THE PROGRESS OF THE NATION IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY.
The Tudors and the Nation—The Church—Population and Wealth—Royal Prerogative—Legislation of Henry VIII.—The Star
Chamber—Beneficial Legislation—Treason Laws—Legislation of Edward and Mary—Elizabeth's Policy—Religion and the
Church—Sketch of Ecclesiastical History under the Tudors—Literature, Science, and Art—Greatness of the Period—Foundation
of Colleges and Schools—Revival of Learning—Its Temporary Decay—Prose Writers of the Period—The
Poets—Scottish Bards—Music—Architecture—Painting and Sculpture—Furniture and Decorations—Arms and Armour—Costumes,
Coins, and Coinage—Ships, Commerce, Colonies, and Manufactures—Manners and Customs—Condition of the
People.
The century of which we have just traced the
events was a period marked by vast progress and
by changes which were the springs of still more
wonderful progress in after ages. Though the
character of the Tudors was absolutely despotic,
no dynasty since the days of Alfred and Magna
Charta wrought out such revolutions in the constitution
of England. These revolutions were
partly effected by the very efforts of the Tudor
monarchs to establish their own power and gratify
their own self-will, but were due also to the fact
that the Tudor despotism was essentially popular,
and encouraged manifestations of the national will.
These revolutions extended not only into the
political constitution of the nation, but into its
religious one; into its literature, its philosophy,
and its morals; and that simply because the spirit
of the age was of that tone and strength that,
though outward powers could agitate it, nothing
but its own momentum could direct its tendency.
Henry VII., with an indifferent title, succeeded
to the crown, because the nation was weary of the
conflicts of the York and Lancaster monarchs,
and longed for peace, which his disposition promised.
Cold, cautious, and penurious, he took
care not to raise a fresh race of powerful barons in
place of that which the Wars of the Roses had
destroyed, but hoarded up money; and beyond the
injustice practised in its collection, left his people
to pursue their trades and their agriculture, and
thus renew their strength. Henry VIII.—violent,
passionate, sensual, and intensely arbitrary,
but fond of parade, and in his youth boastful
of his prowess—gratified the pride of the
nation, whilst he ruled it with a rod of iron. In
the gratification of his lusts he did not hesitate to
renounce allegiance to that great spiritual power
which for above a thousand years had ruled
haughtily over Europe and all its kings and
warriors. By this act he set free for ever the
mind and conscience of England. In vain did
he endeavour to bind the nation in a knot of his
own making. Though he hurled his fiercest terms
against those who claimed a universal liberty
which he intended only for himself, he had broken
the mighty spell of ages—a power and a mystery
before which the world had bowed in impotent
awe; and no chains which he could forge, no creed
which he could set up, no hierarchy which he
could frame, could possess more than the strength
of the fire-scorched flax against the will of the
enfranchised people. The moment that Henry
perished, the soul of the nation showed itself alive.
The very Reformers around his throne, who had
cowered beneath the fell and deadly ire of the
tyrant, rose, with Cranmer at their head and,
under the mild auspices of the religious Edward,
gave free vent to the spirit and the doctrines of
the Reformation. The return of theologic despotism
under Mary only added force to the spirit
of reform, by showing how terrible and bloody was
the animus of ancient superstition. The fires of
Smithfield lit up the dark places of spiritual
tyranny to the remotest corners of the nation,
and gave the blow to the tottering Bastille of
restringent faith in Great Britain. Elizabeth,
with all the self-will of her father, lived to see
both in people and Parliament, a spirit that made
her lion-heart shrink with awe, and own, however
reluctantly, a power looking already gigantically
down upon her own. She felt more than once, in
the pride of her might, the terror of that national
will which, in less than half a century from her
death, shattered the throne of her successor, and
gave to the world the unheard-of spectacle of a
king decapitated for treason to his people.
The grand underlying impulse of the forward
movement of this age was that of the general progress
of the world in knowledge—knowledge of its
rights and of the force inherent in popular association.
The restoration of classical literature,
and especially of the Greek, had rekindled the
lofty and independent sentiments of antiquity;
but still more, the knowledge of the doctrines,
principles, and promises of the Bible, which had
been disseminated among the people by the
Reformers, had spread like a flame amongst them,
and had given them totally new ideas of human
prerogative and dignity. Henry VIII., after
being induced to make public the Scriptures, saw
so clearly their effect that he withdrew the boon
as far as was possible, and pronounced the
severest penalties on any of the common people
who should consult that Divine fountain of truth
and freedom. Throughout the civilised world,
far even beyond the countries in which the Reformation
had established itself, the stimulating
boon of this knowledge was diffused, and gave a
perilous and uneasy feeling to the most slavish
nations and the most despotic sovereigns.
But in England many other causes had co-operated
to raise the power and condition of the
people. The long civil wars had, by the time of
the accession of Henry VII., reduced the old
nobility to a mere fragment. Such extraordinary
specimens of baronial wealth and dominion as the
Warwicks, Beauchamps, and Shrewsburys, no
longer existed. In the first Parliament of Henry
VII., the peers amounted to only twenty-eight;
in that of Henry VIII. they had risen only
to thirty-six. With their extinction had lapsed
their vast estates to the Crown, and this property
had in part been sold to defray the costs by which
the throne had maintained its straggles against
various claimants and their factions. Henry VII.,
as we have said, carefully kept down this haughty
class to the limits into which it had fallen. His
son, Henry VIII., like him, pursued the policy of
Edward IV., who had established a system of fine
and recovery to cut off entails; and by liberal use
of attainders, with their consequent forfeitures of
title and estate, made the nobility entirely subservient
to the Crown, which augmented its wealth
and power on their ruin. By conferring their
estates in part on new aspirants to the peerage
from the families of the lesser gentry, and in
many cases—as in those of Wolsey and Cromwell—from
the ranks of the common people, he divided
the aristocracy against itself, and thus added fresh
influence to the throne.
This predominance of the Crown once established,
Henry VIII. proceeded to a still more
startling blow at a power hitherto equal and often
paramount to that of the Crown—the Church.
To the terror and astonishment of the whole of
Papal Christendom, he stretched his hand not only
against the supreme rule, but the vast property of
that august and time-honoured institution. In
1532 he abolished the annates, or first-fruits,
before that time paid to the court of Rome—an
act in itself proclaiming his independence of that
court. In the following year he declared by Act
of Parliament that his subjects might discuss the
claims and condemn the acts and opinions of the
Pope without incurring any charge of heresy.
Another year, and he caused himself to be proclaimed
"Supreme head of the Church" in his own
realms, and prohibited not only all payments to
the Pope, but all appeals to or recognition of his
authority. In 1535, the very next year, he confiscated
the property of the lesser monasteries; and
this course, once begun, never stopped, till he had
made himself master of all the vast demesnes of
the monasteries, the collegiate churches, hospitals,
and houses of the order of the Knights of St.
John of Jerusalem; the bulk of which he appropriated
to his own use, turning adrift 150,000
monks, priests, and nuns into the world. So
daring a sweep of ecclesiastical property, power,
and privilege never was made by any other man
or in any other era of the world; and nothing
could have emboldened even this impious and
lawless monarch to so astounding a deed but the
clear consciousness that the spirit of the age
was with him.
By this unexampled stroke Henry made himself
master of 644 convents, 90 colleges, 2,374
chantries and free chapels, and 110 hospitals; the
whole of which property, with trifling exception,
was speedily conveyed to the vast swarm of
hungry upstarts—the Russells, the Brownes, the
Seymours, and the like—who rapidly bloomed
into aristocratic greatness, and constituted an
impregnable barrier against any restoration of
this affluent but corrupt ecclesiastical princedom.
These new men, in their turn, were compelled
to subdivide a portion, more or less, among their
followers, to establish their own position; and
other large areas of lands were sold in minor
amounts to the successful merchants and traders,
so that by this means there grew up again a new
power in the country—that of small but sturdy
freeholders, who, at once independent of the
Crown and the aristocracy, soon made their might
felt in the community, and added to the House of
Commons that popular infusion of authoritative
life which speedily electrified the Government by
its tone, and prostrated it by its measures.
That a large number of such men of substance,
whose wealth was the produce of industry, existed
at the period, is an indication that the nation had
grown rich by trade, and had also advanced in
population. When we talk of the England and
other countries of Europe of former ages, we are
scarcely aware of what extremely different countries
they were, both in regard to the cultivation
of their lands, the arts, aspects, and habits of their
cities, their general knowledge, their polish of
speech, and their amount of population. It will
scarcely be credited that at the close of the Wars
of the Roses, the whole population of England and
Wales did not exceed two millions and a half—far
less than the present population of London. But
in 1575, that is, in the seventeenth year of Elizabeth,
the men fit to bear arms alone amounted to
1,172,674, and the entire population to not less
than 5,000,000. Harrison, in his "Description of
England" at this time, says that "Some do grudge
at the great increase of people in these days,
thinking a necessary herd of cattle far better than
a superfluous augmentation of mankind. They
laid," he says, "the cause upon God, as though He
were in fault for sending such increase of people,
or want of wars that should consume them; affirming
that the land was never so full." So little
did they comprehend that the multitude of people,
properly employed, were the strength and wealth
of the nation.
But we shall have occasion to notice that with
this wealth and strength there also existed
much poverty, owing to the derangements of
society in the days of Henry VIII., and to the
great tendency to leave the land in pasture to
supply the growth of wool necessary for the
large demand for the Netherlands and the rapidly
increasing one at home, where the manufacture
of both coarse and fine cloths had been growing
from the time that Edward III., at the instigation
of his queen Philippa of Hainault, invited the
weavers of fine woollens over from that country.
Still the rise in the value of all kinds of articles
of life, including wages, during the whole of this
period, is a proof of the enlarged demand for
skilled workmen, and the capacity to pay much
more than formerly, which could only be the case
with augmented means in the bulk of the population.
At various times, as in 1496 and 1514,
Acts were passed with the vain object of keeping
down wages—attempts which, though they show
little progress in political economy, prove with
equal clearness that employers were more numerous
than they had been in proportion to labour.
In 1500 the wages of a master mason were 6d. a
day; in 1575 they were doubled; and in 1590
they had reached 1s. 2d. The wages of common
labourers had risen from 6d. a day to 10d. In
1511 the salary of a domestic priest was £3 6s. 8d.
a year; in 1545 it had risen to £4 14s. 6d. In
1544 the wages of sailors were advanced from 5s.
per month, in the Royal navy, to 6s. 8d., and all
other trades and professions exhibited the similar
advance of payment.
This, of course, was the result of the like
advance in the prices of provisions, rents, and
clothing—another proof that the people had become
not only more numerous, but more luxurious,
and, therefore, demanded better diet and accommodation.
Wheat, the staple of the people's
food, had advanced from 3s. 4d. a quarter in 1485
to 17s. in 1589; £2 2s. in 1596; and £1 7s. in
1599. It is true the price of wheat varied a great
deal in this period, but except in a very few
seasons it never approached the low price of the
previous century; and in 1587, a year of scarcity,
it rose to £5 4s. In 1500 a dozen pigeons were
4d., in 1541 they were 10d., in 1590 they were
1s., and in 1597, a year of scarcity, 4s. 3d. In
1500 a hundred eggs could be had for 6d., in 1541
they were 1s. 2d., and in 1597 they were 3s. A
good fat goose in 1500 was only 4d., but in 1541
it was 8d., in 1589 it was 1s. 2d. A fat sheep in
1500 was 1s. 8d., in 1549 from 2s. 4d. to 4s., and
in 1597, the dear year, it could not be had under
14s. 6d. In 1500 an ox could be purchased for
11s. or 12s., in 1541 its price had advanced from
£1 to £2; in 1597 a single stone of beef was 2s.,
and a whole fat ox upwards of £5.
In "Stafford's Dialogue," published in 1581, all
the speakers agree in respect to this advance of
prices in their time. "I am fain," says the
capper, "to give my journeymen twopence in a
day more than I was wont to do, and yet they
say they cannot sufficiently live thereon." "Such
of us," says the knight, "as do abide in the
country, still cannot, with £200 a year, keep that
house that we might have done with 200 marks
but sixteen years past. Cannot you, neighbour,"
he adds, addressing the farmer, "remember that
within these thirty years I could in this town
buy the best pig or goose that I could lay my hand
on for 4d., which now costeth 12d., a good capon
for 3d. or 4d., a chicken for 1d., a hen for 2d.,
which now costeth me double and triple the
money? It is likewise in greater ware, as in beef
and mutton. I have seen a cap for 13d. as good
as I can get now for 2s. 6d.; of cloth ye have
heard how the price is risen. Now a pair of
shoes costs 12d., yet in my time I have bought a
better for 6d. Now I can get never a horse shoed
under 10d. or 12d., when I have also seen the
common price was 6d."
This steady advance of prices of all articles is a
sufficient test of the progress of the nation in
general wealth, and in notions of comfort and style
of living; for though undoubtedly a vast mass of
pauperism existed during this period, no people
could go on paying higher and higher rates for
everything, who had not the means of doing so.
A poor nation might have suffered distress or
scarcity, but could not have raised the means of
living to such a degree as is here shown, if they
had not had the money to purchase on such a
scale.
TOWN AND COUNTRY FOLK OF ELIZABETH'S REIGN.
But we have abundant other evidence, with
some degree of detail, of the progress of wealth
in the splendour maintained by the Court, in the
cost of dress, jewellery, horses, and household
establishments, in the amount of taxation and revenue,
in the extent of shipping and foreign commerce,
and in the rank and influence which the
nation had assumed in Europe. We now proceed
to notice these tokens of advance.
The Tudors were a race who had the highest
possible idea of their power and prerogative.
Under Henry VIII. especially the sentiment of
Louis XIV. of France was thoroughly realised
though the phrase was not yet coined, "L'état?
c'est moi!"—"I am the State." If he did not
actually annihilate the Constitution, he reduced
it to a mockery and a mere machine, which
moved only at his will. Yet in truth, paralysed
as the nation appeared then under the terror of
the axe and the gallows, its spirit only waited: it
was never extinguished, and under his successors
it showed itself again unmistakably. It has been
asserted that the people in the time of Henry
VIII. were most cowardly, for that he had
no means of maintaining his arbitrary course
against them, as he had no standing army. But
this is not altogether true, for though he had
no actual standing army, he had such authority
over the minds of both aristocracy and people,
that—as we have seen on all occasions in which
the people revolted, chiefly on account of religion,
and when they were instigated and supported by
the Roman Catholic nobles—he speedily mustered
sufficient forces to put them down. In contemplating
the strange mystery of the base submission
of the Parliament and people to the reckless
caprices and bloodthirsty despotism of Henry
VIII., we must ever bear in mind that the whole
nation was rent into two most antagonistic parts
by the schism in religion. The Roman Catholics
feared the loss of their estates, the Protestants
were eager to secure them. Of the few noblemen
remaining in the country from the sanguinary
decimation of the civil wars, some of the wealthiest
were still staunch Roman Catholics, and were
watched with greedy eyes by the host of poor but
ambitious adventurers who were ready to second
every scheme of spoliation meditated by the
monarch. When the ancient Church was going
to the ground, with all its proud establishments and
enormous estates, the nobles who belonged to it
felt the very earth shaking under their feet, and
saw no means of safety but in the most implicit
obedience. On the other hand, the numerous
swarm of courtiers—whose only law was the word
of the prince, and their only real creed the belief
in plunder and in the acquisition of the lands of
nobles, prelates, abbots, and chantries, as the
reward of subservience—were ever ready to rush
to arms or to the execution of the most fierce and
unconstitutional orders of the king. No mercy
was shown by the members of families to one
another, where the terror of the monarch and the
hope of his favour intervened. And at that day,
when the country swarmed with vagabonds, who
had no home and no ties, who had been increasing
ever since the abolition of villenage, there was no
difficulty in mustering numbers of soldiers, where
there was the chance of liberal pay and more
liberal plunder.
This state of things, this facility of drawing
forces to the field on the shortest notice, and on
the most certain basis, was particularly provided
for by Henry VII. He took care to save money
by all means, and to hoard it, so that though no
man was more reluctant to spend, and none ever
incurred so much odium by his parsimony where
the military fame of the nation was concerned; yet
he gained at least the reputation of ample means,
and the credit for a disposition to punish promptly
and severely any disloyalty or adverse claims on
his Crown. He moreover passed two statutes
for the purpose of bringing his nobles and dependents
rapidly to his standard on any emergency.
By the Acts 2 Henry VII. c. 18, and 19
Henry VII. c. 1, every one who possessed an
office, fee, or annuity, by grant from the Crown,
was required to attend the king whenever he went
to war, under penalty, in case of failure, of
forfeiture of all such grants. There were, of
course, certain exemptions. Some obtained the
king's licence, for an equivalent consideration, to
remain at home, and such as could prove any disqualifying
infirmity were excused. The clergy, as
a matter of course, were exempt, also the judges
and principal officers of the law; and by the latter
Act this privilege was extended to the members of
the king's Council, to such persons as had bought
their patents for a certain sum, and to all persons
under twenty and above sixty years of age. The
exemptions extended to comparatively a small
number of persons, the fear of forfeiture applied
to the majority. To render this more effectual,
Henry VII. was rigorous in prohibiting a large
array of retainers by the nobles, whilst he
was strenuous to enforce the attendance of the
feoffees of the Crown. This process was carried
farther by Henry VIII. by the free use of
attainders, by which, at will, he struck down
the most wealthy and exalted nobles, and appropriated
their demesnes; so that eventually there
was not a foot of land in the kingdom nor an
individual life which was not held at the king's
mercy.
But still more than by the passing of attainders
were the lives, liberties, and property of the nobles
submitted to the will of the king, by the institution
of the Court of the Star Chamber. This
court set aside all other courts at will, and by
abandoning the use of juries in it, laid Magna
Charta and the life and fortune of every man, at
the foot of the throne. From the moment, in fact,
that this court was formally erected by the 3 Henry
VII., c. 1, there was an end of the Constitution,
the privilege of Habeas Corpus was suspended, and
Parliament legislated in vain. The king was the
State, and ruled in this arbitrary court by the
officers of his Privy Council. This court was so
called from the stars which ornamented the ceiling
of the room in which it met.
Henry VII., in his original enactment, plainly
avowed his reason for establishing this court to be,
that he might reach and punish such persons as by
one means or another escaped sentence in the ordinary
courts, through the bribery or "remissness"
of juries, and check the evils of "maintenance,"
or the overriding of justice through the assistance
of a powerful neighbour, and the granting of
"liveries" for the same purpose. The court was,
therefore, directed against the licence of the
nobility, and though arbitrary was at first
popular. It consisted in its original form of the
Chancellor, Treasurer, and Keeper of the Privy
Seal, or any two of them, with a bishop and a temporal
lord of the council and the chief justices of
the King's Bench and Common Pleas, or two other
justices in their absence. Ultimately it developed
into a mere gathering of privy councillors, and its
jurisdiction at first accurately defined, and for the
most part beneficial, became extremely vague and
was exercised at haphazard.
In the reign of Henry VII. the privilege of
benefit of clergy was greatly modified. This privilege,
which originally exempted all clergymen from
the authority of lay tribunals, had become extended
to all such laymen as could read, and were
therefore capable of becoming "clerks." To
restrict this abuse, Henry VII., in 1488, enacted
that such privilege should be allowed to laymen
only once; and afterwards—when a man had
murdered his master—a statute was passed to
deprive all murderers of their lords and masters
of benefit of clergy. Where it was admitted, the
culprit, if a layman, did not entirely escape
punishment, for he was burnt with a hot iron
in the brawn of the left thumb.
The statutes in this reign were drawn up in
English, and printed as they came out, by De
Worde, Pynson, and Faques, a signal step in
progress towards a public knowledge of the laws.
Under Henry VIII. the principle of arbitrary
government arrived at its culmination. The freedom
from restraint which his father had prepared
for him, the passionate and imperious nature of
this prince led him to exercise to the utmost. By
the means which we have described—terror of
death to those who offended, and participation in
the spoils of nobles and the Church, and hope of
new honours to those who served him regardless
of law or conscience—he put himself above all
control of Parliament or statute, and ruled as
royally, according to his own fancy, as any Eastern
despot. Out of this monstrous evil came, nevertheless,
much good to the nation. By his own
daring act he broke up the ancient system of the
Church, with its accumulated wealth, superstitions,
and abuses, and cleared the ground for a
new and more liberal state of things. By the distribution
of this property he founded a new and
influential class of freeholders, and enabled the
affluence of trade to flow into land, and to give to
the mercantile class a new status and influence.
His motive was his own selfishness, but the result
was the public good.
Among the useful Statutes which he passed may
be mentioned the Statute of Uses and the Statute
of Bankruptcy. By the former he put an end to
a most mischievous practice of conveying property
for the use of certain parties or corporate bodies,
which had been introduced to evade the Statute of
Mortmain. So many secret modes of conveyance,
so many legal fictions had been introduced into the
transfer of this property, that it was difficult to
ascertain the real owner; and creditors thus became
defrauded, widows were deprived of their
dowers, and husbands of their estates, by the
courtesy. But the great feudal lords also were
defrauded of their dues on wardships, marriages,
and reliefs. By an Act of the twenty-seventh
year of his reign (1536), it was decreed that whoever
was found in the possession of such property
should be deemed its bonâ-fide owner, and liable
to the charges leviable upon it. By this means
the dubious and fraudulent practice of uses was
abolished, and the lawyers were compelled to
resort to the more tangible theory of trusts.
The nature of the tenure still remained the
same, for the use was but a trust; but it was
simplified, and brought more into the region of
common sense and common observation.
By the preamble to the Statute of Bankruptcy,
we find that the progress of commerce had led to
frauds. Men by means of credit got the property
of others into their hands and absconded with it.
In the 34 and 35 of Henry VIII., therefore, it
was enacted that the Chancellor or Keeper of the
great seal, with the Lord Treasurer, Lord President,
Privy Seal, and others of the privy council,
and chief justices, or any three of them—the
Chancellor, Keeper, President, or Privy Seal being
one—should have power to constitute a court,
before which, on complaints from a party aggrieved,
they should summon the defaulter, should
take possession of all his property, should hear all
necessary evidence on oath, and should make a
distribution of his effects amongst the creditors
according to their claims. Persons concealing
effects of the offender were to forfeit double their
value; and claimants making fraudulent claims
were to forfeit double the amount demanded.
This was the first outline and foundation of our
court and law of bankruptcy, the main principles
of which are still in force, but considerably modified
by the greater development of the action of trade,
and a spirit of increased enlightenment and
humanity. The bankrupt is no longer treated
necessarily as a criminal, but as one who has
suffered from misfortune; and where he is innocent
of dishonest conduct, is discharged from such
obligations as he has no means of fulfilling, and
the way opened for future enterprise.
But the laws of Henry were rarely so rational
or innocent as these. We have seen, in tracing
the events of his reign, that, to stop the mouths of
his subjects regarding his many criminal deeds, the
cruel calumnies on and divorces of his wives, followed
by their execution, and the perpetration of
fresh marriages equally revolting, he was continually
creating new species of treasons, and
loading the Statute book with the most atrocious
specimens of legislation which ever disgraced the
annals of any nation, Christian or pagan.
The first of these extraordinary enactments was
the Statute 25 Henry VIII., c. 22, passed on the
occasion of his divorce of Catherine of Aragon,
and his marriage of Anne Boleyn. In this he
declared that any one who dared to write, print,
or circulate anything to the prejudice of this
marriage, or the queen herself, or the issue of such
marriage, should be guilty of high treason. The
same was to be the fate of any one who endeavoured
to dispute this alliance by advocating
the validity of the former marriage with Catherine,
and every one was to take an oath to obey this
Act fully; and if any refused to take such oath,
they were to be also guilty of misprision of treason.
As, however, the tyrant could not prevent people
from thinking and speaking their minds in private,
next Session he got from his pliant Parliament a
fresh Act, forbidding all persons to speak or even
think a slander against the king; for if they
thought, they could have the oath put to them,
and must either deny their very thought, or be
found guilty of treason.
But by the twenty-eighth year of his reign the
fickle despot had cut off the head of this very
queen, against whom nobody had on any account
been allowed to whisper the slightest fault, on
peril of their lives (1536). The marriage with
her, as well as that with Catherine, was declared
void, and never to have been otherwise; the issue
of both was pronounced illegitimate, and the same
penalties were enacted against every one who
called in question the tyrant's marriage with Jane
Seymour. Thus, on every occasion that this Royal
sensualist thought fit to destroy or divorce a wife
and marry another, did he compel the whole of his
subjects to swear and forswear at his pleasure.
In a Statute of the thirty-first of his reign, c. 8,
he clearly enunciated that doctrine of Divine right
which the Stuarts, his successors, upheld to their
perdition. It is worthy of note, too, that by
abolishing the authority of the Pope, to serve his
own selfish ends, he let loose the human mind
from its long thraldom, and prepared the way—a
necessary sequence—for that political rebellion
which was certain to be assumed by a people who
had once triumphed in a religious one. Thus was
political freedom the consequence of this lawless
monarch's attempt to crush it, as much as the
Reformation was that of his rejection of the
Papacy for the gratification of his passions.
It is needless to follow Henry VIII. through
the still repeated progress of those contradictory
oaths as he slew or wedded fresh wives. It was
the same in the divorce of Anne of Cleves, on the
decapitation of Catherine Howard; but growing
perfectly frantic with wrath and shame on finding
himself married to an unchaste woman whom he
had proclaimed an angel, he went a step farther,
and denounced the terrors of high treason against
any woman who should dare to marry him if she
had been incontinent before marriage, and against
all such persons as should know of this and should
not warn the king in time. When to these
hideous Statutes we add that of 31 Henry VIII.,
c. 14, which abolished all "Diversity of opinions,"
and that of 34 and 35 Henry VIII., c. 1, for the
"Advancement of true religion and abolishment of
the contrary," we have exhibited the most perfect
example of what a man may become by the intoxication
of unlimited power.
