VIIIOF LOVE AND MARRIAGE

“A compassionate turquoise that doth tellBy looking pale the wearer is not well.”

As coral is again becoming quite fashionable, we recall that it was once considered a sure protection against the Evil Eye, and is so still in Italy, where the little coral charm shaped like the hand, with the thumb and middle finger closed (a charm against witchcraft), comes from. It is also a more or less general belief that coral or red beads, worn round the neck, prevent nose-bleeding, on the principle, we suppose, that like cures like.

The carnelian, shaped in the form of a heart, was formerly much worn as an amulet.

The amethyst, as its Greek name implies, isconsidered an antidote to intoxication. It has now a formidable rival in the gold-cure. There is an anecdote of the first Napoleon which affirms that he took a valuable amethyst from the crown in the coffin of Charlemagne. The stolen stone later came into the possession of Napoleon III., who wore it as a seal on his watch-guard. In his will he bequeathed the stone to his son as a talisman. On making her escape from Paris, in 1870, the empress took the historical stone with her.

The carbuncle was formerly believed to guard the wearer against the danger of breathing infectious air. It was also said to have the property of shining in the dark, like a burning coal, thus investing it, in the minds of the credulous, with supernatural power. This, be it said, was an Old-World superstition, which is referred to in some verses written by John Chalkhill (1649), describing a witch’scave:—

“Through which the carbuncle and diamond shineNot set by art, but there by Nature sownAt the world’s birth so star-like bright they shone.”

But strangely enough, our forefathers found a similar belief existing among the Indians of New England, and what is more, these ignorant savages were able to convince the more civilized Englishmen of the truth of it.

According to these Indians, on the loftiest mountain peak, suspended from a crag overhanging a dismal lake, there was an enormous carbuncle, which many declared they had seen blazing in the night like a live coal; while by day it emitted blinding rays of light, dazzling to look upon. No mortal could hope to lay hands upon this gem, which was under the special guardianship of the genius of the mountain.

So ran the legend. It is believed to have inspired the earliest recorded journeys to the great White Mountains of New Hampshire, by adventurous whites. A reference to Sullivan’s “History of Maine” shows that the story found full credence among certain of the ignorant settlers even in his day; and Hawthorne’s grewsome tale of “The Great Carbuncle” isfounded upon this weird legend, so vividly recalling those of the Harz and the Caucasus.

It is noticeable that, in the matter of superstitions concerning gems, it is not the common people, but the wealthy who alone are able to gratify their desires. Everybody has heard of the Rothschild pearls. The Princess Louise of Lorne wears a ring of jet, as a preserver of health. M. Zola carries a bit of coral as a talisman against all sorts of perils by land or water; all of which goes to show that neither wealth nor station is exempt from those secret influences which so readily affect the poor and lowly.

“Now for good lucke, cast an old shoe after me.”—Heywood.

Thefolk-lore of marriage is probably the most interesting feature of the general subject, to the tender sex, at least, with whom indeed none other, in the nature of things, could begin to hold so important a place. In consequence, all favorable or unfavorable omens are carefully treasured up in the memory, quite as much pains being taken to guard against evil prognostics as to propitiate good fortune.

Quite naturally, the young unmarried woman is possessed of a burning desire to find out who her future husband is to be, what he is like, whether he is rich or poor, short or tall, and if they twain are to be happy in the married state or not. To this end the oracle is dulyconsulted, either openly or secretly, after the best approved methods.

One of the best known modes of divination is this: If, fortunately, you find the pretty little lady-bird bug on your clothes, throw it up in the air, repeating at the same time theinvocation:—

“Fly away east and fly away west,Show me where lives the one I love best.”

All charms of this nature are supposed to possess peculiar power if tried on St. Valentine’s day, Christmas Eve, or Hallowe’en. Curious it is that on a day dedicated to All the Saints in the Calendar, evil spirits, fairies, and the like are supposed to be holding a sort of magic revel unchecked, or that they should be thought to be better disposed to gratify the desires of inquisitive mortals on this day than on another. At any rate, calendar or no calendar, St. Matrimony is the patron saint of Hallowe’en.

Among the many methods of divination employed, a favorite one was to drop meltedlead into a bowl of water, though any other sort of vessel would do as well, and whatever form the lead might take would signify the occupation of your future husband. Or to go out of doors in the dark, with a ball of yarn, and unwind it until some one should begin winding it at the unwound end. At this trial, the expected often happened, as the enamored swain would seldom fail to be on the watch for his sweetheart to appear. So also the white of an egg dropped in water, and set in the sun, was supposed to take on the form of some object, such as a ship under full sail, indicating that your husband would be a sailor.

Burning the nuts is perhaps the most popular mode of trying conclusions with fate, as it certainly is the most mirth-provoking. On this interesting occasion, lads and lassies arrange themselves in a circle before a blazing wood fire, on the hearth. Nuts are produced. Each person, after naming his or her nut, puts it upon the glowing coals, with the unspokeninvocation:—

“If he loves me, pop and fly,If he hates me, live and die.”

