% 
 
 éunded 1863 — Opened 1887 
 
 Whe Cbd 
 
 Gimour #Dean Lith Glasgow. 
 
a 
 
 DA175.Hé 
 
 C001 ~ 
 POST NORMAN BRITAIN: FOREIGN INFLUENCES 
 
 OT 00 bi 
 
oa 
 
 fea 
 
© BA Bi a 9 
 
 LiAHIEN BRITAIN, !nstit: TION ) 
 
 SASS GO* pe yg 
 
 POST NORMAN BRITAIN: 
 
 FOREIGN INFLUENCES UPON THE HISTORY OF 
 ENGLAND FROM THE ACCESSION OF HENRY IIT. 
 TO THE REVOLUTION OF 1688. 
 
 BY 
 
 Piao invenG. HEWLETT. 
 
 PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF 
 THE COMMITTEE OF GENERAL LITERATURE AND EDUCATION 
 APPOINTED BY THE SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING 
 CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE, 
 
 LONDON : 
 SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE, 
 NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, CHARING CROSS, W.C. ; 
 
 43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.C.; 
 26, ST. GEORGE’S PLACE, HYDE PARK CORNER, S.W. 
 
 BRIGHTON: 135, NORTH STREET. 
 New York: E. & J. B. YOUNG & Co. 
 1886, 
 
i aad ae 
 
 PREFACE, 
 
 He volumes comprising the series published under 
 
 the title of “ Early Britain” furnish a brief analytical 
 and historical account of the chief racial elements 
 which successively became blended in the mental and 
 physical constitution ‘of the English people down to 
 the close of the Norman:period. The present volume 
 
 is intended to supplement the series by a sketch of the 
 various influences derived, from foreign sources which 
 subsequently contributed to modify and develope 
 
 our national character, down to the period when the 
 modern history of England may be said to begin. 
 The contributions which this survey embraces com- 
 prise not only the accession of new racial elements 
 by occasional. immigrations, but such influences of 
 political, religious, moral, and intellectual force as 
 have become. permanently absorbed into the organism 
 of the nation, or have assisted to promote its historical 
 growth. . The several impulses given to our progress 
 
 in literature, philosophy, science, the arts, commerce, 
 
 colonisation, ‘invention, and industry come directly 
 within. its scope: But. the external influence thus 
 exercised has not always been direct. In more than 
 one instance it proceeded from a hostile source, and 
 was only converted into a beneficent agency by dint 
 
 of the reflex action which it excited. The largeness — 
 
 of the debt to foreign aids which is disclosed by this 
 investigation may seem at first sight to detract from 
 the originality of our native genius, but ought rather 
 
 B 2 
 
 QNUS 
 
4 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 to be regarded as measuring the assimilative power 
 inherent in it. As the period to which this retrospect 
 is confined was anterior to the union of the three 
 kingdoms, it has been necessary to treat both Scotland 
 and Ireland as foreign countries, and to take into 
 account only so much of their history as has concerned 
 that of England. 
 
 The limited scale of the work has rendered many 
 omissions unavoidable, and allowed no more than a 
 cursory glance at topics of interest and importance 
 which deserved ample consideration. I am bound 
 to acknowledge my special obligation to Green’s 
 “History of the English People” for its masterly 
 outline of the national annals in relation to the 
 organic growth of our free institutions, which I have 
 adopted as a groundwork of political narrative; to 
 the excellent summaries of facts connected with the 
 progress of English commerce, art, and industry 
 contained in Macfarlane’s “ Pictorial History of Eng- 
 land”; to the literary histories of Hallam and Shaw, 
 and Professor Morley’s ‘‘ First Sketch of English 
 Literature ” ; to Walpole’s ‘‘ Anecdotes of Painting,” 
 and to Dr. Smiles’s exhaustive work on “The 
 Huguenots.” ‘To the numerous original authorities 
 and books of reference which I have had occasion to 
 consult I must be content with a general acknowledg- 
 ment of indebtedness. To my friend Mr. Walter 
 Tregellas I owe several valuable suggestions which 
 have helped to make this compilation, with all its 
 shortcomings, less incomplete than it would otherwise 
 have been. 
 
 1g hy 6 Sed sb 
 September, 1886. 
 
BONG LeKSNeTSS; 
 
 CHARTER I. 
 
 Foreign influences upon English history during the 
 thirteenth century a ve ‘ Page 
 
 CHAPTER iT: 
 
 Foreign influences during the fourteenth and fifteenth 
 centuries to the accession of Henry VII. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Foreign influences during the fifteenth and sixteenth 
 centuries from the accession of Henry VII. to the 
 death of Henry VIII. 
 
 CHAPTER. IV. 
 
 Foreign influences upon political history during the 
 sixteenth century (from the accession of Edward VI. 
 to the death of Mary) 
 
 CHAPTER Vv. 
 
 Foreign influences upon political history during the reign 
 of Elizabeth 
 
 26 
 
 47 
 
 75 
 
 92 
 
6 ‘POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 CHAPTER: Vi. 
 
 Miscellaneous foreign influences from the accession of 
 Edward VI. to the death of Elizabeth sy Wh SG 27 
 
 CHAPTER .VIE 
 
 Foreign influences on pela pee: during the reign of 
 Hames fa. A cas os ae ie ve 154 
 
 CHAPTER Vie. 
 
 Foreign influences on political history from the accession 
 of Charles I. to the outbreak of the Civil War ‘4 176 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 F oreign influences on political history from the eaten of - 
 
 the Civil War to the Restoration and wa tesvths 206 
 CHAPTER? 
 Miscellaneous foreign influences from ‘the accession of 
 James I. to the Restoration ~ <7, © 7.0.4, ey pa 220 
 
 CHAPTE Raa 
 
 Foreign influences upon political history from the Restora- 
 tion to the Revolution, 1660 to 1688... 4... apne 5d 
 
 CHAP TER Sei 
 
 Miscellaneous foreign influences from the Restoration to 
 the Revolution” 4;. 2 dP eae i ae sie 290 
 
POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 
 
 COAL EER | I. 
 
 Foreign influences upon English history during the thirteenth 
 century. 
 
 THE independent ‘national existence of England, 
 subsequent to the Conquest, dates from the loss by 
 John of his Norman possessions, consummated by 
 the formal cession of them to the French King, 
 made by Henry III., in 1259. Hitherto England 
 had been little more than an appanage of Normandy; 
 henceforth it was self-centred and uncontrolled. 
 The blending of the several races which had settled 
 on its soil into one common nationality, of Celts, 
 Romans, Jutes, Angles, Saxons, Danes, and Normans 
 into Englishmen, was now an accomplished fact. 
 Though Norman-French still continued to be the 
 spoken language of the Court and the nobility, and 
 Latin the written language of officials, lawyers, and 
 Churchmen, the English tongue, Teutonic: in sub- 
 stance and structure, was alone ‘‘ understanded of 
 the people.” That its prevalence had become gene- 
 rally recognised by the middle of the century is 
 
8 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 attested by the issue of a circular Royal Pro- 
 clamation, addressed to the chief towns of the realm 
 in 1258, ordaining the observance of the “ Provisions 
 of Oxford.” 
 
 The war between John and his barons, which had 
 resulted in their establishment of a fixed barrier to 
 the despotic power of the Crown, had been mainly 
 waged in the interest of the feudal landowners, but 
 the benefits which they won for themselves were 
 secured to all classes in the nation. ‘The growth of 
 a common bond of patriotic feeling, obvious traces 
 of which are to be found in the memorials of this 
 century, was the natural consequence of such par- 
 ticipation. It was greatly stimulated by the national 
 policy steadily pursued by Hubert de Burgh, the 
 Justiciary, and Stephen Langton, Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, who practically governed the kingdom 
 during the nonage of Henry III.; the firmness with 
 which they enforced the confirmation and maintained 
 the validity of the Great Charter, resisted the en- 
 croachments of the Papacy, and discouraged the 
 ambition of the young King to recover his Norman 
 possessions. Both had deserved well of the country 
 during the recent constitutional crisis; the Justiciary 
 by the courage with which, while keeping clear of 
 complicity in John’s misrule, he opposed the mis- 
 taken course of the barons, who sought to set up a 
 foreign prince in his stead, and frustrated its sue- 
 cessful issue by the tenacious defence of Dover ; the 
 Archbishop, by the skill with which he had mediated 
 between the barons and the Pope, from whom, at the 
 close of the struggle, he obtained a pledge that no 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. g 
 
 successor to the Legate Pandulf should be sent to 
 England during his lifetime. This last service was 
 vividly recalled to men’s minds by the renewal of 
 Papal aggression, which succeeded his death in 1228. 
 
