An account of the Cape of Good Hope; containing An Historical View of its original Settlement by the Dutch, its Capture by the British in 1795, and the different Policy pursued there by the Dutch and British Governments. Also a Sketch of its Geography, Productions, the Manners and Customs of the Inhabitants, &c. &c. with a view of the political and commercial advantages which might be derived from its possession by Great Britain
THE LEVESON-GOWER–QUENTIN KEYNES COPY
IN BOARDS AND EXTRA-ILLUSTRATED WITH
FOUR WATER-COLORS BY (OR AFTER) SAMUEL DANIELL
London: C. and R. Baldwin, 1804. First edition, first issue.
Quarto (11 1/8” x 8 ¾”, 283mm x 223mm): a2 b4 A-B4 C4(±C4) D-Xx4 [$2 signed; +C4]. 182 leaves, pp. i-iii (title-page, imprint, dedication) iv-xii, 1 2-339, blank, [4] (4pp. advertisements). Extra-illustrated with a folding engraved map (the “second, corrected edition” of “The Dutch Colony of the Cape of Good Hope” by William Faden after Louis Stanislas d’Arcy de la Rochette, dated 1795) and four bifolia mounted on bound-in stubs (see below).
Bound in the publisher’s blue drab boards backed in tape (re-backed, with the original back-strip and spine label (“PERCIVAL’S/ Cape of Good hope/[rule]/ 1804./ Price One Pound, boards.”) laid down). Fore and lower edges untrimmed.
Re-backed, with the original back-strip and spine label laid down. Some wear to the extremities, with bumps to the fore-corners. Quires b and Xx unopened. A splendidly intact copy. Ownership signature of John (or J.M.?) Leveson-Gower to the title-page. Engraved map (at a1-2) and four bifolia on stubs (at L4-M1, N3-4, N4-O1 and Y3-4) bound in, all extra.
Robert Percival (1765–1826) sailed as a captain in the Irish infantry to retake the Cape of Good Hope from the Dutch in 1795. From his triumphal entry into Cape Town in September of 1796 he remained in the region till 1797 before returning to Britain and preparing the present work, which is the first issue of the first edition (the distinguishing point being the typographical error in the head-line of p. 247: “OF GO ODHOPE.” for “OF GOOD HOPE.”). Unsurprisingly, the work is highly critical of the Dutch. Percival goes into great detail about their rough treatment of the locals. Broadly, the aim of the work is to describe the richness of the place, excoriate the Dutch and encourage the British to reclaim the territory fully — which, in 1806, after the Napoleonic Wars upset the status quo established by the 1802 Treaty of Amiens, they did.
The Leveson-Gower who signed the title-page as owner is likely General John Leveson-Gower (1774–1816), son of the famous Admiral of the same name who died in 1792. General Leveson-Gower served in the West Indies 1793–1796, and then sat as MP for Truro 1796–1802 before setting out in the Navy once more in 1807, where he was second-in-command to Whitelock in his unsuccessful expedition to Buenos Aires. The volume was then sold at Sotheby’s London 19 November 1990, lot 246 (£5,200), to Quentin Keynes (1921–2003). Keynes — great-grandson of Darwin, nephew of John Maynard Keynes — was an explorer who traveled extensively in Africa. Keynes was also a noted bibliophile and collector, principally of this sort of material: XIXc travellers’ accounts. The volume was purchased at his sale, Christie’s London 7 April 2004, lot 343.
For being an untrimmed example in the publisher’s boards the present item is remarkable, but it is all the more so for the five extra illustrations bound in. The map, Faden’s unfortunately-named “Dutch Colony of the cape of Good Hope” of 1795, is a good ancilla to the text. The four bifolia, however, are a much richer addition:
- (Following p. 80.) “A Hottentot.” The first leaf is blank, as is the verso of the second. On the recto of the second leaf is a brown-toned ink-and-wash drawing, labeled below the frame as indicated in ink, of a man facing frontally, nude save for a fur-trimmed cape that bears his proper left shoulder, and a string bracelet on his left hand. In that hand he holds three spears. The whole drawing is framed in black ink, heavy on the lower and right edges.