The poet Gay turns this somewhat differently, but it is not our affair to reconcile conflicting presages. Hesings:—

“Two hazel nuts I threw into the flame,And to each nut I gave a sweetheart’s name,This with the loudest bounce me sore amazed,That in a flame of brightest color blazed:As blazed the nut so may the passions grow,For ‘twas thy nut that did so brightly glow.”

A still different rendering is given by Burns. According to him each questioner of the charm names two nuts, one for himself, one for his sweetheart, presumably the mode practised in Scotland in histime:—

“Jean slips in twa wi’ tentie e’e;Wha ’twas, she wadna tell;But this is Jock, an’ this is me,She says in to hersel’:He blaz’d o’er her, an’ she owre him,As they wad never mair part;’Till, fuff! he started up the lum,An’ Jean had e’en a sair heartTo see’t that night.”

Popping corn sometimes takes the place of burning the nuts. The spoken invocation is then “Pit, put, turn inside out!”

There are also several methods of performing this act of divination with apples. The one most practised in New England is this: First pare an apple. If you succeed in removing the peel all in one piece, throw it over your head, and should the charm work well, the peel will so fall as to form the first letter of your future husband’s name, or as Gay poetically putsit:—

“I pare this pippin round and round again,My shepherd’s name to nourish on the plain:I fling th’ unbroken paring o’er my head,Upon the grass a perfect L is read.”

When sleeping in a strange bed for the first time, name the four posts for some of your male friends. The post that you first look at, upon waking in the morning, bears the name of the one whom you will marry. Care is usually taken to fall asleep on the right side of the bed.

By walking down the cellar stairs backward, holding a mirror over your head as you go, theface of the person whom you will marry will presently appear in the mirror.

The oracle of the daisy flower, so effectively made use of in Goethe’s “Faust,” is of great antiquity, and is perhaps more often consulted by blushing maidens than any other. When plucking away the snowy petals, the fair questioner of fate should murmur low to herself the cabalisticformula:—

“‘He loves me, loves me not,’ she said,Bending low her dainty headO’er the daisy’s mystic spell.‘He loves me, loves me not, he loves,’She murmurs ’mid the golden grovesOf the corn-fields on the fell.”

As the last leaf falls, so goes the prophecy.

If you put a four-leaved clover in your shoe before going out for a walk, you will presently meet the one you are to marry. The same charm is used to bring back an absent or wayward lover. Consequently there is much looking for this bashful little plant at all of our matrimonial resorts. The rhymed version runs in thiswise:—

“A clover, a clover of two,Put it in your right shoe;The first young man you meet,In field, street, or lane,You’ll get him, or one of his name.”

In some localities a bean-pod or a pea-pod put over the door acts as a charm to bring the favored of fortune to lift the latch and walk in. This is old. The poet Gay has it in rhymethus:—

“As peascods once I pluck’d, I chanc’d to seeOne that was closely filled with three times three;Which when I cropp’d, I safely home convey’d,And o’er the door the spell in secret laid:—The latch moved up, when who should first come in,But in his proper person—Lubberkin!”

Another mode of divination runs in this way: On going to bed the girl eats two spoonfuls of salt. The salt causes her to dream that she is dying of thirst; and whoever the young man may be that brings her a cup of water, in her dream, is the one she willmarry.16

If after seeing a white horse you count a hundred, the first gentleman you meet will be your future husband.

So far as appearances go, at least, the custom of brewing love-philters or love-potions, to forestall or force the natural inclinations, has completely died out. From this source the astrologers, magicians, and fortune-tellers of former times reaped a rich harvest. Many instances of the use of this old custom occur in literature. Josselyn naïvely relates the only one we can call to mind, coming near home to us. He says: “I once took notice of a wanton woman’s compounding the solid roots of this plant (Satyrion) with wine, for an amorous cup, which wrought the desired effect.”

Would that the hideous and barbarous custom of administering poisons to gratify the cravings of hatred or the pangs of jealousyhad become equally obsolete! But alas! the “green-eyed monster” is “with us yet.”

It is a fact, well known to students of folk-lore, that those customs or usages relating to marriage are not only among the oldest, but have become too firmly intrenched in the popular mind to be easily dislodged. Thus, the ceremony of Throwing the Shoe continues to hold an honored place among marriage customs. In another place, it has been referred to as sometimes employed in the common concerns of life. But in the case of marriage, a somewhat deeper significance is attached to it. It is but fair to say, however, that authorities differ widely as to its origin, some referring it to the testimony of the Scriptures (Deut. xxv.), where the loosing of a shoe from a man’s foot by the woman he has refused to marry, is made an act of solemn renunciation in the presence of the elders. Thereafter, the obdurate one was to be held up to the public scorn, and his house pointed at as “the house of him that hath his shoe loosed.” So again we read inRuth of a man who plucked off his shoe, and gave it to his kinsman, as an evidence to the act of renunciation, touching the redeeming of land, and this, we are there told, was then the manner in Israel. Hence, it has been very plausibly suggested, especially by Mr. Thrupp, in “Notes and Queries,” that throwing an old shoe after a bride was at first a symbol of renunciation of authority over her, by her father or guardian. However that may be, it is certain that no marriage ceremony is considered complete to-day without it, although there is danger of its being brought into ridicule, and so into disrepute, by such nonsensical acts as tying on old shoes to the bride’s trunks, or to some part of her carriage, as I have seen done here in New England, the original design of the custom being lost sight of in the too evident purpose to make the wedded pair as conspicuous as possible, and their start on life’s journey an occasion for the outbreak of ill-timed buffoonery.