 Before Gregory IX. would consent to ratify the 
 appointment of a new primate, an “aid” was 
 demanded from the realm, and when the King’s pro- 
 posal to levy it on the lay fiefs was refused by the 
 barons, the Pope enforced the exaction of a tenth 
 upon the goods of the clergy under the threat of ex- 
 communication. This attack upon the hberties of the 
 national Church, followed by his wholesale appoint- 
 ment of Italian priests to vacant English benefices, 
 in disregard of private nghts of patronage, led toa 
 violent outbreak of popular anger in 1231, which for 
 a time stemmed the tide of usurpation. The Papal 
 tithe-collectors were maltreated, the tithes taken 
 from them and given to the poor. ‘The evidence of 
 organisation among the rioters, and the real or sup- 
 posed countenance given to their proceedings by the 
 Justiciary, brought upon him the displeasure of the 
 Pope, and precipitated his fall from power in 1232. 
 The national sympathy with his policy found ex- 
 pression in the words of the smith of Brentwood, 
 who, when de Burgh was dragged from the sanctuary 
 to which he had fled, sturdily refused to “put irons 
 on the man who freed England from the stranger.” 
 But the King had long been waiting for an opportunity 
 to be rid of so masterful a minister, and no sooner 
 was this end accomplished, than he proceeded to 
 carry out his own policy of entrusting the highest 
 offices of the State either to foreigners, or to English- 
 
Io POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 men of humble position, who were alike dependent 
 on his favour and obsequious to his will. 
 
 His first act was to confer chief authority upon 
 Peter des Roches, Bishop of Winchester, a Poitevin, 
 who was odious to the nation as the unscrupulous 
 tool of John. At his suggestion, a multitude of 
 Poitevin and Breton office-seekers swarmed into the 
 country, and were quickly provided with military 
 and civil posts of rank and influence. Their mal- 
 administration and rapacity provoked a revolt of the 
 barons, and though this was suppressed, and the con- 
 fiscated estates of the rebels were recklessly conferred 
 upon the foreigners, the disaffection of the country 
 became so serious, that the Church at last intervened. 
 Under pressure of a threat of excommunication by 
 the Primate, Edmund Rich, Henry consented to 
 dismiss the Poitevins in 1233. But the relief was. 
 short-lived. The relations of Eleanor of Provence, 
 who became Henry’s Queen in 1236, soon succeeded 
 in absorbing the most important dignities and the 
 wealthiest domains of the Crown. One of her uncles, 
 Peter, Count of Savoy, was enriched with the honours 
 of Richmond and Hastings, besides other possessions. 
 Another uncle, Boniface, was appointed to the vacant 
 primacy. Other members of the family received 
 large grants of land, or money, from the weak and 
 lavish King. ‘The children of his mother, Isabella, 
 by her second husband, the Count of la Marche, 
 were sent over to England for a share of the plunder, 
 and were treated with equal profuseness. Aymer de 
 Valence was made Bishop of Winchester, William 
 was created Earl of Pembroke. Several: of. these 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. II 
 
 favourites having obtained the custody and marriage 
 of young barons, who were wards of the Crown, 
 reaped a rich harvest from the proceeds of their 
 estates during their nonage ; and before they attained 
 majority wedded them to foreign ladies, who had 
 come over in search of husbands. ‘There can be no 
 doubt that these alliances, which affected the blood 
 of some of the oldest and noblest families in the 
 kingdom, were followed by frequent unions between 
 the male and female retainers of the houses thus 
 connected. To what extent this immigration pro- 
 ceeded cannot be ascertained, but it was unquestion- 
 ably very large. The official registers of royal grants, 
 fea. Patent “and “Charter” Rolls of: Chancery, 
 are crowded with examples of the prodigality with 
 which Henry squandered the wealth of England 
 upon his foreign relatives and their dependants. To 
 the scandalous abuse of the powers entrusted to 
 them, which many of these unworthy recipients of 
 his bounty openly committed, the contemporary 
 chroniclers bear abundant witness. A few prominent 
 individuals among the number who made themselves 
 specially obnoxious were eventually forced, by popular 
 indignation, to quit the realm, but there is no reason 
 to doubt that the majority remained. 
 
 Unwelcome as these intruders were to the nation, 
 and severely as it suffered for a long time from their 
 greed of gain, their contempt of law and order, and 
 their subservience to the despotism of the Crown, the 
 mischief thereby wrought was happily transient, while 
 the accession of fresh racial elements which their 
 intermarriage with English families involved, must 
 
12 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 be considered a permanent benefit. ~In two or three 
 notable instances the alien blood infused into the 
 veins of England sensibly increased its patriotic 
 ardour and vitality. ‘To Simon de Montfort, a French 
 noble by birth and breeding, whose title to the 
 earldom of Leicester was acquired by his elder 
 brother’s refusal to accept the inheritance of their 
 father’s mother, coupled with the condition of relin- 
 quishing allegiance to France, we owe the most 
 cherished of our free institutions. His marriage with 
 the King’s sister, Eleanor, widow of William Marshall, 
 Earl of Pembroke, was strongly opposed by the Earl 
 of Cornwall, and other of the barons, on the ground 
 of his foreign descent; but no sooner had he taken 
 his place in their ranks than he proved himself the 
 staunchest supporter of the policy which de Burgh and 
 Langton had initiated. Remaining loyal to the Crown 
 so long as Henry was faithful to his pledge of main- 
 taining the liberties secured by the Great Charter, 
 he steadily opposed the unconstitutional course which 
 the King pursued after the fall of de Burgh, dis- 
 _tinguishing himself especially by hostility to the royal 
 favourites and the aggression of the Papacy. Though 
 not taking an active part in the movement which led 
 to the passing of the provisions of Oxford, he assisted 
 the barons, who had devised them, in enforcing the 
 restraints thereby placed upon the power of the 
 Crown. When these restraints proved ineffectual, 
 and the great barons, harassed by internal dissen- 
 sions, showed signs of relinquishing the struggle, 
 Leicester turned from them to the lesser barons, the 
 knights of the shires, and the burgesses of the chief 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 13 
 
 towns, headed the revolt, which was crowned with 
 victory at Lewes, and turned it to immediate account 
 by summoning, in 1265, the first House of Commons 
 that ever sat at Westminster. The reaction in favour 
 of the Crown, which set in soon after this triumph, 
 and terminated in his defeat and death at Evesham, 
 only temporarily eclipsed the lustre of his fame, and 
 the vindication of his constitutional policy was com- 
 pleted by the establishment of our Parliamentary 
 system by Edward I., in 1295, upon the identical 
 basis which Leicester had laid down. 
 
 Two other names of alien extraction, though less 
 distinguished than his, deserve to be remembered 
 for the same reason, that their bearers became genuine 
 Englishmen. Aymer de Valence, who succeeded to 
 the earldom of Pembroke upon the death of his 
 father, Henry’s half-brother, was prominent among 
 the statesmen and soldiers in whom Edward I. con- 
 fided; and was employed by him as ambassador 
 successively to Flanders, France, and Scotland, and 
 as commander of the army which routed Bruce at 
 Methven. He was one of the trusted few whom the 
 old King, on his death-bed, charged with the obligation 
 of persuading his son never to cancel the sentence of 
 exile imposed upon his worthless companion, Piers 
 Gaveston, for having intrigued to estrange him from 
 his father. Though the pledge to this effect given 
 by Edward II. was quickly violated, Aymer de 
 Valence remained faithful to his trust, and took an 
 active part in the opposition, headed by Thomas, 
 Earl of Lancaster, which led to the re-banishment, 
 and eventually to the death of Gaveston. In the 
 
I4 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 treasonable course, however, which the Earl subse- 
 quently pursued, Pembroke refused to follow him ; 
 and, after the defeat of his army and his capture 
 at Boroughbridge, in 1322, sat as a member of 
 the military tribunal which. condemned him to 
 execution. 
 