Besides particular laws, Henry VIII. erected
two new courts of justice—the Court of the
Steward of the Marshalsea, for the trial of all
treasons, murders, manslaughters, and blows by
which blood was shed in any of the palaces or
houses of the king during his residence there; and
the Court of the President and Council of the
North. This latter court was established in the
thirty-first year of his reign to try the rioters who
had risen against his suppression of the lesser
monasteries; but it included all the powers vested
in the king's own Council, and not only decided
such civil cases as were brought before it, but was
armed with authority, by secret instructions from
the Crown, to inquire into presumed illegalities,
and to bring before it alleged offenders against the
prerogatives of the king. Such oppressive use
was made of it by Strafford in the time of
Charles I., that it was abolished in the sixteenth
year of that monarch's reign.
STATE TRIAL IN WESTMINSTER HALL IN THE TIME OF ELIZABETH.
To the honour of Edward VI. and his counsellors,
all these arbitrary Acts of his father were
repealed by him: the law of treason was restored
to its state under the Statute of 25 Edward III.;
religion was again set free, and proclamations by
the king in council were declared to have no
longer the force of Acts of Parliament. A few
years, however, introduced Queen Mary, and a
reversal of the State religion and all its laws.
That dreadful persecution which we have narrated,
and which is one of the darkest spots in the
history of the world, was carried on to force the
human mind into its former thraldom; and an
attempt was made by the Spanish power which
was then introduced to restore arbitrary rule by a
singular suggestion. Charles V. presented, through
his ambassador, a book to the queen, in which the
principle was laid down that as she was the first
queen regnant, none of the limitations which had
been set to the prerogative of her ancestors the
kings of England, applied to her, but to kings
only; and that by consequence she was free and
absolute. This book Mary showed to Gardiner,
and asked his opinion of it, which was that it was
a pernicious book, and could work her no good.
Thereupon Mary threw the book into the fire;
and Gardiner, on the plea of defining and establishing
her authority, brought in an Act which,
giving her the same powers as the kings before her
possessed, consequently restrained her within the
same limits.
Mary confirmed the Act of her late brother, confining
the law of treason to the Statute of the 25th
of Edward III.; nor does she seem to have created
fresh treasons, except in one instance—making it
treasonable to counterfeit not merely the coin of
the realm, but also such coins as circulated there
by Royal consent.
On the accession of Elizabeth the Reformed religion
was once more restored; and, like her father,
she was not only declared supreme head of the
Church, but she assumed all his claims of supreme
authority in the State. She frequently told her
Parliament that it existed entirely by her will and
pleasure; and when the members entered on
matters disagreeable to her, she snubbed them in
language which sounds oddly enough in these days
of high Parliamentary privilege. By the very
first Statute passed in her reign, she proceeded to
set up a new Court, ignored everything like Magna
Charta and the right of jury, making her own will
the entire law, and placing every subject, with his
life and property, at her mercy. This was the
Court of High Commission, which assumed all the
pretensions of the Star Chamber, but was directed
more especially to ecclesiastical affairs. The queen
was empowered to appoint by letters patent, whenever
she thought proper, such persons, being
natural-born subjects, as she pleased, to execute
all jurisdiction concerning spiritual matters, and
to visit, reform, and redress all errors, heresies,
schisms, abuses, offences, &c., which by any ecclesiastical
authority might be lawfully ordered or
corrected. The Reformers were only too eager
to put this formidable engine into her hands,
because it was to crush the Romish hierarchy;
but they did not reflect that it could on occasion
be employed against themselves, as Laud and
Strafford afterwards demonstrated to their children.
This inquisitorial court was armed with
authority to employ torture to effect the necessary
confessions, and its jurisdiction was extended to
the punishment of breaches of the marriage vow,
and all misdemeanours and disorders in that
state. It was, therefore, sanctioned in forcing
its operations into the very bosom of social and
domestic life.
Elizabeth, indeed, was fully as arrogant and
despotic as her father; and nothing but her lion-like
resolution, her choice of able and unscrupulous
ministers, and the cunning of her Government,
could have enabled her to maintain her sway so
successfully as she did. The homage due to her
sex no doubt also contributed essentially to this
result. Yet not all these circumstances could
prevent her from perceiving that her power was
silently and even rapidly waning before that of
the people. She frequently had to tell persons
that they dared not have done or said certain
things in her father's time. She had repeatedly
to concede the point to the pertinacity of her
Parliament; especially so when, towards the end
of her reign, the House of Commons called so
boldly upon her to abolish the monstrous list of
monopolies which had been granted to her
favourites, commencing from the seventeenth
year of her reign. Amongst these monopolies
were those for the exclusive sale of salt, currants,
iron, powder, cards, calf-skins, felts, poledavy (a
kind of canvas), ox shin-bones, train-oil, lifts of
cloth, potash, anise-seed, vinegar, sea-coal, steel,
aqua-vitæ, brushes, pots, bottles, saltpetre, lead,
accidences (or books of the rudiments of Latin
grammar), oil, calamine stone, oil of blubber,
glasses, paper, starch, tin, sulphur, new drapery,
dried pilchards; the exportation of iron, ham,
beer, and leather; the importation of Spanish
wool and Irish linen; such an astonishing list,
in fact, that when it was read over in the
Commons in 1601, but two years before her
death, a member in amazement asked, as already
stated, whether bread was not of the number.
These grants had been obtained from her by her
courtiers through the weak side of the woman;
but in the expenses of her government, considering
the aid she had to render to her Protestant
allies in Scotland, France, and the Netherlands,
and the enemies she had to contend with, necessitating
costly armaments and navies, her administration
shows most favourably. She would
never incur debt, but paid off that incurred by her
predecessors, Edward and Mary. Instead of debasing
the coin, like her father, she increased its
purity; and the annual outlay of her government
averaged only about £65,000 per annum.
In fact, the more we recede from the personal
history of Elizabeth, and approach her great
political measures, the more we perceive the true
evidences of her glory. She was courageous,
beyond the power of a world in arms to terrify
her; she was moderate in her demands on her
subjects, though vain in her person and showy in
her court; shrewd in her choice of ministers,
though weak in her indulgence of favourites; she
was ambitious of the reputation of her country;
and she rendered to the labouring people their
birthright in the land, which her father had
stripped them of in levelling the monastic institutions
by enacting the Poor Law, the celebrated
Statute of the forty-third of her reign (1601),
on which yet rests the whole fabric of parochial
right to support in age and destitution. In
nothing did she display her sagacity so much as
in her repeated declaration that money in her
subjects' purse was as good as in her own exchequer.
It was better, for there it would be
growing tenfold in the ordinary augmentation of
traffic, ready to yield the State proportionate
interest on any real emergency.
The great struggle between the Papacy and the
growing Protestant forces was nearly ended, but
complete and terrible as was the overthrow of the
ancient hierarchy in England and Scotland, it
came at last with a rapidity which astonished even
the friends of the change. From the time of
Richard II. hatred of the Papacy had been
afloat among the people, and even in his day had
availed to shake the throne, and fill the public
mind with prognostics of Papal decay. Yet reign
after reign had passed, and the Church had not
only maintained its position, but had seemed to
crush with a successful hand the Protestant
schismatics. The fires which consumed the more
daring advocates of the new opinions seemed to
scare the rest into obscurity. The triumphant
Church of Rome still presented a front of determined
strength, and lorded it over the land with
a magnificence which seemed destined to endure
for ever.
Henry VII. was a firm upholder of the Roman
Catholic hierarchy. "He advanced churchism,"
says Bacon; "he was tender of the privileges of
sanctuaries, though they did him much mischief;
he built and endowed many religious foundations,
besides his memorable hospital of the Savoy; and
yet he was a great alms-giver in secret, which
showed that his works in public were rather dedicated
to God's glory than his own." The fact was
that Henry VII. was too cautious a man to
become a reformer. He was too fond of money to
risk its loss by the most distant chance of an unsuccessful
enterprise, and he was too recently
placed on the throne of a vanquished dynasty to
venture on so bold a measure of ecclesiastical
revolution had he been thus inclined, which he
was far enough from being. On the contrary, his
ministers were almost all great and able churchmen.
Cardinals Bourchier and Morton, Archbishops
Deane and Warham, were the accomplished
churchmen who conducted the governmental
affairs of Henry; and when the public outcry
against the worldly and dissolute lives of the
clergy, both secular and regular, became too loud
to be disregarded, these clerical ministers of the
king endeavoured with one hand to reduce the
corruption by advice and remonstrance, and to
check the progress of heresy by the stake and
fagot. Henry VII. permitted this mode of extinguishing
opinion by destroying the entertainers
of it. In the ninth year of his reign Joan
Boughton was burnt in Smithfield, and this auto-da-fé
was followed by that of William Tylsworth,
at Amersham, whose daughter was compelled to
set fire to the pile which destroyed her father,
and that of Laurence Guest at Salisbury. In
addition to the victims of these odious crimes,
many persons were burnt in the cheek, imprisoned,
and otherwise cruelly treated. These atrocities
so far from diminishing the heresy, only excited
the abhorrence of the people and weakened their
attachment to the Church.
Henry VIII. continued the persecuting practices
of his father with unabated rigour. In his earlier
days he appeared determined to do honour to the
Church beyond most of his predecessors. He
raised up and created in Cardinal Wolsey such a
colossus of ecclesiastical pomp and greatness as
the world had rarely seen. In 1513 Wolsey was
made Bishop of Tournay, in France; in 1514,
Bishop of Lincoln and Archbishop of York; in
1515, the king's almoner, Cardinal, and Lord High
Chancellor of the kingdom; in 1518 he became the
Pope's legate à latere and Bishop of Bath and
Wells; in 1521, he was made Abbot of St.
Albans; in 1523, Bishop of Durham, in exchange
for the bishopric of Bath and Wells; and in 1529,
Bishop of Winchester, in exchange for that of
Durham. Besides these dignities, he had pensions
from the King of France, the Emperor of Germany,
the Pope, and other princes. The whole
power of the kingdom was in his hands; for
Henry, so far from being jealous of his greatness,
only felt himself the greater for having a servant
who in pride and splendour rivalled the greatest
monarchs. The state which Wolsey kept would
lead us to infer that the Church had reached a
higher pitch of power and grandeur than ever in
this country. His palaces were more gorgeous,
and filled with more evidences of enormous wealth,
than those of kings. His retinue of servants and
attendants, many of the latter being nobles or the
sons of nobles, was inconceivable. It was only
at Hampton Court that the whole train of his
servants and the crowd of his visitors, including
the nobility and ambassadors of foreign courts,
could be suitably lodged and entertained. For a
long course of years the whole government of
England was in his hands. The king did nothing
without him; and as prime minister and Lord
Chancellor of England, Archbishop of York, and
chief judge in the court of Star Chamber, there
was no man or his estate that was not in his
power. His revenues from a hundred sources
were immense, and such was the magnificence of
his position and influence, that he might well
forget himself and utter the famous words of
unparalleled egotism—"Ego et rex meus."
Who could have deemed that the Papal Church
was near its end as the State religion of England,
whilst the king thus honoured its dignitaries?
The very greatness of Wolsey hastened the fall of
the Church as well as of himself. The arrogance,
the rapacity, and the frequent injustice
of the proud minister made for him and his
Church deadly enemies. "For," says Strype, "he
disobliged not only the inferior sort by his pride
and haughty behaviour, but by laying his hands
upon the rights, privileges, and profits of the
gentry and clergy, he made them his implacable
enemies too. He took upon him to bestow benefices,
though the real right of patronage lay in
others. He called all offending persons before him,
whether of the laity or clergy, and compelled them
to compound as his officers thought fit."
But in spite of all his grandeur, Wolsey was
but the creature of the most violent and capricious
of men. A single word and he fell headlong,
assuredly shaking in his fall the great
hierarchy of which he had seemed the most gorgeous
pillar and ornament; for the whole system
was corrupt and rotten to the core. The wealth
of the monastic orders had especially demoralised
them. Both the regular and secular clergy were
accused of not only spending their time in taverns
and gambling-houses, but of abandoning in such
resorts the very costume which distinguished them
from the laity, of wearing daggers, gowns, and
hoods of silk and embroidery, and of letting their
hair grow long and fall on their shoulders. The
interiors of the monastic houses were described as
dens of licentiousness, both in monks and nuns.
We have it, on the evidence of one of the letters
of reproof addressed by Archbishop Morton to
the Abbot of St. Albans, that that famous
abbey was filled with every species of vice and
sensuality. He further charges them with cutting
down the woods, wasting and embezzling the
property of the Church, stealing the plate, and
even picking out the jewels from the shrine of the
patron saint.
Whilst such was the corruption of the clergy,
these infatuated men fell to quarrelling amongst
themselves. The most remarkable circumstance,
moreover, in this schism, is the very question
which in these latter days has furnished such a
fiery theme of discussion in both Romanist and
Protestant Churches—the Immaculate Conception
of the Virgin.
With the blind tenacity which often induces
falling bodies to assert their prerogatives with
arrogant obstinacy, the Church, in the fourth year
of Henry VIII., commenced a daring opposition
to the Government, in defence of the benefit of
clergy. Henry VII., as we have stated, had
limited this much abused privilege, by his Statute
ordering such laymen as claimed it under charge
of murder, to be burnt in the brawn of the thumb
with the letter M. Henry VIII. had a Bill introduced
into Parliament for the purpose of still
further limiting this mischievous right, and denying
benefit of clergy to all murderers and robbers
whatever. This the clergy opposed in Parliament
and preached against in the pulpit. The Lords
and Commons were unanimously in favour of
the Bill as well as the people, but the clergy
determined not to yield. Whilst the public
mind was in a ferment on this subject, a tailor of
London, of the name of Hunne, was brought into
conflict with the incumbent of his parish, on
account of mortuary dues. Being sued in the
spiritual court, with a boldness which marked the
rising spirit of the times and which the clergy
ought to have noted seriously, he took out a writ
of Præmunire against his prosecutor, for appealing
to a foreign jurisdiction, the spiritual court, still
under the authority of the Pope. Enraged at
this audacity they put the tailor into prison on
a charge of heresy, and there he was discovered
hanging dead. A coroner's inquest found the
officers of the prison guilty of murder, and it appeared
that the Bishop of London's chancellor, the
sumner, and bell-ringer had perpetrated the crime.
This threw the deepest odium on the clergy, and
alienated the people from them; yet they did not
cease to prosecute their claim of privilege, and
after much contest, Wolsey prayed the king
to refer the matter to the Pope. But even then
Henry showed that he was tenacious of his
power, and gave a striking foretaste of what he
would one day do. He replied, "By permission
and ordinance of God, we are King of England;
and the king of England in times past hath
never had any superior but God only. Therefore
know you well that we will maintain the right
of our crown, and of our temporal jurisdiction,
as well in this as in all other points, in as ample
a manner as any of our progenitors have done
before our time."
JOHN KNOX. (From a Portrait of the Period.)
Whilst Edward VI. thoroughly established Protestantism,
Mary as completely reinstated Popery,
and with a series of horrors which for ever stamped
terror and aversion of Roman Catholic ascendency
deep on the spirit of the nation. The
number of persons who died in the flames in that
awful reign, for their faith and the freedom of
conscience, is stated to have been 288; but Lord
Burleigh estimated those who perished by fire,
torture, famine, and imprisonment at not less than
400. Besides these, vast numbers suffered cruelly
in a variety of ways. "Some of the professors,"
says Coverdale, "were thrown into dungeons,
noisome holes, dark, loathsome and stinking corners;
others lying in fetters and chains, and
loaded with so many irons that they could scarcely
stir. Some tied in the stocks with their heels
upwards; some having their legs in the stocks,
with their necks chained to the wall with gorgets
of iron; some with hands and legs in the stocks
at once; sometimes both hands in and both legs
out; sometimes the right hand with the left leg,
or the left hand with the right leg, fastened in the
stocks with manacles and fetters, having neither
stool nor stone to sit on to ease their woful bodies;
some standing in Skevington's gyves [commonly
called "Skevington's daughter"]—which were most
painful engines of iron—with their bodies doubled;
some whipped and scourged, beaten with rods, and
buffeted with fists; and some having their hands
burned with a candle to try their patience, and
force them to relent; some hunger-pined, and some
miserably famished and starved." The leading Reformers
fled out of the kingdom, chiefly to Frankfort
and to Switzerland; and 800 or more lived to
become the heads of the restored Church under
Elizabeth; amongst these were Poynet, Bishop
of Winchester; Grindal, afterwards Bishop of
London, and finally Primate of England; Sandys,
afterwards Archbishop of York; Ball, Bishop of
Ossory; Pilkington, afterwards Bishop of Durham;
Bentham, afterwards Bishop of Lichfield;
Scorey, Bishop of Chichester, and afterwards of
Hereford; Young, afterwards Archbishop of York;
Cox, afterwards of Ely; Jewel, afterwards of
Salisbury; Coverdale, the translator of the Bible,
Bishop of Exeter; Horn, Dean of Durham; Knox,
the apostle of Scotland; and Foxe, the martyrologist.
Besides these eminent men, there were
Sir John Cheke, the famous Greek scholar, Sir
Anthony Cooke, and Sir Francis Knollys, afterwards
Elizabeth's vice-chamberlain.
On Elizabeth's accession to the throne she was
by no means disposed to go so far as her brother
Edward had gone, much less as far as the refugees—who
now flocked back again from Geneva—would
have carried her. They had imbibed the
rigid independent notions of Calvin and Zwinglius,
and that probably before their departure from
England—a circumstance which there is little
doubt directed their course to Switzerland, for the
Reformers who resorted to Frankfort were much
nearer to her standard—a standard very much
the same as that of her father. She renounced all
allegiance to the Pope and the Church of Rome,
though she hesitated to declare herself the supreme
head of the Church till it was conferred on her by
Parliament. She issued orders to restrain the
zeal of the Protestants, who began to pull down
the images, and to restore the service to its state
in King Edward's time. She gave directions that
a part of the service should be read in English,
and forbade the elevation of the Host; but at the
same time she suspended all preaching.
Parliament, on meeting, passed an Act asserting
the supremacy of the Crown over the Church, revived
the Acts of Henry VIII. which abolished the
power and jurisdiction of the Pope in England, and
authorised the use of King Edward's Book of
Common Prayer, with some alterations, chiefly in
the Communion Service. Thus they cast off the
Roman Catholics who would not conform, but did
not go far enough for the more zealous Reformers.
The oath of Supremacy was presented to the
bishops, and it had the effect of clearing the
Church of all but Kitchen of St. Asaph. The inferior
clergy, however, were not so firm, and only
six abbots, twelve deans, twelve archdeacons,
fifteen heads of colleges, fifty prebendaries, and
eighty rectors refused compliance. The monks
returned to secular life, but the nuns mostly went
abroad. The clergy were ordered to wear the
habits in use in the latter part of King Edward's
time; and their marriages, against which the
queen showed a strong repugnance, were put
under stringent regulations. The press also was
laid under the most rigorous restrictions, and no
book was to be printed or published without the
licence of the queen, or of six of her privy council,
or of her ecclesiastical commissioners, or the two
archbishops, the Bishop of London, the chancellors
of the universities, and the bishop and archdeacons
of the place where it was produced. All persons
were commanded to attend their parish churches
under severe penalties. In 1562 the articles of
religion of King Edward were reduced from forty-two
to thirty-nine. In 1571 they underwent a
further revision, and were made binding on the
clergy before they could be admitted to orders.
Like her father, the longer she lived the more
resolute she became to enforce her own dogmas on
the whole body of her subjects. In the twenty-third
year of her reign the penalty for non-attendance
of the Established Church was raised to £20
per month. In the same year another Act was
passed, declaring it high treason to attempt to
draw any one to the Church of Rome; and the
persons thus drawn were equally guilty of treason,
and all their aiders, abettors, and concealers were
made guilty of misprision of treason. These arbitrary
laws against the freedom of opinion went on
increasing in severity. In 1585 an Act was
passed which made traitors of all Jesuits and
other Popish priests who had been ordained
abroad, and of all subjects whatever educated in
Papal seminaries who did not immediately return
home and take the oath of supremacy. The receivers
of any such persons were declared felons
without benefit of clergy. Whoever sent money
to any foreign Jesuits or priests was liable to
Præmunire; and parents sending their children to
school abroad without licence from her Majesty
were liable to a penalty of £100. Fresh Acts
were added in 1581 and 1593, the former to make
void all conveyances of property by Popish recusants,
with the object of escaping the penalties
imposed upon them, and to decree that the penalty
of £20 a month for non-attendance at church
should be levied by distress to the extent of all
the offenders' goods and two-thirds of their lands;
the latter ordered all Popish recusants above
sixteen to repair to their proper places of abode,
and never more to go more than five miles from
them without special licence from the bishop of
the diocese or lieutenant of the county, under
penalty of forfeiture of their goods and of the
profits of their lands for life; those having no
goods or lands to be deemed felons.
But if the atrocities committed by the Roman
Catholics in the reign of Mary, and the fears of
their recurrence should the Papists regain the
power, afforded some plea for these persecutions,
what is to be said of the same rigours applied to
the Reformers, who simply desired to form their
religious opinions on the Bible—the Divine charter
of Humanity? Thousands of these, from the
earliest days of the Reformation, had claimed this
privilege as their birthright; and many of those
who came back from the Continent on the termination
of the Marian persecution, were surprised and
discouraged to find themselves equally excluded
with the Catholics from the exercise of their own
judgments by a Protestant queen. They were
required to attend the preaching of those against
whose doctrines they protested, and suffered the
same monstrous fines if they absented themselves.
Instead of that "glorious liberty of
the gospel" which they had promised themselves,
they had to accept with all homage the
cut out and prescribed pattern of opinion dictated
by an autocratic woman, who made a desperate
stand against the removal of images from the
churches, and practised many Popish ceremonies
in her own private chapel. Instead of the form of
service which the English refugees had established
at Geneva, in which there were no Litany, no responses,
and scarcely any rites or ceremonies, they
were commanded to adopt a form which appeared
to them little removed from Popery. The Genevan
refugees—who, from their demand for the utmost
purity and primitive simplicity in worship, were
styled Puritans—would, had they been permitted,
have planted a church far more like the church as
it came to exist in Scotland than that which was
established for England. They opposed the claims
of the bishops to a superior rank or authority
to the presbyters; they denied that they possessed
the sole right of ordination, and exercise of church
discipline; they objected to the titles and dignities
which had been copied by the Anglican Church
from the Roman, of archdeacons, deans, canons,
prebendaries; to the jurisdiction of Spiritual
Courts; to an indiscriminate admission of all
persons to the Communion; to many parts of the
liturgy, and of the offices of marriage and burial,
including the use of the ring in marriage; they
repudiated set forms of prayers, and the use of
godfathers and godmothers, the rite of confirmation,
the observance of Lent and holidays, the
cathedral worship, the use of the organ, the retention
of the reading of apocryphal books in
church, pluralities, non-residence, the presentation
to livings by the Crown, or any other patron, or
by any mode but the free election of the people.
But in that age no conception of religious
liberty was entertained. The Puritans were as
resolute in their ideas of conformity to their
notions as Elizabeth was to hers; and had they
had the power, would have used the same compulsion.
Knox exhibited that spirit of exclusiveness
to the extreme in Scotland, even calling for
the deposition of the queen as a "Jezebel" and
"an idolatress," because she would not adopt his
peculiar tenets and view of things. The Puritans
exhibited the same spirit long after in America
for the exercise of their faith. In fact, the great
and divine principle of the entire liberty of the
gospel was too elevated to be arrived at suddenly
after so many ages of spiritual despotism, and required
long and earnest study of the spirit and
example of Christ. Severe struggles, bloody
deaths, and incredible sufferings in those who came
to see the truth, had to be undergone before the
battle of religious freedom was fought out, and
all parties could admit the plain fact which had
revealed itself to Charles V. after his abdication
of the throne, when he amused himself with
clock making—that as no two clocks can be
made to go precisely alike, it is folly to expect
all men to think precisely alike. "Both parties,"
says Neal, in his "History of the Puritans,"
"agreed too well in asserting the necessity of
a uniformity of public worship, and in using
the sword of the magistrate for the support
and defence of their respective principles, which
they made an ill use of in their turns whenever
they could grasp the power in their hands. The
standard of uniformity, according to the bishops,
was the queen's supremacy, and the laws of the
land; according to the Puritans, the decrees of
provincial and national synods, allowed and enforced
by the civil magistrate: but neither party
were for admitting that liberty of conscience and
freedom of profession which is every man's right
as far as is consistent with the peace of the civil
Government he lives under." Heresy was, in fact,
punished by the Government as a purely political
offence.
Elizabeth, having the power, compelled all those
clergymen who conformed sufficiently to accept
livings and bishoprics, not only to conform but
more or less to persecute their brethren. Even
men like Parker and Grindal, naturally averse
from compulsion, were obliged to do her bidding,
till Grindal rebelled and was set aside; but their
places were supplied by Sandys, who had himself
fled from Popish compulsion, and by Whitgift,
who rigorously enforced the laws. Sandys actually
sentenced the anabaptists who, in 1575, were
burnt at the stake by order of the queen—for to
this pass it came: Hammond, a ploughman, being
burnt at Norwich in 1579, and Kett, a member of
one of the universities, in the same place, ten years
afterwards, under Elizabeth.
Such was the state of the Protestant Church at
the termination of the period we are now reviewing.
The queen discouraged preaching and instruction
of the people, allowing many bishoprics,
prebends, and livings to be vacant, and receiving
their incomes. She declared that one or two
preachers in a county was enough, probably fearing
the prevalence of the more advanced opinions.