In “Primitive Marriage” Mr. McLennanthinks that throwing the shoe may be a relic of the ancient custom, still kept up among certain Hindu tribes, where the bride, either in fact or in appearance only, is forcibly carried off by the groom and his friends, who are, in turn, themselves hotly pursued and in good earnest pelted with all manner of missiles, stones included, by the bride’s kinsfolk and tribesmen. This sham assault usually ends in the pursuers giving up the chase,—as, indeed, was intended beforehand,—and is probably a survival of the earliest of marriage customs, namely, that of stealing the bride, as recorded in ancient history. But this explanation is chiefly interesting as fixing thestatusof woman in those primitive days, when she was more like the slave of man than his equal. That relation is now so far reversed, however, that it is now the man who has become the humble suitor and declared servitor of womankind. So, at least, he insists. Now and then, though quite rarely, the old barbaric custom is recalled by the forcible abduction of someunwilling victim by her rejected lover; but only in a few instances, so far as we know, has a bride been kidnapped and held to ransom, in this country, before being restored to her friends. The American Indians are known to have practised this custom of stealing the bride, quite after the manner described by Mr. McLennan as in vogue among the Hindus.

Even royalty itself must bow to the behests of old custom, as well as common mortals. When the Duke and Duchess of Albany left Windsor, while they were still within the private grounds, the bridegroom’s three brothers and Princess Louise and Princess Beatrice ran across a part of the lawn enclosed within a bend of the drive, each armed with a number of old shoes, with which they pelted the “happy pair.” The Duke of Albany returned the fire from the carriage with the ammunition supplied him by his friendly assailants, causing the heartiest laughter by a well-directed shot at the Duke of Edinburgh.

It was always reckoned a good omen if the sun shone on a couple when coming out of church. Hence the saying: “Happy is the bride that the sun shines on.”

Every one knows, if not from experience, at least by observation, what self-consciousness dwells in a newly married pair—what pains they take to appear like old married folk, and what awkward attempts they make to assume thedégagéair of ordinary travellers. As touching this feature of the subject, I one day saw a carriage driven past me, at which every one stopped to look, and stare in a way to attract general attention, and after looking, gave a broad grin. The reason was apparent. On the back of the carriage was hung a large placard, labelled “Just Married.” Several old shoes, besides some long streamers of cheap cotton cloth, were dangling from the trunks behind. When the carriage, thus decorated, drew up at the station, followed by a hooting crowd of street urchins, it was greeted with roars of laughter by the throng of idlers inwaiting, while the unconscious cause of it all first learned on alighting what a sensation they had so unwittingly created.

The custom of throwing rice over a bride, as an emblem of fruitfulness, also is very old, though in England it was originally wheat that was cast upon her head. The poet Herrick says to the bride,

“While some repeatYour praise and bless you sprinkling you with wheat.”

All the sentiment of this pretty and very significant custom is in danger of being killed by excess on the part of the performers, who so often overdo the matter as to render themselves supremely ridiculous, and the bride very uncomfortable, to say the least. To scatter rice, as if one were sowing it by the acre, when a handful would amply fulfil all the requirements of the custom, is something as if an officiating clergyman should pour a pailful of water on an infant’s head, instead of sprinkling it, at a baptism.

It is not surprising that now and then cases arise where a newly married couple try to escape from the shower prepared for them by giving these over-zealous assistants the slip. A chase then begins corresponding somewhat to that just related of ignorant barbarians; and woe to the runaways if the pursuers should catch up with them!

The custom of furnishing bride-cake at a wedding is said to be a token of the firm union between man and wife, just as from immemorial time breaking bread has been held to have a symbolic meaning. The custom is centuries old. At first it was only a cake of wheat or barley. What it is composed of now, no man can undertake to say. That it is conducive to dreaming, or more probably to nightmare, few, we think, will care to dispute.

We learn that it was a former custom to cut the bride-cake into little squares or dice, small enough to be passed through the wedding-ring. A slice drawn through the ringthrice (some have it nine times), and afterward put under the pillow, will make an unmarried man or woman dream of his or her future wife or husband. This is another of those old customs of which trial is so often made “just for the fun of the thing, you know!”

TheCharivari, or mock serenade, is another custom still much affected in many places, notably so in our rural districts, though to our own mind “more honored in the breach than in the observance.” The averred object is to make “night hideous,” and is usually completely successful. In the wee sma’ hours, while sleeping peacefully in their beds, the newly wedded pair are suddenly awakened by a most infernal din under their windows, caused by the blowing of tin horns, the thumping of tin pans, ringing of cowbells, and like instruments of torture. To get rid of his tormentors the bridegroom is expected to hold an impromptu reception, or, in other words, “to treat the crowd,” which is more often the real objectof this silly affair, to which we fail to discover one redeeming feature.