 Of the family of Dreux, who united the French 
 duchy of Brittany, with the , English earldom of 
 Richmond, and allied themselves by marriage with 
 the blood royal of England, it must suffice to say 
 that one of several members of it, successively 
 bearing the name of John, spent his life in the ser- 
 vice of the first and second Edwards. A second 
 John adhered to the cause of Edward III. during 
 the war with France, and thereby temporarily for- 
 feited his French possessions. It was not until the 
 close of the fourteenth century that the strain of this 
 divided allegiance proved too severe for endurance ; 
 and,-during the crisis of another war with France, the 
 then Duke of-Brittany adhered to her flag, and was 
 deposed from his English honours. 
 
 ‘There isno reason to suppose that the foregoing 
 instances of the quick conversion of naturalised 
 foreigners into English patriots were by any means 
 exceptional. Probably in the course of two or three 
 generations most of the alien grafts became thoroughly 
 incorporated < with; the, native. stocks to which they 
 were attached, and: adopted their robust virtues; 
 imparting i in. return certain desirable qualities of or 
 owns, The. vivacious gaiety and bright ardency of 
 spirit for which the: natives of south-western France 
 are remarkable ; the romantic chivalry and imagina- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 15 
 
 tive extravagance, which are typical of the Provencal 
 temperament, are not among the characteristics of 
 our Teutonic family; and the large share of these 
 which so many English men and women possess may 
 be reasonably attributed to their derivation from an 
 ancestral alliance with one of those southern families 
 which at various periods of our history have become 
 transplanted here, and whose importation in the 
 middle of the thirteenth century was the first ona 
 large scale that occurred since the Conquest. 
 
 The “Hanse of Almain,” and other colonies of 
 foreign merchants, who, during this century, became 
 settled in several English cities and towns, cannot be 
 reckoned as an accession of racial elements, in the 
 absence of evidence to show that, although col- 
 lectively naturalised as trading communities, their 
 members intermarried to any considerable extent 
 with Englishwomen, or enrolled themselves indi- 
 vidually as English subjects. - Regarded, however, as 
 one of the main channels of commercial intercourse 
 with the continents of Europe and Asia, their con- 
 tribution to our national development was of the 
 greatest value. The Flemings, who settled here soon 
 after the Conquest, are believed to have first intro- 
 duced the manufacture of woollen cloths and the art 
 of dyeing them. Another colony of the same race is 
 said to have established itself in Norfolk, in the reign 
 of Henry II., and founded the worsted manu- 
 factories for which Norwich became celebrated in 
 the thirteenth century. As early, also, as the reign 
 of Henry II. the gold and spices of Arabia, precious 
 stones from Egypt, silks and other stuffs from India, 
 
16 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 and furs from Russia and Norway, were brought to 
 London by foreign merchants. Corn, too, was im- 
 ported in times of scarcity, and the wines of France 
 and Spain were in regular demand. Bristol, Exeter, 
 Winchester, York, Chester, Dunwich, Norwich, 
 Lincoln, Lynn, and Grimsby were all thriving ports 
 to which foreign merchants resorted. ‘The benefits 
 which they conferred would, doubtless, have been far 
 greater but for the regulations and restrictions im- 
 posed upon their trading privileges, by statutes passed 
 from time to time in the interest of the native 
 merchants and guilds. 
 
 In connexion with this subject a passing reference 
 must be made to the Jews, who flocked into England 
 in great numbers soon after the Conquest; and, in 
 spite of the severe persecution to which they were 
 repeatedly subjected, remained here until 1290, when 
 they were expelled in a body. During the two 
 centuries of their residence in the chief cities and 
 towns of the kingdom they appear to have occupied 
 the position of capitalists, or money-lenders, without 
 devoting themselves to any industrial calling. They 
 unquestionably performed a useful function in this 
 capacity as commercial intermediaries ; but the reli- 
 gious aversion with which they were regarded by the 
 Christian world, and the complete segregation from 
 social intercourse with it which their creed imposed 
 upon them, precluded their ever becoming incor- 
 porated with the body politic. ‘The shrewdness and 
 rigour with which they drove their bargains and 
 enforced the law against their debtors, combined 
 with these causes to render them so generally detested, 
 
© PvE te 
 INSTITU 
 ke 
 FOREIGN INFLUENCES. NOEASG 
 
 that the decree for their expulsion was hailed with 
 public acclamation, and its severity aggravated by 
 several acts of barbarity. 
 
 Another alien element in the midst of the race 
 equally unincorporable with its physical and spiritual 
 constituents, was the large body of foreign ecclesi- 
 astics, whose intrusion into English benefices (under 
 presentations illegally granted at Rome) has already 
 been mentioned as one of the intolerable wrongs in- 
 flicted by the Papacy upon the national Church 
 during this period, and basely submitted to by 
 HenryIII. As celibate priests these intruders added 
 little or nothing to the vital or political force of the 
 realm, while their Continental training, their ignorance 
 of the English tongue, manners, and habits of thought 
 disqualified them for the adequate discharge of their 
 pastoral functions. The implicit obedience which 
 they were bound to render to the dictates of the 
 Roman See estranged them from sympathy with the 
 great body of the clergy and laity of the national 
 Church, who were actuated by a desire to maintain such 
 measure of independence as it still possessed. They 
 were accordingly regarded by the people in the light 
 of a hostile garrison, and credited with the worst 
 motives as “ hirelings seeking only their worldly gain.” 
 The irritation which their presence excited broke out 
 in indignant protests of the Commons, and dignified 
 remonstrances on the part of the Crown and its 
 ministers, repeated from time to time, but without 
 effect, until the source of the evil was at length re- 
 strained by the passing of the Statutes of Provisors and 
 . Preemunire (25th and 27th Edward III., and 16th 
 Cc 
 
18 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Richard II.), which rendered it penal to procure from 
 Rome any presentation to an English benefice. Such 
 influence, therefore, as these foreign ecclesiastics ex- 
 ercised must be considered as detrimental rather than 
 helpful to the national development. 
 
 Another stream of migration which flowed from 
 the Continent to this country, early in the same 
 century, 1s entitled to grateful remembrance for the 
 beneficent effects which it exerted upon the spiritual 
 and moral condition of the people. The corruption 
 which had long since tainted the religious life of 
 Christendom at its source now extended far and 
 wide, and was nowhere more apparent than among 
 the English clergy and monks who were constantly 
 in communication with Rome. The frequent employ- 
 ment of bishops and other dignitaries of the Church 
 in judicial and ministerial functions hindered them 
 from exercising due  watchfulness and _ control 
 over their dioceses, and the existence of shameful 
 abuses and grave scandals among many of the 
 parochial clergy was the unavoidable result. ‘The 
 monastic houses aggravated this evil by obtaining 
 appropriations of some of the richest livings in the 
 kingdom, the emoluments of which they absorbed, 
 assigning paltry stipends to the vicars who served the 
 cure of souls. Many of the regular were, equally 
 with the secular clergy, in bad repute for their dis- 
 orderly lives, but they contrived to escape the censure 
 of their episcopal visitors by purchasing “exemptions” 
 from Rome. Upon the neglect of their sacred duties 
 by the teachers to whom the spiritual education of 
 the people was solely confided, together with the in- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 19g 
 
 fluence of their immoral example, the gross ignorance, 
 licentiousness, and violence prevalent in all ranks of 
 pike at this period were in great measure charge- 
 able.» | 
 
