The Picture in the House

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Tinsel

What we somehow have here is the American version of the book printed in Frankfurt with relativism applied to it. Was this what Lovecraft was looking at when he wrote the story?

There is no "American version" of the book (as I stated earlier, to the best of my knowledge, the book has never had an English translation save for brief excerpts)... this was a book which a sea captain (Ebenezer Holt) bought during his merchanting travels (most likely in Europe) and brought back with him, then traded to the old man (who was most likely not old at the time):

“Oh, thet Afriky book? Cap’n Ebenezer Holt traded me thet in ’sixty-eight—him as was kilt in the war.” Something about the name of Ebenezer Holt caused me to look up sharply. I had encountered it in my genealogical work, but not in any record since the Revolution. I wondered if my host could help me in the task at which I was labouring, and resolved to ask him about it later on. He continued.
“Ebenezer was on a Salem merchantman for years, an’ picked up a sight o’ queer stuff in every port. He got this in London, I guess—he uster like ter buy things at the shops. I was up ta his haouse onct, on the hill, tradin’ hosses, when I see this book. I relished the picters, so he give it in on a swap."

As for what Lovecraft was looking at -- or, in this case, referring to, as it was, as I recall, likely a library copy he had seen the reproduction in -- was, as stated earlier, Thomas Henry Huxley's On Man's Place in Nature and Other Anthropological Essays, where the very inaccurate rendition of the original -- that is, a totally redrawn sketch, not a genuine reproduction of the original plate -- is to be found in chapter 2. This is, as the title states, a book of scientific (anthropological) essays by one of the leading figures of that field in his day. There is no evidence that Lovecraft ever saw a copy of the actual Regnum Congo itself in any form.

[Lobolover]

Is there any modern reprint of that modified sketch , JD ?

[Tinsel]

Just logging on very quickly (have not read posts yet):

My understanding is that the Sea Captain lied to him about where he got the book from.

[Tinsel]

Is it safe to say that the book was reprinted in pre America in Latin, than the Revolution occured and the British took it back to London, where the Captain picked it up and brought it back to America.

[Tinsel]

Last of all, this maniac did not have prolonged life, but evil certainly took form. He picked up the book in 1868, which was 28 years to the day of the encounter, giving his murders in that time frame.

[Tinsel]

I did read your comments j.d. worthington,

What I will say is that in the book it says that the Latin version of the book was "printed at Frankfort in 1598". I understand that Frankfort is located in Kentucky. I'm not sure if that is the same Frankfort, but if it is than this means that this book existed in what is now America, but before America became a country and during Spanish rule there (is that correct, I'm not exactly educated).

In regard to the pictures of native Americans, it is apparent that Kentucky was highly populated by native Americans, and based on the wikipedia of Theordor de Bry Theodor de Bry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia it says that the carvings were done according to the region. In other words, a book done in Frankfort would resemble native Americans and Caucasian people of that region rather than black people, but the example provided in the article is Europeans. Anyway I would have to sit here and focus on wording if I wanted to explain this better, but that is a lot of work. What I am saying is that this book traveled out of pre America as stated in the above post.

Well this hellish nightmare is clearly ended, is it not? Case solved, except for one thing. What kind of evil occured? Yes, the blood is the life, that is what the LORD said in Leviticus maybe. I thought about that too. I also thought about how just before Abraham lowered his knife to sacrifice his son, than the Angel of God interceded. This part of the story is going to have to remain subjective. There is also the strong hint of Puritanism and that is going to have to serve as the answer to why he went astray. I suspect that there is more to it, but it would be difficult to prove.

One thing that can be said about the dragon with the alligator head and the monkeys and human hybrids is that in other stories when these symbols show up, there is always the notion of paganism.

I like to hear your interpretation because you appear to be much better educated than I am. I vegetated during all of my school years except for elementary or grades 1 - 6. Only now am I learning other than a couple years post secondary which were okay.

[Tinsel]

Actually where is Frankfort in 1598? Is that Belgium? Hmm, did they colonize anywhere? That could mess things up.

This is impossible for me to know but otherwise my theory makes total sense.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Tinsel

I did read your comments j.d. worthington,

What I will say is that in the book it says that the Latin version of the book was "printed at Frankfort in 1598". I understand that Frankfort is located in Kentucky. I'm not sure if that is the same Frankfort, but if it is than this means that this book existed in what is now America, but before America became a country and during Spanish rule there (is that correct, I'm not exactly educated).

