588 



M N E M O N I C S. 



Mncmo- i )O i of some current coin ; tlint on naval affairs, by the 

 " ICf - figure of a ship ; tliat on wisdom, by the Jigtire of the 



"""*"" ' goddess who presided over it. He would cither actu- 

 ally transfer, or suppose transferred, these symbols to 

 the different compartments of the house, and then all 

 he had to do, in order to recollect the subject of any 

 paragraph, was, either to cast his eye on the symbol 

 during delivery, or to remember upon what division 

 the symbol was placed. The memory, by this con- 

 trivance, easily recalled the discourse. The orator ei- 

 ther saw, or could not i'ail to remember the compart- 

 ments, because he was perfectly familiar with them. 

 Neither could he forget the symbols of each paragraph, 

 because they were no more than hieroglyphical paint- 

 ings of the sense. 



Such were the origin and principles of the celebrat- 

 ed topical memory of the ancients ; from which source 

 are derived all the various modern systems of local and 

 symbolical memory. Our readers will find this story 

 of Simonides circumstantially related and commented 

 on by Cicero, tie Oral. lib. ii. ; by the author of the 

 books ad Herennium, lib. iii. : and by Quintilian in the 

 second chapter of the eleventh book of his Institutions. 

 The Anthology has preserved the following distich of 

 Simonides, relative to the subject of his memory : 



nvee (fyifLt ~ 

 ITU zra.i^t 



Jfcinomagis manor est Simonide, conscins alo 

 Cut se t etfuerant lustra pcrycta deccm. 



We must observe, however, that in spite of these ancient 

 authorities, the claim of Simonides to the merit of in. 

 venting the art of memory, has been recently contro- 

 verted in a dissertation on the mnemonic art among 

 the ancients, by Professor Morgenstern of Dorpat, who 

 seems to trace this science to the Egyptian hierogly- 

 phics. 



Several of the Greek philosophers appear to have 

 adopted and recommended certain artificial rules for 

 the assistance of the memory ; Aristotle is said, among 

 others, to have written a work entitled MmKovixisv, 

 which has been lost; and Pliny (Hist. Nat. Lib. VII. 

 cap. I Z\:) expressly names Metrodorus, a contemporary 

 of Cicero, as the individual who first brought the art 

 into a systematic and scientific form. It is to him, 

 therefore, that we are probably indebted for the theory 

 of places and images. 



In more modern times, this art was cultivated by 

 Ilaymund Lully, (in his Ars Magtta,) and others, 

 whose wtorks we shall notice at the end of this article. 

 The Germans, who are fond of constructing theories 

 upon all subjects, have recently paid much attention 

 to mnemonics, and have not only explained the ancient 

 methods, but invented several new systems. 



So early as towards the end of the 16th century, the 

 art of memory was revived by Lambert Schenckel, a 

 man who possessed considerable learning, and who 

 wrote various works on grammar, prosody, rhetoric, 

 &c. He travelled for many years in Germany, the 

 Netherlands, and France; and he obtained from the 

 University of Paris the privilege of teaching his mne- 

 monic doctrines in that capital. In his old age, he 

 appointed his friend and pupil, Martin Summer, a Sile- 

 sian, to be his successor in the mnemonic chair. Som- 

 mer published a short tract in Latin, by way of invita- 

 tion to the study of his art. Like his master, Schenc- 

 kel, he travelled a great deal, and realised a consider- 

 able fortune by teaching. Schenckel's work on the 

 art of memory appeared, for the first time, in l(JIO; 

 and S< mmer published a new edition of it in 1619. 

 For a long period, the principles of Lullus and 



5 



Schenckel continued to be studied and commented Mnemo- 

 upon, but little accession was made to the doctrine of nic? - 

 mnemonics ; on the contrary, the speculations on this " """Y"" 1 

 subject degenerated so much into frivolous common* 

 place, or mystical jargon, that they tended rather to 

 degrade than to promote the study of the art. 



The principal work published in England, on the 

 subject of the local memory, appeared in 16 18, under 

 the title of Mnemonica ; sive ars retiiinisie.di, &c. by 

 John Willis; and was translated, in l66l, by one 

 Sowersby, a bookseller. In the year 1651, Henry 

 Herdson published his Ars Mnemonica, sive Her/lsoniis 

 Brvxiatus, &c. in Latin and English. It is merely a 

 republication of part of Brux's Simotiideo Redivivus. 

 The Memoria Tcclinica of Richard Grey was publish- 

 ed in 1 730 ; and to the ninth edition are appended the 

 Mnemonics of Solomon Lowe, a small tract, now ex- 

 ceedingly rare, which was first published in 1737. 

 The system of Dr. Grey is allowed to be very inge- 

 nious. Dr. Priestley observes, " It is so easily learned, 

 and may be of so much use in recollecting dates, when 

 other methods are not at hand, that he thinks all per- 

 sons of a liberal education inexcusable, who will not 

 take the small degree of pains that is necessary to 

 make themselves masters of it; or who think any thing 

 mean, or unworthy of their notice, which is so useful 

 and convenient." 



Since the commencement of the present century, the 

 mnemonic doctrine has been again revived on ti;e ( on- 

 tinent, with considerable success, by Graff e, Avetin, 

 Duchet, Kastner, Feinagle, and others. Feinagle tra- 

 velled a good deal ; and some years ago, he taught, 

 and exhibited specimens of his method, at Paris, Lon- 

 don, and Edinburgh. A small volume was afterwards 

 published, illustrative of the principles of his system, 

 and exhibiting their application to the various sciences; 

 from which we shall endeavour to present our readers 

 with an abridged account of his method. 



Locality, it is observed, is the most efficacious me- 

 dium of reminiscence; and that system of memory will 

 be the most serviceable which brings this principle 

 into the most extensive operation. For this reason, 

 locality, or the connection of our ideas with places, is 

 made the foundation of the present system. 



A room having generally four walls, the most ob- 

 vious division of it is into four sides, and each wall or 

 side may be subdivided into patmels or Compartments. 

 Accordingly, the ancient system divided a wall into 

 five spaces ; and this plan was applied to as many rooms 

 as were found necessary to the extent of each particu- 

 lar scheme every room being similarly divided into 

 four sides, and every side being subdivided into five 

 compartments. Thus, any idea which, according to 

 this method, had been associated in the mind with the 

 forty- eighth compartment, would be placed in the third 

 compartment of the second wall, in the third room. 

 But as few compartments could be obtained on each 

 wall by these means, the calculation of high numbers 

 would be exceedingly difficult To remedy this de- 

 fect, each wall might be divided into nine or ten com. 

 partments. If a wall be divided into nine parts, there 

 will be 36 compartments in every room. In order to 

 ascertain the situation of any particular number, it is 

 to be considered in relation to the total number of tne 

 subdivisions For example, if the situation of number 

 48 be required ; according to the last-mentioned divi- 

 sion of the rooms, it is to be found by considering the 

 proportion which that number bears to 36, the total 

 number of the compartments in this arrangement, 

 the number in question be less than this total, the place 