 Detietine from two Loan sources in Spain 
 and Italy,'a religious and: moral reaction had set in 
 at the beginning of the century, which resulted in the 
 establishment of two new orders of monks, inspired 
 by the fervid zeal and ‘self-denying devotion of their 
 founders, St. Dominic and St. Francis. Differing 
 from the older monastic bodies in two essential 
 particulars, viz., that they mingled with their fellow 
 men instead of immuring themselves in convents, and 
 were vowed to poverty instead of acquiring lands and 
 tithes, they embraced the missionary calling, and, clad 
 ‘in.coarse robes ‘and barefooted, travelled into all parts 
 of the‘known world. ‘The first band of the Domini- 
 can brotherhood, or Black friars, reached England in 
 1221, and was followed three years later by a band 
 of Franciscan or Grey friars. ‘Their earnestness and 
 homely preaching soon won them attentive hearers 
 among the townsmen, to whom they first turned their 
 steps.’ The utter'sacrifice of health and comfort to 
 which they submitted; by living and labouring among 
 beggars and lepers*in the foulest quarters of the cities, 
 stirred the hearts of rich men with a strange sense of 
 shame, and awoke the’*poorest to a new belief in the 
 existence’ of human kindness. Apart from the 
 fanatical intolerance of all forms of heretical opinion, 
 ‘which’ has left a stain on the memory of the Domin1- 
 cans, and the extravagance to which the Franciscans 
 often carried their asceticism, the virtues and graces 
 
 Gee 
 
20 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 which marked the lives of their earliest missionaries 
 must command the admiration of all followers of 
 Christ. ‘The cordial welcome which they generally 
 met with operated to modify their original intention 
 of forming no fixed settlements, and they eventually 
 established friaries in all parts of the kingdom. ‘The 
 disregard of theological study which they at first 
 shewed was abandoned as soon as they discerned its 
 value in influencing the Universities, and the theolo- 
 gical school which the Franciscans set up at Oxford 
 soon became famous throughout Europe. Grostéte, 
 the accomplished Bishop of Lincoln, was one of their 
 chief supporters, and they numbered in their ranks 
 the most learned Englishman of his age, Roger 
 Bacon. 
 
 The University of Oxford, which since the reign of 
 Henry II. had been rapidly growing in renown as a 
 resort of scholars and a centre of intellectual activity, 
 attained in the thirteenth century a reputation scarcely 
 inferior to that of Paris. Both shared in common an 
 indebtedness to the East as the source of their know- 
 ledge, and to the Crusades as the main channel of its 
 communication, although some scanty filtration of the 
 learning of Persia and Spain reached Oxford through 
 the medium of an English student, Adelard of Bath, 
 who in the twelfth century translated Euclid’s “ Ele- 
 ments” from an Arabic version. Paris, however, was 
 the chief reservoir from which Oxford drew, until her 
 own resources sufficed. Flocking to the lectures of 
 Abelard, William de Champeaux, and other eminent 
 teachers, many English scholars returned home to 
 become teachers in their turn at Oxford, and after 
 
 > 
 
 ee ee 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 21 
 
 spreading there the new ideas which they had acquired, 
 often set forth again to seek fresh food for thought. 
 The revival of classical learning soon spread to 
 England, and has left its mark upon the writings of 
 the monastic chroniclers of this period, which abound 
 in quotations from Latin authors. The “ Logic” of 
 Aristotle was introduced at Oxford by Edmund Rich, 
 who subsequently became Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 Bacon records of Bishop Grostéte, of Lincoln, that 
 he invited Greek scholars over to England, and to- 
 wards the close of his life commenced the study of 
 their language. The English scholarship of this 
 period, however, culminated in the attainments of 
 Bacon himself, whose Opus Magnum, which was given 
 to the world in 1267, is a monument of knowledge 
 which would have been remarkable in any age, and 
 was unique in his own. “It embraced,” says its 
 latest editor, Mr. Brewer, ‘‘with the exception of logic, 
 the whole range of science, as science was then under- 
 stood. ‘Theology, grammar, mathematics, including 
 geography, chronology, music, the correction of the 
 “calendar, optics, experimental philosophy, and ethics 
 are successively discussed.” Bacon, who had studied 
 both at Paris and Oxford, made himself master of 
 Hebrew, Arabic, Greek, and Latin, deriving through 
 their media an intimate acquaintance with the works 
 of Aristotle, and of his great Rabbinical and 
 Arabian commentators, especially Averroes and 
 Avicenna, which constituted the armoury of the 
 medizeval schoolmen. 
 
 In these studies Bacon had many distinguished 
 compeers and successors, Marsh, Dun Scotus, Brad- 
 
g2 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 wardine, Ockham, and others,: whose’ reputation .for 
 erudition, subtlety, and «skill: became spread: over 
 Europe. It would be foreign to the purpose of this 
 volume to attempt any analysis ofthe scholastic 
 philosophy, but it may be briefly-characterised: in thé 
 words of Hallam as “an: endeavour to arrange the 
 orthodox system of the Church, such as atithority 
 had made it, according to the rules and methods of the 
 Aristotelian dialectics.” Barren and wire-drawn as-the 
 speculations of the schoolmen often were, they: were 
 serviceable to intellectual progress, by appealing to 
 the standard of reason rather than authority, as well 
 as by insisting upon exactness of language .and-rigo- 
 rous argument. ‘That theirstudies had a:tendency to 
 encourage openness of mind:and: liberal. sympathies 
 may be inferred from the ‘political course. pursued 
 by some of their leading representatives. Adam -de 
 Marsh, the master of the Franciscan School -at 
 Oxford, was the confidant and adviser of Simon: de 
 Montfort ; Archbishop Rich: and Bishop. Grostéte 
 were among the staunchest opponents. of Papal ex- 
 actions ; Ockham was the champion of the resistance 
 which the German empire offered ‘to the pretensions 
 of the Holy See to overrule the civil power; and 
 Wycliff carried the principles of his master to’ their 
 logical conclusion by vesting supreme authority in 
 the conscience of ee man, and an: ultimate : eg 
 in God. i 
 The chief contributions to the English | ligeraitire of 
 this period were translations made from the French 
 metrical romances of ‘‘Havelok,” ‘‘ Kyng Horn,” 
 ““Kyng Alesaunder,” “ Richard Coeur de Lion,” and 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 23 
 
 the Arthurian heroes, Sir Tristram and Sir Gawaine. 
 The metrical chronicles of Robert of Gloucester 
 and Robert Mannyng, or de Brunne, are both para- 
 phrases of Latin or French works by earlier writers, 
 although interesting illustrations of contemporary 
 English. All original works continued to be written 
 in Latin or Norman-French. ‘The Latin chronicle of 
 Matthew Paris is the most valuable historical memo- 
 rial of his age. 
 
 The prevalence of Norman architecture in England 
 terminated with the twelfth century, and the following 
 century witnessed the culmination of the Early 
 English phase of Gothic, which was a modification of 
 the transition Norman style immediately preceding it. 
 The design and execution of the buildings then 
 erected consequently did not call for the employment 
 of the foreign architects and masons who had been 
 hitherto in request, and it is probable that most of 
 the artistic work produced during this period should 
 be ascribed to native genius. It is certain, however, 
 that one Italian painter, William the Florentine, was 
 commissioned by Henry III. to execute several works 
 for him at Guildford and other royal residences. 
 The architect of the shrine of Edward the Confessor, 
 in Westminster Abbey, which Henry also erected, is 
 described thereon as Peter, a Roman citizen, and has 
 been plausibly identified as Pietro Cavallini, the in- 
 ventor of mosaic.! Traces of inspiration drawn 
 
 1 A recent authority, Professor Middleton, suggests, as a 
 preferable identification, Pietro Cosmati, one of the artists 
 employed in the church of St. Paolo fuori le Mura, at Rome. 
 —Academy, Feb. 6, 1886. 
 
 lilinois State University Library 
 
24 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 from the contemporary art of Italy, have been dis- 
 cerned in other parts of the same fabric which belong 
 to this period, such as the mosaic pavement by 
 the altar and the mural paintings of the chapter- 
 house, as well as in the tomb of Henry himself. 
 The sculptors of the statues and crosses set up by 
 Edward I. to the memory of his Queen Eleanor are 
 conjectured by Flaxman to have been pupils from 
 the school of Nicolo Pisano, the peculiar grace of 
 whose manner is reflected in these designs. 
 
