The Child and Childhood in Folk-Thought by Alexander F. Chamberlain (read full novel txt) 📖

>“One day Manabozho appeared upon the earth in an ill-humour. Walking along, he espied a little child sitting in the sun, curled up with his toe in his mouth. Somewhat surprised at this, and being of a dauntless and boastful nature, he set himself down beside the child; and, picking up his own toe, he essayed to place it in his mouth after the manner of the child. He could not do it. In spite of all twisting and turning, his toe could not be brought to reach his mouth. As he was getting up in great discomfiture to get away, he heard a laugh behind him, and did no more boasting that day, for he had been outwitted by a little child.”

This characteristic attitude of the child has also been noted by the folk-historians of India; for when, after the death of Brahma, the waters have covered all the worlds, “Vishnu [the ‘Preserver,’ in the Hindoo Trinity] sits, in the shape of a tiny infant, on a leaf of the pipala (fig-tree), and floats on the sea of milk, sucking the toe of his right foot” (440. 366), and, as Mrs. Emerson points out, “the feat that Manabozho sought in vain to perform is accomplished by the more flexible and lithe Hindoo god, Narayana” (440. 367).

In another Micmac legend, given by Leland, Gluskap appears somewhat more to advantage. Of the Turtle [Mikchich], the “Uncle” of Gluskap, for whom the latter had obtained a wife, we read (488. 57):—

“And Turtle lived happily with his wife, and she had a babe. Now it happened in after-days that Glooskap came to see his uncle, and the child cried. ‘Dost thou know what he says?’ exclaimed the Master. ‘Truly, not I,’ answered Mikchich, ‘unless it be the language of the Mu-se-gisk (spirits of the air), which no man knoweth.’ ‘Wel,’ replied Glooskap, ‘he is talking of eggs, for he says, ‘Hoowah! hoowah!‘ which, methinks, is much the same as ‘waw-wun, waw-wun.’ And this in Passamaquoddy means ‘egg.’ ‘But where are there any?’ asked Mikchich. Then Glooskap bade him seek in the sand, and he found many, and admired and marvelled over them greatly; and in memory of this, and to glorify the jest of Glooskap, the turtle layeth eggs even to this day.”

In Mr. Leland’s collection, as in the later volume of Dr. Band, there are many other delicate touches of childhood that show that these aborigines have a large measure of that love for children which is present with all races of mankind.

In the legends of the saints and heroes of the Christian Church we meet with numberless instances of the wisdom and instruction that came to them from the mouths of little children.

Among the stories in the life of St. Augustine is the following: “While St. Augustine was composing his book On the Trinity, and was at Cività Vecchia, he saw a little child making a hole in the seashore, and asked him what he was doing. The child replied: ‘I am making a hole to contain the water of the sea.’ The doctor smiled, telling the child it would not be possible to do so; but the child made answer: ‘Not so, Augustine. It would be far easier to drain off the waters of the great deep than for the finite to grasp the Infinite’; and so he vanished. Augustine then knew that the child was an angel of God, sent to warn him, and he diligently set to work to revise what he had written” (191.

355).

 

The best of mankind can still sit at the feet of childhood and learn of its wisdom. But of many a one must it be said:—

 

“He hath grown so foolish-wise He cannot see with childhood’s eyes; He hath forgot that purity And lowliness which are the key Of Nature’s mysteries.”

 

CHAPTER XIX.

 

THE CHILD AS JUDGE.

So, Holy Writ in Babes hath judgment shown, Where Judges have been babes.—_Shakespeare_.

O wise young judge I—_Shakespeare_.

 

The Child as Judge

Shakespeare in All’s Well that Ends Well, makes Helen say to the King:—

 

“He that of greatest works is finisher, Oft does them by the weakest minister: So, Holy Writ in babes hath judgment shown, When judges have been babes.”

 

And in the history of the human race, appeal has often been made to the innocence and imputed discernment of the child.

As one of the glories of God, David sang in Israel of old: “Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength, because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.” And the disciple Matthew reiterates the thought: “Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes”; and, again: “Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings hast thou perfected praise.”

 

Solomon.

The stories told of Solomon—the judgments of the wise Hebrew monarch, when a child, were as remarkable as those which he made after attaining man’s estate—have their counterparts in other lands. One of the most celebrated decisions was rendered by Solomon when he was but thirteen years of age. Well gives the story as follows (547.192):—

“The accuser had sold some property to the other, who, in clearing out a cellar, had found a treasure. He now demanded that the accused should give up the treasure, since he had bought the property without it; while the other maintained that the accuser possessed no right to the treasure, since he had known nothing of it, and had sold the property with all that it contained. After long meditation, David adjudged that the treasure should be divided between them. But Solomon inquired of the accuser whether he had a son, and, when he replied that he had a son, he inquired of the other if he had a daughter; and he also answering in the affirmative, Solomon said: ‘If you will adjust your strife so as not to do injustice one to the other, unite your children in marriage, and give them this treasure as their dowry.’” In many other difficult cases, David, after the loss of the tube which, according to legend, the angel Gabriel brought him, was aided in judgment by the wisdom and far-sightedness of his young son. A decision similar to that of Solomon is attributed to Buddha, when a child, and to Christ.