While there is a Frankfort in Kentucky, Frankfurt is in Germany. (Note from the article on Theodor de Bry you cite: "In 1588, Theodorus and his family moved permanently to Frankfurt-am-Main"; emphasis added.) This is another instance of HPL's being tripped up by second-hand scholarship: the plates first made their appearance (as noted earlier) in the German edition (see my post above quoting Joshi's notes) and, in fact, in most reproductions of that plate the text from that page is included, and this is in the "black-letter" German -- that is, the older Gothic script:

Blackletter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for your statement and query earlier... I'm curious where you get that Ebenezer Holt lied about where he acquired the book (and, for that matter, why you think he would even want to). On the idea that his encounter with Holt was in 1868, look again at the following:

Cap’n Ebenezer Holt traded me thet in ’sixty-eight—him as was kilt in the war.” Something about the name of Ebenezer Holt caused me to look up sharply. I had encountered it in my genealogical work, but not in any record since the Revolution.

The date meant was 1768, eight years before the War of Independence, as is made clear by the narrator's commenting that he had encountered Holt's name before in his genealogical researches, but "not in any record since the Revolution" (1775-1783), during which war Holt "was kilt". So, yes, the old man of the tale is at least 150 years old (granting that he was in his twenties at the time of this meeting with Holt), quite likely older.

Incidentally, it was not Theodor (or Theodorus) de Bry, but his son, John-Theodore who, with his brother, did the illustrations for this particular book; though John-Theodore did work with his father on others.

One thing that can be said about the dragon with the alligator head and the monkeys and human hybrids is that in other stories when these symbols show up, there is always the notion of paganism.

I don't recall anything quite like those, though there are certainly chimaera-like creatures in some of his tales; notably "The Dunwich Horror"; cf. the citation from Charles Lamb's essay "Witches, and Other Night-Fears" which heads the story... a very fascinating essay, by the way:

Charles Lamb's Essay: Witches, And Other Night-Fears

I like to hear your interpretation because you appear to be much better educated than I am. I vegetated during all of my school years except for elementary or grades 1 - 6. Only now am I learning other than a couple years post secondary which were okay.

Though I thank you for the compliment (and am glad you find my -- perhaps overly-lengthy -- comments interesting, I think you overpraise my abilities undervalue your own. I've known many who were so thoroughly alienated by the way modern education is so often handled that they simply didn't engage with learning until once they were out of the school system... a rather sharp but, I feel often deserved, criticism of our educational methods. The point is that you are attempting to broaden your horizons now, and that can be both a difficult and very rewarding challenge... my heartiest congratulations and best wishes with the endeavor!

Lobo (and anyone else interested): You can find Huxley's book at the following link; the picture in question is at page 74:

Man's place in nature: and other ... - Google Books

[Tinsel]

The Captain must have had the extended life, not this turkey who became a cannibal. If that date was 1768 instead of 1868, I thought that it would have to be declared 1768 instead of just 68, which I would interpret to be the current century, otherwise I would accept your claim.

So the de Bry brothers father carved images of native Americans or native canibals, whatever the article says. These carvings existed. The also messed up the images on purpose by changing racial features and items.

I have to agree with you about Frankfurt Germany. That is now understood. The spelling was Frankfort and I used the Reader dictonary and got faked out when Kentucky appeared in the definition.

The father did othe drawings of the New World as well. Yes there is at least some background information here. I don't want to start looking at those things if they are fake, but I thought I read that he carved images of dinosaurs.

Imagine what a voyage into the unexplored remote Congo would be like in the late sixteenth century. Now that would be quite an expedition.

I moved on to Herbert West. You can't expect me to read a whole bunch of stuff. I can barely read.

[Tinsel]

What do you figure, that eternal life only applies to butchers and not sailors? The butcher shop carving is the only carving in that dem dare evil book?

[Tinsel]

Actually I see that now, where it said that the Captain was killed in the war. That must than eliminate the book, and make the cause of insanity more related to Puritanism, however the longer life span is still mysterious. If you eat human flesh, it isn't as if you are going to live longer.

Basically I was wondering why the Captain would give up the book. It must have something to do with mixing religion and this book, otherwise it is just a plain book.

Yes, though, now I agree that the butcher was that old. In the Bible, there are characters that are very old near the beginning.

The other thing is that the drop of blood was like the first drop of rain before the storm hit. Oh and there is the mention of the old Yankee dialect thought to be long extinct. The other thing that I would include is that now the book is destroyed.

[Tinsel]

Too bad he failed; Lovecraft that is (according to the Mexicans).

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Tinsel

Too bad he failed; Lovecraft that is (according to the Mexicans).

? Sorry, but I missed the connection there....

[Tinsel]

I was reading the synopsis of this here Lovecraft: Fear of the Unknown Blu-ray (2008)

It was a couple months ago that I read it. I think I remember it said something about him failing so I didn't buy it.

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

Del Toro's the only Mexican there, as far as I can see. Lovecraft was certainly not a financial success; that does not make him an artistic failure and I don't think anyone was implying that.