itself are placed engravings, photographs, and the like,
illustrative of the century, and representing either human personality
or some results of human effort. In order to aid the memory each
century is designated by the name of some prominent person of the time,
to whom other associations may conveniently cling. These names, painted
in bold characters, head the columns which represent the centuries.
Beneath these prominent names we have (in the case of a considerable
number of the most recent centuries) put up schedules of the principal
events, and lists of some of the principal persons. The appended
schedule is one of them and will illustrate what is meant:--

                            FOURTEENTH A.D.

                               CHAUCER.

                    The Three Edwards.
                    Bannockburn.
                    Famine in England.
                    The Hundred Years’ War begins.
                    Battle of Crecy.
                    The Black Death (Plague).
                    Battle of Poictiers.
                    Bolingbroke dethrones Richard II.
                    Froissart’s Chronicle.

    Wallace and Bruce. Dante. John of Gaunt. Rienzi. Van Artevelde.
          Wickliffe. Huss. Boccaccio. Petrarch. William Tell.

It will, if what we have tried to describe has conveyed its intended
meaning, be seen that an observer passing slowly down the length of
the room, may appreciate at a glance the relative position of the
principal events in the world’s history. He can hardly avoid noticing,
with fair accuracy, the distance between Homer and Socrates, between
Socrates and Paul, and between the Christian epoch and the times of
Milton and Shakespeare. He will be impressed at once, as, possibly,
he never was before, with a perception of the brief and very recent
portion of time which contains the whole of the annals of our own
nation. If, in addition to thus obtaining a sort of bird’s-eye view
of the progress of the world, it is desired to go into detail and
devote time to the enquiry, a certain amount of help will be found
to have been provided on the table-shelf. Detailed schedules taken
from the “The Centuries” (see advertisement) have been mounted on
board conveniently for hand use, and are placed on the table-shelf at
the foot of each century. A few books of reference in biography and
history, and numerous maps, have also been suitably placed, and there
are chairs.

The “Historical Schedule” described takes up, as we have said, the
whole of one side of the long room. The other side of it, as well
as much of the floor-space, is occupied by somewhat miscellaneous
illustrations of prehistoric times, and of nations and races which
have not as yet attained to history. The anthropoids, anthropology
and ethnology in general here find illustration, in large part, but
not wholly, by pictorial aid. We have also a few interesting objects
suitable, as illustrating social progress, for what is now known as a
Folk-Museum.

It is believed that this department of the Museum offers special
facilities to teachers, who bring their classes into it and give
explanations on the spot, and that by enabling the pupil to obtain a
wide purview of historical times, it may do somewhat to obviate the
inevitably cramping influence of the too detailed study of single
epochs.

       *       *       *       *       *

FAMOUS WOMEN AT THE NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY.

We have climbed to the third landing. Let us turn into the left-hand
gallery and we shall come to one of the most interesting groups in the
whole Museum.

It is that which contains portraits of English women whose names
have become famous in literature. Here we have Mrs. Browning, Sarah
Austin, Mrs. Carter, Miss Strickland, George Eliot, Mary Somerville,
and many others. The collection is not nearly so complete as could
be wished--for Jane Austen, Anne and Jane Taylor, Hannah More, the
Brontës, and many others are wanting--still, it is very good. But
few males are admitted. Robert Browning is very properly allowed
to accompany his wife, and the fact, we presume, that his wife was
with him, has also gained access for Thomas Hood. A portrait of Lady
Hamilton strikes us as a little out of place, but the Museum has as
yet no department for female charm, and as this is by Romney it may
have been difficult to refuse it. With the exception of it and one of
Elizabeth Fry, all the others have more or less direct claim to be
associated with literature or science. To Mrs. Opie, Mrs. Browning
and Miss Strickland no one will hesitate to accord the praise of good
looks, and many others exhibit in a remarkable degree the bright-eyed
intelligence which we expect from authoresses. Several show a splendid
breadth of forehead, the accompaniment, no doubt, of a brachycephalic
or broad head. Mrs. Carter, Miss Mitford (of “Our village”), Mrs.
Trimmer, Miss Strickland and George Eliot are the best, but not the
only instances of this. It might be hardly good manners to describe
too exactly the various features of feminine faces, and the fact that
but few show the profile makes it difficult to judge accurately as to
size and shape of nose and chin. Few are, in any sense, disappointing.
That of Mrs. Carlisle might have been kept back without loss, since,
if it is in the least true to life, it gives a too painful sense
of justification to the rumours of married unhappiness, which were
probably to a large extent unfounded. The portrait of Sarah Austin,
when old and ill, might also perhaps be spared, since there is a very
pleasing one of her in earlier life. At any rate, the two ought to be
placed together. Declining, as we do, in reference to almost the whole,
the task of detailed analysis of features, we cannot, in the interests
of physiognomical research, exempt those behind which lay the most
profound intellect ever possessed by a woman. Mrs. Carter in classical
and literary attainments, and Mary Somerville in the domain of science,
must be accorded foremost places. Mrs. Browning is second, perhaps, to
none in depth of human sympathy and beauty of poetic expression; but
if we estimate character by profundity of insight, we shall probably
accord to George Eliot amongst women much the same position as that
which Shakespeare holds amongst men. We do not for a moment compare her
with Shakespeare.

Of George Eliot the Museum possesses three portraits. Most fortunately,
it has also one of her father. It would add enormously to the value
of portraits as a means to the illustration of character, if we might
always have associated with that of a distinguished individual those
of his parents, and even of his brothers and sisters. The portrait of
Robert Evans (George Eliot’s father) is a very pleasing one--a grave,
serious face, with a large Roman nose, well-formed lips and chin, and
a really magnificent forehead. The nose probably gives a clue to his
family descent.

Of those of the authoress herself, the first, taken when she was 23,
by a lady friend (Mrs. Bray), is a poor work of art, and exhibits a
commonplace face, surmounted by a very large rounded forehead. It is
impossible to judge of the nose. A second is of some years older, and
is much better executed. The forehead is still there, and the nose is
shown of good size and shapely, and the lips and chin are well formed.
The face is a shorter one than in the next, and the hair is of a much
lighter tint. The face is pleasing and attractive, not much unlike, if
we remember rightly, one which represented Jenny Lind.

Lastly, we come to the often copied and well-known portrait at age 46,
by Sir F. Burton. In this the nose and face are long, almost suggesting
an approach to what is called a horse face. The chin is good, but as
the fine forehead is much concealed by folds of hair, the balance of
features is not perfect, and the whole result not pleasing. All the
three show the eyes light grey or blue. There can be no doubt that
George Eliot had a large forehead and a fairly large nose and chin, but
further than this these somewhat disaccording portraits do not take us.
We must fall back on her father’s Roman nose and really beautifully
balanced features.

Mary Somerville’s face is a very intellectual one, but a trifle cold as
regards mouth and chin