The custom of wearing the wedding ring upon the left hand originated, so we are told, in the common belief that the left hand lay nearest to the heart.

As is well known, the Puritans tried to abolish the use of the ring in marriage. According to Butler in “Hudibras”:—

“Others were for abolishingThat tool of matrimony—a ringWith which the unsatisfied bridegroomIs married only to a thumb.”

The times have indeed changed since in the early days of New England no Puritan maiden would have been married with a ring for worlds. When Edward Winslow was cited before the Lord’s Commissioners of Plantations, upon the complaint of Thomas Morton, he was asked among other things about the marriage customs practised in the colony. He answered frankly that the ceremony was performed by magistrates. Morton, his accuser, declares thatthe people of New England held the use of a ring in marriage to be “a relic of popery, a diabolical circle for the Devell to daunce in.”

The first marriage in Plymouth Colony, that of the same Edward Winslow to Susannah White, was performed by a magistrate, as being a civil rather than a religious contract. From this time to 1680, marriages were solemnized by a magistrate, or by persons specially appointed for that purpose, who were restricted to particular towns or districts. Governor Hutchinson, in his history of Massachusetts, says he believes “there was no instance of marriage by a clergyman during their first charter.” If a minister happened to be present, he was desired to pray. It is difficult to assign the reason why clergymen were excluded from performing this ceremony. In new settlements, it must have been solemnized by persons not always the most proper for that purpose, considering of what importance it is to society, that a sense of this ordinance, at least in some degree sacred, should be maintained and preserved.

The first marriage solemnized at Guilford, Connecticut, took place in the minister’s house. It is not learned whether he performed the ceremony or not. The marriage feast consisted wholly of pork and beans. As time wore on, marriages became occasions of much more ceremony than they were fifty or sixty years ago. During the Revolutionary period, and even later, the bride was visited daily for four successive weeks.

A gold wedding-ring is accounted a sure cure for sties.

If the youngest daughter of the family should be married before her older sisters, they must all dance at her wedding in their stockings-feet, if they wish to have husbands.

It is strongly enjoined upon a bride, when being dressed for the marriage ceremony, towear,—

“Something old and something new,Something borrowed and something blue,And a four-leaved clover in her shoe.”

June is now at the height of popularity asthe month of all months to get married in, for no other reason that I can discover, than that it is the month of roses, when beauty and plenty pervade the fair face of nature.

It is now the custom for the bride, if she is married at home, or on returning there from church, to throw away her bouquet for the guests to scramble for. The one getting the most flowers will be married first, and so on.

Giving wedding presents was not practised before the present (nineteenth) century.

One old marriage custom, though long since obsolete, may be briefly alluded to here, not only for its singularity, but for its suggestiveness touching a state of mind that would admit of such tomfoolery. This was the so-called Smock-marriage, in which the bride went through the ceremony standing only in her shift, thereby declaring herself to be possessed of no more than she came into the world with. On being duly recorded, the act exempted the husband from liability for hiswife’s debts previously contracted. If she went through this ridiculous performance in the presence of witnesses, and in the “King’s Highway,” that is to say, the lawfully laid out public road, she thereby cleared herself from any old indebtedness. As amazing as it may seem, several such cases are recorded in New England, the formalities observed differing somewhat in different localities.

It is considered unlucky to get married before breakfast.

“If you marry in Lent,You will live to repent.”

May is considered an unlucky month to be married in.

“Marry in May,And you’ll rue the day.”

To remove an engagement or wedding ring from the finger is also a badomen.17To lose either of them, or to have them broken on the finger, also denotes misfortune.

It is extremely unlucky for either the brideor groom to meet a funeral when on their way to be married.

It is an unlucky omen for the church clock to strike during the performance of a marriage ceremony, as it is said to portend the death of one of the contracting parties before the year is out.

“A woman’s story at a winter’s fire.”—Macbeth.

Wecome now to those things considered as distinctly unlucky, and to be avoided accordingly. How common is the peevish exclamation of “That’s just my luck!” Spilling the salt, picking up a pin with the point toward you, crossing a knife and fork, or giving any one a knife or other sharp instrument, are all deemed of sinister import now, as of old.

One must not kill a toad, which, though

“ugly and venomous,Wears yet a precious jewel in its head,”

or a grasshopper, possibly by reason of the veneration in which this voracious little insect was held by the Athenians, whose favorite symbol it was, although it is now outlawed, and a price set upon its head as a pest, to be ruthlessly exterminated, by some of the Western states. So, too, with the warning not to kill a spider, against which, nevertheless, the housemaid’s broom wages relentless war. If, on the contrary, you do not kill the first snake seen in the spring, bad luck will follow you all the year round. Be it ever so badly bruised, however, the belief holds fast in the country that the reptile will not die until sunset, or with the expiring day,

“That like a wounded snake drags its slow length along.”