 The introduction of the mariner’s compass into 
 partial use in England may probably be assigned to 
 the end of the thirteenth century, although the 
 exact date is uncertain. ‘That the knowledge of the 
 polarity of the magnet reached us from abroad there 
 can be no doubt, but which foreign nation is entitled 
 to the credit of the discovery is matter of dispute. 
 It appears to have been known to the Chinese before 
 the Christian era; a full account of it is given by a 
 Saracen geographer, who wrote early in the twelfth 
 century; anda rude compass was certainly used by 
 mariners upon the Syrian coast during the following 
 century. ‘The first European writer who describes 
 the compass is a French poet, named Guyot de 
 Provins, who as a professional minstrel is likely to 
 have attached himself to the retinue of one of the 
 crusaders, and to have acquired his knowledge of it 
 in the East. ‘The date of his work is about the year 
 1200. Less than half a century later, two other 
 French writers, both crusaders, refer to the compass 
 as an Oriental novelty. These notices seem to point 
 to the returned crusaders as the probable medium of 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 25 
 
 its communication to Europe. England, by reason of 
 its insular position, would, no doubt, be among the 
 last recipients of the boon. 
 
 In the seventh and last Crusade, which was one of 
 the notable events of this century, England took a 
 prominent part. Without travelling into the region 
 of conjecture, it would be difficult to indicate any 
 special advantage which thereby accrued to the 
 nation. In common, however, with the rest of Europe, 
 England shared in the general benefits which are 
 attributable to the Crusades as a phase in the world’s 
 history. Chief among such benefits were the dissipa- 
 tion of international jealousies, which the union of 
 Christendom in a sacred bond was calculated to 
 effect, and the diffusion of liberal ideas on the subject 
 of religion, government, and social usages, brought 
 about by the intercourse between the East and West. 
 Scarcely less important was the increased activity 
 imparted to maritime commerce, and the consequent 
 opening of fresh avenues to the acquisition of scientific 
 knowledge. Last, but not least, was the breach in 
 the integrity of the feudal system, occasioned by the 
 enforced sale of their estates by the great nobles, in 
 order to raise money for the cost of the expeditions to 
 which they were pledged. ‘The rise of the mercantile 
 class into wealth and power, which was closely con- 
 nected with this exchange of property, operated as an 
 influential factor in the future development of the 
 nation. 
 
26 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 ;CHAP TER EG 
 
 Foreign influences during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries 
 to the accession of Henry VII. 
 
 ALTHOUGH the Celtic element was probably more 
 apparent in the composition of the English nation 
 during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries than 
 it is now, the Welsh, who had retained it with scarcely 
 any admixture since they were driven into their 
 mountain fastnesses by the Saxon invasion, seem to 
 have been regarded by the Englishmen of that day as 
 a foreign race. ‘This is sufficiently accounted for by 
 the differences existing between the two peoples in 
 point of character, language, and government, to say 
 nothing of the incessant state of conflict occasioned 
 by their mutual aggressions upon the marches, and 
 the partially-successful attempts of one Norman king 
 after another to subdue the independence of the 
 native princes of Wales. Their final subjugation, 
 which was achieved by Edward I. in 1283-4, followed 
 by the adoption of the principality as a title for the 
 heir to the throne, and a course of wise and just 
 legislation, brought about a gradual amalgamation of 
 the two races. A partial colonisation of South Wales 
 had been effected by some of the followers of the 
 Norman Conqueror and his successors, particularly 
 in Pembrokeshire, where one of their settlements 
 acquired the appellation of “ Little England,” and in 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. ay. 
 
 some of the border counties,.where the. distinctive 
 titles ‘‘ English” and “Welsh” are still retained by 
 places bearing the same name. This colonisation had 
 already led to a few intermarriages between:.the in- 
 vaders and Welsh families; and the. reigning princes 
 had more than once accepted the hands of English 
 ladies, in token of reconciliation with their suzerain at 
 the close of a war, or as a pledge of friendly alliance. 
 The complete conquest of the-country, however, was 
 followed by a much larger influx of. English officials, 
 judges, soldiers, and others, especially into the chief 
 towns, and by the permanent residence: there of a 
 considerable number. There can be no doubt that 
 many of the settlers intermarried with natives, and 
 that the descendants of these marriages in some cases 
 became naturalised Welshmen. In. other cases, it 
 must be presumed that there was a counter-current of 
 migration into England. . It is only in this way that 
 one can satisfactorily account. for the existence in 
 Wales of so many ancient families bearing English 
 names, and the corresponding occurrence of Welsh 
 family names in various parts of England. . The 
 gradual interfusion of the races was stimulated by the 
 employment, from time to time, of Welsh levies. in 
 the national army ; comradeship in the field of battle 
 naturally leading to the peaceful intimacies of domestic 
 life. To what extent this interfusion. proceeded is 
 uncertain, but its effects. may: probably still be dis- 
 cerned in the physical and mental constitution of 
 many individuals in both countries.:. Neither race can 
 fairly claim to have conferred an unmixed. good..upon 
 the other by the transmission of its, special .charac- 
 
28 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 teristics, but the balance of gain over loss is clearly 
 apparent on the English side. The gifts which the © 
 Celtic mind wasable to impart—its delicately-flowering 
 fancy, its attachment to ancestral claims and local 
 associations, its reverence for legend and tradition,— 
 were cheaply purchased at the cost of an excitable 
 temperament, too prone to indulge in rash impulse 
 and litigious obstinacy. The solid sense and cool 
 deliberation upon which Englishmen justly pride 
 themselves were admirably fitted, on the other hand, 
 to correct the exuberance of these qualities. Two 
 centuries had yet to elapse before the union of the 
 two countries was finally consummated, but its growth 
 commenced with the Conquest, and though tempo- 
 rarily checked in the fifteenth century by the revolt of 
 Owen Glyndwr, who revived the Welsh spirit of 
 independence, was never seriously disturbed. 
 
 With Scotland, whose sovereigns owed a nominal 
 vassalage to the English crown, our relations were 
 intermittently hostile. The attempt of Edward I. 
 to abuse his feudal superiority by depriving the 
 Scots of their national liberties, though stoutly 
 resisted, was for a time successful, but during 
 the last years of his reign a fresh uprising of 
 patriotic spirit, directed by Robert Bruce, swept 
 away his authority. The weak hands of Edward II. 
 proved unable to restore the yoke, and by the vic- 
 tory of Bannockburn (1314) the Scots established 
 their independence. Incessant raids across the 
 border, and occasional aggressions on a_ larger 
 scale, kept the two nations upon a more or less un- 
 friendly footing for nearly three centuries longer. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 29 
 
 Though happily insufficient to prevent the spread 
 of beneficial influences from the southern into the 
 northern kingdom, it was strong enough to hinder 
 our reception of any corresponding benefit. 
 
 In Ireland, since the date of its conquest by 
 Henry II., the English invaders formed a colony 
 which intermingled without coalescing with the 
 native tribes, whom they persistently oppressed and 
 plundered ; descending to their barbarous level 
 rather than imparting to them the advantages of 
 a higher culture. When, in process of time, the 
 severance of the settlers from their kindred and 
 the attractive qualities of the Celtic nature tended 
 to bring about a partial amalgamation of the races, 
 the Legislature sharply checked it by prohibitory 
 enactments. Resenting the injustice with which 
 their conquerors treated them as savages incapable 
 of civilisation, the Irish repaid it with a fierce 
 hatred and rebellious turbulence that provoked re- 
 newed severities. The relations of the two countries 
 thus became so deeply embittered as to preclude 
 any interchange of helpful influences. 
 