- (Following p. 94.) “A Bosjeman in Armour.” The recto of the first leaf and the verso of the second are blank. To the verso of the first leaf are 23 lines of manuscript followed by “Vide. _Barrows Cape of Good Hope._” On the recto of the second leaf is an ink-and-wash drawing, labeled below the frame as indicated in ink, of a man facing frontally, covered entirely save the proper left hand in a fur-trimmed cloak. Slung over his left shoulder is a quiver in peach wash, and in his left hand a bow and arrow. The man has a long transverse piercing through his nose, and wears a fringed cap with about 15 arrows held in his cap behind his head, creating a crest upward and downward. The whole drawing is framed in black ink, heavy on the lower and right edges.
- (Following p. 96.) “A Kaffer[1] Woman.” The recto of the first leaf and the verso of the second are blank. To the verso of the first leaf is an ink-and-wash drawing, labeled below the frame as indicated in ink, of a woman facing three-quarters to the left, covered to the best in a fur-trimmed cloak. She wears a single long peach necklace and head-scarf. The whole drawing is framed in black ink, heavy on the lower and left edges. To the recto of the second leaf are 12 lines of manuscript followed by “Vide. Barrows Cape of Good Hope.”
- (Following p. 164.) “Broad tailed Sheep of Southern Africa.” The first leaf and the verso of the second are blank. To the recto of the second leaf is an ink-and-wash drawing, labeled below the frame (i.e., at the fore-edge of the sheet, the image being oriented in landscape) as indicated in ink, of a sheep in profile facing left. The sheep stands on a scrubby knoll and casts a black shadow. The whole drawing is framed in black ink, heavy on the lower and right edges.
Each bifolium is a single sheet of wove pot (full sheets roughly 374mm x 232mm) drawing paper water-marked “J. Lloyd/ 1803”. “Barrows Cape of Good Hope,” to which the reader of the text is directed, is either the first or second edition of Sir John Barrow’s (first edition: An Account of) Travels into the Interior of Southern Africa… Two volumes. London: Cadell and Davies; first: 1801 and 1804; second: 1806. For the second edition, Barrow commissioned Samuel Daniell to do the illustrations; the first edition was unillustrated. The manuscript text is similar but not identical to the printed editions, sitting, in several cases, between the two:
|
First edition text (pp. 204–205; emphasis mine) |
Manuscript (facing “A Kaffer Woman.”) |
Second edition text |
|
the Kaffers: they are tall, stout, muscular, well made, elegant figures. They are exempt, indeed, from many of those cause that, in more civilized societies, contribute to imped the growth of the body. Their diet is simple; their exercise of a salutary nature; their body is neither cramped nor encumbered by clothing; the air they breathe is pure; their rest is not disturbed by violent love, nor their minds ruffled by jealousy; they are free from those licentious appetited which proceed frequently more from a depraved imagination than a real natural want: their frame is neither shaken nor enervated by the use of intoxicating liquors, which they are not acquainted with; they eat when hungry, and sleep when nature demands it. With such a kind of life, languor and melancholy have little to do. The countenance of a Kaffer is always cheerful; and the whole of his demeanor bespeaks content and peace of mind. |
The Caffree, or Kaffer, are tall, stout, muscular, well made figures. their diet is simple, their exercise of a most salutary nature; their limbs are not encumbered with cloathing [sic]. the air they breathe is pure; their rest is not disturbed by jealousy, or violent passions; their frame is not enervated by frequent use of intoxicating Liquors. they eat when they are hungry, & sleep when nature demands it. With such a mode of life, languor, listlessness, and melancholy have little to do. the countenance of a Kaffer is indeed always cheerful, & his whole demeanour bespeaks content, & peace of mind._ |
the Kaffers: they are, tall, stout, muscular, well made, elegant figures. The particular causes to which they are indebted for their fine forms and athletic strength of body I do not pretend to develop, but, it may be observed, that they are exempt from many of those causes that, in more civilized societies, contribute to impede and cramp the growth of the body. Their diet is extremely simple; their exercise that of the most salutary nature; their limbs are not encumbered with clothing; the air they breathe is pure; their rest is not disturbed by violent love, nor their minds ruffled by jealousy; they are free from those licentious appetites which proceed frequently more from a deprave imagination than a real natural want: their frame is not shaken and enervated by the use of intoxicating liquors, for they are not acquainted with them; they eat when they are hungry, and sleep when nature demands it. With such a mode of life, languor and listlessness and melancholy have little to do. The countenance of a Kaffer is indeed always cheerful; and his whole demeanor bespeaks content and peace of mind. |