The peacock’s feathers were supposed to be unlucky, from an old tradition associating its gaudy colors with certain capital sins, which these colors were held to symbolize. Nevertheless, this tall and haughty feather has been much the fashion of late years as an effectivemantel ornament, showing how reckless some people can be regarding the prophecy of evil.

Getting married before breakfast is considered unlucky. It would be quite as logical to say this of any other time of the day; hence unlucky to get married at all, though it is not believed all married people will cordially subscribe to this heresy.

May is an unlucky month to be married in. So, also

“If you marry in LentYou will live to repent.”

Old Burton says, “Marriage and hanging go by destiny; matches are made in heaven.”

Getting out of bed on the wrong side bodes ill luck for the rest of the day. A common remark to a person showing ill-humor is, “I guess you got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning.” It has in fact become a proverb.

To begin dressing yourself by putting the stocking on the left foot first would be trifling with fortune. I know a man who would not doso on any account. It is also unlucky to put a right foot into a left-hand shoe, orvice versa. These are necessary corollaries of the “right-foot-foremost” superstition.

According to that merry gentleman, SamuelButler:—

“Augustus having b’oversightPut on his left shoe for his right,Had like to have been slain that day,By soldiers mutining for their pay.”

Cutting the finger nails on the Sabbath is a bad omen. There is a set of rhymed rules for the doing of even this trifling act. Apparently, the Chinese know the omen, as they do not cut the nails at all.

Of the harmless dragon-fly or devil’s darning-needle, country girls say that if one flies in your face it will sew up your eyes.

In some localities I have heard it said that if two persons walking together should be parted by a post, a tree, or a person, in their path, something unlucky will surelyresult—

“Unless they straightway mutter,‘Bread and butter, bread and butter.’”

Low, the pirate, would not let his crew work on the Sabbath, not so much, we suppose, from conscientious scruples, as for fear it would bring him bad luck. The rest of the Decalogue did not seem to bother him in the least.

After having once started on an errand or a journey, it is unlucky to go back, even if you have forgotten something of importance. All persons afflicted with frequent lapses of memory should govern themselves accordingly. This belief seems clearly grounded upon the dreadful fate of Lot’s wife.

It was always held unlucky to break a piece of crockery, as a second and a third piece shortly will be broken also. This is closely associated with the belief respecting the number three, elsewhere referred to. In New England it is commonly said that if you should break something on Monday, bad luck will follow you all the rest of the week.

To stumble in going upstairs is also unlucky; perhaps to stumble at any other time. Friar Lawrence says, in “Romeo and Juliet,”—

“They stumble that run fast.”

Two persons washing their hands in the same basin or in the same water will quarrel unless the sign of the cross be made in the water.

It is considered unlucky to take off a ring that was the gift of a deceased person, an engagement, or a marriage ring.

The term “hoodoo,” almost unknown in the Northern United States a few years ago, has gradually worked its way into the vernacular, until it is in almost everybody’s mouth. It is, perhaps, most lavishly employed during the base-ball season, as everyone knows who reads the newspapers, to describe something that has cast a spell upon the players, so bringing about defeat. The term is then “hoodooing.” The hoodoo may be anything particularly ugly or repulsive seen on the way to the game—a deformed old woman, a one-legged man, a lame horse, or a blind beggar, for instance. Most players are said to give full credit to the power of the hoodoo to bewitch them. Indeed, the term has been quite widely taken up as the synonym for bad luck, or, rather, the cause ofit, even by the business world. If this is not, to all intents, a belief in witchcraft, it certainly comes very close to what passed for witchcraft two hundred years ago.

This vagrant and ill-favored word “hoodoo” is, again, a corruption of the voudoo of the ignorant blacks of the South, with whom, in fact, it stands, as some say, for witchcraft, pure and simple, or, perhaps, the Black Art, as practised in Africa; while others pronounce it to be a religious rite only. More than this, the voudoo also is a mystic order, into whose unholy mysteries the neophyte is inducted with much barbaric ceremony. In the case of a white woman so initiated in Louisiana, this consisted in the elect chanting a weird incantation, while the novitiate, clad only in her shift, danced within a charmed circle formed of beef bones and skeletons, toads’ feet and spiders, with camphor and kerosene oil sprinkled about it. All those present join in the dance to the accompaniment of tom-toms and other rude instruments, until physical exhaustion compels the dancers to stop.

In its main features we find a certain resemblance between the voudoo dance of the ignorant blacks and the ghost dance practised by some of the wild Indians of the West, and by means of which they are wrought up to the highest pitch of frenzy, so preparing the way for an outbreak, such as occurred a few years ago with most lamentable results.

While the sporting fraternity is notoriously addicted to the hoodoo superstition, yet it is by no means confined to them alone. Not long ago a statement went the rounds of the newspapers to the effect that the superstitious wife of a certain well-known millionnaire had refused to go on board of their palatial yacht because one of the crew had been fatally injured by falling down a hatchway. In plain English, the accident had hoodooed the ship.