Parker in his time had been ordered to enforce
strict compliance with the rubric, and numbers of
the most eminent and eloquent clergymen resigned
their livings and travelled over the country, and
preached where they could, "as if," says Bishop
Jewell, "they were apostles; and so they were
with regard to their poverty, for silver and gold
they had none." Being, however, continually
brought before the authorities and fined and otherwise
punished, they determined to break off all
connection with the public churches, and form
themselves into an avowed separate communion,
worshipping God in their own way and being
ready to suffer for His sake. Here, then, commenced
the great cause of Nonconformity, and the
formation of all those sects which from time to
time have since appeared, each claiming—and
justly—the right to worship God and to regulate
their particular church as seems conformable to
their understanding of the Scriptures. These
separate assemblies, however, were stigmatised as
conventicles, and from this time many were the
laws passed to put them down, as we shall hereafter
find. Among the Nonconformists a most
zealous and resolute sect arose called Brownists,
from Robert Brown, a preacher in the diocese of
Norwich, a man of good family, and said to be a
relative of Lord Burleigh. His followers soon
acquired the name of Independents, which they
afterwards changed for that of Congregationalists,
from their denial of all ecclesiastical dignities and
authority whatever, asserting that each congregation
constitutes a complete church, with the right
to nominate their own minister and conduct their
own affairs. This body of Christians, at this day
so extensive and respectable, of course felt the
especial weight of the persecution of the Established
Church, with which it refused to hold the
slightest communion; yet to such a degree did it
flourish—a proof of the onward spirit of the time,
that Sir Walter Raleigh declared in Parliament
that there were before the death of Elizabeth not
less than 20,000 members of that body in Norfolk,
Essex, and the neighbourhood of London.
REDUCED FACSIMILE OF THE TITLE-PAGE OF THE GREAT BIBLE, ALSO CALLED CROMWELL'S BIBLE.
In the narration of the struggles of this period
in Scotland we have sufficiently traced the persecution
of the Protestants by the Romish Church—the
martyrdom of Patrick Hamilton, George
Wishart, Walter Mill, and others; the murder of
Cardinal Beaton, and the final triumph of Knox
and his compeers, from which period the organisation
of the Protestant Church of Scotland went
on rapidly. In 1560 the Lords of the Congregation
entered Edinburgh in arms; and Parliament
assembling, abolished for ever the Pope's jurisdiction,
abolished the celebration of Mass, and authorised
"The Confession of the Faith and Doctrine
believed and professed by the Protestants of Scotland."
An Act also was passed to pull down all
cloisters and abbey-churches still left standing:
and the Church, not waiting for any further enactment
of the Parliament or Crown, went on exercising
its own proper functions as an independent
church, governed, not by the State, but by presbyteries,
synods, and general assemblies. In 1580
the General Assembly, after having at various
times diminished the power and rank of bishops,
declared that episcopacy was unscriptural and
unlawful—a dictum which the Parliament fully
ratified in 1592, establishing the Presbyterian
Church as the national one, with general assembly,
provincial synods, presbyteries, and kirk sessions.
In 1597 the Parliament admitted certain representatives
of the clergy to seats in it, to which the
General Assembly assented at its next meeting;
and thus was completed the system of Church
government in Scotland at that time.
The sixteenth century produced as great a
revolution in Literature and Science as in religion.
We still look back to this era for some of the
greatest names and greatest works which have
adorned and enlightened not only our own country,
but the whole civilised world. When we enumerate
Sir Thomas More, Lord Surrey, Roger
Ascham, Spenser, Sir Philip Sidney, Shakespeare,
Marlowe, Bacon, Buchanan, Gawin Douglas,
Dunbar, and Sir David Lyndsay, we remind our
readers that we are moving amid a constellation
of genius, than which Time has scarcely any
brighter. But in the two words Shakespeare
and Bacon, we pronounce the names and glorious
births of dramatic and philosophic genius, which
have placed England on the summit of intellectual
fame, by works never surpassed before or
since in any nation, and by discoveries in science
and art which have flowed from the "Novum
Organum" of Bacon as from an eternal and ever-strengthening
fountain. True it is both men
belong, by their works, rather to the succeeding
period than to the present; but Bacon had,
long before the death of Elizabeth, sketched
out the plan of his immortal work, though he
had not dared to publish it; and Shakespeare
had not only written his poems, but had also
written and acted in many of his most brilliant
and original plays. By these great writers
the English language was established as a
classical language; and though it has since
extended and connected itself with the progress
of knowledge and most astonishing and varied
discoveries, we can produce no purer, no stronger,
nor more eloquent specimens of it than from the
pages of Shakespeare, which continue to be read
and listened to on our stage, the genuine speech
of Englishmen—somewhat quaint occasionally,
but always musical to the ear, familiar to the
sense, and animating to the spirit.
The violent changes and spoliations of the
Reformation did not check the foundation of
new colleges and seminaries of learning—the
fountains, under a more liberal order of things,
certain to produce noble results. Even Henry
VIII., in his wholesale destruction of endowed
property, and though college property was included
in the Acts which he procured from his
obsequious Parliament, for the most part spared
the resources of education. His reign was distinguished
by the foundation, in Oxford, of
Brazenose College, in 1509, by Sir William
Smith, Bishop of Lincoln, and Sir Richard Sutton,
of Prestbury, in Cheshire. Old Richard Fox,
Bishop of Winchester, who had been prime
minister of Henry VII., and still was of the
council of his son, in 1516 founded Corpus
Christi. The only exception to Henry VIII.'s
patronage of the colleges occurred in those founded
by Wolsey—his Cardinal College at Oxford, and
his college at Ipswich, which both fell with him.
In 1545 Henry himself founded Christ Church
instead of that of Wolsey, which he then dissolved.
In 1554 Trinity College was founded on the basis
of Durham College by Sir Thomas Pope. In
1555 Sir Thomas White, alderman and merchant
tailor of London, founded St. John's College, on
the site of Bernard College. These were in the
reign of Queen Mary. In Elizabeth's time rose
Jesus College, in 1571, from funds furnished by
Dr. Hugh Price, and augmented by the queen
herself.
In Cambridge three colleges arose during the
reign of Henry VII.—the only educational endowments
of any note during that period. In
1496 John Alcock, Bishop of Ely, founded Jesus
College. In 1505 Margaret Countess of Richmond,
mother of Henry VII., founded Christ's
College, and also in 1511, very shortly before her
son's death, St. John's College. In 1519 Edward
Stafford, Duke of Buckingham, commenced the
College of Magdalene; but as he was executed for
high treason in 1521, Lord Audley, the Lord
Chancellor, completed it. Henry VIII. founded
Trinity College in 1546, and at the same time
four new professorships in the university; namely,
for theology, law, Greek, and Hebrew. Henry
was proud of his learning, and had the good sense
to support, with all the imperative force of his
character, the new study of Greek, when it was
violently assailed by the Church and professors.
Dr. Caius founded the college named after him,
and popularly pronounced "Keys," on the basis
of the old hall of Gonville, in 1558—the only
extension of Cambridge University under Queen
Mary. Sir Walter Mildmay founded Emmanuel
College in 1584, and in 1598 Sidney-Sussex
College was founded by Lady Frances Sidney,
widow of Ratcliffe, Earl of Sussex.
The universities of Scotland were greatly
extended during this period. That of Aberdeen
was founded in 1494 under the name of King's
College, James IV. having procured a bull for
that purpose from Pope Alexander VI., though
the bishop was the main benefactor. In 1593
Marischal College, in the same university, was
erected by George, Earl Marischal. At St.
Andrews the college of St. Leonard's was established
in 1512 by Archbishop Stuart and John
Hepburn, prior of the metropolitan church. This
was afterwards united with that of St. Salvator
(founded in 1456), and together bore the name of
the United College. St. Mary's, in the same
university, was founded, in 1537, by Beaton.
In 1582 James VI. founded the University
of Edinburgh. In 1591 Elizabeth founded in
Dublin the University of Trinity College.
Contemporaneous with these colleges and universities
rose a great number of grammar-schools,
designed to extend the knowledge of Latin to
the mass of the people. Among the magnificent
endowments, since too much withdrawn,
by the influence of wealth, from the poor and
the orphan, for whom they were designed, and
devoted to the use of the affluent, for whom they
were not designed, we may name St. Paul's
School, London, founded by Dean Colet in
1509; Christ's Hospital, London, founded by
Edward VI. in 1553, the year of his death;
Westminster School, established by Elizabeth,
1560; and Merchant Taylors School, founded by
that guild in 1561. In Scotland the High School
of Edinburgh was founded by the magistrates of
that city in 1577.
It is a curious fact that the revival of the
Greek language and literature was coincident
with the Reformation. Widely opposed as the
spirit of Christianity and of the Greek mythology
are, yet in one particular they are identical,
in breathing a spirit of liberty and popular
dominance which were not long in showing
their effects in Great Britain. The Scriptures
were now translated and made familiar to the
people, at least by means of Puritan preachers,
who were thus proclaiming that God had made
of one blood all the nations of the earth, and that
He was no respecter of persons; thereby laying
the foundations of eternal justice in the
public mind, and teaching, as a necessary consequence,
that the end and object of all human
government was not the good of kings or nobles,
but of the collective people. The poets, the historians,
the dramatists, and the philosophers of
republican Greece were made to bring all the
force of their fiery eloquence, their glowing narratives,
and their subtle reasoning to bear upon the
same theme; presenting not only arguments for
general liberty and a popular polity, but examples
of the most sublime struggles of a small but
glorious people against domestic tyrants and the
vast hordes of barbarism without, of noblest
orators thundering against the oppression of the
mighty, of awful tragedians steeping their stage
in the imaged blood of tyrants and of traitors,
of patriots perishing in joy for the salvation of
their country.
It was not to be wondered at that on the
bursting of these novel elements like a sudden and
strong torrent into the arena of human life, there
should arise a fearful struggle and combat between
the old intellectual ideas and the new. The two-fold
inundation pouring from the hills of Palestine
and of Greece, and in united vastness deluging
Europe, threatened to destroy all the old land-marks
of the schoolmen, and to drown Duns
Scotus and Aquinas along with the owls and
bats of the monkish cells and dream chambers.
It was soon seen that this new language was the
language of the very book from which the Reformers
drew their words winged with the fire of
destruction to the ancient slavery of popular ignorance
and popular dependence on priests and
Popes, and no time was lost in denouncing it as a
gross and new-fangled heresy. It was a heresy
from which not only freedom in Church but in
State was to spring; the seed from which grew, in
the next age, our Hampdens, Marvels, Pyms,
Prynnes, Cromwells, and Miltons.
Yet it is only due to Henry VIII., to his ministers
Wolsey, Fox, and More, and to other eminent
dignitaries—amongst them Cardinal Pole in Queen
Mary's reign—to state that they were zealous
advocates and promoters of the Greek learning.
The very first public school in which Greek is
said to have been taught in England was the
new foundation of Dean Colet, St. Paul's school,
where the celebrated scholar William Lilly, who
had studied in Rhodes, was the master. Wolsey
introduced it into his new colleges, and Henry
VIII. being at Woodstock, and hearing of a
furious harangue made at Oxford against the
study of the Greek Testament in the University,
immediately ordered the teaching of it, and established
a professorship of it also in Cambridge.
Notwithstanding, a violent opposition arose
against the study of Greek in consequence of the
authority it gave to the doctrines of the Reformers,
rendering an appeal to the original
text invincible. Erasmus informs us that the
preachers and declaimers against his edition of
the Greek Testament really appeared to believe
that he was by its means attempting to introduce
some new kind of religion. The book was prohibited
in the University of Cambridge, and a
heavy penalty decreed for any one found with it
in his possession. Erasmus attempted to teach the
Greek grammar of Chrysoloras there, but a terrible
outcry was raised against him, and his
scholars soon deserted his benches. As the contest
went on, however, the Universities, both here
and abroad, became divided into the factions of the
Greeks and Trojans, the Trojans being those who
were advocates for Latin, but not for Greek. The
Greeks, however, victorious, as of old, expelled the
works of the famous Duns Scotus from the
schools; they were torn up and trodden under
foot; and the King sent down a Commission
which altogether abolished the study of this old
scholastic philosophy which had had so long and
absolute a reign.
Yet the new knowledge appears for some
time after the first excitement to have made less
progress in the schools than at Court and amongst
the aristocracy. On the surface, therefore, the
age appeared a very learned one. All the chief
churchmen on both sides of the question in the
reigns of Henry VIII. and Edward VI.—Wolsey,
Fox, Gardiner, Cranmer, Ridley, Tunstall, Cardinal
Pole—were men of great acquirements. Henry
was a fine scholar, and, despite his harsh treatment
of his wives and children, gave to the
latter educations perhaps superior to those of any
princes or princesses of the time. Edward was
steeped in learning, to the injury of his overtaxed
constitution. Mary and Elizabeth were
both accomplished linguists, speaking Latin,
French, and Spanish fluently; and Elizabeth
adding to these Greek and Italian, with a
smattering of Dutch and German. Mary was
studiously instructed in the originals of the
Scriptures, and made a translation of the Latin
paraphrase of St. John, by Erasmus, which was
printed and read as part of the Church service, till
it was ordered to be burnt by herself in her own
reign with other heretical books. She was deeply
read in the fathers, and in the works of Plato,
Cicero, Seneca, Plutarch, and selected portions of
Horace, Lucan, and Livy. Elizabeth was a
poetess of no mean pretensions and, besides her
knowledge of the classical and modern languages,
read by preference immense quantities of history.
Roger Ascham, the teacher of Lady Jane Grey,
said that "numberless honourable ladies" of
the time surpassed the daughters of Sir Thomas
More, but that none could compete with the
Princess Elizabeth; that she spoke and wrote
Greek and Latin beautifully; that he had read
with her the whole of Cicero, and great part of
Livy; that she devoted her mornings to the New
Testament in Greek, select orations of Isocrates,
and the tragedies of Sophocles, whilst she drew
religious knowledge from St. Cyprian and the
"Common-places" of Melanchthon; that she was
skilful in music, but did not greatly delight in it.
With such examples, no wonder that there
were such learned ladies at Court as Lady Jane
Grey, Lady Tyrwhit, Mary Countess of Arundel,
Joanna Lady Lumley, and her sister Mary the
Duchess of Norfolk—all learned in Greek and
Latin, and authoresses of translations from them;
the two daughters of Sir Thomas More, and the
three daughters of the learned Sir Anthony Cooke—one
of them the wife of the all-powerful statesman
Burleigh, another the mother of the illustrious
Francis Bacon, and the third, Lady Killigrew, a
famous Hebrew scholar, as well as profound in
Latin and Greek. It is extraordinary that
learning, which had been so ardently taken up by
these accomplished women, should have languished
in the schools and amongst the people. Yet such
was the fact, and is explained by the violent
and continual changes which were taking place in
Church and State. A great part of the reign of
Henry VIII. was engrossed by the conflict with
the Court of Rome regarding his divorce from
Catherine, and then by his stupendous onslaught
on the monastic and cathedral property. As no
man at the Universities could tell where promotion
was to come from in the Church under a king who
equally took vengeance on Romanist and Protestant
who dared to differ from him, and as it was
equally uncertain whether, in some new fit of
anger or caprice, he might not suppress the colleges
as he had suppressed monasteries, ministers, and
chantries, it is not surprising to hear Latimer
exclaim, "It would pity a man's heart to hear
what I hear of the state of Cambridge. There be
few that study divinity, but so many as of necessity
must furnish the college."
CHRIST'S HOSPITAL, LONDON (1899).
Under Edward VI. things became far worse.
Then it was a scramble amongst his courtiers who
should get the most of the property devoted to
religion or learning. Bishoprics, good livings,
the rest of the monastic lands which yet remained
with the Crown did not suffice. These
cormorants clutched at the University resources.
They appropriated exhibitions and pensions, and,
says Warton, in his "History of English Poetry,"
"Ascham, in a letter to the Marquis of Northampton,
dated 1550, laments the ruin of grammar-schools
throughout England, and predicts the
speedy extinction of the universities from this
growing calamity. At Oxford the schools were
neglected by the professors and pupils, and allotted
to the lowest purposes. Academical degrees were
abrogated as anti-Christian. Reformation was
soon turned into fanaticism. Absurd refinements,
concerning the inutility of human learning,
were superadded to the just and rational purgation
of Christianity from the Papal corruption." He
adds that the Government visitors of the University
totally stripped the public library, established
by Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, of all
its books and manuscripts; and Latimer, in one of
his sermons about that time, declared his belief
that there were then 10,000 fewer students than
there had been twenty years before.
Classical literature did not fare better during
the persecuting reign of Mary, though Cardinal
Pole was a warm friend of the introduction of
Greek, notwithstanding the use made of it by the
Protestants. When he urged Sir Thomas Pope to
establish a professorship of that language in his
new college of Trinity, Sir Thomas replied, "I
fear the times will not bear it now. I remember,
when I was a young scholar at Eton, the Greek
tongue was growing apace, the study of which is
now a-late much decayed." Nor was it likely
when Elizabeth discouraged preaching even, saying
that "one or two preachers in a county was
enough," that Classical studies would be much encouraged.
In fact, nothing could be lower than
the condition into which both learning and
preaching had fallen in Elizabeth's Church. The
Bishop of Bangor stated that he had but two
preachers in all his diocese. Numbers of churches
stood vacant, according to Neal, where there was
no preaching, nor even reading of the homilies for
months together, and in many parishes there could
be found no one to baptise the living or bury the
dead; in others, unlearned mechanics, and even
the gardeners of those who had secured the
clerical glebes and income, performed the only
service that there was. But no doubt this afforded
good scope to the Puritans, who had now the Bible
in English, Cranmer's, Coverdale's, and Parker's,
or the Bishops' Bible; and these zealous men,
despite the crushing penalties, would find constant
opportunities of diffusing their knowledge.
In Oxford there were only three divines in 1563
who were considered able to preach a sermon, and
these three were Puritans. The knowledge of the
Classics was fallen so low that all that Archbishop
Parker required of the holders of his three
new scholarships in Cambridge, in 1567, was that
they should be well instructed in grammar and be
able to make a verse. The classical qualifications
in the two Universities were below contempt.
It is a satisfaction to turn from this humiliating
state of things to the great lights of genius and
learning which were burning brightly amid this
thick darkness. Here there meets us the illustrious
constellation of names of More, Ascham,
Puttenham, Sidney, Hooker, Bacon, Barclay, Skelton,
Sackville, Heywood, Surrey, Wyatt, Spenser,
Shakespeare, Marlowe, and others—names which
cast a lustre over this period, and in whose blaze
all its faults and failings are forgotten.
Of the prose writers Sir Thomas More (b. 1480,
d. 1535) is one of the earliest and most famous.
He was equally remarkable for the suavity of his
manners, his wit, his independence of character,
and the eloquence and originality of his writings.
We have seen how he served and was served by
Henry VIII. Erasmus, who stayed some time at
his house, says, "With him you might imagine
yourself in the academy of Plato. But I should
do injustice to his house by comparing it to the
academy of Plato, where numbers and geometrical
figures, and sometimes moral virtues, were the
subjects of discussion. It would be more just
to call it a school, and an exercise of Christian
religion. All its inhabitants, male and female,
applied their leisure to liberal studies and profitable
reading, although piety was their first care.
No wrangling, no angry word was heard in it, no
one was idle; every one did his duty with alacrity,
and not without a temperate cheerfulness."
More's chief work is his "Utopia," and it may
be pronounced the first enunciation of a system of
Socialism since the Apostolic age. It may surprise
many, but More, in fact, was the forerunner of
Proudhon and Fourrier. His "Utopia" describes
an island in which a commonwealth is established
completely on Socialistic principles. No one is
allowed to possess separate property; because such
possession produces an unequal division of the
necessaries of life, demoralising those who become
inordinately rich and, in a different direction, depraving
and degrading those who are obliged to
labour incessantly. What is remarkable, More in
his imaginary commonwealth admits the fullest
toleration of religious belief, though he fell so far
in practice as to join in the persecutions of his
time. His principles were too noble for his practice;
yet with this one flaw he was one of the
most admirable men who ever lived. His
"Utopia" was written by him in Latin, but was
translated into English in 1551, afterwards by
Bishop Burnet, and in 1808 by Arthur Cayley.
In addition to this, he wrote a life of Richard III.,
and various compositions in Latin and English,
besides a number of letters which have been published
in his collected works. As a specimen of
the prose style and state of the language in the
early part of the reign of Henry VIII., we may
quote a short passage from a letter to his second
wife, Alice Middleton, in 1528, on hearing that
his house at Chelsea was burnt down:—
"Maistress Alyce, in my most harty wise I recommend
me to you; and whereas I am enfourmed
by my son Heron of the losse of our barnes and of
our neighbours also, with all the corne that was
therein, albeit (saving God's pleasure) it is grit
pitie of so much good corne loste; yet sith it hath
liked Hym to sende us such a chaunce, we must
and are bounden, not only to be content, but also
to be glad of His visitacion. He sente us all that
we have loste; and sith He hath by such a chaunce
taken it away againe, His pleasure be fulfilled.
Let us never grudge thereat, but take in good
worth, and hartily thank Him, as well for adversitie
as for prosperite; and peradventure we have
more cause to thank Him for our losse than for
our winning; for His wisdome better seeth what is
good for us than we do our selves. Therefore I
pray you be of good chere, and take all the howshold
with you to church, and there thanke God,
both for what He hath given us, and for that
He hath taken from us, and for that He hath left
us, which, if it please Hym He can encrease when
He will. And if it please Hym to leave us yet
lesse, at His pleasure be it. I pray you to make
some good insearche what my poore neighbours
have loste, and bid them take no thought therefore;
for an I shold not leave myself a spone,
there shal no poore neighboure of mine bere no
losse by any chaunce happened in my house. I
pray you be with my children, and your howshold
mery in God."
Latimer (b. 1470, d. 1555) was the son of a
Leicestershire farmer, and rose to be Bishop of
Worcester, and to the far higher rank of a martyr
for his faith. He has been pronounced by writers
of this age as a good but not a great man. To
our mind he was a very great man. Not in
worldly wisdom, for he was simple as a child;
but he was a genius, true, racy, and original.
He was made, as his sermons show, for a preacher
to the people rather than to princes, though to
them he bore a bold and unblenching testimony.
But to the people he was a prophet and an
awakener. He had been amongst them; he knew
their deepest feelings, their most secret thoughts
their language and their desires; and he addressed
them from the pulpit with the loving and picturesque
familiarity which he used at their firesides.
There is occasionally much rudeness in his
discourses, his images are often bizarre, his allusions
grotesque; but there is a life that kindles,
there is a poetry that warms, a spirit that arouses,
a bold aggressive truth which must have made his
hearers look into their souls and think. We take
a short passage from a sermon preached before
Edward VI. in 1549—twenty-one years after the
composition of More just given, and yet how much
more old-fashioned is the language. After telling
the king that so plain was his preaching that it
had been called seditious, and that his friends,
with tears in their eyes, assured him he would get
into the Tower, he says:—"There be more of
myne opinion than I. I thought I was not alone.
I have now gotten one felowe more, a companyon
of sedytyon, and wot ye who is my felowe? Esaye
the prophete. I spake but of a lytle preaty shyllynge;
but he speaketh to Hierusalem after
another sorte, and was so bold to meddle with
theyr coine (Isaiah i. 22). Thou proude, thou
covetous, thou hautye cytye of Hierusalem, argentum
tuum versum est in scoriam; thy sylver is
turned into what? into testyiers. Scoriam—into
drosse. Ah, sediciouse wretch, what had he to do
wyth the mynte? Why should not he have lefte
that matter to some master of policy to reprove?
Thy sylver is drosse, it is not fine, it is counterfeit,
thy sylver is turned, thou haddest good sylver.
What pertayned that to Esaye? Mary, he espyeth
a piece of divinity in that policie; he threatened
them God's vengeance for it. He went to the
rote of the matter, which was covetousness. He
espyed two poyntes in it: that eythere it came of
covetousnesse, whych became hym to reprove; er
els that it tended to the hurte of the pore people,
for the naughtyness of the sylver was the occasion
of dearth to all thynges in the realme. He imputeth
it to them as a great cryme. He may be
called a mayster of sedicion in dede. Was this
not a sidicyouse varlet to tell them thys to theyr
beardes, to theyr face?"
Amongst writers of this age who tended to
purify and perfect the language were Sir Thomas
Wilson, and Puttenham, who wrote the "Art of
English Poesy," which was published in 1582.
Wilson (b. 1520, d. 1581) wrote his "Art of Rhetorique"
thirty years before, only three years later
than the sermon of Latimer's just quoted; yet
what an advance in both style and orthography:—"What
maketh the lawyer to have such utterance?
Practice. What maketh the preacher to
speake so soundly? Practice. Yea, what maketh
women go so fast awai with their wordes? Marie,
practice, I warrant you. Therefore in all faculties,
diligent practice and earnest exercise are the
only thynges that make men prove excellent."
Contemporary with More was Sir Thomas Elyot
(b. 1495, d. 1546), whose treatise called "The
Governor" is a fine example of vigorous English.
Cranmer and Ridley were not less distinguished
for their fine style than for their liberal principles;
and Roger Ascham (b. 1515, d. 1568), the instructor
of Lady Jane Grey and Queen Elizabeth,
was equally famed for his caligraphy, his musical
talents, his proficiency in the new learning—Greek—for
his classical Latin, and his English
composition. To relieve the severities of study he
practised archery, and wrote his "Toxophilus,
the Schole of Shootinge," to recommend that old
English art. In it he strongly advocated the old
English language, and the abstinence from foreign
terms, a recommendation which succeeding generations
wisely declined, to the vast enrichment
of the language. But Ascham was a genuine
Englishman, and advised his countrymen to follow
the counsel of Aristotle, and "speak as the common
people do, but think as wise men do." His
next principal work was the "Scholemaster: a
plaine and perfite way of teaching children to
understand, write, and speak the Latin tong"—a
work which has become more known than any
other of his, because in it he mentions his visit
to Lady Jane Grey at Bradgate Park, near
Leicester, where he found her deep in Plato's
"Phædo" while the rest of the family were
hunting. But besides these works he wrote on
the affairs of Germany; and Latin poems, Latin
letters, and his celebrated Apology for the Lord's
Supper, in opposition to the Mass.
