SPORTS AND PASTIMES.

HUNTING.

Why is it inferred that hunting was practised by the ancient Britons?

Because Dionysius (who lived 50 B. C.) says, that the inhabitants of the northern part of this island tilled no ground, but lived in great part upon the food they procured by hunting. Strabo (nearly contemporary) also says, that the dogs bred in Britain were highly esteemed upon the continent, on account of their excellent qualities for hunting.

Cæsar tells us, that venison constituted a great portion of their food; and as they had in their possession such dogs as were naturally prone to the chase, there can be little doubt that they would exercise them for procuring their favourite diet; besides, they kept large herds of cattle and flocks of sheep, both of which required protection from the wolves and other ferocious animals that infested the woods and coverts, and must frequently have rendered hunting an act of absolute necessity.-Strutt.

Absenteeism has, of course, contributed much to the decay of field sports in England. This occasioned a celebrated politician to say, "he would willingly bring in one bill to make poaching felony; another to encourage the breed of foxes; and a third to revive the decayed amusements of cock-fighting and bull-baiting B 2

-that he would make, in short, any sacrifice to the humours and prejudices of the country gentlemen, in their most extravagant form, providing only that he could prevail upon them to dwell in their own houses, be patrons of their own tenantry, and the fathers of their own children.”—Quarterly Review, No. 74.

Why is hunting considered more ancient than hawking? Because, in the earliest ages of the world, hunting was a necessary labour of self-defence, or the first law of nature, rather than a pastime; while hawking could never have been adopted from necessity, or in selfprotection.

Strutt tells us, that the earliest among the treatises on hunting that he has met with, is dated early in the fourteenth century; and that hawking most commonly forms a part of these treatises; and, though this practice can only be considered as a modern invention comparatively with hunting, yet it has obtained the precedence.

Upon the antiquity of hunting there is a coincidence in the sacred scriptures and the fabulous traditions of the poets. Thus, we read in the former, that Nimrod was "a mighty hunter before the Lord." Hunting, proscribed in the book of Moses, is apotheosized in mythology, under the tutelage of Diana.

Why was hunting originally considered a royal and noble sport?

Because, as early as the ninth century, it formed an essential part of the education of a young nobleman. Alfred the Great was an expert and successful hunter before he was twelve years of age. Among the tributes imposed by Athelstan, upon a victory over Constantine, King of Wales, were, "hawks and sharpscented dogs, fit for hunting of wild beasts." Edward the Confessor "took the greatest delight to follow a pack of swift hounds in pursuit of game, and to cheer them with his voice."-Malmesbury. Harold, his

successor, rarely travelled without his hawk and hounds. William the Norman, and his immediate successors, restricted hunting to themselves and their favourites. King John was particularly attached to field sports, and even treated the animals worse than his subjects. In the reign of Edward II, hunting was reduced to a perfect science, and rules established for its practice; these were afterwards extended by the master of the game belonging to Henry IV, and drawn up for the use of his son, Henry Prince of Wales, in two tracts, which are extant. Edward III, according to Froissart, while at war with France, and resident there, had with him sixty couple of stag-hounds, and as many hare-hounds, and every day hunted or hawked. Gaston, Earl of Foix, a foreign nobleman, contemporary with Edward, also kept 600 dogs in his castle for hunting. James I. preferred hunting to hawking or shooting; so that it was said of him, "he divided his time betwixt his standish, his bottle, and his hunting; the last had his fair weather, the two former his dull and cloudy,"

The bishops and abbots of the middle ages hunted with great state, and some of them were skilful sportsmen. Walter, Bishop of Rochester, in the 13th century, hunted at the age of fourscore, to the total neglect of his episcopal duties; and in the succeeding century, an abbot of Leicester surpassed all the sportsmen of his time in hare-hunting; and these dignitaries even travelled from place to place upon affairs of business, with both hawks and hounds in their train.

In former times the ladies often joined hunting parties, and had parties among themselves. Queen Elizabeth was extremely fond of the chase, and hunted at the age of 77; and an author of the seventeenth century speaks of certain fair huntresses of Bury, in Suffolk, who equipped themselves for the chase entirely as men; a custom, we may add, " more honoured

in the breach than the observance." Still, they uniformly wore habits, as in the present day.

Ladies' hunting dresses, of the fifteenth century, as figured in Strutt's Sports, &c. differ but little from the modern riding habit.

According to the ancient books of the practice of sportsmen, the seasons for hunting were as follows:The time of grace begins at Midsummer, and lasteth to Holyrood day (14th September). The fox may be hunted from the Nativity to the Annunciation of our Lady (25th March); the roe-buck from Easter to Michaelmas; the roe from Michaelmas to Candlemas (Feb. 2.); the hare from Michaelmas to Midsummer. The wolf, as well as the fox and the bear, from the Nativity to the Purification of our Lady, (Feb. 2.)

Why are greyhounds still petted by ladies?

Because in former times they were considered as valuable presents, especially among the ladies, with whom they appear to have been peculiar favourites. In an ancient metrical romance (Sir Eglamore), a princess tells the knight, that if he was inclined to hunt, she would, as an especial mark of her favour, give him an excellent greyhound, so swift that no deer could escape from his pursuit.-Strutt.

Why were certain forests called royal chases?

Because the privileges of hunting there were confined to the king and his favourites; and, to render these receptacles for the beasts of the chase more capacious, or to make new ones, whole villages werɛ depopulated, and places of divine worship overthrown; not the least regard being paid to the miseries of the suffering inhabitants, or the cause of religion.—Strutt.

Blount tells us that there formerly existed a very cruel law, which subjected all the dogs that were found in the royal chases and forests, excepting such as belonged to privileged persons to be maimed, by

having the left claw cut from their feet, unless they were redeemed by a fine. This law probably originated with the Normans, and certainly was in force in the reign of Henry I.

Why were lands first imparked?

Because their owners might still more effectually preserve deer and other animals for hunting. Stowe tells us, that the park at Woodstock, in Oxfordshire, seven miles in circumference, and walled round with stone by Henry II. was the first made in England. The royal example was first followed by Henry Earl of Warwick, who made a park at Wedgenoke, near Warwick; after which, the practice of park-making became general among persons of opulence.

A recent French newspaper gave notice of an association for the purpose of enabling persons of all ranks to enjoy the pleasure of the chase. A park of great extent is to be taken on lease near Paris; its extent is about 6000 acres, partly arable, and partly forest ground. The plan is, to open it to subscribers during six months, viz. from September 1 to March 1, an ample stock of game being secured in preserves.

Why were parks and inclosures usually attached to priories?

Because they were receptacles of game for the clergy of rank, who at all times had the privilege of hunting in their own possessions. At the time of the Reformation, the see of Norwich only was in the possession of no less than thirteen parks, well stocked with deer and other animals for the chase.-Spelman.

The eagerness of the clergy for hunting is described as irrepressible. Prohibitions of councils produced little effect. In some instances a particular monastery obtained a dispensation. Thus, that of St. Denis, in 774, represented to Charlemagne that the flesh of hunted animals was salutary for sick monks, and that their skins would serve to bind books in the library.