But the power of the hoodoo would seem not to be limited to human beings, according to this statement, taken from the columns of a reputable newspaper: “A meadow at Biddeford, Maine, is known as the hoodoo lawn, for thereason that rain follows every time it is mowed, before the grass can be cured. It is said that this has occurred for twenty-five consecutive years.”

To break the spell of the hoodoo, it is as essential to have a mascot, over which the malign influence can have no power, as to have an antidote against poisons. Therefore most ball-players carry a mascot with them. Sometimes it is a goat, or a dog, or again a black sheep, that is gravely led thrice around the field before the play begins.

It is not learned whether or not the different kinds of mascot have ever been pitted against each other. Perhaps the effect would be not unlike that described by Cicero in his treatise on divination. He says there that Cato one day met a friend who seemed in a very troubled frame of mind. On being asked what was the matter, the friend replied: “Oh! my friend, I fear everything. This morning when I awoke, I saw, shall I say it? a mouse gnawing my shoe.” “Well,” said Cato, reassuringly,“calm yourself. The prodigy really would become frightful if the shoe had been gnawing the mouse.”

Naval ships often carry a goat, or some other animal, as a mascot, in deference to Jack’s well-known belief in its peculiar efficacy; and in naval parades the goat usually gravely marches in the procession, and comes in for his share of the applause. Simple-minded Jack christens his favorite gun after some favorite prize-fighter. And why not? since the great Nelson, himself, carried a horseshoe nailed to his mast-head, and since even some of our college foot-ball teams bring their mascots upon the field just like other folk.

The war with Spain could hardly fail of bringing to light some notable examples of the superstitions of sailors concerning mascots. The destruction of Admiral Cervera’s fleet, off Santiago de Cuba, by the American fleet, under command of Admiral Sampson, is freshly remembered. One of the destroyed Spanish ships was named theColon. Twenty-six daysafter the battle, the tug-boatRight Armof the Merritt-Chapman Wrecking Company visited theColon, for the purpose of raising the Spanish cruiser. The only living thing aboard was a black and white cat. For nearly a month it had been the sole crew and commander of the wrecked battle-ship.

The crew of theRight Armtook possession of the cat, adopted it as a mascot and named it Tomas Cervera. But Cervera brought ill luck. When Lieutenant Hobson raised theMaria Teresathe rescued cat was placed aboard her, to be brought to America.

TheMaria Teresanever reached these shores, and when the vessel grounded off the Bahamas the cat fell into the hands of the natives. He was rescued the second time, and at last reached America, a passenger on the United States repair shipVulcan.

It will be admitted that this cat did not belie that article of the popular belief, which ascribes nine lives to his tribe. But poor Tomas Cervera did not long survive the varioushardships and perils to which he had been subjected. He gave up the ghost shortly after all these were happily ended.

Speaking of ships and sailors, it is well known to all seafaring folk that the reputation of a ship for being lucky, or unlucky, is all important. And this reputation may begin at the very moment when she leaves the stocks. Should she, unfortunately, stick on the ways, in launching, a bad name is pretty sure to follow her during the remainder of her career, and to be an important factor in her ability to ship a crew. Even the practice of christening a ship with a bottle of wine is neither more nor less than a survival of pagan superstition by which the favor of the gods was invoked.

The superstition regarding thirteen persons at the table also boasts a remarkable vitality. Just when or how it originated is uncertain. It has been surmised, however, that the Paschal Supper was the beginning of this notion, for there were thirteen persons present then, and what followed is not likely to be forgotten.It has, perhaps, been the subject of greater ridicule than any other popular delusion, probably from the fact of its touching convivial man in his most tender part,—to wit, the stomach. In London some of the literary and other lights even went to the trouble of forming a Thirteen Club for the avowed purpose of breaking down the senseless notion that if thirteen persons were to sit down to dinner together, one of them would die within a twelvemonth. The motto of this club should have been, “All men must die, therefore all men should dine.” If the club’s proceedings showed no lack of invention and mother wit, we still should very much doubt their efficacy toward achieving the avowed end and aim of the club’s existence, for surely such extravagances could have no other effect than to raise a laugh. We reproduce an account of the affair for the reader’samusement:—

“At the dinner of the club, above mentioned, there were thirteen tables, a similar number of guests being seated at each table. The servingof the meal was announced by the “shivering” of a mirror placed on an easel, a ceremony performed by two cross-eyed waiters! Having put on green neckties and placed a miniature skeleton in their button-holes, the guests passed under a ladder into the dining room. The tables were lighted with small lamps placed on plaster skulls; skeletons were suspended from the candles, which were thirteen in number on each table; the knives were crossed; the salt-stands were in the shape of coffins, with headstones bearing the inscription, ‘In memory of many senseless superstitions, killed by the London Thirteen Club, 1894.’ The salt-spoons were shaped like a grave-digger’s spade.

“After the dinner was fairly started, the chairman asked the company to spill salt with him, and later on he invited them to break looking-glasses with him, all of which having been done, he presented the chairmen of the different tables with a knife each, on condition that nothing was given for them in return. An undertaker, clothed in a variety costume, whichwould have done credit to a first-class music hall, was then introduced ‘to take orders,’ but he was quickly shuffled out of the room.”