LATIMER PREACHING BEFORE EDWARD VI. (From a Woodcut in Foxe's "Martyrs," 1563.)
As a prose writer Edmund Spenser (b. 1553,
d. 1599), the author of the "Faerie Queene," must
be mentioned for his "View of the State of
Ireland," which contained many judicious recommendations
for the improvement of that country,
and presents in its serious statesmanlike views a
curious contrast to the allegorical fancy of his
great poem. But far greater as prose writers of
the latter portion of this period stand forth Sir
Philip Sidney and the "judicious Hooker." Sir
Philip Sidney (b. 1554, d. 1586), who was celebrated
as the most perfect gentleman of his time,
or as, in the phrase of the age, "the Mirror of
Courtesy," was killed at the age of thirty-three
at Zutphen. Yet he left behind him the
"Arcadia," a romance; the "Defence of Poesie,"
and various minor poems and prose articles, which
were published after his death. The person
and writings of Sidney have been the theme of
unbounded panegyric. He was a gentleman
finished and complete, in whom mildness was
associated with courage, erudition mollified by
refinement, and courtliness dignified by truth.
He is a specimen of what the English character
was capable of producing when foreign admixtures
had not destroyed its simplicity, or politeness
debased its honour. In his own day he was the
object of the most enthusiastic praises, and has
been lauded in the most vivid terms by writers of
every period since. Near his own times Nash,
Lord Brooke, Camden, Ben Jonson, Naunton,
Aubrey, Milton, and Cowley, were his eulogists;
Wordsworth and the writers of our own day are
equally complimentary. Perhaps, after so continuous
and high-toned a hymning, a modern
reader, taking up his "Arcadia" for the first
time, would find it stiff, formal, and pedantic.
He might miss that fervid spirit which animates
the fictions of the great masters of our own age,
and wonder at the warmth of so many great
authorities upon what failed to warm him. In
fact, it must be confessed, that it is a noble
specimen of what pleased the taste of the time
in which it was written. It displays imagination,
though often on stilts instead of on wings, and
breathes the spirit which animated its author, of
a refined nature, a chivalrous temperament, a
generous heart, and the instincts of the perfect
scholar. Of that period it is a noble monument;
in this it is a unique work of art, which, however,
strikes us as fair, mild, and antiquated. "The
Defence of Poesie," with much of the same
mannerism, is worthy of a poet, and of a man
whose life was the finest poem, from its generous
patronage of talent, its high literary taste,
and the hero's death, in the very agonies of
which he gave from his own scorched lips the
draught of cold water to the dying soldier at his
side.
ROGER ASCHAM'S VISIT TO LADY JANE GREY. (See p. 364.)
The list of the prose writers of this period
presents no more honourable name than that of
the great champion of the Church of England,
Richard Hooker (b. 1553, d. 1600), whose composition
is as remarkable for its cogent reasoning
and elevated style, as Sidney's is for fancy and
grace of sentiment. His "Ecclesiastical Polity,"
in eight books, is regarded as the most able
defence of church establishments that ever appeared.
From the breadth of its principles it
drew the applause of Pope Clement VIII. as well
as of the royal pedant, James I. To those who
study it as an example of the intellect, learning,
and language of the time, it presents itself, even
to such as dissent from its conclusions, as a
labour most honourable to the country and age
which produced it.
A still greater man was yet behind. Bacon
(b. 1561, d. 1626) was figuring as the great lawyer,
the eloquent advocate and senator; but under
the duties of these offices lay hid the master
who was to revolutionise philosophy and science;
the father of the new world of discovery, and the
most marvellous career of social and intellectual
advance. To this period he is the sun sending its
rays above the horizon, but not yet risen. His
speeches, his "Essays Civil and Moral," and
"Maxims of Law," already foretold his fame.
A very different writer was John Lyly, the
Euphuist (b. 1553, d. 1601). Lyly was a poet
and dramatist of repute; but in 1579 he published
"Euphues; or, Anatomy of Wit," which
was followed, in 1581, by a second part, called
"Euphues and his England." In this he invented
a style and phraseology of his own,
which seized the fancy of the public like a mania,
and set the Court, the ladies, the dandies, and
dilettanti of the day speaking and writing in a
most affected, piebald, and fantastic style. Sir
Philip Sidney, in his "Arcadia," ridiculed it, not
without being in a considerable degree affected by
it himself. Shakespeare, in "Love's Labour's Lost,"
and Sir Walter Scott, in his Sir Piercie Shafton,
in "The Monastery," have made the modern public
familiar with it. Yet, after all, probably Lyly
was only laughing in his sleeve at the follies of
others, and was, as has been asserted, aiming at
the purification of the language; for in his
dramas his diction is simple enough, considering
the taste of the age.
Among the rising writers was also Sir Walter
Raleigh; but his literary reputation belongs
rather to the age that was coming. On the whole,
the period from the reign of Henry VII. to the
end of that of Elizabeth was a period more
kindred to our own than any which had gone
before it. It produced prose writers whose minds
still hold communion with and influence those of
to-day. Its philosophy had assumed a more
practical stamp, and was full of the elements of
change and progress. Its poetry, which we have
now to consider, reached the very highest pitch of
human genius.
The earliest poet who has left any name of
note is Stephen Hawes, whose principal work was
"The Pastime of Pleasure," which was printed
by Wynkyn de Worde in 1517. Hawes was a
native of Suffolk, had travelled much, and by his
proficiency in French and French literature
acquired the favour of Henry VII. Another
poem, "The Temple of Glass," has been ascribed
to Hawes, but is most probably Lydgate's, who,
Hawes tells us, composed such a poem.
Next to Hawes comes Alexander Barclay, the
author of numerous works in prose and poetry,
as "The Castell of Labour," wherein is "Rychesse,
Vertue, and Honour," an allegorical poem,
translated from the French; "The Shyp of Foles
of the Worlde," translated from Sebastian Brandt's
German poem, "Das Narren Schiff;" "Egloges;
or, the Miseries of Courts and Courtiers;" a
treatise against Skelton the poet; a translation of
Livy's "Wars of Jugurtha;" "Life of St. George,"
&c. &c. The work, however, which has handed
down his name to posterity is the "Ship of
Fools," which, by interspersing it with original
touches on the follies of his countrymen, he made
in some degree his own. But the chief merit of
the poem in our time is the evidence of the
polish which the English language had acquired,
and to which Barclay probably contributed, for
he had travelled through Germany, Holland,
France, and Italy, studying diligently the best
authors of those countries. He was successively
a prebendary of the college of Ottery St.
Mary, a Benedictine monk, Vicar of Great
Barlow, in Essex, of Wokey, in Somersetshire,
and Rector of All Hallows, London, terminating
his life at Croydon. A stanza or two
will suffice to show the state of the language
at the close of the reign of Henry VII. A
man in orders is speaking:—
"Eche is not lettred that nowe is made a lorde,
Nor eche a clerke that hath a benefice:
They are not all lawyers that plees do recorde,
All that are promoted are not fully wise.
On such chaunce nowe fortune throwes her dice
That, though one knowe but the Yrishe game,
Yet would he have a gentleman's name.
I am like other clerkes which so frowardly them gyde,
That after they are once come unto promotion,
They give them to pleasure, their study set aside,
Their avarice covering with fained devotion.
Yet daily they preache, and have great derision
Against the rude lay men, and all for covetise,
Though their own conscience be blinded with that vice."
The reign of Henry VIII. was distinguished
chiefly by satirists: and it says much for the
courage of poets that they were almost the only
men in that terrible period who dared open their
mouths on the crying sins of Government. Skelton,
Heywood, and Roy were men who amused themselves
with the follies and vices of their contemporaries.
When the sun of poetry rose in a more
glowing form in Surrey, the ferocious king, so
ready with the headsman's axe, quenched it in
blood. John Skelton (b. 1460, d. 1529) was a
clergyman, educated at Oxford. Erasmus declared
him to be "Britannicarum Literarum
Lumen et Decus"—"the light and ornament of
Britain." He became Rector of Diss, in Norfolk;
but, like Sterne at a later day, Skelton was overflowing
with humour and satire rather than
sermons, and so fell under the resentment of
Nykke, Bishop of Norwich. He lashed with all
the wonderful power of his merry muse the licentious
ignorance of the monks and friars; and,
soaring at higher game, attacked the swollen
greatness of Cardinal Wolsey in a strain of the
most daring invective. The incensed cardinal endeavoured
to lay hold on him, and he would
not have escaped scatheless out of his hands, had
not the venerable John Islip, Abbot of Westminster,
opened the sanctuary to him; and there
Skelton lived secure for the remainder of his days,
neither stinting his stinging lashes at the cardinal,
nor suppressing his overflowing humour, which
welled forth in a torrent of the most wild, sparkling,
random, and rodomontade character. His
amazing command of language, his never-failing
and extraordinary rhymes, remind us of one man
only, and that of last century—Hood. The
airiness and irregularity of his lyrical measures
equally suggest a comparison with that most untranslatable
Swedish poet, Bellmann.
His friend Thomas Churchyard, in a eulogium
on him, enumerates a number of poets of that and
preceding times, some of them now little known:—
"Peirs Plowman was full plaine,
And Chaucer's spreet was great;
Earl Surrey had a goodly veine,
Lord Vaux the marke did beat.
And Phaer did hit the pricke
In things he did translate,
And Edwards had a special gift;
And divers men of late
Have helped our English tongue,
That first was base and brute.
Oh! shall I leave out Skelton's name?—
The blossom of my fruit!"
The "Pithy, Pleasant, and Profitable Works of
Maister Skelton, Poet Laureate to Henry VIII.,"
contain "The Crowne of Laurell," by way of introduction;
"The Bouge of the Courte," in which
this unique poet laureate attacks the vices of the
Court without mercy; "The Duke of Albany," a
poem equally severe on the Scots; "Ware the
Hawk," a castigation of the clergy; "The Tunning
of Eleanor Rumming," a wild rattling string of
rhymes on an old ale-wife and her costume; and
"Why come ye not to Court?" an unsparing satire
on Wolsey. There is no part of the cardinal's
history or character that he lets escape. His
mean origin, his puffed-up pride, his sensuality,
his lordly insolence, his covetousness and cruelties,
run on in a strain of loose yet vivid jingle that
was calculated to catch the ear of the people. The
gentlest word that Skelton has for him is that—
"He regardeth lords
No more than potsherds;
He is in such elation
Of his exaltation
Of our sovereign lord
That God to record,
He ruleth all at will,
Without reason or skill,
Howbeit they be primordial
Of his wretched original
And his base progeny,
And his greasy genealogy.
He came of the sink royal
That was cast out of a butcher's stall.
But however he was born,
Men would have the less scorn
If he could consider
His birth and room together."
He tells us that the king,
"Of his royal mind,
Thought to do a thing
That pertaineth to a king—
To make up one of nought,
And made to him be brought
A wretched poor man,
With his living wan,
With planting leeks,
By the days and by the weeks;
And of this poor vassal
He made a king royal!"
We cannot afford space for the wild riot of Skelton's
description of old Eleanor Rumming—
Droupy and drowsy,
Scurvy and lousy,
Her face all bowsy;
Comely crinkled,
Wonderfully wrinkled,
Like roast pig's ear,
Bristled with hair.
But Skelton has shown that he could praise in
strains not unworthy the fair and noble, and buoyant
with music of their own. Such is his canzonet to
MISTRESS MARGARET HUSSEY.
Merry Margaret
As midsummer flower,
Gentle as falcon,
Or hawk of the tower.
With solace and gladness,
Mirth and no madness,
All good and no badness:
So joyously,
So maidenly,
So womanly,
Her demeanour
In everything
Far, far passing
That I can indite,
Or suffice to write
Of Merry Margaret,
As midsummer flower,
Gentle as falcon,
Or hawk of the tower, etc.
A far more grave and not less vengeful satirist
of Wolsey and the clergy was William Roy, the
coadjutor of Tyndale in the translation of the
Bible. He was originally a friar, but joining the
Reformers, he wrote a poem against Wolsey, who
had ordered the burning of Tyndale's New Testament.
It is called—
"Rede me, and be not wrothe,
For I saye no thynge but trothe."
In this work he placed on the title a coat of arms
for Wolsey in black and crimson, with a description
in verse at the back of the title, of which the
following stanza, alluding to the deaths of the
Duke of Buckingham (the swan) and the Duke
of Norfolk (the white lion), may serve as a
specimen:—
"Of the proude Cardinall this is the shelde,
Borne up betweene two angels of Sathan.
The sixe bloody axes in a bare felde
Sheweth the cruelty of the red man,
Which hath devoured the beautiful swan,
Mortal enemy of the white lion,
Carter of York, the vile butcher's sonne."
The burning of Tyndale's New Testament is denounced
by Roy in many verses of the bitterest
feeling, every stanza repeating his indignation at
the unhallowed deed:—
"O miserable monster, most malicious
Father of perversitie, patron of hell!
O terrible tyrant, to God and man odious,
Advocate of antichrist, to Christ rebell;
To thee I speak, O caytife cardinall so cruell,
Causeles chargynge by thy coursed commandment
To burne Godde's worde, the wholly Testament."
Besides these satirists there was John Heywood,
in the time of Henry VIII., Edward, and Mary,
who wrote "Six Centuries of Epigrams," of a pious
nature, a considerable number of plays, and an
allegory called "The Spider and the Fly." Of
course, he was a favourite with Henry and Mary,
and is said to have been more amusing in his conversation
than in his books. Heywood has the
honour commonly assigned him of being the first
author of interludes; the stepping-stones from the
old mysteries and moralities to the regular drama.
With the Church passed away these grotesque
performances called religious; and the drama
quickly expanded in all its fair proportions before
the eyes of the public. Shakespeare arose, and
the dates of the appearance of his plays show us
that they were many of them produced before
1603, the close of the reign of Elizabeth. In fact,
Shakespeare seems to have retired from the stage
in the very year of Elizabeth's death. Before him,
however, a number of dramatic writers had appeared;
but the greater part of them overlived
the termination of Elizabeth's reign, or their
works began after that period to take their due
rank. Of these dramatic writers some may be
noted in passing. Heywood had been preceded by
Skelton in the line of interlude, whose strange
"Nigromansia" was printed by Wynkyn de
Worde as early as 1505. Heywood wrote various
interludes, but his chief one was the "4 P's,"
namely, a Palmer, a Pardoner, a Poticary, and a
Pedlar. On the heels of this appeared the first
regular comedy, "Gammer Gurton's Needle,"
written by John Hill, and printed in 1551. Ten
years after was acted the first English tragedy,
"Gorboduc," written by Thomas Norton and the
celebrated poet Thomas Sackville, afterwards Lord
Buckhurst and Earl of Dorset. Passing over the
"Damon and Pythias" of Richard Edwards, the
"Promos and Cassandra" of George Whetstone,
which, borrowed from an Italian novel, contains
the rude outline of Shakespeare's "Measure for
Measure," we come to Robert Greene, who with
Kyd, Lyly, Peele, Nash author of "Queen Dido,"
and Marlowe, constituted a remarkable constellation
of genius. Greene's chief plays are "Friar
Bacon and the Friar of Bungay," and "A Looking
Glasse for London," written in conjunction with
his friend Thomas Lodge. He also wrote much
poetry. The principal dramas of George Peele
are "David and Bethsabe, with the Tragedy of
Absolon," written in 1579, which is a real mystery
play, and "The Famous Chronicle of Edward I.,"
"The Old Wives' Tales, a Comedy," &c. Lyly,
the Euphuist, wrote nine plays, amongst them
"Alexander and Campaspe," "Sappho and
Phaon," "Midos," "Gallathea," etc. Lyly was
fond of Greek subjects, but he could also enjoy
English comedy, as in "Mother Bombie," and
others, which are regular comedies, divided into acts
and scenes, and interspersed with agreeable songs.
Contemporary with the preceding, as well as
with Shakespeare, Marlowe (b. 1564, d. 1593) is the
greatest name which precedes that of the supreme
dramatist. We can do no more here than name
some of his chief tragedies, for Marlowe was
essentially a tragedian. These were "Tamburlaine
the Great," in two parts, "The Massacre of Paris,"
"Edward II.," including the fall of Mortimer and
Gaveston, "Doctor Faustus," "The Rich Jew of
Malta," and "Lust's Dominion; or, the Lascivious
Queen." Marlowe was, moreover, a beautiful
lyrical poet, as is evident by his charming madrigal
"Come live with me and be my love," given in
Walton's "Angler." Greene, Peele, Marlowe,
Nash, and that whole company were dissipated
in their lives, and lived and died in deep poverty.
To these we must add, as dramatic poets of
this era whom it is essential to a continuous
view of the progress of the drama to mention
with the rest, Decker; Kyd, author of "Jeronimo"
and the "Spanish Tragedy;" Lodge,
author of "The Wounds of Civil War," &c.;
Gascoine; Chapman, also the celebrated author of
the translation of Homer; Jasper Heywood, son
of John Heywood; Weston, Marston, &c. So
much was the drama now advanced in estimation,
that even Elizabeth's Lord Chancellor, Hatton,
was in part author of the tragedy of "Tancred
and Sigismunda," founded on the story of
Boccaccio.
Amongst the lyrical poets, the reign of Henry
VIII. presents us with a remarkable trio, who
were associated as well by their genius as their
position and fate. These were Sir Thomas Wyatt,
the early lover of Anne Boleyn, her brother,
George Boleyn, afterwards the unfortunate Earl
of Rochford, and the equally unfortunate Henry
Howard, Earl of Surrey, the last victim of the
sanguinary Henry VIII. Surrey was the cousin-german
of the Boleyns, Wyatt was their early
neighbour and playfellow; together they all
figured amongst the most accomplished courtiers:
two of them lost their heads, the third only
narrowly escaping; and their poetry was printed
together in one volume.
Sir Thomas Wyatt (b. 1503, d. 1542, and
called the Elder, to distinguish him from his son,
who was executed for rebellion in the reign of
Queen Mary) was one of the most illustrious men
of the Court of Henry VIII. His country-house
was Allington Castle, in Kent, and its vicinity to
the residence of the Boleyns made him a youthful
companion of Anne and her brother and sister.
He became attached to Anne, but was obliged to
give way to the king, of whose wrath he was in
some danger. After that he was long employed
abroad in embassies to France, Spain, Italy, and
the Netherlands. Incurring the king's displeasure
for aiding Cromwell in the promotion of the
marriage with Anne of Cleves, he prudently withdrew
from Court to his castle in Kent. He had
never ceased writing poetry even when engaged in
his diplomatic missions, and he now more than
ever cultivated the muses. His amatory verses
are polished and elegant, but his satires display
more vigour, and are remarkable as containing the
earliest English version of "The Town and Country
Mouse." Besides his poems he has left letters, in
which he not only gives us many insights into the
state of the Courts where he resided, but various
particulars regarding the fate of Anne Boleyn,
and some addressed to his son, which place him in
a most favourable light as a man and a father.
His prose has been greatly admired. A short
lyric, which we may give, addressed to Anne
Boleyn, when her creation of Marchioness of
Pembroke warned him that he saw in her the
future queen, clearly informs us that he had been
her accepted lover:—
"Forget not yet the tried intent
Of such a truth as I have meant;
My great travail so gladly spent,
Forget not yet.
"Forget not yet when first began
The weary life ye know; since when
The suit, the service none tell can,
Forget not yet.
"Forget not yet the great assays,
The cruel wrongs, the scornful ways,
The painful patience and delays,
Forget not yet.
"Forget not, O! forget not this,
How long ago had been and is
The love that never meant amiss,
Forget not yet.
"Forget not now thine own approved,
The which so constant hath thee loved,
Whose steadfast faith hath never moved,
Forget not yet."
His friend George Boleyn was, perhaps, a more
spirited poet than himself, and is said to have sung
the night before his execution (May 17, 1536)
a lyric which had been printed some time, along
with the poems of Wyatt, called, "Farewell, my
lute," the refrain of which was too strikingly
applicable to his situation:—
"Farewell, my lute, this is the last
Labour that thou and I shall waste,
For ended is that we began;
Now is the song both sung and passed;
My lute, be still, for I have done."
But the most famous of these was the Earl of
Surrey (b. 1516, d. 1547). Like Wyatt, he had
travelled in Italy, and formed a high admiration
of the great Italian poets, Dante, Ariosto, and
Petrarch, on whose model he formed his taste.
Like his ancestor, the conqueror of Flodden, he
was brave and high-spirited but seems to have had
a facility for getting into scrapes, both with his
own family and the Government. As a gay
courtier, however, he was much admired by the
ladies, and still more by people of taste for his
poems, which went through four editions in two
months, and through seven more in the thirty
years after their appearance. They are supposed
to have strongly influenced the taste of Spenser
and Milton. The theme of his lyrics was the fair
Geraldine, but who she was precisely neither
critics nor historians have quite determined,
though believed to be a lady of the Irish family of
Fitzgerald. A single stanza will indicate the
spirit with which he proclaimed her beauty:—
"Give place, ye lovers, here before
That spent your boasts and brags in vain!
My lady's beauty passeth more
The best of yours, I dare well say'n,
Than doth the sun the candle-light,
Or brightest day the darkest night."
But the most important fact in Surrey's poetical
history is his introduction of blank verse into the
English language, a simple but, in its consequences,
most eventful innovation, liberating both
the heroic and the dramatic muse from the
shackles of rhyme, and leading the way to the
magnificent works of Shakespeare and Milton in
that free form. There has been much dispute
among critics as to whether Surrey invented
blank verse, or merely copied it from some other
language; but the only wonder seems that some
one of our poets had not attempted it before.
What so likely as that Surrey, in translating the
first and fourth books of the "Æneid," should
adopt the blank verse in which the original was
written, not exactly the hexameter but a measure
more suitable to the English language? All the
verse of the ancient Greeks and Romans is of this
blank species; and it is extraordinary that men
well read in these tongues had so long omitted the
experiment; especially as the Italians, the French,
and the Spaniards had tried it. Gonsalvo Perez,
secretary to Charles V., had translated Homer's
"Odyssey" into blank verse; and in 1528 Trissino,
in order to root out the terza rima of Dante,
had published his "Italia Liberata di Goti"—"Italy
delivered from the Goths"—in blank
verse. In the reign of Francis I. two of the most
popular poets of France, Jodelle and De Baif,
wrote poems in this style. Gawin Douglas, Bishop
of Dunkeld, had already translated the "Æneid'
into Scots metre, and it would seem as if Surrey,
in trying his hand on two books of the same poem,
had been induced to make the essay of blank verse
at the same time. Whatever was the immediate
cause, nothing could exceed the success of Surrey's
experiment. His verse flows with a stately dignity
full of music and strength. We take a specimen
from the fourth book of the "Æneid," where
Dido, who has vowed never to marry again, perceives
her new passion for Æneas, and discloses her
pain to her sister:—
"Ne to her lymmes care graunteth quiet rest.
The next morrowe with Phœbus' lampe the erthe
Alightened clere, and eke the dawning daye,
The shadowe danke gan from the pole remove,
When all unsownd her sister of like minde,
Thus spoke she to: 'O sister An, what dremes
Be these that me tormenten, thus afraide?
What newcome gest unto our realm ys come?
What one of chere? How stowt of harte in arms?
Truelie I think, ne vaine ys my beliefe,
Of goddishe race some of springe should he seeme.
Cowardie noteth harts swarved owt of kinde
He driven, lord, with how hard destinie!
What battells eke atchieved did he tell!
And but my minde was fixt immovablie
Never with wight in wedlocke for to joine,
Sithe my first love me lefte by deth disseverid,
Yf bridal bowndes and bed me lothed not,
To this one fawlt perchaunce yeet might I yeld;
For I will graunt sith wretched Syche's dethe,
My spouse and hawse with brother slaughter stained,
This onley man hath made my senses bend,
And pricketh forthe the minde that gan to slide:
Feelinglie I taste the steppes of mine old flame.
But first I wishe the erth me swallow downe,
Or with thunder the mighty Lord me send
To the pale gostes of hell and darkness depe,
Or I thee stayne shamefastness, or the lawes.'"
If we turn to Sackville's "Gorboduc," acted
before Queen Elizabeth in 1561, we shall see how
thoroughly blank verse had asserted its freedom of
the language. Even Greene, in his "Friar
Bacon," in 1594, has passages that in their rich
and harmonious diction display the wonderful
power of blank verse. The true vehicle for the
deathless dramas of Shakespeare was established,
and already he had taken possession of it with
some of his noblest imaginings, for Nash, as early
as 1589, alludes to "Hamlet."
But before coming to Shakespeare, we must add
another word regarding Sackville (b. 1527, d.
1608). In 1559 he published "The Mirrour for
Magistrates." The poetical preface to this work,
which he called "The Induction," and the
"Complaint of Henry, Duke of Buckingham,"
displayed the most remarkable powers of poetry,
and at once arrested the public attention. The
work itself was a mere series of the lives of
personages prominent in English history; it is
supposed to be an imitation of Lydgate's "Fall
of Princes," but is expanded by the loftier genius
of the author, while the induction is so illustrated
by allegory, as to give rise to the belief that
Spenser was indebted to him.
Edmund Spenser, the greatest of our allegoric
poets, was born (1553) in East Smithfield, in
London, and was educated at Pembroke Hall,
Cambridge. He had the good fortune to secure
the friendship of the all-powerful Earl of Leicester,
of Sir Philip Sidney and Sir Walter Raleigh.
By their introduction to Queen Elizabeth, he
obtained an annuity of £50 a year; and besides
being employed by Leicester on a mission to
France, went to Ireland in 1580 with Lord Grey
de Wilton. We have already mentioned his
"View of the State of Ireland," and for that able
work, as well as for other services, he received a
grant of the abbey and manor of Enniscorthy in
Wexford, which the same year, probably under
pressure of necessity, he transferred to a Mr.