|
|
|
|
|
First edition text (pp. 282–283; emphasis mine) |
Manuscript (facing “A Bosjeman in Armour.”) |
Second edition text |
|
Except in the extreme flatness of the nose… Indeed, from all the ancient accounts that have been preserved of the Egyptians and Ethiopians, it would appear that the real Hottentots, or Bosjesmans,[2] were the people intended to be described. In their general physical character they bear a strong resemblance to the Pigmies and Troglodytes, two tribes who are said to have dwelt in the neighbourhood of the Nile. The character drawn by Diodorus Siculus, of some of the Ethiopian nations, agrees exactly with that of the Bosjesmans. A species of brutality is stated by him to prevail in all their manners and customs; their voices were shrill, dissonant, and scarcely human; their language almost inarticulate; and they wore no clothing. The Ethiopian soldiers, when called upon to defend themselves, or to face an enemy, stuck their poisoned arrows within a filled bound round the head, which, projecting like so many rays, formed a kind of crown. The Bosjesmans do exactly the same thing; and they place them in this manner for the double purpose of expeditious shooting, and of striking terror into the minds of their enemies. [A paragraph on the geography of Hottentot country.] The Bosjesmans, though in every respect a Hottentot, yet in his turn of mind differs very widely from those who live in the colony. In his disposition he is lively and chearful; in his person active. His talents are far above mediocrity; and averse to idleness; they are seldom without employment. |
The Boschies, or Bosjemans, resemble the former Egyptian, remarkably flat-nosed._ The character drawn by Diodorous [sic] Siculus of some of the Ethiopian nations, agrees with that of the Bosjeman._ a gross brutality is stated by him to have prescribed in all their manners, and customs; their voices shrill, dissonant, & scarcely human; their language is almost inarticulate; & they wear no sort of cloathing [sic]._ The Ethiopian Soldiers when called upon to defend themselves, or to face an enemy, stuck their poisoned Arrows within a Fillet; bound round the head, which projecting like so many rays, formed a kind of Crown; & they place them in the manner for the double purpose, of expeditious shooting, & of striking terror into the minds of their Enemies._ The annexed is an accurate Likeness of a Bosjeman Hottentot, but at the same time may be considered as the representation of one, whose features are more favored than they usually are met with._ The Bosjeman through in every respect a Hottentot, yet in his turn of mind differs widely from those who live in the Colony. in his disposition he is lively & cheerful; in his person active._ his talents are far above mediocrity; and, averse to idleness, he is seldom without employment._ |
Except in the extreme flatness of the nose… Indeed, from all the ancient accounts that have been preserved of the Egyptians and Ethiopians, it would appear that the real Hottentots, or Bosjesmans, were the people intended to be described. In their general physical character they bear a strong resemblance to the Pigmies and Troglodytes, two tribes who are said to have dwelt in the neighbourhood of the Nile. The character drawn by Diodorus Siculus, of some of the Ethiopian nations, agrees exactly with that of the Bosjesmans. A gross brutality is stated by him to have prevailed in all their manners and customs; their voices were shrill, dissonant, and scarcely human; their language almost inarticulate; and they wore no sort of clothing. The Ethiopian soldiers, when called upon to defend themselves, or to face an enemy, stuck their poisoned arrows within a fillet bound round the head, which, projecting like so many rays, formed a kind of crown. The Bosjesmans do exactly the same thing; and they place them in this manner for the double purpose of expeditious shooting, and of striking terror into the minds of their enemies. The annexed print is an accurate likeness of a Bosjesman Hottentot, but at the same time may be considered as a representation of one whose features are more favored than they are usually met with. [A paragraph on the geography of Hottentot country.] The Bosjesman, though in every respoed a Hottentot, yet in his turn of mind differs very widely from those of this nation who live in the colony. In his disposition he is lively and chearful; in his person active. His talents are far above mediocrity; and, averse to idleness, he is seldom without employment. |
The question at hand is the relation of the manuscript to the printed editions. In both instances an alternate name — suggesting primary experience — is given for the groups: “Caffree” and “Boschies.” Observations appear in the manuscript that do not in the printed texts, e.g., “their frame is not enervated by frequent use of intoxicating Liquors” in the manuscript facing “A Kaffer Woman” but in the printed texts they do not drink at all and are unacquainted with liquor entirely.