These unbelieving jesters, who so audaciously defied the fatal omen, did not seem to realize that a popular superstition is not to be laughed out of existence in so summary a manner. Equally futile was the attempt to put it to a scientific test, as, if tried by that means, it appears that, of any group of thirteen persons, the chances are about equal that one will die within the year. Therefore, the attempt to break the spell by inviting a greater number of persons could have the effect only of increasing, rather than diminishing, the probability of the event so muchdreaded.18

It has been stated in the newspapers, from which I take it, that there are many hotels in New York which contain no room numbered thirteen. There are other hotels and office buildings wherein the rooms that are so numbered cannot be leased except once in a great while. Inlarge hotels one custom is to letter the first thirteen rooms and call them parlors. Another custom is simply to skip the unpopular number, and call the thirteenth room “No. 14.” A man who had just rented an office which bears the objectionable number, in a down-town building, asserts that though he has no superstitious dread of the number, he finds that others will not transact business with him in that office. I also find it stated as a fact that the new monster passenger steamshipOceanichas no cabin or seat at the table numbered thirteen.

It was again instanced as a deathblow to a certain candidate’s hopes of a reëlection to the United States Senate, that repeated ballotings showed him to be just thirteen votes short of the required number. From the same state, Pennsylvania, comes this highly significant announcement in regard to a base-ball team: “Because the team left here on a very rainy day, and on a train that pulled out from track No. 13, the superstitious local fans (sic) are in a sad state of mind to-night, regarding the coincidenceas an evil omen.” Again the small number of six, in the graduating class of a certain high school, was gravely referred to as owing to there having originally been thirteen in that class.

At the same time there are exceptions which, however, the superstitious may claim only go to prove the rule. For instance the Thirteen Colonies did not prove so very unlucky a venture.

As regards the superstitions of actors and actresses, the following anecdote, though not new, probably as truly reflects the state of mind existing among the profession to-day as it did when the incident happened to which it refers. When the celebrated Madame Rachel returned from Egypt in 1857, she asked Arsène Houssaye, within a year thereafter, the question: “Do you recollect the dinner we had at the house of Victor Hugo? There were thirteen of us,—Hugo and his wife, you and your wife, Rebecca and I, Girardin and his wife, Gerard de Nerval, Pradier, Alfred de Musset, Perrèe, of theSiècle, and the Count d’Orsay, thirteen in all. Well, where are theyto-day? Victor Hugo and his wife are in Jersey, your wife is dead, Madame de Girardin is dead, my sister Rebecca is dead, De Nerval, Pradier, Alfred de Musset, and d’Orsay are dead. I say no more. There remain but Girardin and you. Adieu, my friends. Never laugh at thirteen at a table.”

The world, however, especially that part of it represented by diners out, goes on believing in the evil augury just the same. A dinner party is recalled at which two of the invited guests were given seats at a side table on account of that terrible bugbear “thirteen at table.” When mentioning the circumstance to a friend, he was reminded of an occasion where an additional guest had been summoned in haste to break the direful spell.

Unquestionably, the newspapers might do much toward suppressing the spread of superstition by refusing to print such accounts as this, taken from a Boston daily paper, as probably nothing is read by a certain class with greater avidity. It says “that engine No. 13of the Boston, Hoosac Tunnel & Western Railroad has, within three weeks, killed no less than three men. The railway hands fear the locomotive, and say that its number is unlucky.” It is true, we understand, that the standard number of a wrecked locomotive, that has been in a fatal accident, is not unfrequently changed in deference to this feeling on the part of the engine-men.

It is held to be unlucky to pass underneath a ladder, an act which indeed might be dangerous to life or limb should the ladder fall. But it is even harder to understand the philosophy of thedictumthat to meet a squinting woman denotes ill luck.

The bird was formerly accounted an unlucky symbol, perhaps from the fact that good fortune, like riches, is apt to take to itself wings. The hooting of an owl, the croaking of a raven, the cry of a whip-poor-will, and even the sight of a solitary magpie were always associated with malignant influences or evil presages. Poe’s raven furnishesthe theme for one of his best-known poems. And the swan was long believed to sing her own death-song. Be that as it may, the fact is well remembered that a ring, bearing the device of a bird upon it, or any other object having the image of the feathered kind, was not considered a suitable gift to a woman. That article of superstition, like some others that could be mentioned, has vanished before the resistless command of fashion, so completely indeed, that birds of every known clime and plumage have since been considered the really proper adornment for woman’s headgear.

There is, however, an odd superstition connected with the magpie, an instance of which is found related by Lord Roberts, in “Forty-one Years in India.” We could not do better than give it in his own words: “On the 15th July Major Cavagnari, who had been selected as the envoy and plenipotentiary to the Amir of Kabul, arrived in Kuram. I, with some fifty officers who were anxious to do honorto the envoy and see the country beyond Kuram, marched with Cavagnari to within five miles of the crest of Shutargardan pass, where we encamped, and my staff and I dined that evening with the mission. After dinner I was asked to propose the health of Cavagnari and those with him, but somehow I did not feel equal to the task: I was so thoroughly depressed, and my mind filled with such gloomy forebodings as to the fate of these fine fellows, that I could not utter a word.