 The political relations between England and France 
 form the most eventful chapter in the history of these 
 centuries, and, owing to the signal success which 
 attended their arms, the reigns of Edward III. and 
 Henry V. have been accounted the most glorious in 
 our annals. But the glory was as brief as it was 
 splendid, and the drain of her blood and treasure 
 reduced the country to the point of exhaustion. For 
 a time England occupied the most conspicuous place 
 among the European powers, the number of her 
 
30 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 French subjects equalling, if it did not exceed, that: 
 of her native population. By the treaty of Bretigny, 
 in 1360, which terminated his longest war with France, 
 Edward agreed to abandon his shadowy claim to the 
 French throne and the Duchy of Normandy, in ex- 
 change for the sovereignty of the Duchy of Aquitaine, 
 which comprised Guienne, Gascony, and other rich 
 provinces ; besides retaining his family inheritance of 
 Ponthieu and his récently-acquired territory of Calais 
 and Guisnes. Before the end of his reign, however, 
 his vast possessions in the south of France had 
 dwindled to'the area of the towns of Bordeaux and 
 Bayonne. The military genius of Henry V. redeemed 
 this loss by the reconquest of Normandy, but his 
 acquisitions dropped from the weak grasp of his 
 successor, and, by: the middle of the fifteenth century, 
 Calais and Guisnes were the sole remnants of English 
 dominion in France. Substantially hurtful, rather 
 than helpful, to the well-being of the nation as these 
 unjustifiable and fruitless wars must be regarded from 
 ‘our higher modern: standpoint, they undoubtedly 
 served to mould the heroic type of Englishman, and 
 to store the popular memory with traditions of his 
 dauntless valour and fortitude, which have since stood 
 us in good stead on many a worthier battle-field. 
 The ‘incessant state of conflict between England 
 and France which prevailed during this period necés- 
 sarily checked‘ such slight currents of emigration as 
 had hitherto intermittently flowed from one to the 
 other. The unfriendly attitude which France occupied 
 during the time when England was most cruelly 
 agitated by civil war, the dynastic struggle of the 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, a 
 
 “Roses,” was maintained almost persistently down to 
 the middle of the sixteenth century. The raids which 
 French ships of war made from time to time upon 
 unprotected ports of our eastern and southern coasts 
 inflicted great destruction of property and individual 
 suffering. The traditional memory of these repeated 
 injuries is sufficient to account for the rank growth 
 of insular prejudice against the French nation which 
 eventually became a marked feature in our national 
 character. 
 
 With the Low Countries our relations were usually 
 on a friendly footing, and it formed part of the 
 diplomatic policy of Edward III. to make them inti- 
 mately cordial. The Flemish cities were not only 
 staunch allies in his campaign against France, but 
 furnished him with the means of sustaining it by their 
 readiness to employ in their looms as much wool as 
 English merchants were able to export. The duties 
 levied upon this commodity alone are said to have 
 amounted to £30,000 in a single year. The only 
 emigration from the Continent of any importance 
 which occurred during these two centuries arose out 
 of the friendly relations thus established. In 1331 
 Edward III. invited the settlement of Flemish 
 weavers, dyers, and fullers in his dominions by the 
 promise of his favour and protection, with the avowed 
 object of introducing their skill to the knowledge of 
 his subjects. That the invitation was not long in 
 waiting for acceptance was probably due to the severe 
 competition which must have prevailed in such pros- 
 perous trades ; but the guilds would undoubtedly have 
 prohibited the emigration of skilled craftsmen could 
 
32 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 its consequences have been foreseen. ‘The first 
 emigrant was a weaver named Kempe, who was 
 accompanied by his apprentices and servants. ‘‘Many 
 of his countrymen soon followed: a few years later 
 other weavers came over from Brabant and Zealand, 
 and thus. was established certainly the first manu- 
 factory of fine woollen cloths in England.”!  Settle- 
 ments of these artisans are said to have been made in 
 London, Norfolk, Devonshire, Somersetshire, Lanca- 
 shire, Westmoreland, and Yorkshire. 
 
 The guilds of foreign merchants continued during 
 this period to be the principal, although by no means 
 exclusive, channels of commercial intercourse between 
 England and the rest of the world. The Hanse of 
 German merchants (whose guildhall in London was 
 situated in Thames Street) still took the leading place 
 among these companies, and in 1475 obtained a 
 valuable ratification of their trading privileges. Im- 
 portant commercial treaties were made about the 
 same time with the merchants of other countries. 
 Into the ports of London, Southampton, and Bnistol 
 trading vessels from Genoa and Venice brought the 
 products of Italy, together with those of India, Egypt, 
 and other parts of the East. With Spain there 
 appears to have been no direct traffic, but its produce 
 was imported into England by means of the merchants 
 of Bruges. ‘There was, however, a direct trade with 
 Portugal of considerable importance in wine, figs, 
 raisins, and othercommodities. The capital required 
 for loans and other financial transactions, subsequent 
 
 1 «¢ Pictorial History of Engiand,” vol. i. p. 834. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 33 
 
 to the expulsion of the Jews, was usually supplied by 
 the Lombard and Tuscan merchants, some of whom 
 became large creditors to the English exchequer, and 
 were allowed to farm the customs for their security. 
 Two great Italian firms, the Bardi and Peruzzi, were 
 reduced to bankruptcy in 1345 by the inability or 
 neglect of Edward III. to repay the enormous debt 
 which he had incurred to them for the expenses of 
 the French war. 
 
 A succession of royal and princely marriages allied 
 the Plantagenet dynasty with Spain, France, Flanders, 
 Italy, and Germany in turn, and the foreign attend- 
 ants whom each bride brought in her train must 
 have formed a considerable element in the household 
 of the Court. More than one instance is recorded of 
 intermarriages between them and English subjécts, 
 and there were, doubtless, others which have escaped 
 mention. Fcreign favourites, of whom the Gascon, 
 Piers Gaveston, was a prominent example, were 
 occasionally raised to distinction by the sovereign, 
 and won the hands of wealthy English heiresses. 
 One of Edward III.’s most famous captains, Sir 
 Walter de Maunay, was a native of Hainault, and 
 probably other of his countrymen were attracted by 
 his successful career to serve under the illustrious 
 conqueror of Crecy and Poitiers. The influences 
 derived from these sources, however, scarcely proved 
 durable enough, or operated upon a sufficiently large 
 scale, to be taken into account as aids to our national 
 growth. 
 
 A stream of foreign influence still continued to 
 flow from the Papacy as the fountain of spiritual 
 
 D 
 
34 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 authority in Christendom, but its force was consider- 
 ably checked by the removal of the Papal court 
 from Rome to Avignon, which implied subordination 
 to France, and by the steady resistance of Parliament 
 to its encroachments upon the freedom of the 
 national Church. The ‘‘Lollard” movement, of which 
 Wycliff was the leader, was at the outset a revolt 
 on behalf of this freedom, though it subsequently 
 developed into a protest against Romish corruptions 
 of the faith of Christ. The rapid growth and 
 eventual suppression of this movement, as matters 
 of domestic history, do not here concern us, but its 
 memory cannot be dissociated from the great religious 
 reform of the sixteenth century, which it faintly fore- 
 shadowed. 
 