Various points in both passages suggest that the manuscript is intermediary between the editions; e.g., in the text opposite “A Kaffer Woman,” “Their diet is simple” in both the first edition and the manuscript, the second edition reads “their diet is extremely simple,” and is preceded by an apophasis of the athleticism of the people that is new. Similarly, in the first edition text corresponding to that facing “A Bosjeman in Armour,” Barrow writes of “a species of brutality;” in the manuscript and in the second edition this is amplified to “a gross brutality.”
Most telling is the presence in the manuscript facing “A Bosjeman in Armour” making direct reference to the image, which is altogether absent from the first edition (being unillustrated) but appears in both the manuscript and in the second edition, though with a telling addition of “print” in the second edition. This brings right to the fore the more pressing question: are the paintings inserted here preparatory to the printed images, or derived from them?
The four watercolors all correspond to plates in the second edition.[3] Overlapping the images digitally shows closeness rather than replication. Juxtaposed, the watercolors show modulation of line and tone that is flattened in the plates; i.a., the collarbone in “A Hottentot,” the shadows modelling the proper left breast of “A Kaffer Woman,” and the edge of the cloak on the right breast of “A Bosjeman in Armour.” “The broad-tailed sheep of Southern Africa” is the most distinct; the printed plate has landscape in the middle (left) and back (right) ground. In this last example, the background elements can argue in either direction: either the addition of atmosphere by the maker of the plate (T. Medland) if original, or the removal of extraneous detail in keeping with the style of the other three if derivative.
Drawings by Samuel Daniell (1775–1811) — though attribution is sometimes clouded by the more extensive output of his brother William, with whom he collaborated — are held in by the Huntington, the Met (acquired in 2021; it presents a particularly close parallel in style if not in technique) and the British Museum (an album of 79 drawings and prints including material by both Daniell brothers; 8 drawings are now attributed to Samuel). Several drawings attributed to Daniell have come onto the market, including an album of birds now at Arader, though only about six depict African figures.
The watermark gives a terminus post quem of 1803. Daniell was in Africa from 1799 to 1802, and so would have been back in England until 1806, when he went out to Ceylon, where he remained until his death in 1811. It is during this period, without doubt, that Daniell was approached by Barrow (or his publisher) to produce drawings that would be reproduced in the second edition of his Travels. The text facing two of the paintings suggests access to the text, then undergoing revision by Barrow, which must have come either from the author or the publishers. Because the present item has been re-backed, it cannot be said with certainty when the paintings (and the map, assuming it was inserted at the same time) were bound in; the creases of the drawings conform to those of the text-block.
Stylistically, the assurance and nuance of the lines suggest an original rather than a derivative work, most clearly seen in the monochrome “Hottentot,” whose face seems to have been regularized — Europeanized, even — by Medland in the published plate. This same shift occurs in “A Kaffer Woman,” especially in the presence of a scar or mark to her proper left cheekbone in the painting, which has been replaced by a highlight in the published plate. Because so few drawings in public collections are confidently attributed to Samuel Daniell, it is difficult to characterize his working technique or his materiality. The drawing now at the Met is a strong comparison, with similarities in the rendering of the mouth and nasolabial folds of the “Kaffer Woman.”
Thus we posit that the present item contains four original watercolors by Samuel Daniell, and as such is a vitally important collection not only of that artist’s limited output but a valuable record of a European’s view of Africans at the beginning of the XIXc.
Mendelssohn II p. 152 (giving 1809 as the publication date).
[1] The term “kaffer” or “kaffir,” from the Arabic meaning “unbeliever,” is considered an ethnic slur and its use is forbidden in South Africa. It historically referred to Bantus in central and southern Africa. The term is used here as a reflection of the title of the drawing.
[2] In the printed texts, the orthography is “Bosjesman,” whereas in the manuscript it is “Bosjeman.”
[3] The plates from the second edition used for comparison are taken from the digitalized Smithsonian Libraries copy.
Item #JLR0447
Price: $45,000