 

Child-Judgments.

Müllenhoff records two cases of child-judgments in his collection of the folk-lore of Schleswig-Holstein. The first is as follows: “A branch of the river Widau, near Tondern, is named Eenzau, from the little village Eenz in the parish of Burkall. Where the banks are pretty high and steep, a man fell into the water once upon a time, and would have been drowned had not a certain person, hearing his cries, hastened to the river, and, holding out a pole, enabled the drowning man to help himself out. In doing so, however, he put out an eye. The rescued man appeared at the next thing (court), entered a complaint against the other, and demanded compensation for his lost eye. The judges, not knowing what to make of the case, put it off till the next thing, in order to meditate upon it in the meantime. But the third thing came, and the district-judge had not made up his mind about it. Out of humour, he mounted his horse and rode slowly and thoughtfully in the direction of Tondern, where the thing was then held. He reached Rohrkarrberg, and, opposite the house which is still standing there, lay a stone heap, upon which sat three herd-boys, apparently busy with something of importance. ‘What are you doing there, children?’ asked the judge. ‘We are playing thing’ (court), was the answer. ‘What is the matter before the court?’ continued the judge. ‘We are trying the case of the man who fell into the Eenzau,’ they answered, and the judge held his horse to await the verdict. The boys did not know him, for he was well hidden in his cloak, and his presence did not disturb them. The judgment rendered was, that the man who had been rescued should be thrown into the stream again at the same spot; if he was able to save himself, then he should receive compensation for the eye he had lost; if he could not, the decision was to be in favour of the other. Before the district-judge went away, he put his hand into his pocket and gave the boys some money; then, merrily riding to Tondern, he rendered the same judgment as the boys had given. The fellow was unable to save himself without assistance, and was like to have been drowned; consequently, his rescuer won the case” (508. 87, 88). The other case, said to have occurred at Rapstede, was this:—

“A tailor and a peasant, both possessing nothing more than a wretched hut, made a bargain for so and so many bushels of corn at such and such a price, although the tailor knew that the peasant had no money, and the peasant knew that the tailor had a needle, but no corn. Soon the price of corn rose, and the peasant appeared before the court to demand that the tailor should fulfil his part of the bargain. The judges were at a loss to decide such a matter. In this case, also, boys rendered judgment. The decision was, that the agreement was invalid, for both, being neighbours, had known each other’s circumstances, and yet both were culpable for having entered into such a deceitful bargain” (508.

88).

 

These decisions belong to the same category as that rendered by Solomon in the case of the two women, who both claimed the same child,—a judgment which has gone upon record in the Bible (1 Kings, iii. 16-28),—and a multitude of similar interpretations of justice found all over the world (191. 290).

Mr. Newell, speaking of children’s games in which judicial procedures are imitated, but from whose decisions no serious results ever come, observes (313. 123):—

“In the ancient world, however, where the courts were a place of resort, and law was not a specialized profession, the case was different. Maximus of Tyre tells us that the children had their laws and tribunals; condemnation extended to the forfeiture of toys. Cato the younger, according to Plutarch, had his detestation of tyranny first awakened by the punishment inflicted on a playmate by such a tribunal. One of the younger boys had been sentenced to imprisonment; the doom was duly carried into effect; but Cato, moved by his cries, rescued him.”

 

Children’s Ideas of Right.

Mr. Brown, of the formal School at Worcester, Massachusetts, has given us an excellent collection of Thoughts and Reasonings of Children (194), and Signora Paola Lombroso, in her interesting and valuable Essays on Child-Psychology, has also contributed to the same subject (301. 45-72). A very recent study is that of Children’s Rights, by Margaret E. Schallenberger (341), of Leland Stanford, Jr. University, California. The last author has charted the opinions of a large number—some three thousand papers were collected—of boys and girls from six to sixteen years of age, upon the following case, the story being employed as specially appealing to children (341. 89):—

“Jennie had a beautiful new box of paints; and, in the afternoon, while her mother was gone, she painted all the chairs in the parlour, so as to make them look nice for her mother. When her mother came home, Jennie ran to meet her, and said, ‘Oh mamma! come and see how pretty I have made the new parlour’; but her mamma took her paints away and sent her to bed. If you had been her mother, what would you have done or said to Jennie?”

From this extensive and most ingenious investigation, the following results are