 The foreign contributions to our development 
 during the fourteenth century that chiefly call for 
 attention are those which concern the consolidation 
 and enrichment of the language and literature. 
 Although English had long since asserted its domi- 
 nance over French as the vernacular tongue, and 
 was beginning to supersede it as a written tongue, it 
 was not until past the middle of the century that this 
 was publicly recognised. In 1363 the sitting of 
 Parliament was opened by an English speech, and in 
 the previous year an Act was passed (36 Edward III. 
 cap. 15) prescribing that the pleadings in an action 
 should be argued in English instead of French, while 
 the enrolment of the proceedings was to be in Latin. 
 Sir John de Mandeville, whose “ Voiage and Travells,” 
 written in 1356, is among our earliest writings in 
 prose, translated it from the Latin, in which he first 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 35 
 
 composed it, into French, and then into English, 
 “that every man of my nation may understand it.” 
 In 1385, we are told by the chronicler Trevisa that, 
 ‘in alle the grammar scoles of Engeland children 
 leveth Frensche and construeth and lerneth on 
 Englische.” French, however, still continued to be 
 the language of the Court and the upper classes, and 
 it was employed in drawing up the Rolls of Parlia- 
 ment, as well as in private deeds and letters for more 
 than a century later. Having remained in use for so 
 long a period side by side with the popular tongue, 
 a considerable number of its words had been adopted 
 into our vocabulary, and many of its modes of pro- 
 nunciation and metrical accentuation were still in 
 vogue. This is more apparent in the literature of the 
 fourteenth than in that of the thirteenth century, 
 which contains a larger percentage of Saxon words, 
 and conforms more strictly to the alliterative method 
 of versification which prevailed before the Norman 
 Conquest. Even Lawrence Minot and William Lang- 
 lande, the most eminent of the poets who preceded 
 Gower and Chaucer, and the nearest to them in point 
 of date, show fewer traces of French influence than 
 either. The several conditions of their birth or 
 training, and the circumstances which called forth 
 the exercise of their individual powers, sufficiently 
 account for this. Minot, whose poems are in the 
 nature of brief ballad-epics, which were inspired by 
 the victories of Edward III. in his wars with France 
 and Scotland, employed a north-country dialect which 
 would scarcely have been intelligible to natives of 
 other parts of England, and may be presumed to 
 D2 
 
26 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 have written them for a provincial audience, chiefly 
 composed of soldiers drawn from the middle class. 
 Langlande, who appears to have been a priest, of 
 humble extraction, and a native of Shropshire, wrote 
 his moral and satirical allegory, the ‘‘ Visions” of 
 Piers the Ploughman, in the special interest of the 
 class who in his time (about 1362) were groaning 
 under the weight of feudal oppression. To adopt 
 the words of a recent critic, “the narrowness, the 
 misery, the monotony of the life he paints reflect 
 themselves in his verse.” ! Gower, on the other hand, 
 was of gentle birth, and possessed estates in Kent 
 and other counties, while he lived in London, and 
 was often at the Court. Hus ‘‘Speculum Amantis” 
 (now lost) and a series of “‘ Ballades” were written 
 in French, for the imperfection of which he apologises, 
 indeed, on the ground that he is “English,” but 
 justifies himself for using the language because he 
 is writing “al université. de tout le monde.” The 
 ‘‘ Ballades ” have love for their theme, and he imitated 
 the tone in which it was treated by the Provencal 
 troubadours and Norman fvouveres, whose form of 
 rhymed verse he adopted. His “Vox Clamantis,” 
 composed in Latin, is a didactic allegory, suggested 
 by the popular insurrection of 1381, which the poet 
 regards in the light of a judicial retribution for the 
 social sins of the age. Gower’s last work, the 
 ‘‘Confessio Amantis,” although written in English, 
 which he was induced to adopt by the example of 
 Chaucer, is expounded by means of a marginal Latin 
 
 1 Green’s ‘‘ Short History of the English People,” p. 249. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 37 
 
 commentary. ‘The poem appears to have been sug- 
 gested by the ‘‘ Roman de la Rose,” a popular French 
 poem. It was obviously addressed to a cultivated 
 audience, being in the form of a confession made by 
 a despairing lover to Genius, the priest of Venus, 
 whom, at his prayer, she appoints to receive it. The 
 fatal effects of each passion which the lover confesses 
 that he has experienced are illustrated by the priest 
 in a series of stories drawn from various sources, 
 including the Bible, the works of Ovid, the “ Gesta 
 Romanorum,” and many other medizval romances 
 and chronicles. The alchemical lore and scholastic 
 learning which the author had acquired are copiously 
 infused into his work. He employs the eight-syllabled, 
 rhymed couplets of the ‘‘Roman de la Rose,” and 
 a larger number of French words than Chaucer. 
 There is scarcely a trace in his verse of the alliteration 
 which is so abundant in the verse of Minot and 
 Langlande. 
 
 Chaucer, with whom Gower cannot be compared 
 in point of genius, transcended him no less in the 
 range of his culture, if he may be admitted to have 
 been inferior in learning. ‘Though sprung from the 
 burgess class, he obviously must have received a 
 scholarly education, and at an early age was admitted 
 to a post in the household of one of the royal 
 princes. After serving in the French campaign of 
 1359-60, and being taken prisoner, he was ransomed, 
 and returned home to become valet of the chamber 
 to Edward III. He was next employed in foreign 
 negotiations on behalf of the Crown, and visited 
 Genoa and Florence in 1372. In the course of this 
 
38 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 journey he is supposed to have met Petrarch, and 
 was certainly indebted to it for the acquaintance 
 which he shows with the writings of that poet, as well 
 as those of Dante and Boccaccio. He next filled the 
 office of Comptroller of the Customs in the port of 
 London ; was again employed as a royal envoy in 
 France and Italy in 1376-82; was appointed to 
 another post in the Customs in the latter year, and 
 sat as one of the knights of the shire for Kent in 
 1386. He subsequently filled the office of Clerk of 
 the King’s Works, and, though under some cloud 
 during the closing years of his life, retained the favour 
 of both Richard II. and Henry IV. as his patrons, 
 and died in 1400 within the precincts of the palace, 
 wherein it is probable that his audience chiefly resided. 
 The evidences of French culture and modes in his 
 verse cannot under these circumstances be a matter 
 for surprise ; and it is rather to be wondered at that 
 in spite of them he should have remained so pre- 
 dominantly English in the scope of his observation 
 and so uncourtierlike in the breadth of his sympathies. 
 It has been well said by his latest biographer, Mr. 
 Ward, that ‘“‘in him the mixture of Frenchman and 
 Englishman is still in a sense incomplete, as that of 
 their language is in the diction of his poems.”} 
 Among his earliest efforts was a translation of the 
 favourite French poem, the ‘‘ Roman de la Rose” of 
 Guillaume de Lorris and Jean de Meung, already re- 
 ferred to; a motley production wherein, owing to its 
 double authorship, the allegorical refinement of 
 
 1 “English Men of: Letters: Chaucer, peas: 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 39 
 
 chivalry was incongruously blended with the coarse- 
 ness of medizeval satire. Chaucer’s next important 
 poem, the “ Book of the Duchess,” a lament upon the 
 death of Blanche, the wife of John of Gaunt, Duke 
 of Lancaster, owes several of its graceful touches to 
 the French poet, Machault, whose version of Ovid’s 
 ‘¢ Metamorphoses ” appears to have been before him 
 when he preluded the dream which is the vehicle of his 
 elegy by a reference to the love-story of Ceyx and 
 Alcyone. Between the production of this and of his 
 later works, Chaucer paid his first visit to Italy, where 
 he was privileged to witness the spectacle of that 
 marvellous dawn of the Renaissance which had 
 set the genius of Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio 
 aglow. The inspiring influence of their literary 
 masterpieces is henceforth traceable in his own. 
 His “Troilus and Cressid” is founded upon the 
 ‘“‘ Filostrato ” of Boccaccio, although his version of 
 the story is considerably modified, and includes 
 ‘several remarkable reminiscences of Dante.” His 
 ‘Assembly of Foules” includes a translation from 
 Boccaccio’s “'Teseide.” In the “ House of Fame,” 
 which is apparently original in its conception, he has 
 borrowed touches from Dante and Petrarch, as well 
 as from classical sources. The “ Legend of Good 
 Women” is mainly drawn from Ovid’s ‘‘ Heroides” 
 and Boccaccio’s “De Claris Mulieribus.” His 
 greatest work, the immortal “Canterbury Tales,” 
 essentially English as it is in tone and colouring, 
 not improbably owes its plan to the ‘‘ Decamerone” 
 of Boccaccio. ‘The franklin’s, the shipman’s, and the 
 reeve’s tales are taken from that work, while the 
 