Lynot. The estate, at the time of Gilbert's
survey of Ireland, was worth £8,000 a year.
Afterwards Spenser obtained the grant of the
castle of Kilcolman, in the county of Cork, part
of the estate of the unfortunate Earl of Desmond,
with 3,000 acres of land. On this property
the poet went to live, and his dear friend Sir
Philip Sidney being just then killed at the battle
of Zutphen, he wrote his pastoral elegy of "Astrophel"
in his honour. He also wrote his great
work the "Faerie Queene" there; but in 1597 he
was chased by the exasperated Irish from his
castle, which was burned over his head, his
youngest child perishing in the cradle. He
reached London, with his wife and two boys and a
girl, and thus broken down by his misfortunes, he
sank and died in 1599 at an inn or lodging-house
in King Street, Westminster. Ben Jonson says
"he died for lake of bread, yet refused twenty
pieces sent to him by my Lord of Essex, adding
he was sorry he had not time to spend them."
It has been asked how he could die of "lack of
bread" with an annuity of £50 a year. The thing
is very possible. Burleigh was his life-long enemy.
He hated him as the commonplace soul instinctively
hates the man of genius, and this hatred
was aggravated by his being patronised by Leicester,
Essex, and Raleigh, all men whom Burleigh
detested. Nothing was, therefore, easier than for
Burleigh to withhold the dying poet's pension, or
his son Robert Cecil, who now possessed his power,
for Burleigh was in his last days, and Cecil inherited
all his meanness. Spenser has recorded
the malice of Burleigh in various places. In his
"Ruins of Time" he says:—
"The rugged foremost that with grave foresight
Wields kingdoms' causes and affairs of state,
My looser verse, I wot, doth sharply wite
For praising love."
And at the close of the sixth book of "The Faerie
Queene," he declares there is no hope of escaping
"his venomous despite." Spenser's verses in
"Mother Hubbard's Tales," describing the miseries
of Court dependence, have often been quoted:—
"Full little knowest thou that hast not tryed
What hell it is in suing long to byde;
To lose good days that might be better spent;
To waste long nights in pensive discontent;
To speed to-day, to be put back to-morrow;
To feed on hope, to pine with fear and sorrow;
To have thy prince's grace, yet want her peeres';
To have thy asking, yet wait many years;
To fret thy soul with crosses and with cares;
To eat thy heart with comfortless despairs;
To fawn, to crouch, to wait, to ride, to run,
To spend, to give, to want, to be undone."
The minor poems of Spenser beside the "Astrophel,"
are the "Epithalamium" on his own marriage;
four "Hymns to Love and Beauty;"
"Sonnets;" "Colin Clout come Home again;"
"The Tears of the Muses;" "Mother Hubbard's
Tales," which refer to Court characters of the
time; "The Ruins of Time;" "Petrarch's
Visions," "Bellaye's Visions," &c. In all these
there is much beauty and fancy, mingled with
much that is far-fetched and fantastic—the inevitable
fault of that age. The "Faerie Queene"
rises above them all as the cathedral over the
lesser churches of a great city. It was written in
a stanza which from him has ever since been
called the Spenserian, a stanza so capable of every
grace, strength, and harmony, that there are few
poets who have not essayed it: Thomson's "Castle
of Indolence," Beattie's "Minstrel," Mrs. Tighe's
"Psyche," Campbell's "Gertrude of Wyoming,"
and Byron's "Childe Harold's Pilgrimage," have
made it the vehicle of many immortal thoughts.
To the modern reader, nevertheless, the "Faerie
Queene" would prove a tedious task in a continuous
perusal. It is of a fashion and taste so
entirely belonging to the age in which it was
written—that of courtly tourneys, of parade of
knighthood, at least in books, and of fondness of
high-flown allegory—that it unavoidably strikes a
reader of this more realistic age as visionary, formal
in manner, and descriptive not of actual human life,
but of an impossible style of existence. It is dedicated
to Queen Elizabeth as "The Most High,
Mightie, and Magnificent Empresse," and in a
letter to Sir Walter Raleigh he explains its plan.
Following the example of Ariosto in his "Orlando,"
he endeavours to exalt worthy knighthood by portraying
Prince Arthur before he was king, under
the image of a brave knight, perfected in the
twelve private moral virtues, as Aristotle hath devised,
in which is the purpose of these first twelve
books. From the arguments of "Despair" to the
"Red-Crosse Knight," we may take a specimen
of the "Faerie Queene:"
"'Who travailes by the wearie, wandering way,
To come unto his wished home in haste,
And meets a flood that doth his passage stay,
Is not great grace to help him over past,
Or free his feet that in the myre sticke fast?
Most envious man that grieves at neighbour's good,
And fond, that joyest in the woe thou hast,
Why wilt not let him passe, that long hath stood
Upon the bancke, yet wilt thyselfe not pas the flood?
"'He there does now enjoy eternall rest,
And happy ease, which thou dost want and crave,
And further from it daily wanderest:
What if some little payne the passage have,
That makes frayle flesh to feare the bitter wave?
Is that not payne well borne, that bringes long ease,
And lays the soul to sleepe in quiet grave?
Sleepe after toyle, port after stormie seas,
Ease after warre, deathe after life, does greatly please.'
"The knight much wondered at his suddeine wit,
And sayst, 'The terme of life is limited,
Ne may a man prolong, nor shorten it;
The soldier may not move from watchful steed,
Nor leave his stand, until his captaine bid.'
'Who life did limit by Almightie doome,'
Quoth he, 'knows best the terms established;
And he that points the centenel his roome,
Doth license his depart at sound of morning droome.
"'Is not his deed, whatever thing is done,
In heaven and earth? Did he not all create
To die againe? All ends, that was begoune,
Their times in his eternall booke of fate
Are written sure, and have their certain date.
Who, then, can strive with strong necessitie?
That holds the world in its still changing state,
Or shunne the death ordayned by destinee?
When houre of death is come, let none aske whence nor why.
"'The longer life, I wote, the greater sin;
The greater sin, the greater punishment.
All those great battles which thou boasts to win,
Through strife, and bloodshed, and avengement,
Now praysed, hereafter deare thou shalt repent—
For life must life, and blood must blood repay.
Is not enough thy evill life forespent?
For he that once hath missèd the right way,
The further he doth goe, the further he doth stray.'"
The language of Spenser must not be held to
be the language of the time; he purposely used
an antiquated diction to give a quaint and piquant
tone to his romance. A modern critic has denied
that the language is thus treated by the poet;
but it must be allowed that Sir Philip Sidney,
living at the moment, was a competent judge of
this fact, and in his "Defence of Poesie" he
complains of this very circumstance in the "Faerie
Queene."
THE HOUSE AT STRATFORD-ON-AVON IN WHICH SHAKESPEARE WAS BORN.
We arrive now at the last name which we
intend to introduce in our review of the literature
of England at this period, and it is the greatest;
perhaps the greatest which has yet diffused its
glory over this or any other country. The genius
of Shakespeare appears to penetrate into all
departments of human knowledge, and his instincts
possess a universal accuracy. Whether he
describes the beauties of Nature at large, or
enters the haunts of busy life, high or low, royal,
noble, or plebeian, or sends his all-searching
glance into the depths of the human mind, or the
strange intricacies of human nature, we are equally
astonished at the clearness of his perceptive
faculties, and the justness of his conclusions. We
shall not here discuss the various guesses, for
such to a great degree they are, which have
been indulged in by his host of critics and biographers,
regarding his little known life. It is
sufficient that we know that he was born at
Stratford-on-Avon in 1564; that his father was
in the Town Council, and a man of property;
that William was said to have been apprenticed
to a butcher, or that one of his father's trades
was that of a butcher; that at the age of nineteen
he married Anne Hathaway, who was eight
years his senior; that at the age of twenty-two
he was driven by increasing poverty, and it is
said through a disturbance about poaching in
Sir Thomas Lucy's park, to London, where
he became connected with the theatre, and so
early as 1589 we find that he had written
"Hamlet," if no other of his dramas, though
none of them seem to have been published till
1597, eight years afterwards. The first of his
poems, "Venus and Adonis," was printed in
1593, four years earlier, and the "Rape of
Lucrece" in the following year. From that time
to 1603, the year of the death of Elizabeth, a
great number of his dramas was published, but
"King Lear," "Macbeth," "Cymbeline," "The
Winter's Tale," the "Tempest," "Troilus and
Cressida," "Henry VIII.," "Coriolanus," "Julius
Cæsar," and "Antony and Cleopatra," would
appear to have been the glorious products of his
ten or thirteen years of leisure in his native
town. One of the first labours of his retirement
seems to have been the collection of his Sonnets,
for they were published in 1609.
We mention these facts here merely as historical
data; because it will be necessary to
notice his plays in the next centennial period
of our history, in connection with the drama at
large; but we shall confine our notice of Shakespeare
on this occasion solely to his poetical
character.
The poems of Shakespeare are "Venus and
Adonis," "The Rape of Lucrece," "Sonnets,"
"A Lover's Complaint," and "The Passionate
Pilgrim." The poems for the most part, if not
altogether—"The Passionate Pilgrim" and some
of the sonnets excepted—would appear to have
been his earliest productions. He dedicates
"Venus and Adonis" to Lord Southampton, and
styles it "the first heir of my invention." This
poem, "The Rape of Lucrece," and the "Lover's
Complaint," bear marks of youthful passion.
They burn with a voluptuous fire, yet they
are at the same time equally prodigal of a
masterly vigour, imagination, and the faculty of
entering into and depicting the souls of others.
They as clearly herald the great poet of the age,
as a morning sun in July announces what will be
its intensity at noon. The language, in its
purity and eloquence, is so perfect that it might
have been written, not in the days of Elizabeth,
but in those of Victoria, and presents a singular
contrast to that of Spenser. "The Passionate
Pilgrim" is an extraordinary production; it
has no thread, not even the slightest, of story
or connection, and seems to be merely a stringing
together of various passages of poetry, which
he had struck off at different moments of
inspiration, and intended to use in his dramas.
Some of them indeed we find there. It opens
with a commencement of the legend of "Venus
and Adonis," apparently his first rude sketch of
the poem he afterwards wrote more to his mind.
It then breaks suddenly off with those well-known
lines, beginning—
"Crabbed age and youth
Cannot live together;"
soon after as suddenly changes into—
"It was a lording's daughter, the fairest one of three;"
as abruptly gives us those charming stanzas
opening with—
"Take, oh, take those lips away
That so sweetly were forsworn;"
and presents us with a number of disjointed
passages which are found in "Love's Labour's
Lost."
But the Sonnets are the most interesting,
because they give us glimpses into his own life
and personal feelings. Many of them are plainly
written in the characters of others; some express
the sentiments of women towards their
lovers, but others are unmistakably the deepest
sentiments and feelings of his own life. From
these we learn that Shakespeare was not exempt
from the dissipations and aberrations incident on
a town life at that time, but his true and noble
nature led him to abandon the immoral city as
early as possible, and retire to his own domestic
roof in his own native place. We may select
one specimen of these sonnets, which probably
was addressed to his wife, and which at once
betrays his dislike of his profession of an actor,
and his regret over the influence which it had
had on his mind, and the stigma which it had
cast on his name; for the profession of a player
was then so low as to stamp actors as "vagabonds."
"Oh, for my sake do you with Fortune chide,
The guilty goddess of my harmful deeds,
That did not better for my life provide
Than public means which public manners breeds:
Thence came it that my name receives a brand,
And almost thence my nature is subdued
To what it works in, like the dyer's hand.
Pity me then, and wish I were renewed;
Whilst, like a willing patient, I will drink
Potions of eysell
[A] 'gainst my strong infection;
No bitterness that I will bitter think,
Nor double penance to correct correction.
Pity me then, dear friend, and I assure ye,
Even that your pity is enough to cure me."
But if the great dramatist and inimitable poet
shrank with disgust from the profession of
acting, because of the estimation in which the
actor then was held and the pollutions which
surrounded the stage, he held a very different
opinion of the vocation of a dramatist. In the
peaceful and virtuous retirement of his country
residence he still occupied himself with the composition
of the noblest dramas of all time; and
whilst he was so free from the petty egotism of
a small mind that he left scarcely any record of
himself, he boldly avowed his assurance of the
immortality of his fame:—
"Now with the drops of this most balmy time,
My love looks fresh, and Death to me subscribes;
[B]
Since, spite of him, I'll live in this poor rhyme,
While he insults o'er dull and speechless tribes:
And thou in this shalt find thy monument,
When tyrants' crests and tombs of brass are spent."
WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.
From the Painting known as the Chandos Portrait,
attributed to Richard Burbage,
in the National Portrait Gallery.
We shall have occasion to show that Shakespeare
had much to do in shaping and raising the
drama out of that chaotic state in which he found
it, and the wonder has always been that, with
his apparently imperfect education, he could
accomplish so much. But there is no education
like self-education; this was William Shakespeare's,
and his genius was of that brilliant and
healthy kind that gave him all the advantages of
such a tuition. In history and in society he
found the materials of the drama, but the wealth
and power of the poet he found in the great
school of Nature.
In Scotland the language had remained much
more stationary than in England. In this period
we find the chief Scottish poets writing in a diction
far more unintelligible to the English reader than
Chaucer's or Gower's was in the middle of the
fourteenth century. Two of the Scots poets of
that period—Barbour and King James I.—wrote
in English, and, therefore, in a language far in
advance of Gawin Douglas, Dunbar, and Sir
David Lyndsay in the sixteenth century. One
great reason of this probably was the constant
strife and enmity between the nations, which
made the Scots cling in confirmed nationality
to their own language and customs, for the works
and merits of the English poets were known and
acknowledged. James I. called Chaucer and
Gower "his maisters dear." Henryson, a succeeding
poet, even wrote a continuation of
Chaucer's "Troilus and Cresseide," under the
names of the "Testament," and the "Complaint
of Cresseide;" and Gawin, or Gavin, Douglas,
the famous Bishop of Dunkeld, pronouncing his
vernacular tongue barbarous, declared that rather
than remain silent through the scarcity of
Scottish terms, he would use bastard Latin,
French, or English. A still greater and later
poet, Dunbar, expresses repeatedly his admiration
of "Chawcer of Makars flowir," of "the Monck
of Berry," "Lydgate," and "Gowyr." Yet if
we use the very language which he did to utter
his admiration in, we find no advance towards the
polish of these poets:
"O reverend Chawcer, rose of rethouris all,
As in our toung the flowir imperiall,
That ever raise in Brittane, quha reids richt,
Those biers of makars the triumphs ryall,
The fresche enamallit termes celestiall;
This matter thou couth haif ilumint bricht,
Was thou not of our Inglis all the licht;
Surmounting every toung terrestiall,
As far as Mayis fair morning does midnight.
"O morale Gower and Lidgate laureat,
Zour suggurat toungs and lipps aureat
Bene till our eirs cause of grit delyte."
It is curious that Dunbar calls this English and
not Scots. He also enumerates a long list of
Scottish poets who were deceased, as Sir Hew of
Eglintoun, Etrick, Heriot, Wyntoun, Maister
John Clerk, James Afflek, Holland, Barbour,
Sir Mungo Dockhart of the Lie, Clerk of Tranent,
who wrote the adventures of Sir Gawayn, Sir
Gilbert Gray, Blind Harry, and Sandy Traill,
Patrick Johnstone, Mersar, Rowll of Aberdeen,
and Rowll of Corstorphine, Brown of Dunfermline,
Robert Henryson, Sir John the Ross, Stobo,
Quinten Schaw, and Walter Kennedy. Of these
little is now known, except of Henryson, and
that chiefly for his ballad of "Robert and
Makyn," given by Bishop Percy in his "Reliques
of English Poetry."
Gawin Douglas, third son of the celebrated
fifth Earl of Angus, called Bell-the-Cat, was
born in 1474. He lived a troubled life in those
stormy times, and died a refugee in London, of
the Plague, in 1522. He was patronised by
Queen Margaret, sister of Henry VIII., and
richly deserved it, for his learning, his virtues,
and his genius. He was most celebrated in his
own time for his translation of Virgil's "Æneid,"
the first metrical version of any ancient classic
in either English or Scots. He also translated
Ovid's "De Remedio Amoris." But his original
poems, "The Palace of Honour," "King Hart,"
and his "Comœdiæ Sacræ," or dramatic poems
from the Scriptures, are now justly esteemed the
real trophies of his genius. "The Palace of
Honour" and "King Hart" are allegoric poems,
abounding with beautiful descriptions and noble
sentiments.
The principal poems of William Dunbar (b.
1465, d. 1530,) are "The Golden Terge," or
target; "The Thistle and the Rose," in honour of
the marriage of Margaret of England with James
IV. of Scotland; "The Fained Friar;" the
"Lament of the Death of the Makars," or poets,
and a number of other poems, chiefly lyrical,
which display versatile genius—comic, satirical,
grave, descriptive, and religious—and place him in
the first rank of Scotland's poets, notwithstanding
the obsolete character of his language; and
not the least of his distinctions is the absence
of that grossness which disfigured the writings of
the poets of those times. A few lines may
denote the music of his versification:
"Be merry, man, and tak nocht far in mynd
The waivering of this wrechit world of sorrow,
To God be humill, and to thy freynd be kynd,
And with thy nychtbouris glaidly len and borrow;
His chance to-nycht, it may be thyne to-morrow."
SHAKESPEARE. (From the Portrait by Droeshout in the First Folio.)
The last poet of this period that we must notice
is Sir David Lyndsay of the Mount, Lyon King-at-Arms,
whom Sir Walter Scott, in "Marmion,"
has made so familiar to modern readers, predating,
however, Sir David's office of Lyon
King by seventeen years. Sir David was born
about 1490, and is supposed to have died about
1567; so that he lived in the reigns of Henry
VII. of England and of Elizabeth, through the
whole period of Henry VIII., Edward VI., and
Mary. His life was cast in times most eventful,
and Sir David, as Lyon-Herald of Scotland,
occupied a prominent position in the shaping of
those events. At the time of the battle of
Flodden in 1513, both Pitscottie and Buchanan
assure us that he was with James IV. when the
ghost appeared to him in the church at Linlithgow,
warning him against the battle. Lyndsay
was then only three-and-twenty. He was appointed
page to the young king, and continued
about him and in his service during the king's
life. In his "Complaynt," addressing the king,
he says:—
"How as are chapman beres his pack,
I bore thy grace upon my back,
And sometymes stridlingis on my neck,
Dansand with mony bend and beck:
The first syllabis that thou did mute,
Pa-da-lyn upon the lute;
Pa-da-lyn upon the lute;
For play, thou leit me never rest,
But gyngertoun, thou luffit ay best.
And ay quhen thou come from the scule,
Then I luffit to play the fule."
Lyndsay went to France on embassies of royal
marriage; and after the king's early death, under
the Regency, he was again sent to the Low
Countries on a mission to the Emperor Charles
V. In 1548 he went as Lion-King to Denmark,
to King Christian, to seek aid against the
English, and afterwards lived to see the great
struggle between the old Church and the Reformation,
the murder of Cardinal Beaton, the
return of Knox, and must have died about the
time of the murder of Darnley.
THE ACTING OF ONE OF SHAKESPEARE'S PLAYS IN THE TIME OF QUEEN ELIZABETH.
Sir David, though bred a courtier, was a
thorough Reformer; and his poems abound with
the most unrestrained exposure of the corruptions
of Courts and of the Church. On the
flagitious lives of monks, nuns, and clergy, he
pours forth the most trenchant satire and denunciation;
and in this respect he may be styled
the Chaucer of Scotland. His poems are "The
Dreme," "The Complaynt," "The Complaynt
of Papingo," "The Complaynt of Bagsche," "Ane
Pleasant Satyre of the Three Estatis," "The
Answer to the King's Flyting," "Kittie's Confession,"
"The Tragedie of the Cardinal," "The
Historie and Testament of Squire Meldrum,"
"Monarchie," and "The Epistill Nuncupatorie."
"The Dreme" reminds one of the dreams of
former poets, of Chaucer, William Langland's,
"The Vision of Piers Plowman," and of those of
Douglas and Dunbar. Probably "The Golden
Terge" of Dunbar suggested this poem, for just
as Dunbar goes out, as "the stern of day began
to schyne," and lying under a roseir, or arbour of
roses, lulled by the songs of birds and the sound of
a river, dreams, so does Lyndsay dream, passing,
with Dame Remembrance as his guide, through
earth, hell, purgatory, heaven, paradise, and "the
planets seven," hearing and seeing all the works
of God, and the rewards and punishments of
the good and the evil. "The Complaynt"
describes the degenerate manners of the Court
whilst Lyndsay was banished from it, and the
grapes were sour. "The Complaynt of the
Papingo," or the king's parrot, deals out the same
measure to the hierarchy as Lyndsay had given to
the State, and in it Cardinal Beaton, the Pope and
the clergy in general, are soundly rated. Next
comes "The Three Estatis," a morality play
in which all kinds of emblematical personages—Rex
Humanitas, Sensualitie, Chastitie, &c.—act
their parts. Its scope may be inferred from
its being declared to be "in commendation of
vertew and vituperation of vyce." This is the
great work of Lyndsay, and was acted before the
king and queen, who sat out nine mortal hours in
its performance, in which they successively heard
every order in the State—Court, nobility, Church,
and people—severely criticised. Lyndsay's play
has the merit of preceding both "Gorboduc" and
"Gammer Gurton's Needle;" and it certainly
possesses the moral of the former and the wit of
the latter. "The Answer to the King's Flyting"
is a very curious example of what the indulgence
of a professional fool at Court led to: it produced
not only the jester but the poet laureate. The
king condescended to flyte, or jibe, with his jester;
the jester in return became the satirist, and the
poet laureate healed all wounds by his eulogies.
James V. flyted with Lyndsay, and Lyndsay
answered with interest. In "Kittie's Confession"
Lyndsay ridicules auricular confession. In "The
Cardinal" he sings a song of triumph over the fall
of Beaton. In the "Legend of Squire Meldrum"
the poet dresses up the adventures of a domestic
of Lord Lyndsay's of that name in the manner of
an ancient romance, and it was extremely popular.
It has been declared by critics of note to be the
best of Lyndsay's poems, and equal to the most
polished pieces of Drayton, who lived a century
after him.
We have taken thus much notice of the Lyon
King-at-Arms, because nowadays he does not
enjoy, perhaps, his due fame in comparison with
that of our Chaucer and our early dramatists; yet
a perusal of his works is necessary to a real knowledge
of the times in which he lived. The reader,
however, must be warned that in the search after
this knowledge he will have to wade through much
filth, and language now astonishing for its naked
coarseness. On the other hand, he will occasionally
find scientific theories of modern pretension
quite familiar to our Lyon-King. For instance,
Kirwan in his "Elements of Mineralogy"—a
work published in 1794 and marking a considerable
advance in knowledge—claimed the geologic
discovery that the currents which broke up
the hills in Europe came from the south-west,
leaving the diluvial slopes declining to the
north-east. But hear Lyndsay three hundred
years ago:—
"I reid how clerkis dois conclude,
Induryng that maist furious flude
With quhilk the erth was sa opprest,
The wynd blew feorth of the south-west,
As may be sene be experience,
How, throw the watter's violence,
The heich montanis, in every art,
Ar bain fornenst the south-west part;
As the montanis of Pyreneis,
The Alpis, and rochis in the seis;
Richt sa the rochis gret and gray
Quhilk standis into Norroway.
The heichest hillis, in every art,
And in Scotland, for the maist part,
Throuch weltryng of that furious flude,
The craigis of erth war maist denude.
Travelling men may considder best
The montanis bair nixt the south-west."
The sixteenth century was nearly as distinguished
for its Music as its poetry. The reproach
which has been cast on England in our own time
for not being a musical or music-producing nation
did not apply then. On the contrary, we stood at
the head of Europe in original musical composition.
The monarchs of that age, like their most illustrious
predecessors from Alfred downwards, were
highly educated in music. Henry VIII. was himself
a composer of Church music. It must be
recollected that Henry, being but the second son
of Henry VII., was originally educated for the
Church, whose dignities were then princely; and,
as a matter of course, he was made familiar with
its music, which occupied so prominent a part in
its worship. Erasmus bears testimony to the fact
of Henry having composed Offices for the Church—a
fact confirmed by Lord Herbert of Cherbury
and Bishop Burnet; and Sir John Hawkins in his
"History of Music," and Boyce, in his "Cathedral
Music of English Masters," have preserved specimens
of the Royal composition. Boyce gives a
fine anthem of Henry's, "O Lord, the Maker of
all things." The king's musical establishment for
his chapel consisting of 114 persons cost annually
upwards of £2,000, and was continued by
Edward. Mary and Elizabeth were equally learned
in music, though they do not appear to have
patronised it as royally.
Under these circumstances great composers,
both of sacred and social music flourished in the
sixteenth century. The names of Tye, Marbeck,
Tallis, Bird, Farrant, Dowland, Bennet, Wilbye,
Ford, &c., stand in superb array as composers of
some of our finest Church music, or of madrigals
and part songs.
Tye was so much esteemed by Henry VIII.,
that he was made music preceptor to Edward VI.,
and was afterwards organist to Elizabeth. He
composed both anthems and madrigals; and his
motett, "Laudate nomen Domini," is still famous.
Marbeck composed the notes to the Preces and
Responses, which, with some alterations, are still
in use in our cathedrals. He was organist at
Windsor, and was very nearly losing his life under
the ferocious Henry, being found to be a member
of a society for religious reformation. He and his
three accomplices were condemned to the stake;
but Marbeck was saved by his musical genius,
Henry observing, on Marbeck's "Latin Concordance,"
on which he had been employed, being
shown to him, "Poor Marbeck! it would be well
for thine accusers if they employed their time
no worse." His fellows were burnt without
mercy, though no more guilty than himself.
QUEEN ELIZABETH'S CITHER AND MUSIC-BOOK.
