The Cornhill Magazine (Vol. I, No. 5, May 1860)Various
General
The Cornhill Magazine (Vol. I, No. 5, May 1860)
Various
England -- Periodicals; English literature -- Periodicals; Short stories, English -- Periodicals
Is this so? Titles and badges of honour are vanity; and in the American
Revolution you have his Excellency General Washington sending back, and
with proper spirit sending back, a letter in which he is not addressed
as Excellency and General. Titles are abolished; and the American
Republic swarms with men claiming and bearing them. You have the French
soldier cheered and happy in his dying agony, and kissing with frantic
joy the chief’s hand who lays the little cross on the bleeding bosom. At
home you have the dukes and earls jobbing and intriguing for the Garter;
the military knights grumbling at the civil knights of the Bath; the
little ribbon eager for the collar; the soldiers and seamen from India
and the Crimea marching in procession before the queen, and receiving
from her hands the cross bearing her royal name. And, remember, there
are not only the cross wearers, but all the fathers and friends; all the
women who have prayed for their absent heroes; Harry’s wife, and Tom’s
mother, and Jack’s daughter, and Frank’s sweetheart, each of whom wears
in her heart of hearts afterwards the badge which son, father, lover has
won by his merit; each of whom is made happy and proud, and is bound to
the country by that little bit of ribbon.
I have heard, in a lecture about George the Third, that, at his
accession, the king had a mind to establish an Order for literary men. It
was to have been called the Order of Minerva—I suppose with an Owl for
a badge. The knights were to have worn a star of sixteen points, and a
yellow ribbon; and good old Samuel Johnson was talked of as President,
or Grand Cross, or Grand Owl, of the society. Now about such an order
as this there certainly may be doubts. Consider the claimants, the
difficulty of settling their claims, the rows and squabbles amongst the
candidates, and the subsequent decision of posterity! Dr. Beattie would
have ranked as first poet, and twenty years after the sublime Mr. Hayley
would, no doubt, have claimed the Grand Cross. Mr. Gibbon would not have
been eligible on account of his dangerous freethinking opinions; and her
sex, as well as her republican sentiments, might have interfered with the
knighthood of the immortal Mrs. Catharine Macaulay. How Goldsmith would
have paraded the ribbon at Madame Cornelys’s, or the Academy dinner! How
Peter Pindar would have railed at it! Fifty years later, the noble Scott
would have worn the Grand Cross and deserved it; but Gifford would have
had it; and Byron, and Shelley, and Hazlitt, and Hunt would have been
without it; and had Keats been proposed as officer, how the Tory prints
would have yelled with rage and scorn! Had the star of Minerva lasted to
our present time——but I pause, not because the idea is dazzling, but too
awful. Fancy the claimants, and the row about their precedence! Which
philosopher shall have the grand cordon?—which the collar?—which the
little scrap no bigger than a buttercup? Of the historians—A, say,—and
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account