“Early next morning the Sirdar, who had been deputed by the Amir to receive the mission, came into camp, and soon we all started for the top of the pass.... As we ascended, curiously enough, we came across a solitary magpie, which I should not have noticed had not Cavagnari pointed it out and begged me not to mention the fact of his having seen it to his wife, as she would be sure to consider it an unlucky omen.

“On descending to the (Afghan) camp, wewere invited to partake of dinner, served in the Oriental fashion on a carpet spread on the ground. Everything was done most lavishly and gracefully. Nevertheless, I could not feel happy as to the prospects of the mission, and my heart sank as I wished Cavagnari good-by. When we had proceeded a few yards in our different directions, we both turned round, retraced our steps, shook hands once more, and parted forever.”

The sequel is told in the succeeding chapter. “Between one and two o’clock on the morning of the 5th of September, I was awakened by my wife telling me that a telegraph man had been wandering around the house and calling for some time, but that no one had answered him. The telegram told me that my worst fears had been only too fully realized.” Cavagnari and his party had been massacred by the Afghans.

Again, there are certain things which may not be given to a male friend (young, unmarried ministers excepted), such, for example, asa pair of slippers, because the recipient will be sure, metaphorically speaking, to walk away from the giver in them.

There is also current in some parts of New England a belief that it is unlucky to get one’s life insured, or to make one’s will, under the delusion that doing either of these things will tend to shorten one’s life. This feeling comes of nothing less than a ridiculous fear of facing even the remote probability involved in the act; and is of a piece with the studied avoidance of the subject of death, or willing allusion in any way, shape, or form to the dead, even of one’s own kith and kin, quite like that singular belief held by the Indians which forbade any allusion to the dead whatsoever.

Spilling the salt, as an omen of coming misfortune, is one of the most widespread, as well as one of the most deeply rooted, of popular delusions. It is said to be universal all over Asia, is found in some parts of Africa, and is quite prevalent in Europe and America to-day. Vain to deny it, the unhappy delinquent whois so awkward as to spill salt at the table instantly finds all eyes turned upon him. Worse still, the antidote once practised of flinging three pinches of salt over the left shoulder is no longer admissible in good society. Instantly every one present mentally recalls the omen. His host may politely try to laugh it off, but all the same, a visible impression of something unpleasant remains.

Something was said in another place about the potency of the number “three” to effect a charm either for good or for evil. Firemen and railroad men are more or less given to the belief that if one fire or one accident occurs, it will inevitably be followed by two more fires or accidents. A headline in a Boston newspaper, now before me, reads, “The same old three fires in succession,” and then hypocritically exclaims, “How the superstitious point to the recurrence!”

The superstition about railroad accidents is by no means confined to the trainmen, or other employees, but to some extent, at least, is sharedeven by the higher officials, who point to their past experiences in the management of these iron highways as fully establishing, to their minds, certain conditions. One of these gentlemen once said to me, after a bad accident on his road, “It is not so much this one particular accident that we dread, as what is coming after it.” I also knew of a conductor who asked for a leave of absence immediately after the occurrence of a shocking wreck on the line.

Although periodically confronted with a long series of most momentous events in the world’s history that have happened on that day of the week, the superstition in regard to Friday, as being an unlucky day, has so far withstood every assault. It will not down. Whether it exists to so great an extent as formerly may be questioned, but that it does exist in full force, more especially among sailors, is certain. We have it on good authority that this self-tormenting delusion grew out of the fact that the Saviour was crucified on Friday, ever afterstigmatized as “hangman’s day,” and, therefore, set apart for the execution of criminals, now as before time.

It is not wholly improbable that some share of the odium resting upon Friday may arise from the fact of its being so regularly observed as a day of fasting, or at leastmaigre, by some religionists.

In some old diaries are found entries like the following: “A vessel lost going out of Portland against the advice of all; all on board, twenty-seven, drowned.” It is easy to understand how such an event would leave an indelible impression upon the minds of a whole generation.

Notwithstanding the belief is openly scouted from the pulpit, and is even boldly defied by a few unbelieving sea-captains, the fact remains that there are very many sober-minded persons who could not be induced on any account to begin a journey on Friday. There are others who will not embark in any new enterprise, or begin a new piece of work on that day; andstill others who even go so far as to say that you must not cut your nails on Friday. A man could be named who could not be tempted to close a bargain on any other day of the week than Thursday. It is a further fact, which all connected with operating railroads will readily confirm, that Friday is always the day of least travel on their lines. This circumstance alone seems conclusive as to the state of popular feeling. Apparently a brand has been set upon the sixth day of the week for all time.

Numerous instances might be given to show that men of the strongest intellect are as fallible in this respect as men of the lowest; but one such will suffice. Lord Byron once refused to be introduced to a lady because it was Friday; and on this same ill-starred day he would never pay a visit.

Back to Index Next