Tallis was indebted to Marbeck for the notes
just mentioned in his compositions for the Church.
His entire service, including prayers, responses,
Litany, and nearly all of a musical kind, are preserved
in Boyce's collections. They became the
most celebrated of any of that remarkable age. In
conjunction, also, with his pupil William Bird, he
published, in 1575, "Cantiones Sacræ"—perfect
of their kind; one of them, "O sacrum convivium,"
since adapted by Dean Aldrich to the
words "I call and cry," still continues to be frequently
performed in our cathedrals. The "Cantiones"
are also remarkable as having been the
first things of the sort protected by a patent for
twenty-one years, granted by Elizabeth.
Bird was the author of the splendid canon,
"Non nobis, Domine," which has been claimed by
composers of Italy, France, and the Netherlands,
but, as sufficiently proved, without any ground.
The names of Tallis and Bird are of themselves an
ample guarantee to the claim of musical genius by
this country. Richard Farrant and Dr. Bull—the
first a chorister in Edward VI.'s chapel, and
the latter organist to Queen Elizabeth—added
greatly to the sacred music of the period. Farrant's
compositions especially are remarkable for their
deep pathos and devotion. His anthem, preserved
by Boyce, "Lord, for Thy tender mercy's
sake." is unrivalled.
In social music the poetical Surrey stands conspicuous,
having set his own sonnets to music.
Madrigals and other part songs—since better
known as glees—were carried to a brilliant height
in this country. The madrigal was originally
invented by the Flemings, but glee singing seems
to be English, though no doubt derived from the
madrigal. Morley's first book of madrigals was
published in 1594, Weelkes's in 1597, Wilbye's in
1598, Bennet's in 1599, and soon after Ward's and
Orlando Gibbons'. Dowland's and Ford's are more
properly glees than madrigals; the former appeared
in 1597, and the latter in 1607. Morley,
one of the gentlemen of Queen Elizabeth's chapel,
appears, like Dowland, to have studied the works
of the great composers abroad; and the harmony
and science which he evinces are eminent.
His canzonets for two voices are especially lively
and pleasing. Dowland not only travelled in
France, Italy, and Germany, but, at the request of
King Christian IV., who saw him in England, he
went to reside in Denmark. Fuller declares that
he was the rarest musician of the age. In 1598
Wilbye published thirty madrigals, and a second
book, applicable to instrumental as well as vocal
music, in 1609, amongst which are, "Lady, when
I behold the roses sprouting," "As fair as morn,"
"Down in a valley," &c.; and in 1599 John
Bennet published a set of madrigals, including the
admirable ones of "O sleep, fond Fancy!" "Flow,
O my tears!" Lastly, John Milton, the father
of the poet, who also composed several psalm
tunes, was a contributor to "The Triumphs of
Oriana," a set of madrigals in praise of Queen
Elizabeth. Altogether this century was brilliant
in both Church and convivial music; and if we
are to judge from some specimens to be found in
"The Dancing Master" and "Queen Elizabeth's
Virginal Book," the popular airs were in many
instances of a superior character, among which
we may mention Bird's "Carman's Whistle" and
the "Newe Northern Ditty of Ladye Green
Sleeves."
The change which marked religion and literature
in this country extended itself as strikingly
into Architecture. We have no longer to record
the rise of new Orders of ecclesiastical building,
nor to direct the attention of the reader to splendid
churches as examples of them. The unity of the
Church, which had enabled it to erect such a host
of admirable cathedrals and abbeys, was broken
up; the wealth which had supplied the material
and engaged the skill was dispersed into other
hands, and destined not only to produce new
orders of society, but new forms of architecture.
Churches must give way to palaces and country
halls, as full of innovations as the very faith of
the country. From this period to our own time
the taste for ecclesiastical architecture continued
to decline, till the very principles of what is called
Gothic architecture were forgotten. The architects,
as Wren and Jones, went back to classic
models, so little adapted to the spirit of Christian
worship that, in spite of the genius expended upon
them, they have remained few in number and,
from the revival of the knowledge of Anglo-Gothic
amongst us, are not likely to increase.
HOLLAND HOUSE, KENSINGTON. (From a Photograph by Bedford, Lemere & Co.)
But it is even a question whether the Gothic
style had not reached its full development at the
period of the Reformation; for we find in most
European countries that the noblest buildings of
this kind are for the most part anterior to this
epoch. It is at the same time true that the same
causes which brought our ecclesiastical architecture
to a sudden stand in the sixteenth century strongly
affected all Europe, even where Roman Catholicism
managed to maintain its ground. Everywhere the
conflict was raging—everywhere the rending influence
was felt; and the ancient power and
wealth of the Church were broken and diminished.
In England a few churches might be pointed to of
this period, but they exhibit the influence of the
age in marks of decline, and to none can we turn
as examples to be named with our Westminsters,
Yorks, and Winchesters. Bath Abbey was in
progress of erection when the Reformation burst
forth and arrested its progress. It was not completed
till 1616—more than ten years after the
death of Elizabeth—and cannot be named as one
of our finest erections.
The wealth which was diverted from the Church
into the hands of the Crown and the aristocracy,
reappeared in palaces and country halls; and a
totally new genius displayed itself in these. The
old Tudor, so called, which marked the baronial
residences even before the Tudors reached the
throne, the mixture of castle and manor-house,
with its small windows, battlemented roofs, and
flanking turrets, began to enlarge and exaggerate
most of these features, and to mix with them new
elements clearly brought into the country by
foreign architects, and in a great measure from
Italy. The windows rapidly augmented themselves,
till they soon occupied a predominant portion
of the towers and fronts; the turrets became
surmounted by domes, and by those bulbous domes
which were often piled one above another. There
was soon seen one tier of pillared or pilastered
storey above another, in the Palladian or Paduan
fashion. Turrets often gave way to scroll-work
parapets; and instead of the house standing as heretofore
on a level plain, it was elevated on a terrace,
with broad and balustraded flights of steps, and
all the adjuncts of fountains, statues, and balustraded
esplanades essential to the Italian garden.
THE GREAT COURT OF KIRBY HALL, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.
The houses were still built round a court or
quadrangle, and adorned with outer and inner
gateways, while groined roofs and rich oriels
still demonstrated the connecting link of descent
from the Gothic. In fact, the architecture of the
Tudor period is a singular yet often superb mixture
of the Gothic and the Italian, with profusion
of ornaments and ingraftment of parts which tell
strongly of a more Eastern origin. Nor does it appear
that these foreign elements were introduced at
the latter portion of this period only—they stand
forth conspicuously in the very commencement
of it. In the later years of the reign of Elizabeth
we can point to noble houses which are
more allied to the ancient Tudor, with its small
windows and simple towers and roofs, than those
of the Henrys VII. and VIII., who in their
earlier days had a gorgeous and even fantastic
taste for palatial architecture. For example,
Hampton Court is far more simple and chaste
than Richmond Palace (see p. 341), built by
Henry VII., or Nonsuch, built by Henry VIII.
In family mansions, Wimbledon House, built in
1588, with its open court, its two terraces, clearly
Italian in character, is yet so chaste and simple,
with its flat roof, its square slated towers, and
mixture of small and large windows, that, compared
to Nonsuch, as it has been, you at once
see the violent contrast of the fanciful and the
grave. Again, in Charlton House, in Kent, with
its central entrance of Italian character, with two
tiers of engaged columns, its ornamented parapets
just verging into scroll-work, its turret windows of
medium size, and its turret domes simple, and
still plainer chimneys; or in Holland House (see p.
380), built in 1607, without domes, but with ogee-gables;
or in Campden House, as it was built in
1612, with roof of plainest character, and pilastered
entrance, we mark a far less ornate style than in
the days of the Henrys. The whole of this period
was one of a mixed style, in which different architects
indulged themselves in employing more or
less of one or other of the prevailing elements,
according to their tastes. What is more strictly
called Elizabethan may be seen in such houses as
Wollaton or Hardwicke, in which the ample
square windows, the square towers superseding the
octagon ones of Nonsuch, the absence of the
Eastern-looking domes, and the presence of superb
scroll-work, give a fine distinctive style.
The Palace of Richmond, as built by Henry VII.,
with its projecting towers occupied almost entirely
with windows, and its roof presenting an immense
number of double domes, a smaller one surmounting
a lantern placed on the larger domes, had an
air more Saracenic than English; but the Palace
of Nonsuch, built by Henry VIII., outdid that in
the singularity of its style, and was the wonder of
its age. It was built round a quadrangle; the front
was flanked by octagonal towers which, at the
height of the ordinary roof, rose, by a demi-arch
expanding over the lower one, into three more
storeys, and upon these were lesser towers of two
storeys, surmounted by domes and fanes. All the
lower storeys were divided into compartments
by pilasters and bands, these compartments embellished
by figures and groups in bas-relief. The
lower part of this palace was of stone, the upper
of wood. Hentzner, the German traveller, became
quite enthusiastic in describing it as a palace in
which everything that architecture could perform
seemed to have been accomplished; and says that
it was "so encompassed with parks full of deer,
delicious gardens, groves ornamented with trellis-work,
cabinets of verdure, and walks so embowered
by trees, that it seemed to be a place pitched
upon by Pleasure herself to dwell in along with
Health."
But there were two men in the reign of
Henry VIII. who drew him off from this more
florid and fanciful style to others of a very different,
but equally imposing character, and full of
rich detail. These were Wolsey and John of Padua.
Wolsey appeared to have an especial fondness
for brick-work, and Hampton and the gatehouse
of his mansion at Esher remain as proofs of the
admirable masonry which he used. In Hampton
Court (see p. 121) we go back from the barbaric
pomp of Nonsuch to the castellated style; to
small windows, pointed archways, castellated
turrets and battlements, mingled with rich oriel
windows over the entrances, rich groined roofs
in the archways, but a very sparing use of the
ordinary aid of the bulbous dome. In this and
the other buildings of this class, as Hengrave in
Suffolk, the richly cross-banded chimneys are a
conspicuous ornament. John Thorpe, or John of
Padua, who became chief architect to Henry
VIII., and afterwards built Somerset House for
the Protector, seems to have been unknown in
his own country, but originated a modified Italian
style here which bears his name, possessing great
grace and dignity, and of which Stoneyhurst
College in Lancashire, Longleat in Wiltshire, and
Kirby Hall in Northamptonshire (built for Sir
Christopher Hatton), are fine examples.
In the smaller houses of town and country there
continued to be little change. They were chiefly of
timber, and displayed much more picturesqueness
than they afforded comfort. In towns the different
storeys, one over-hanging another till the inhabitants
could almost shake hands out of the attic
windows across the narrow streets, and their want
of internal cleanliness and ventilation, caused the
plague periodically to visit them. The Spaniards
who accompanied Philip, in Mary's reign, were
equally amazed at the good living of the English
people and the dirt about their houses. One great
improvement about this time was the introduction
of chimneys; and in good country-houses the ample
space of their staircases, often finely ornamented
with balustrade work, diffused a pure atmosphere
through them.
In other arts, however, the sixteenth century in
England was almost destitute of native talent. In
Statuary and Carving the preceding century had
made great progress, but the destruction of the
churches, and the outcry raised against images and carving on tombs as
idolatry and vain-glory, gave a decided check to their development. As
for Painting, it had never, except in illumination, flourished much
among the English, and now that the Italian and Flemish schools had
taken so high a position, it became the fashion of the princes and
nobility, not to call forth the skill of natives, but to import foreign
art and artists. In the reign of Henry VII. a Holbein, supposed to
be the uncle of the great Hans Holbein, visited England, but we know
little of his performance here. There is a picture at Hampton Court,
called a Mabuse, of the Children of Henry VII.—Prince Arthur,
Prince Henry, and the Princess Margaret. As Prince Henry appears to
be about seven years old, that would fix the painting of the picture
about 1499. But its authenticity is doubtful, as, according to some,
Mabuse was born that year. In Castle Howard there is a painting by him
of undoubted authority, "The Offering of the Magi," containing thirty
principal figures. It is in the highest state of preservation, and Dr.
Waagen, who was well acquainted with the productions of this artist
in the great galleries of the Continent, pronounced it of the highest
excellence. He is said to have painted the children of Henry VIII.,
but if he did so, the picture has perished. The date of his visit is
quite uncertain, and the attribution to him of portraits is at the best
no more than conjectural. Mabuse was a very dissipated man, and had
fled from Flanders on account of his debts or delinquencies, yet the
character of his performances is that of the most patient industry and
painstaking. His works done in England could not have been many, as his
abode here is supposed to have been only a year. He died in 1532.
ENTRANCE FROM THE COURTYARD OF BURLEIGH HOUSE, STAMFORD.
Besides Mabuse, the names of several other
foreign artists are known as having visited
England; but little or nothing is known of the
works of Toto del Nunziata, an Italian, or of
Corvus, Fleccius, Horrebout or Horneband, or of
Cornelius, Flemish artists; but another Fleming
was employed, in the early part of the reign of
Henry VIII., by Bishop Sherbourne, in painting
a series of English kings and bishops in Chichester
Cathedral.
Of the celebrated Hans Holbein, the case is better authenticated.
He resided in England nearly thirty years, and died in London of the
plague in 1543. There is an obscurity about both the time and place of
his birth, but the latter appears now to be settled to be Grünstadt,
formerly the residence of the Counts of Leiningen-Westerburg. He
accompanied his father to Basle, receiving from him instructions in his
art. There he became acquainted with Erasmus, who gave him letters to
Sir Thomas More. He arrived in England in 1526, and lived and worked in
the house of his noble patron, Sir Thomas, for three years. The learned
chancellor invited Henry VIII. to see his pictures, who was so much
delighted with them, that he took him instantly into his service. It is
related of him that while busily engaged with his works for the king,
he was so much annoyed and interrupted by a nobleman of the court, that
he ordered him to quit his studio, and on his refusing, pushed him
downstairs. When the nobleman complained to Henry of this rudeness,
Henry bluntly told him that the painter had served him right, and
warned him to beware of seeking any revenge. "For," added he, "remember
you now have not Holbein to deal with,
but me: and I tell you, that of seven peasants
I can make as many lords, but I cannot make
one Holbein."
The demand of portraits from Holbein by the
Court and nobility was so constant and extensive,
that he completed comparatively few historical
compositions. He has left us various portraits of
Henry, and adorned the walls of a saloon at
Whitehall with two large paintings representing
the triumphs of riches and poverty. He also
painted Henry as delivering the charter of the
barber-surgeons, and Edward VI. delivering that
for the foundation of Bridewell Hospital. The
former piece is still at the hall of that guild.
Amongst the finest of Holbein's paintings on the
Continent is that of "The Burgomaster and his
Family" in the gallery at Dresden. There is
less of the stiffness of his manner in that than in
most of his pieces; but in spirited design, clearness
and brilliancy of tone, and perfection of
finish, few painters excel Holbein; he wanted
only a course of study in the Italian school to
have placed him among the greatest masters of
any age.
ELIZABETH'S DRAWING-ROOM, PENSHURST PLACE.
(From a Photograph by Carl Norman and Co., Tunbridge Wells.)
In the reign of Mary, Sir Antonio More, a
Flemish artist, was the great portrait-painter.
In that of Elizabeth, though she was not more
liberal to the arts than to literature, yet her
personal vanity led her to have her own portrait
repeatedly painted, and the artists, chiefly
Flemings, were much employed by the nobility
in the same department. Some of the foreign
artists also executed historical and other pieces.
Among these artists may be named Frederic
Zuccaro, an Italian portrait-painter; Luke van
Heere, who executed a considerable number of
orders here, including a series of representations
of national costume for the Earl of Lincoln;
and Cornelius Vroom, who designed the defeat
of the Spanish Armada, for the tapestry which
adorned the walls of the House of Lords, and
which was destroyed by the fire in 1834. In
Elizabeth's reign also two native artists distinguished
themselves: Nicolas Hilliard, a miniature-painter;
and Isaac Oliver (b. 1556, d. 1617), his
pupil, who surpassed his master in portraits, and
also produced historical works of merit.
Among the sculptors were Pietro Torregiano,
from Florence, who, assisted by a number of
Englishmen, executed the bronze monument of
Henry VII., and is supposed also to be the
author of the tomb of Henry's mother in his
chapel. John Hales, who executed the tomb of
the Earl of Derby at Ormskirk, was one of
Torregiano's English assistants. Benedetto Rovezzano
designed the splendid bronze tomb of Henry
VIII., which was to have exhibited himself and
Jane Seymour, as large as life, in effigy, an
equestrian statue, figures of the saints and
prophets, the history of St. George, amounting
to 133 statues and forty bas-reliefs. This
monument of Henry's egotism none of his children
or successors respected him enough to complete;
and Parliament, in 1646, ordered the portion
already executed to be melted down.
SOLDIERS OF THE TUDOR PERIOD.
In Scotland during this period the arts were
still less cultivated. The only monarch who
had evinced a taste for their patronage was
James V., who improved and adorned the royal
palaces, by the aid of French architects, painters,
and sculptors whom he procured from France,
with which he was connected by marriage and
alliance. His chief interest and expenditure
were, however, devoted to the palace at Linlithgow,
which he left by far the noblest palace
of Scotland, and worthy of any country in
Europe.
The furniture of noble houses in the sixteenth
century was still quaint; but in many instances
rich and picturesque. The walls retained their
hangings of tapestry, on which glowed hunting-scenes,
with their woodlands, dogs, horsemen,
and flying stags, or resisting boars, or lions;
scenes mythological or historical. In one of the
finest preserved houses of that age, Hardwicke, in
Derbyshire, the state-room is hung with tapestry
representing the story of Ulysses; and above this
are figures, rudely executed in plaster, of Diana
and her nymphs. The hall is hung with very
curious tapestry, of the fifteenth century, representing
a boar-hunt and an otter-hunt. The chapel
in this house gives a very vivid idea of the furniture
of domestic chapels of that age; with its
brocaded seats and cushions, and its curious
altar-cloth, thirty feet long, hung round the rails
of the altar, with figures of saints, under canopies,
wrought in needlework. You are greatly struck
as you pass along this noble old hall, which has
had its internal decorations and furniture carefully
retained, with the air of rude abundance, and
what looks now to us nakedness and incompleteness,
mingled with old baronial state, and
rich and precious articles of use and show. There
are vast and long passages, simply matted; with
huge chests filled with coals, which formerly were
filled with wood, and having ample crypts in the
walls for chips and firewood. There are none of
the modern contrivances to conceal these things;
yet the rooms, which were then probably uncarpeted,
or only embellished in the centre with a
small Turkey carpet bearing the family arms, or
perhaps merely with rushes, are still abounding
with antique cabinets, massy tables, and high
chairs covered with crimson velvet, or ornamental
satin. You behold the very furniture used by the
Queen of Scots; the very bed, the brocade of
which she and her maidens worked with their own
fingers. In the entrance hall the old feudal
mansion still seems to survive with its huge
antlers, its huge escutcheons, and carved arms
thrust out of the wall, intended to hold lights.
But still more does its picture gallery, extending
along the whole front of the house, give you a
feeling of the rude and stately grandeur of those
times. This gallery is nearly 200 feet long, of
remarkable loftiness, and its windows are stupendous,
comprising nearly the whole front, rattling
and wailing as the wind sweeps along them, whilst
the walls are covered with the portraits of the
most remarkable personages of that and prior
times. You have Henry VIII., Elizabeth, the
Queen of Scots, with many of the statesmen and
ladies of the age.
In such old houses we find abundance of furniture
of the period. The chairs are generally
high-backed, richly carved, and stuffed and
covered with superb velvet or satin. At Charlcote
House, near Stratford-on-Avon, the seat of the
Lucys, there are eight fine ebony chairs, inlaid
with ivory, two cabinets, and a couch of the same,
which were given by Queen Elizabeth to Leicester,
and made part of the furniture of Kenilworth.
At Penshurst, Kent, the seat of the Sidneys, in
the room called Elizabeth's room, remain the
chairs which it is said she herself presented, with
the rest of the furniture. They are fine, tall, and
capacious; the frames are gilt, the drapery is yellow
and crimson satin, richly embroidered, and the
walls of each end of the room are covered with
the same embroidered satin. In the Elizabethan
room at Greenwich Court are chairs as well as other
articles of that age. In Winchester Cathedral is
yet preserved the chair, a present from the Pope,
in which Queen Mary was crowned and married.
At Penshurst we have, in the old banqueting-hall,
the furniture and style which still prevailed
in many houses in Sir Philip Sidney's time: the
dogs for the fire in the centre of the room, from
which the smoke ascended through a hole in
the roof, the rude tables, the raised daïs, and the
music gallery, such as Sir Philip Sidney, Spenser,
Shakespeare, and Bacon, as well as the Royal
Elizabeth, witnessed them. In this house is also
preserved a manuscript catalogue of all the furniture
of Kenilworth in Leicester's time, a document
which throws much light on the whole
paraphernalia of a great house and household of
that day.
Looking-glasses were now superseding mirrors
of polished steel. Sir Samuel Meyrick had a
fine specimen of the looking-glass of this age at
Goodrich, as well as a German clock, fire-dogs, a
napkin-press, and an "arriere-dos" or "rere-dosse,"
and a small brass fender of that age. He
also possessed the box containing the original
portraits of Henry VIII. and Anne of Cleves.
The clock, like the large one over the entrance
at Hampton Court, had the Italian face, with
two sets of figures, twelve each, thus running
the round of the twenty-four hours, such as
Shakespeare alludes to in "Othello:"—
"He'll watch the horologe a double set,
If drink rock not his cradle."
Richly carved wardrobes and buffets adorned
the Tudor rooms: some of these buffets were of
silver and of silver gilt. Engravings of these, as
well as of tables with folding tops, round tables
with pillar and claw, and many beds of that period
may still be seen in old houses, and are represented
in engravings in Montfaucon, Shaw, and
Willemin. The beds at Hardwicke, the great
bed at Ware, a bedstead of the time of Henry
VIII. at Lovely Hall, near Blackburn, are
good specimens. Forks, though known, were
not generally used yet at table, and spoons of
silver and gold were made to fold up, and were
carried by great people in their pockets for their
own use. Spoons of silver—apostle-spoons, having
the heads of the twelve apostles on the handles—were
not unfrequent, but spoons of horn or wood
were more common.
The armour of every period bears a coincident
resemblance to the civil costume of the time, and
is in this period rather noticeable by its fashion
than by any material change of another kind.
The breastplate was still globose, as in the reign
of Edward IV., but was beautifully fluted in that
of Henry VII. In the reign of Henry VIII., the
breastplate being still globose, the old fashion
revived of an edge down the centre, called a tapul;
and in this reign puffed and ribbed armour, in
imitation of the slashed dresses of the day, was
introduced. In the reign of Elizabeth the breastplate
was thickened to resist musket-balls. The
helmet in all these reigns assumed the shape of
the head, having movable plates at the back to
guard the neck, and yet allow free motion to the
head. In the reign of Elizabeth the morions
were much ornamented by engraving. In the
time of Henry VII. the panache which had
appeared on the apex of the bassinets of Henry
V. was changed for plumes, descending from the
back of the helmet almost to the rider's saddle.
A new feature in armour also came in with
Henry VII., called "lamboys" from the French
"lambeaux," being a sort of skirt or petticoat of
steel, in imitation of the puckered skirts of cloth
or velvet worn at that time, and this fashion, with
variations in form, continued through the whole
period. In the reign of Henry VIII. the armour
altogether became very showy and rich, in keeping
with the ostentation of that monarch. A
magnificent suit of the armour of Henry is preserved
in the Tower, which was presented to
him by the Emperor Maximilian, on his marriage
with Catherine of Aragon, and is the fellow to a
suit of Maximilian's preserved in the Little
Belvedere Palace in Vienna. It covers both
horse and man, and is richly engraved with
legendary subjects, badges, mottoes, and the like.
The seal of Henry presents a fine figure of him
on horseback, in armour, with his tabard and
crowned helmet, and its depending plumes.
The tilting helmet disappeared altogether in the
time of Henry VIII., and a coursing-hat was worn
instead, with a "mentonnière," or defence for the
lower part of the face. In the reign of Mary we
learn that the military force of the kingdom consisted
of demi-lancers, who supplied the place of
the men-at-arms; pikemen, who wore back and
breast-plates, with tassets, gauntlets, and steel hats;
archers, with steel skull-caps and brigandines;
black-billmen or halberdiers, who wore armour
called almain rivet and morions; and harquebussiers,
similarly appointed. In Elizabeth's reign
the armour was seldom worn on the legs and
thighs, except in jousting, and not always then.
There were various changes in the shapes of
swords and glaives; the battle-axe changed into
the halberd in the time of Edward IV., which
became general in that of Henry VII. In the
reign of Henry VIII. was added the partisan, a
kind of pike or spontoon; but the great change was
in firearms, the hand-gun making several steps towards
its modern termination in the musket and
rifle, with detonating caps. The first improvement
was to place a cock to the gun-barrel, to hold and
apply the match instead of the soldier holding it
in his hand. This was called an arc-a-bousa,
thence corrupted into the arquebuse, much used
by Henry VII. In his son's reign the wheel-lock
was invented by the Italians, in which a wheel
revolving against a piece of sulphuret of iron
ignited the powder in the pan by its sparks.
Pistols were also introduced now, and called
pistols or dags, according to the shape of the butt-ends;
the pistol finishing with a knob, the dag—or
tacke—having its butt-end slanting. Pistols at
first more resembled carabines in length, and the
pocket pistol was of a considerable bulk. Cartridges
were first used in pistols, and were carried
in a steel case called a patron. In the reign of
Elizabeth we hear of carabines, petronels, and
dragons. Carabines were a sort of light, Spanish
troops, who, probably, used this kind of arm;
petronels were so called because their square butt-end
was placed against the chest, or "poitrine;"
and the dragon received its name from its muzzle
being terminated with the head of that fabulous
monster, and gave the name of "dragoon" to the
soldiers who fought with them. Bandoliers, or
leathern cases, each containing a complete charge
of powder for a musket, were used till the end of
the seventeenth century, when they gave way to
the cartridge-box.
With the progress of firearms, it is almost needless
to say that the famous art of archery, by
which the English had won such fame in the
world, was gradually superseded. During the
reigns of Henry VII. and Henry VIII., bows
were much used in their armies as well as firearms,
but it was impossible long to maintain the
bow and arrow in the presence of the hand-gun
and powder. In vain did Henry VIII. pass
severe laws against the disuse of the bow; by the
end of his reign it had fallen, for the most part,
from the hands of the warrior into that of the
sportsman. In vain did Henry forbid the use
even of the cross-bow to encourage the practice of
archery, and Roger Ascham in his "Toxophilus"
endeavour to prolong the date of the bow. By
the end of the reign of Elizabeth, the endeavour to
protract the existence of archery by statute was
abandoned, and its long reign, except as a graceful
amusement, was over.
The costumes of this age come down to us depicted
by great masters, and are displayed to
us in their full effect, at least this much can
be said for those of the aristocracy. Looking
at these ladies and gentlemen, they appear as little
like plain matter-of-fact English people as possible.
There is a length and looseness of robes
about the men which has more the air of a holiday,
gala garb, than the attire of people who had
serious affairs to carry through, and you would
scarcely credit them to be the ancestors of the
present prosaic, buttoned-up, and busy generation.
In a MS. called the "Boke of Custome," the
chamberlain is commanded to provide against his
master's uprising, "a clene sherte and breche, a
pettycotte, a doublette, a long cotte, a stomacher,
hys hosen, hys socks, and his shoen." And the
"Boke of Kervynge," quoted by Strutt, says to the
chamberlain, "Warme your soverayne his pettycotte,
his doublette, and his stomacher, and then
put on his hosen, and then his schone or slyppers,
then stryten up his hosen mannerly, and tye them
up, then lace his doublette hole by hole." Barclay,
in the "Ship of Fools," printed by Pynson in
1508, mentions some who had their necks
"Charged with collars and chaines,
In golden withs, their fingers full of rings,
Their necks naked almost to the raines,
Their sleeves blazing like unto a crane's winges."
Their coats were generally loose and with broad
collars, and turned back fronts, with loose hanging
sleeves, often slashed, and sometimes without
sleeves at all, but the sleeves of their doublets
appearing through them, laced tight to the elbow
and puffed out above. Hats and caps were of
various fashions in the time of Henry VII.
There was the square turned-up cap, a round hat
something like the present wide-awake, but the
more gay and assuming wore large felt hats, or
bonnets of velvet, fur, or other materials, with
great spreading plumes of party-coloured feathers.
They wore the showy hats so much on one side, as
to display under them close-fitting caps, often of
gold network. Others, again, wore only the small
cap, and let the large plumed hat hang on their
shoulders.
The hose, when the dress was short enough to
show them, were close-fitting, and of gay, often of
two different colours; the long-toed shoes had
given way to others, with toes called duck-bills,
from their shape, being wider in front than they
were long. Top-boots were worn for riding. The
face was close shaven, except in the case of soldiers
or old men, and the hair was suffered to hang
long and flowing. The first mention of a collar of
the garter occurs in this reign, and a collar is seen
on the effigy of Sir George Daubeny, of this date.
In the costume of the ladies the sleeves were
as wide as they were in that of the men, and have
been imitated in modern times, being called
"bishop's sleeves" in London. The gown was cut
square in the neck, and they wore stomachers, belts,
and buckles, girdles with long pendents in front, and
hats and feathers. Others wore caps and cauls of
gold net, or embroidery, from beneath which the
hair hung down the shoulders half way to the
ground. The morning dress was a full, loose, flowing
robe, with cape and hood, and the extent and
material of it was regulated by Royal ordinance.
Every one is familiar with the costume of the
reigns of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. The
ordinary costume of bluff Harry was a full-skirted
jacket, or doublet, with large sleeves to the wrists;
over which was worn a short but equally full cloak
or coat, with loose, hanging sleeves, and a broad,
rolling collar of fur. Many, however, still wore
the doublet sleeves, as in the last reign: tight to
the elbow, puffed out about the shoulders, and the
coat sleeveless, allowing this to appear. The cap
was square or round, and still worn somewhat side-ways,
jewelled, and plumed with ostrich feathers.
The hose were now often divided into hose and
stockings, and the shoes, though sometimes square-toed,
yet often resembling the modern shape.
The Norman "chausses" were revived under the
older name of "trousses," being close hose, fitting
exactly to the limbs.
THE WEDDING OF JACK OF NEWBURY: THE BRIDE'S PROCESSION. (See p. 390.)
Henry VIII. was most extravagant in dress,
and was followed with so much avidity by his subjects
in his ostentation, that in the twenty-fourth
year of his reign he was obliged to pass a sumptuary
law to restrain them, and the style and
quality of dress for every different rank was prescribed—as
we may suppose with indifferent success.
No person of less degree than a knight was
to wear crimson or blue velvet or embroidered
apparel, broched or guarded with goldsmith's
work, except sons and heirs of knights and
barons, who might use crimson velvet, and tinsel
in their doublets. Velvet gowns, jackets and
coats, furs of martens, &c., chains, bracelets, and
collars of gold, were proscribed to all but persons
possessing two hundred marks per annum; except
the sons and heirs of such persons, who might
wear black velvet doublets, coats of black
damask, etc.
Henry's own dress was of the most gorgeous
kind. He is described at a banquet at Westminster
as arrayed in a suit of short garments of
blue velvet and crymosine, with long sleeves all
cut and lined with cloth of gold, and the outer
garments powdered with castles and sheaves of
arrows—the badges of Queen Catherine—of fine
ducat gold; the upper part of the hose of like
fashion, the lower parts of scarlet, powdered with
timbrels of fine gold. His bonnet was of damask
silver, flat, "woven in the stall," and therefore
wrought with gold, and rich feathers on it. When
he met Anne of Cleves he had tricked himself out
in a frock of velvet embroidered all over with
flatted gold of damask, mixed with a profusion of
lace; the sleeves and breast being cut and lined
with cloth of gold, and tied together with great
buttons of diamonds, rubies, and orient pearls.
The king was deemed to be the best dressed
sovereign in the world, for he put on new clothes
every holy day.
Henry ordered his subjects to cut off their
long hair; beards and moustaches were now worn
at pleasure.
The reigns of Edward and Mary did not vary
much in the costume of the men. The dress
worn now by the boys of Christ's Hospital
(familiarly known as the Bluecoat School), founded
by Edward, is very much that which was worn by
the London apprentices of that period—blue coats
and yellow stockings being also common to the
citizens generally. The square-toed shoes were
banished by proclamation in the reign of Queen
Mary.
The costume of the ladies of the reign of
Henry VIII. is extremely familiar, from the
numerous portraits of his six wives, engravings
of which are in Lodge's "Portraits." With
the exception of the bonnet or coif—which,
though worn by Catherine of Aragon, came
to be called the Anne Boleyn cap—the dress
of the ladies of this reign bears a striking
resemblance to one of the later Victorian
fashions, though differing of course in material.
You find the gown fitting close to the bust
of the natural length of waist, and cut square
at the chest, where it is edged with narrow
lace. The sleeves, tight at the shoulder, widened
to the elbow, where they hung deep, showing an
under-sleeve of fine lawn or lace extending to the
wrist, and terminated by lace ruffles. On the
neck was generally worn a pearl necklace, with
a jewelled cross. The skirts were full, the train
long, according to rank. Seven yards of purple
cloth of damask gold were allowed for a kirtle for
Queen Catherine, in a wardrobe account of the
eighth year of Henry's reign. The sleeves of ladies'
garments, like those of gentlemen's dresses, could
be changed at pleasure, being separate and attached
at will. They were extremely rich; and we find
in one lady's inventory three pair of purple satin
sleeves, one of linen paned with gold over the
arms, quilted with black silk, and wrought with
flounces between the panes and at the hands; one
pair of purple gold tissue damask wire, each sleeve
tied with aglets of gold; one pair of crimson
satin, four buttons of gold on each sleeve, and in
every button nine pearls.
The coif was of various materials, from simple
linen to rich velvet and cloth of gold; either with
the round front, as in Mary and Elizabeth as princesses,
in Catherine Parr and Catherine Howard,
or dipping in front, which came to be called the
"Queen of Scots" bonnet; but the commonest
shape was the five-cornered one. This last was
indeed the hood of the time of Henry VII., in which
we have a portrait of his queen, Elizabeth of York;
the lappets of the hood depending on the bosom, embroidered
and edged with pearls; the scarf behind
hanging on the shoulders. In the portrait of Catherine
of Aragon, the front, embroidered and jewelled,
had become shorter, touching the neck only; but
the scarf behind still spread on the shoulder. In
Anne Boleyn's portrait the coif had reached its extreme
of elegance; the frontlet, consisting of the
five-pointed frame, is still shorter, only covering the
ears, and is faced with a double row of pearls (see
p. 165). Her hair is scarcely seen, being concealed
by an under-coif, which shows as a band in a
slanting direction over the forehead. The back
consists of a green velvet hood, with broad scarf
lappets, of which one is turned up over the back of
the head, and the other hangs on the left shoulder.
Of the dress of the ladies of the citizen class we
have a curious account in the bride of John of
Winchcomb, the famous clothier, called "Jack
of Newbury." "She was habited in a gown of
sheep's russet, and a kirtle of fine worsted, her
head attired with a billiment of gold, and her hair,
as yellow as gold, hanging down behind her, which
was curiously combed and plaited. She was led to
church by two boys with bride laces and rosemary
tied about their silken sleeves. When she in after
years came out of her widow's weeds, she appeared
in a fair train gown stuck full of silver pins,
having a white cap on her head, with cuts of
curious needlework under the same, and an apron
before her as white as driven snow."
With Elizabeth came in a totally new fashion,
not only of women's but of men's costumes. The
large trunk hose made their appearance; the long-waisted
doublet, the short cloak or mantle, with its
standing collar, the ruff, the hat, the band and
feather, the roses in the shoes, are all of this
period. To such a degree did the fashion of
puffed and stuffed breeches obtain, which had
begun to swell in the prior reigns, that about the
thirty-third of Elizabeth, over the seats in the
Parliament House, were certain holes, some two
inches square, in the walls, in which were placed
posts to uphold scaffolds round about the house for
those to sit upon who wore great breeches stuffed
with hair, like woolsacks.
As to ruffs, Stubbs, in his "Anatomie of
Abuses," tells us that sooner than go without
them, men would mortgage their lands, or risk
their lives at Tyburn; and he adds, "They have
now newly (1595) found out a more monstrous
kind of ruff of twelve, yea, sixteen lengths apiece,
set three or four times double, thence called three
steps and a half to the gallows." The French or
Venetian hose, he tells us, cost often £100 a pair,
probably from being cloth of gold and set with
jewels. To these were added boot hose of the
finest cloth, also splendidly embroidered with birds,
beasts, and antiques. The doublets, he says, grew
longer and longer in the waist, stuffed and quilted
with four, five, or six pounds of bombast, the exterior
being of silk, satin, taffeta, gold, or silver
stuff, slashed, jagged, covered, pinched, and laced
with all kinds of costly devices. Over these
were their coats and jerkins, some with collars,
some without, some close to the body, some
loose, called mandilions; some buttoned down
the breast, some under the arm, some down
the back. They had cloaks also—white, red,
tawny, yellow, green, violet—of cloth, silk,
or taffeta, and of French, Spanish, or Dutch
fashion, ornamented with costly lace of gold, silver,
or silk. These cloaks were as costly inside as
out. Their slippers or "pantoufles" were of
all colours, and yet, says Stubbs, they were
difficult to keep on, and went flap-flap up and
down in the dirt, casting the mire up to their
knees. Their hats, he states, were sharp at the
crown, peaking up like the shaft of a steeple a
quarter of a yard above the crown of their heads,
some more, some less; others were flat and broad on
the crown; some had round crowns and bands of
all colours; and these hats or caps were of velvet,
taffeta, or sarcenet, ornamented with big bunches
of feathers; and finally we hear of beaver hats,
costing from twenty to forty shillings apiece,
brought from beyond seas.
But if such was the dress of gentlemen to please
the strange taste of the maiden queen, that of this
famous queen herself, as evinced by her numerous
portraits, has nothing like it in all the
annals of fashion. In an early portrait of Elizabeth
we have her dressed in a costume very little
different to that of a man. Over her gown or
doublet she wore a coat with the enormous
shoulder-points standing up six inches, and with a
close upright collar completely enveloping her
neck, and surmounted by a ruff; her coat cut and
slashed all over, and on her head a round hat,
pulled down to a peak in front, and thickly
jewelled. Stubbs, alluding to this particular
fashion, says, "The women have doublets and
jerkins as the men have, buttoned up to the
breast, and made with wings, welts, and pinions on
the shoulder-points, as men's apparel in all respects....
Yet they blush not to wear it."
But it was about the middle of her reign that
Elizabeth introduced that astounding style of
dress in which she figures in most of her portraits,
and in which the body was imprisoned in whalebone
to the hips; the partlet or habit-shirt, which
had for some time been in use, and covered the
whole bosom to the chin, was removed, and an
enormous ruff, rising gradually from the front of
the shoulders to nearly the height of the head behind,
encircled the wearer like the enormous wings
of some nondescript butterfly. In fact, there was
ruff beyond ruff; first, a crimped one round the
neck like a collar; and then a round one standing
up from the shoulders behind the head; and,
finally, the enormous circular fans towering high
and wide. The head of the queen is seen covered
with one of her eighty sets of false hair, and
hoisted above that a jaunty hat, jewelled and
plumed.
In order to enable this monstrous expanse of
ruff to support itself, it was necessary to resort to
starch, and, as Stubbs tells us, also to a machinery
of wires, "erected for the purpose, and whipped all
over with gold thread, silver, or silk." This was
called a "supportasse, or underpropper." The
queen sent to Holland for women skilled in the
art of starching; and one Mistress Dingham
Vander Plasse came over and became famous in
the mystery of tormenting pride with starch.
"The devil," says Stubbs, "hath learned them to
wash and dress their ruffs, which, being dry, will
then stand inflexible about their necks."
From the bosom, now partly left bare, descended
an interminable stomacher, and then the farthingale
spread out its enormous breadth, like the
Victorian crinoline. Stockings of worsted yarn
and silk had now become common; and Mistress
Montague presented Her Majesty, in the third
year of her reign, with a pair of silk stockings
knit in England; thereupon she would never wear
any else. A fashion of both ladies and gentlemen
of this time was to wear small looking-glasses
hanging at their sides or inserted in the fan
of ostrich feathers.
The history of the coinage from Henry VII. to
the reign of Elizabeth is one of depreciation and
adulteration, as it had been in the preceding century.
Not till Elizabeth did it begin to return to
a sound and honest standard.
Henry VII. made several variations in the
money of the realm. He preserved the standard
of Edward IV. and Richard III., coining 450
pennies from the pound of silver, or thirty-seven
nominal shillings and sixpences. He introduced
shillings as actual money, being before only
nominal, and used in accounts. These shillings,
struck in 1504—called at first large groats, and
then testons, from the French "teste," or "tête,"
a head—bore the profile of the king instead of the
full face; a thing unknown since the reign of
Stephen, but ever after followed, except by Henry
VIII. and Edward VI., who, however, used the
profile in their groats. Henry coined also a novel
coin—the sovereign, or "double rose noble," worth
twenty shillings, and the "rose rial," or half-sovereign.
These gold coins are now very rare.
On the reverse of his coins he for the first time
placed the Royal arms.
The gold coins of Henry VIII. were sovereigns,
half-sovereigns, or rials, half and quarter rials,
angels, angelets, or half angels, and quarter-angels,
George nobles—so called from bearing on
the reverse St. George and the dragon—crowns,
and half-crowns. His silver coins were shillings,
groats, half-groats, and pennies. Amongst these
appeared groats and half-groats coined by Wolsey
at York, in accordance with a privilege, exercised
by the Church long before. In his impeachment
it was made a capital charge that he had placed the
cardinal's hat on the groats under the king's arms.
The groats also bore on each side of the arms his
initials, "T. W.," and the half-groats "W. A."—Wolsey
Archiepiscopus.
Not only did Henry adulterate the coin in the
most scandalous manner, but he also depreciated
the value of the silver coins, by coining a much
larger number of pennies out of a pound of
the base alloy. Before his time the mixed mint
pound had consisted of eleven ounces two pennyweights
of silver, and eighteen pennyweights of
alloy; but Henry, in 1543, altered it to ten
ounces of silver and two ounces of alloy. Two
years later he added as much alloy as there was
silver; and not content with that, in 1546, or one
year after, he left only four ounces of silver in
the pound, or eight ounces of alloy to the four
ounces of silver! But this even did not satisfy
him: he next proceeded to coin his base metal
into a larger amount than the good metal had ever
produced before. Instead of 37s. 6d., or 450
pennies, into which it had been coined ever since
the reign of Edward IV., he made it yield 540
pennies, or 45s., in 1527, and in 1543 he extended
it to 48s., or 576 pennies. He thus, instead of
450 pennies out of a pound containing eleven
ounces two pennyweights of silver, coined 576
pennies out of only four ounces of silver! Such
were the lawless robberies which "Bluff Harry"
committed on his subjects. Any one of the smallest
debasements by a subject would have sent him to
the gallows. He certainly was one of the most
wholesale issuers of bad money that ever lived.
The counsellors of his son Edward—a most
rapacious set of adventurers—however, even out-Harryed
Harry; for though Edward restored at
first the value of the mint mixture in some degree,
in 1551 the amount of silver in a pound of that
alloy was only three ounces, or an ounce less than
the worst coin of his father. And still worse,
instead of 48s., the largest number coined by his
father out of a pound, he coined 72s., or instead of
450 pennies out of four ounces of silver, 864
pennies were coined out of three ounces. The
ruin, the confusion of prices, and the public outcry,
however, consequent upon this violent public
fraud, at length compelled Government to restore
the amount of silver in the pound to nearly what
it was at the beginning of the reign of Henry
VIII., and the number of shillings was reduced
from seventy-two to sixty. The gold, which was
equally debased, was also restored to the same
extent.
Queen Mary, while she issued a proclamation
at the commencement of her reign denouncing
the dishonest proceedings of her predecessors, again
increased the alloy in a pound of mint silver to an
ounce instead of nineteen pennyweights; and she
added two pennyweights more of alloy to the
ounce of gold. The coins issued by Philip and
Mary bear both their profiles.
Elizabeth honourably restored the coinage to its
ancient value. She fixed the alloy in a pound of
silver at only eighteen pennyweights; but she
coined sixty-two shillings out of the pound instead
of sixty, at which it remained till 1816, when it
became sixty-six, as it still remains. The standard
mixture of Elizabeth has continued the same to
our own day. She called in and melted down the
base money of her father and brother to the
nominal value of £638,000, but of real value only
£244,000. The gold coins of Elizabeth are rials,
angels, half-angels, and quarter-angels, crowns and
half-crowns, nobles and double nobles. Some of
her coins were the first which had milled edges,
both of gold and silver. Besides shillings, sixpences,
groats, and pence, Elizabeth coined a
crown, for the use of the East India Company,
called portcullis crowns, in imitation of the Spanish
dollar. These were valued at four shillings and
sixpence, and are now rare.
SHIPS OF ELIZABETH'S TIME.
In Scotland the alloy of the silver at the mint
was not so great as in England during this period;
but the number of shillings coined out of one
pound of silver was astonishingly increased. This
kind of depreciation had been going on for two
centuries before this period; but from 1475, when
only 144 shillings were coined out of the pound of
silver, the number was rapidly augmented every
few years, till in 1601 no less than 720 shillings
were coined out of it, or, in other words, the
original value of one pound was made to pass for
thirty-six pounds.
In tracing the historical events of these reigns,
we have had occasion to show the increasing
strength of the Royal navy of England. Both in
the reigns of Henry VIII. and of Elizabeth the
sea fights were of a character and attended by
results which marked out England as a maritime
power growing ever more formidable. In the
fourth year of his reign Henry drove the French
fleet from the Channel with forty-two ships, Royal
and others. He chastised the Scots, who, under
James V., had become daring at sea; and on
various occasions during his reign he showed his
superiority to the French and Spaniards.
But it was the victory over the Armada under
Elizabeth, and the exploits of Drake, Essex,
Raleigh, and others in the Spanish ports, and
of Drake, Hawkins, and Frobisher in the Spanish
settlements of America, that raised the fame of
the British fleet to a pitch which it had never
reached before. For, after all, the amount of
Henry's fleet never was large. We are told,
indeed, that at first he had only one ship of war,
the Great Harry, till he took the Lion, a large
Scottish ship, with its commander, the celebrated
Andrew Barton; but probably this is meant of
such size as to merit the name of man-of-war.
Parsimonious as was Henry VII., and careful to
avoid any collisions with foreign powers, we cannot
suppose he left the kingdom totally destitute
of a navy. But Henry VIII. was not contented
with owning merely a mediocre fleet; he had an
ambition of building large vessels, and in 1512 he
built one of 1,000 tons, called the Regent. This
was blown up in a battle with the French fleet off
Brest, and instead of it he built another called
Grâce de Dieu. The rivalry of Henry was excited
by the King of Scotland building a much larger
ship than his Regent, which was said to carry 300
seamen, 120 gunners, and 1,000 soldiers. This
ship, like Henry's Regent, was unfortunately lost
at sea. By the end of Henry's reign, his fleet
altogether amounted to 12,500 tons.
Besides building of ships, Henry seems to have
planned all the necessary offices for a naval
system. He established the Navy Office, with a
sort of Board of Admiralty for its management,
and he also founded, in the fourth year of his
reign, the Corporation of the Trinity House at
Deptford, for managing everything relating to the
education, selection, and appointment of pilots, the
putting down of buoys, and erecting beacons and
lighthouses. Similar establishments were created
by him at Hull and Newcastle. He built at
great cost the first pier at Dover, and passed an
Act of Parliament for improving the harbours of
Plymouth, Dartmouth, Teignmouth, Falmouth, and
Fowey, which had been choked up by the refuse of
certain tin-works, which he prohibited. But perhaps
his greatest works of the kind were his
establishment of the navy-yards and storehouses
at Woolwich and Deptford. No monarch, in fact,
had hitherto planned so efficiently and exerted
himself so earnestly to found an English navy.
Great merit is due to him for his advancement of
the maritime interests of the nation.
The manner in which the different monarchs of
the Tudor dynasty advanced or neglected the
navy is well shown by the returns of the Navy
Office to Parliament in 1791. At the end of
the reign of Henry VIII. it amounted to 12,500
tons, at the end of that of Edward VI. to only
11,065 tons, and at the end of Mary's to 7,110
tons, but at the end of Elizabeth's it rose to
17,110. At the time of the Armada, Elizabeth
had at sea 150 sail, of which, however, only forty
were the property of the Crown; the rest belonged
to the merchants who were liable to be called
upon on such emergencies to furnish their largest
craft for the public service. Thirty-four of these
ships were from 500 to 1,100 tons each, and
these larger vessels are said to have carried 300
men and forty cannon each. Besides the vessels
thus called out for war, the mercantile navy at
this time amounted to another 150 sail of various
capacity, averaging each 150 tons, and carrying
forty seamen.
This extent of Royal and mercantile navy had
not been reached without much fostering care on
the part of the queen. With all her parsimony
and dread of expense, it was one of the finest parts
of her very mixed character, that she saw the
necessity of a strong power at sea and had all the
pride of her father to maintain it. Whilst on
land she introduced the manufacture of gunpowder,
and raised the pay of the soldiers, she extended
her care to the fleet, and made it in the end the
best equipped navy in Europe. She raised the
pay of the sailors as she had done that of the
soldiers, and the merchants entered so readily into
her service that she had no longer occasion to hire
vessels, as her predecessors had done, from the
Hanse Towns, or from Venice and Genoa. She
built a fort on the Medway, somewhere near the
present Sheerness, to protect her fleet, and justly
acquired the name of the Queen of the North
Seas. Many circumstances combined to give a
new and wonderful development in her time to
commerce—the discovery and partial settlement of
the New World; the way opened by the Cape to
India; the extension of commercial inquiry and
enterprise into the north of Europe and to the
banks of Newfoundland. But ere this stirring
period arrived, commerce had had to struggle
with many severe restrictions, the fruit of the
ignorance of political economy.
Henry VII. is praised by Hall, the chronicler,
as a prince who "by his high policy marvellously
enriched his realm and himself, and left his
subjects in high wealth and prosperity; as is
apparent by the great abundance of gold and
silver yearly brought into the kingdom, in plate,
money, and bullion, by merchants passing and repassing."
But the true reason of the rapid
advance of commerce under Henry VII. was,
undoubtedly, the quietness and stability of affairs
which he introduced; for Henry was too fond of
hoarding to be a very munificent patron of trade.
Amongst the very first measures which he passed
was one against usury, totally forbidding the loan
of money on interest, which, if it could have been
really carried out, would have nearly extinguished
commerce altogether. In this, however, Henry
was but continuing the practice of his predecessors,
who, though great warriors, were no merchants.
So severe was Henry's enactment against usury,
that, by the Act of the third year of his reign,
every offender was, on discovery, to be fined £100,
and the bargain to be made void. Henry VIII.
abrogated this law, and allowed usury under
ten per cent.; it was again put in force by
Edward VI. in terms of the utmost severity, declaring
it to be "a vice most odious and detestable,
and utterly prohibited by the Word of God."
Elizabeth, however, again restored the law of her
father in 1571, permitting interest under ten
per cent.
Whilst Henry VII. endeavoured to extinguish
usury, he was equally jealous of foreign merchants—of
their bringing their foreign manufactures and
carrying out English goods—lest our wealth should
be drained away by them. The careful old king
could not see that it mattered little by whom the
exchanges of commerce were made, so that merchants
were left to make their own bargains;
whence the result would be that they would only
purchase such things as they wanted, and sell
such as they did not want, with benefit to everybody.
It accorded, however, with Henry's ideas,
and was so far beneficial as to induce the settling
of English merchants in foreign countries, with
the object of endeavouring to drain them of their
wealth. Therefore, he was careful to heal the
breach with the Netherlands which the patronage
of Perkin Warbeck by the Duchess of Burgundy
had made, and the company of Merchant Adventurers
was again established in Antwerp. The
treaty on this occasion was termed by the rejoicing
Flemings the "Intercursus Magnus," or Great
Treaty of Intercourse; but Henry, in 1506, on
intercepting the Archduke Philip at Weymouth,
forced from him a less liberal treaty, which the
Flemings branded as the "Intercursus Malus,"
or Evil Treaty.
In the same one-sided spirit of trade, Henry,
in 1489, concluded a treaty with Denmark, by
which English companies were authorised to purchase
lands in Bergen in Norway, Lund and
Landskrona in Sweden, and Lowisa in Finland,
on which to erect factories and warehouses, to
remain theirs in perpetuity for the purposes of
trade. He also renewed a similar treaty at the
same time with the great trading republic of
Venice, by which the English companies were
to enjoy all the privileges of the citizens of
Florence and Pisa, where they were established,
and were privileged to export English wool, and
re-ship the spices and valuable articles which
were brought by the Venetians overland from
India.
It was not long, however, before Henry was
called on to check the effects of monopoly in his
English companies. The Merchant Adventurers
of London soon showed so strongly these effects,
that they compelled the king to interfere with a
view to counteract them.
The markets of Europe were now fast growing
in importance and demand. The wealth of South
America was flowing into Spain, in the shape of
gold, to the amount of a million sterling annually,
and the spices and riches of the East Indies into
Portugal, since the discovery of the way round the
Cape. Amsterdam became the great mercantile
depôt of these commodities in Europe, and the
benefit of it was felt nowhere more sensibly
than in England. Henry VII., who had let
slip the opportunity of securing South America
and the West Indies by neglecting the offers of
Columbus, now endeavoured to repair the mischief
by granting patents to the Cabots and others for
the discovery of new lands. He could not open
his heart or his coffers sufficiently to assist the
adventurers with funds, but he was ready to reap
his share of the benefit, which was to consist of all
the countries discovered and a fifth of the immediate
proceeds. Under such patents the Cabots,
father and son, in the course of several voyages,
discovered Labrador in 1497, and afterwards ran
along the whole coast of North America, to the
Gulf of Mexico.
From this moment the spirit of mercantile enterprise
rapidly developed itself. In 1562 we find
Captain Hawkins trading to Guinea for elephants'
teeth, and to Brazil, to which coasts voyages soon
became common. Trading to all parts of the
Mediterranean was frequent during the reign of
Henry VIII.; taking out wool, cloth, and skins,
and importing silks, drugs, wines, cotton-wool,
spices, and Turkey carpets. The voyages of Cabot
had opened up a new trade—that of cod-fishing—on
the coasts of Newfoundland, which was eagerly
engaged in; and the voyages of Willoughby and
Richard Chancellor, by exploring the White Sea,
at the suggestion of Cabot, opened a new trade
with Russia. A Russian company was formed by
Edward VI., and fully incorporated by Mary, who
vigorously prosecuted that trade; and in 1556 an
ambassador arrived at London from the Czar.
Jenkinson, an agent of this company afterwards
descended the Volga to Astrakhan, and crossing
the Caspian Sea, reached Bokhara, the great
resort of the merchants of Russia, Persia, India,
and China. He is said to have made six other
voyages to Bokhara by that route—a striking
proof of the growing enterprise of the English
merchant. The loss of Calais by Mary was a
circumstance which, as was to be expected, exerted
an injurious influence on commerce in her unfortunate
reign.
THE FIRST ROYAL EXCHANGE, LONDON (FOUNDED BY SIR THOMAS GRESHAM).
The earliest European trade with India was
Venetian, and was conducted by way of the Black
Sea. On the discovery by Vasco da Gama of the
passage by the Cape of Good Hope, in 1497, the
Dutch claimed the exclusive right of navigating
those seas. The Spaniards again were equally
exclusive with regard to their own subsequent
discovery of a passage by the Straits of Magellan.
These monopolies, so strange in their contrast to our
modern conceptions and practice, left the English
the sole alternative of a north-west or north-east
passage. About 1500, a Portuguese named Corte
Real attempted to discover a north-west passage,
and was followed by a similar effort on the part
of the English in 1553. The idea received the
greatest encouragement from Queen Elizabeth,
and a company was formed in 1585, called the
"Fellowship for the discovery of the North-West
Passage." Sir Hugh Willoughby's last voyage,
which was entered on with a view to discover a
north-east passage to China, was fatal to him and
his brave comrades, who perished in the ice. The
instructions given to Sir Hugh by Sebastian Cabot,
Grand Pilot of England by appointment of Henry
VII., are extant, and furnish a curious and interesting
specimen of naval regulation. No dicing,
carding, tabling, nor other such practices were to
be allowed on ship-board; morning and evening
prayers were to be diligently observed. On the
other hand, the natives of strange countries were
to be "enticed on board and made drunk with
your beer and wine, for then you shall know the
secrets of their hearts:" and they were to be
cautious with regard to "certain creatures with
men's heads and the tails of fishes, who swim with
bows and arrows about the fords and bays, and
live on human flesh."
During the long reign of Elizabeth foreign trade
made gigantic strides. Among the very first acts
of this queen was one to abolish the restriction
of English merchants to English ships in the
transport of goods. The Act states that this
restriction had provoked the natural adoption of
like restrictions by foreign princes. This was the
first acknowledgment of the mischief of meddling
with the freedom of trade; and our foreign trade
had now acquired an importance which demanded
respect. With the Netherlands alone our trade
was extraordinary, its value amounting to nearly
two millions and a half sterling annually; and we
find at this time the first mention of insurance of
goods on their voyage. In 1562 we hear also of
that detestable commerce the slave trade, which
was introduced by John Hawkins, so well known
afterwards as the daring compeer of Drake and
Frobisher, and one of the heroic conquerors of the
Armada. Hawkins carried out English goods,
called at the Guinea Coast, and took in slaves,
sailed to Hispaniola, and brought thence sugar,
ginger, hides, and pearls.
During the reign of Elizabeth the many voyages
which were made in order to discover a north-west
passage to India led to a more intimate knowledge
of the North American coasts. In these Frobisher,
Cavendish, and Davis distinguished themselves.
From 1576 to the end of Elizabeth's reign, Raleigh
and his step-brother, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, made
repeated attempts to colonise North America,
and particularly Virginia—so called in honour of
Elizabeth—but in vain. Equally strenuous and
unsuccessful efforts were made to open a direct sea
communication with India by the English; and it
was not till the close of Elizabeth's reign that the
incorporation of an East India Company, destined
to establish that trade, was effected. The charter
was granted by Elizabeth in 1600. Elizabeth also
chartered a company in 1579 for the exclusive
right of trading to all the countries of the Baltic.
As regarded the domestic manufactures of this
period, the woollen manufactures were the most
important, and extended themselves greatly on
account of the foreign demand. This manufacture
had to contend with many old charters and restrictions
which were introduced to monopolise the
practice of it to certain towns and persons; but
these were gradually broken through after much
contest, and people in both town and country were
allowed to make cloths and other woollen goods.
Originally London, Norwich, Bristol, Gloucester,
and Coventry were the privileged places. Essex
became a clothing county; but by degrees the
trade spread into those quarters where it still prevails.
Berks, Oxford, Surrey, and Yorkshire
made coarse kerseys for exportation; Wales manufactured
fringes and coarse cloths; but Tiverton,
Bridgewater, Chard, and other towns of Wilts,
Gloucester, and Somerset were famous for their
broad-cloths; those of Kidderminster, Bromwich,
Coventry, Worcester, Evesham, Droitwich, as
also of Norfolk, Suffolk, and Essex, were in
esteem. Manchester and Halifax were already
noted for rugs and fringes, Norfolk for coverlets,
and Lincolnshire and Chester for what were called
"cottons," but which were a species of woollen.
There was much complaint at that day of the
adulteration of these fabrics by intermixture of
inferior yarns, and by not taking the proper means
to prevent them from shrinking on being exposed
to wet. Norwich had manufactures of woollen
different to ordinary cloth, in which it excelled all
other places; and in Elizabeth's reign the Norwich
manufacturers introduced new kinds under the
name of Norwich satins and fustians.
The art of dyeing received a new impulse and
new colours from the discovery of Brazil and other
distant countries. Soap-making was also introduced,
soap having before 1524 been chiefly
imported. Many manufacturing processes in
weaving, dyeing, and cleaning cloths were brought
over by the refugees from the Netherlands,
driven to England by the Spanish persecutions.
During Elizabeth's reign the smelting of iron,
which had been chiefly carried on in Kent, Sussex,
and Surrey, became restricted there on account of
the consumption of wood. Copper mines and
alum pits were discovered in the time of Elizabeth,
in Cumberland and Yorkshire, which contributed
to the extension of the manufacturing arts.
Sir Thomas Gresham, the chief financial leader
of the day, although a protégé of the Duke of
Northumberland's, was received with much favour
by Elizabeth on her accession. The great merchant
then gave her advice—the following of
which may well be called an epoch in the history
of this country. He told her that all the debased
coin should be converted into fine coin of a certain
weight; that their monopoly should not be restored
to the Steelyard merchants; that licences
should be granted as seldom as possible; that
she should incur no debt, or as little debt as
possible, beyond the seas; and that she should
keep her credit with her own merchants, as they
would be her best and most powerful friends.
These wise measures of reform were gradually
carried out. Elizabeth probably perceived their
value, but she could not find it in her heart to
act altogether with the necessary self-denial and
liberality. Thus she would not give up her power
to reward favourites by means of special grants
and licences. The monopoly of sweet wines which
Essex enjoyed is an instance of her influence in
this respect.
Gresham himself superintended the restoration
of the coinage, and his advice with regard to the
Steelyard merchants was also carried into practice.
It was to him that the merchants of that day owed
their first place of meeting for the transaction of
business. Before that they had been "constrained
either to endure all extremities of weather, namely,
heat and cold, snow and rain, or else to shelter
themselves in shops." Gresham therefore built a
house for them, which the queen visited in 1570
and called the Royal Exchange. This building,
like many others belonging to the City companies,
was destroyed in the Great Fire. It was designed
after the model of the Bourse of Antwerp, and
was Flemish also in its architect, its workmen, and
its materials. The commerce of Scotland during
this century was affected by precisely the same
circumstances as that of England.
During this century much progress was made in
the improvement of London. Henry VIII. passed
various Acts for the paving of the thoroughfares,
which before were horrible sloughs, "very foul and
full of pits."
The public amusements of the nation underwent
as great a revolution during this century as its
religion or its literature. The fall of the Church
and the introduction of firearms were fatal to the
spirit of chivalry, and the whole host of religious
pageants and plays. Henry VIII. and Elizabeth
exerted themselves to prolong the exercises of
chivalry, but they had lost their spirit, and fell
lifeless to the ground. In vain was the tournament
of the Cloth of Gold, or the jousts at which
Elizabeth presided at Greenwich. They were
become mere mockeries of what once had been the
all-engrossing contests of knightly honour. In
vain did they endeavour to keep alive the long
bow and the feats of archery. The musket and
the sportsman's gun had made the bow and quiver
mere playthings. The tournament made way for
the joust, in which the contest was conducted with
headless lances, and fighting at the barriers with
blunted axes; and that gave way to "riding at the
ring," in which the gentlemen did not run their
lances through their antagonists, but through a ring
suspended for the purpose. The last of the ancient
exercises was the contest with the sword and
buckler; but the sword was deprived of both
edge and point, and as the combatants were not
allowed to lunge, but only to strike, the practice
was perfectly harmless. In the time of Henry
VIII., however, the art of fencing was introduced;
and in the time of Elizabeth the use of the
rapier and the deadly thrust rendered the acquirement
of the art of fence a matter of the first
importance.
But though the chivalric exercises went out in
this age, never was the love of pageant and display
more alive. The revival of the Greek literature
brought forward a crowd of gods and goddesses,
who figured in public processions and galas; and
the strangest allegoric absurdities were gazed upon
by grave princes and their counsellors, as well as
by the ladies, with all the enthusiasm of country
lads and lasses gaping at a strolling theatre or a
puppet-show.
Strange masquerades and allegoric pageants
were got up in London for Mary and Elizabeth;
and readers of worthy Laneham's description of
the nineteen days in which Queen Bess was entertained
at Kenilworth by Leicester, will find plenty
of giants, distressed Ladies of the Lake, "salvage
men," presents from Bacchus, Pomona, Ceres,
floating islands, and sham Arions riding on sham
dolphins. More healthy but little less romantic
were the holiday sports which had survived the
Church, and were mingled in by both princes,
nobles, and people. The old Mystery did not for
some time disappear before the secular drama, and
the Coventry Play was played before Elizabeth at
Kenilworth. May-day had its grand may-pole
still; and Henry VIII. did not disdain, on May-day,
1515, to go a-maying to Shooter's Hill, with
his queen and his sister, the Queen-Dowager of
France. May-day was also the great day of the
milkmaids, who danced from door to door with a
pyramid of plates on their heads.
Stubbs—who, Puritan as he was, seems to have
enjoyed what he describes so well—gives us the
following description of the amusements of the
merry gentlemen of the Temple in those days:—
"First, all the wild heads of the parish covening
together, choose them a grand captain of mischief,
whom they ennoble with the title of My Lord of
Misrule, and him they crown with great solemnity
and adopt for their king. This king anointed
chooseth for him twenty, forty, threescore, or a
hundred lusty guts like to himself to wait upon
his lordly majesty and to guard his noble person.
Then every one of these his men he investeth with
his liveries of green, yellow, or some other wanton
colour. And, as though they were not gaudy
enough, they bedeck themselves with scarfs, ribbons,
and laces, hanged all over with gold rings,
precious stones, and other jewels; this done, they
tie about either leg twenty or forty bells, with rich
handkerchiefs in their hands, and sometimes laid
across over their shoulders and necks, borrowed
for the most part of their pretty Mopsies and
loving Bessies.... Thus all things set in
order, then have they their hobby-horses, dragons,
and other antics, together with their pipers and
thundering drummers to strike up the devil's
dance withal; then march these heathen company
towards the church and churchyard, their pipers
piping, their drummers thundering, their stumps
dancing, their bells jingling, their handkerchiefs
swinging about their heads like madmen, their
hobby-horses and other monsters skirmishing
amongst the throng; and in this sort they go to
the church (though the minister be at prayer or
preaching), dancing and swinging their handkerchiefs
over their heads in the church like devils
incarnate, with such a confused noise that no man
can hear his own voice. Then the foolish people
they look, they stare, they laugh, they fleer, and
mount upon forms and pews to see these goodly
pageants solemnised in this sort. Then, after
this, about the church they go again and again,
and so forth into the churchyard, where they
have commonly their summer halls, their bowers,
arbours, and banqueting-houses set up, wherein
they feast, banquet, and dance all that day, and
peradventure all that night, too. And thus these
terrestrial furies spend the Sabbath-day in the
country."
To relate all the jollity with which Christmas
was celebrated is beyond our space. The Christmas
carols with which the waits awoke all the
sleeping people for a fortnight before; the yule-log
dragged into the hall and piled on the fire;
the boar's-head feast, with plum-pudding and
mince-pies, and all the dances and games, were
as much in fashion as in the days of the ancient
Church. Plough Monday, Valentine Day, Easter
and Whitsuntide, St. John's Eve, and all the
charities of Maundy Thursday, were still maintained.
Even Palm Sunday, when the figure of
Christ went on its procession mounted on a
wooden ass, resisted the Reformation till the
year 1548.
The drama, which was now shaping itself into
freedom and splendour under such men as Shakespeare
and Marlowe, was yet conducted in a very
rough style. The theatres were mostly of wood;
the actors were rarely arrayed in proper costume;
women's parts were represented by boys; any
scenery which the play had, remained, like a
picture on a country fair booth, through the
whole piece. The aristocratic frequenters sate on
the stage, for there were no boxes or dress-circle,
and the commonalty sate on stools and enjoyed
their pipes and beer during the performance.
What was worse, the theatre had to contend, in
the affections of the public, with the bear-garden,
bull-baiting, and cock-fighting. This was true—and
to us the fact must seem deplorable—of the
very highest classes among the people.
As Sunday had been the great day of the
Church plays or Mysteries, so Sunday was the
chief day of the theatre, which brought it into
disrepute with the serious portion of the community;
and when there was bull-baiting, the
theatre was closed that it might not interfere.
Queen Elizabeth was especially fond of the bear-garden,
and that sport was consequently included
by Leicester in the recreations which he provided
for her at Kenilworth. In truth, bear-gardens,
cock-pits, bowling-greens, tennis-courts, dicing-houses,
taverns, smoking ordinaries, and the like
abounded, giving us a fair idea of the grade of
taste of that age. Hunting and hawking were
still pastimes of the gentry, and horse-racing became
a great rage. The first notice we have of
this latter pastime is on the occasion before mentioned,
when Henry went a-maying in 1515; after
which it is said that he and his brother-in-law, the
Duke of Suffolk, diverted themselves by "racing
on great coursers."
But amid the pleasures of this century there
must have existed a large intermixture of a more
moral class, for the Bible had become extensively
read, and the Reformers must have been numerous
to enable the Government to effect the ecclesiastical
changes which they did; and the advance
of physical improvement must not be judged of
by the popular condition of to-day, but of previous
times. In the course of the century the condition
of the people considerably advanced. At the
beginning the houses of farmers were generally
of timber, and those of labourers of mud, or wattle
and mud. In many of them were no chimneys,
except one for cooking. Wooden trenchers and
wooden spoons were used instead of pewter or
earthenware; and a yeoman who had half a dozen
pewter dishes in his house was looked on as
wealthy. Their lodging was equally mean. Straw
beds and pillows of chaff were most common; flock
beds were a rural luxury; and the farm servants
lay on straw, and often had not even a coverlet
to throw over them. The bread of the common
people was made of rye, barley, or oats, and in
many districts of peas or beans. The gentry only
ate wheaten bread. The men by the fire in the
evening, after their day's work, made their own
shoes, or prepared the yokes for oxen, and their
plough-gear. The women made the wool and
the hemp or flax ready for the weaver at the
spinning-wheel. As they do now on the Continent,
the countrywomen worked much in the fields.
Fitzherbert, the first of our writers on husbandry,
says that it was the business of the farmer's wife
"to winnow all manner of corn, to make malt, to
wash, to make hay, to shear corn, and, in time of
need, to help her husband to fill the muck-wain,
or dung-cart, drive the plough, to load hay or corn,
to go to market and sell butter or pigs or fowls."
Latimer, who was a farmer's son, describes the
advance in the value of land in his time. When
he was young, he says, his father's farm was
rented by him at £4 a year; that he employed
half-a-dozen men upon it, and had 100 sheep and
thirty cows; that his father managed to send him
to school and college, and to give to each of his
daughters £5 on her marriage. But, continues
Latimer, at the time he wrote this, the same farm
was charged £16 a year, or fourfold, and then the
farmer of it could do nothing for his prince, himself,
or his children, nor give a cup of drink to
the poor. The cause of this was the increased
demand for wool, which had occasioned great
enclosures, and a decrease of tillage in favour of
pasturage. This pressed greatly on the labouring
class who were not employed; for the gentlemen
had flocks of from 10,000 to 20,000, and a few
shepherds were all they needed in their great
enclosures. The gentry, who thus occupied the
land, we are told, did not reside on it, but
crowded up to London and hung about the Court.
"Hence," says Roger Ascham, "so many families
dispersed, so many houses ruined. Hence the
honour and strength of England, the noble yeomanry,
are broken up and destroyed."
THE FROLIC OF MY LORD OF MISRULE. (See p. 399.)
The evils of this state of things compelled the
Legislature to put restrictions on the extent of
pasturage, to insist on the tillage of sufficient
land for the wants of the community; and
penalties were enacted for such as did not build
proper cottages for their labourers, with four acres
of land each, or who allowed more than one family
in one cottage. The evil produced its own remedy.
The scarcity of tillage land raised the price of
produce, and that stimulated to the manuring
and better culture of the land. We learn from
Harrison and Norden, writers of the period, that
towards the end of the century things were greatly
improved. The farmers and small builders were
become more painstaking and skilful. They collected
manure and even the sweepings of streets,
burnt lime, and carted sea sand, as in Cornwall
and Devon. The consequence was that they had
better cattle and better crops, they had milk from
their cows, ewes, and goats; and they used much
more meat. In the autumn they cured bacon and
beef for the winter; and in summer they had
abundance of veal, beef, and mutton, which, says
Harrison, they ceased to baste with lard, but
basted with butter, or suffered the fattest to baste
itself.
With their living, their houses improved. Wood
or wattle gave way to stone or brick, the wooden
trenchers were superseded at substantial tables by
pewter, and with the pewter were sometimes
seen articles of silver. Feather beds replaced
the straw and chaff mattresses; there was
more abundant linen, bed-covers, and better
clothing. Coal was beginning to make the scarcity
of wood less felt.
The vast increase of foreign trade and of manufactures
which has been described must have
proved the most effectual means, far more than
enactments, for encouraging tillage, from the augmented
demand of provisions and luxuries; and
the same causes would provide employment and
good wages for increased numbers. The land as
well as every other thing in the kingdom was in a
transition state, and as the large estates of nobles
and the Church, now divided amongst a multitude,
came to be settled and cultivated, the diffusion
of life and prosperity through the rural districts
was no doubt proportional. At this time there
must have been a great flow of population from
the agricultural to the manufacturing districts, as
the latter were making increased demands on the
strength of the nation; yet it appears that the
produce both of the tilled ground and of pasturage
grew steadily. The small cottagers, who
had probably been but poor farmers, being now
gradually absorbed into the growing artisan
population, gave place to greater and wealthier
men, who laid out the ground in large grazing
farms. This gave rise to the false impression
that the population was decreasing, and the
statistics of the period give frequent evidence of
the alarm thus occasioned. The evidence, however,
for the increase of the population is incontestable;
and the wage for ordinary labour seems
to have been quite double its old amount in this
century. It may be interesting to record some
of the salaries of the period. In the household
of the Earl of Northumberland, in 1511, the
principal priest of the chapel received £5 a year;
a chaplain graduate, £3 6s. 8d.; a chaplain, not
a graduate, £2; a minstrel, £4; a serving-boy,
13s. 4d.; all these being lodged and fed in
addition. In 1500 a mason received 4d. a day,
and 2d. for diet. In 1575 a master mason
received 1s. a day, and a common labourer 8d.
In 1601 a master mason had 1s. 2d. a day, and a
labourer 10d. The long continuance of internal
peace had increased the population from two
millions and a half in the commencement of the
fifteenth century, to six millions and a half at
the end of the sixteenth; but the increase of
trade, of commerce, and of tillage, had not been
able to absorb a tithe of the homeless and
destitute people who had been increasing since
the abolition of villenage and the destruction of
the monasteries, which had fed swarms of them.
We have had occasion to show that these wandering
tribes overran the country like a flood—"vagabonds,
rogues, and sturdy beggars"—carrying
terror and crime everywhere. Henry VIII.,
Harrison tells us, in the course of his reign,
hanged of robbers, thieves, and vagabonds, no
fewer than 72,000, and Elizabeth, toward the
latter part of her reign, sent 300 or 400 of
them annually to the gallows.
We find a statute of the first year of Edward
VI. containing the following:—"Idleness and
vagabondry is the mother and root of all thefts,
robberies, and all evil acts and other mischiefs, and
the multitude of people given thereto hath always
been here within this realm very great and more
in number, as it may appear, than in other regions;
the which idleness and vagabondry all the
king's highness' noble progenitors, kings of this
realm, and this high court of Parliament hath
often and with great travail gone about and
assayed with godly acts and statutes to repress;
yet until this our time it hath not had that success
which hath been wished; but—partly by foolish
pity and mercy of them which should have seen
the said godly laws executed, partly by perverse
natures and long-accustomed idleness of the persons
given to loitering—the said godly statutes
hitherto hath had small effect, and idle and
vagabond persons hath been suffered to remain
and increase, and yet so do." "If," continues the
Act, "they should be punished by death, whipping,
imprisonment, or with other corporal pain,
it were not without their desert, for the example
of others and to the benefit of the commonwealth;
yet if they could be brought to be made profitable
and do service, it were much to be wished and
desired." Such words would lead us to conclude
that they were about to adopt conciliatory
measures with regard to this troublesome class,
but we find on the contrary the harshest enactments
put in execution. Thus, every person found
idle and wandering without any effort to obtain
work was to be considered a vagabond, and was
liable to be seized by any one and forced to labour,
for which he was to receive only his daily food.
If he attempted to run away, he was to be branded
on the breast with the letter "V" and made the
slave of his owner for two years. If he made a
second attempt for liberty, he was to be branded
on the forehead or cheek with the letter "S" and
made his master's slave for ever; while a third
effort at escape was punishable by death. The
severity of this law prevented it from being properly
executed, and caused its repeal in two years.
After various futile enactments, Henry VIII., in
1530, gave the sick and impotent permission to
beg; and in 1536 the magistrates and the clergy
were ordered to make collections for their relief.
These were the first approaches to a poor-law, and
in the year 1562 Queen Elizabeth passed an Act
making parochial assessments for the poor compulsory.
The poor-law, therefore, in reality dates
from that period; but in the year 1601, the celebrated
Act of the 43rd of Elizabeth organised and
completed that system of employing and maintaining
the destitute poor, which—with its subsequent
modifications—has remained ever since the
law of England.
PUNISHMENT OF THE STOCKS.