40 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 knight’s tale of Palamon and Arcite is transferred 
 from the same writer’s “Teseide,” The clerk’s tale 
 was translated from a Latin romance by Petrarch. 
 Dante’s ‘‘Inferno” was the source of the monk’s 
 tale of Ugolino and his sons. ‘The nun’s priest’s 
 tale is drawn from the “ Roman de Renart.” ‘The 
 pardoner’s tale is apparently founded upon a fabian, 
 of which an Italian version is still extant. Chaucer’s 
 own ‘Tale of Meliboeus” seems to be a_ version 
 from a French translation of another Italian original. 
 The nun’s tale is taken from the ‘‘Golden Legend” 
 of Jacobus a Voragine. ‘The parson’s tale is “ partly 
 adapted from a popular French religious manual.” 
 Some of the sources of the remaining tales have not 
 been traced, but, in the opinion of the competent 
 critic above cited,-‘“*not a single one sof these 
 tales can, with any show of reason, be ascribed 
 to Chaucer’s own invention. French literature.... 
 doubtless supplied the larger share of his materials.” 
 Besides the debt which he owed to the great Italian 
 masters for the motive and structure of so many of 
 his stories, Chaucer more than once acknowledges 
 his obligation to their thoughts and language. He 
 was indebted to both French and Italian literature 
 for his forms of verse, borrowing the eight-syllabled 
 couplet and the rhymed quatrain from the Provencal 
 and Norman poets, and the seven-lined stanza, which 
 was a special favourite with him, from the oftava 
 vima of Boccaccio, by omitting the fifth line. While 
 the syntax of his language was substantially English, 
 his idioms were often French, and he “used a 
 number of French and Gallicised Latin words not 
 
_ FOREIGN INFLUENCES. AL 
 
 found in other English writers of his time.” A con- 
 siderable number of these words were ‘in a manner 
 forced upon” him and his fellow-poet Gower by 
 ‘‘the necessities of rhyme,” in which our language 
 is notoriously poor, as compared with the French 
 and other Romance tongues. 
 
 In the department of theological literature, the in- 
 fluence of foreign thought and learning upon the 
 mind of Wycliff, the herald of the Reformation in 
 England, cannot be wholly ignored. He was master 
 of Balliol College, Oxford, when he first came forward 
 as the champion of the independence of the English 
 Church and the civil power against the autocratic 
 claims of the Papal see, and was then recognised as 
 one of the greatest schoolmen of his time. His 
 indebtedness to William de St. Amour, Ockham, 
 and other of his predecessors who inherited the 
 philosophical traditions of the Parisian university, 
 is acknowledged in one of his treatises (“ De Or- 
 dinatione Fratrum ”), and his theory of ‘ dominion,” 
 as already stated, is a bold attempt to carry Ockham’s 
 principles to their legitimate result. There is some 
 reason to think, from a reference in another of 
 his treatises (“De Triplici Vinculo Amoris”) to a 
 German translation of the Bible, which is known to 
 have existed in the fourteenth century, that he may 
 have seen acopy of it ; but it is questionable whether 
 he could have derived any assistance from it in 
 making his own translation from the Vulgate in 
 1380-3. The homely, nervous English of this work, 
 
 * Marsh, ‘‘ Lectures on the English Language,” pp. 116, II7. 
 
42 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 and of the tracts which he scattered broadcast among 
 the people, attests how thoroughly he assimilated 
 whatever culture he had imbibed. In spite of this, 
 however, the proportion of French words in his 
 vocabulary has been estimated by Mr. Marsh to be 
 as large ‘“‘as occurs in those of Chaucer’s works 
 where they are most numerous.” 
 
 Though strictly belonging to French literature, it 
 would be impossible to omit reference to the 
 Chronicle of Jean Froissart, on account of the light 
 which it throws upon our history during the four- 
 teenth century. The author was for some time 
 resident in England, where he held the appointment 
 of secretary or clerk of the chamber to Queen 
 Phillippa. 
 
 To the fifteenth century probably belong several 
 poems which were formerly attributed to Chaucer, 
 but have been assigned by recent critics, upon what 
 appears to be sufficient grounds, to a later period. 
 “The Court of Love,” “The Cuckoo samdatie 
 Nightingale,” and ‘‘The Flower and the Leaf” are 
 the most remarkable of the number, and may be 
 credited to disciples of the master who had drunk at 
 the same sources which inspired his genius. They 
 are all mystical allegories of the Provencal type of 
 poetry, and must have been written for a courtly and 
 cultivated audience, but the love of wild nature 
 which animates the writers is thoroughly in harmony 
 with English taste. John Lydgate, a monk of the 
 monastery of Bury St. Edmunds, was also a follower 
 
 1 Marsh, zd supra 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 43 
 
 of Chaucer. His “ Falls of Princes,” a poem written 
 in the seven-lined Chaucerian stanza, is founded upon 
 a French version of Boccaccio’s ‘‘ De Casibus Illus- 
 trium Virorum.” His “ Storie of Thebes” is drawn 
 from a medizeval romance based upon the ‘‘’Thebaid” 
 of Statius, and his “Troy Book” from a French 
 translation of the ‘Historia Trojana” of Guido 
 della Colonna. 
 
 Two momentous events, which render the fifteenth 
 century memorable in the history of the world, are 
 prominent among the foreign contributions to our 
 development. The invention of printing, althougha 
 few years later than the dispersion of Greek scholars 
 consequent upon the fall of Constantinople, takes 
 precedence of it, as having affected us first. The 
 use of movable types, by John Gutenberg, of 
 Mayence, dates from the year 1438 ; but the printing 
 of the Mazarin Bible, which was the crowning success 
 of his partnership with John Fust, was not com- 
 pleted until 1455. ‘Twenty years later, the invention 
 was communicated to England by William Caxton, 
 who acquired the knowledge of it at Cologne. He 
 was a native of Kent, and apprenticed to a mercer in 
 London, but spent the best part of his life in the 
 Low Countries, andheld an appointment in the service 
 of Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy, sister of Edward 
 IV. At Bruges, in 1469, he began atranslation of the 
 *‘Recuyell of the Historyes of Troye,” from the French 
 of Raoul le Fevre, and finished it at Cologne in 1471. 
 Another translation which he made from the French, 
 and entitled “The Game and Playe of the Chesse,” 
 is supposed to be the first book which he printed 
 
44 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 after his return to England in 1474, where he set up 
 his press in the Almonry of Westminster Abbey. 
 The first book which bears his zmprimatur there is 
 “The Dictes and Sayings of Philosophers,” trans- 
 lated from the French by Anthony Woodville, Lord 
 Rivers. It was followed by a series of devotional 
 manuals, romances, and legends, chiefly translated 
 from the same language, but including one (the 
 famous story of Reynard the Fox) from the German. 
 The most precious and delightful of all his publica- 
 tions, the ‘‘ Morte D’Arthur” of Sir Thomas Malory, 
 was avowedly a digest of the principal French 
 romances embodying the Arthurian legends. In the 
 existing dearth of native literature, the press continued 
 for some years longer to be fed almost exclusively by 
 versions of foreign works. 
 
 The revival of classical learning in Italy, which 
 stimulated the genius of Chaucer in the fourteenth 
 century, continued to find English sympathisers in 
 the century following. Its most influential patron 
 was Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, younger brother 
 of Henry V. One Italian scholar, Titus Livius, was 
 dignified by the title of his ‘‘court poet and orator.” 
 Another dedicated to him a translation of Aristotle’s 
 *‘ Politics,” and a third sent him a: pattialiitransia. 
 tion of Plato’s ‘‘ Republic.” Woodville, Earl Rivers, 
 and Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester, were no less eminent 
 for their culture and the munificent patronage which 
 they extended to scholars. 
 
 The introduction, however, of the study of Greek 
 literature into England was due to the efforts of 
 William Grocyn and Thomas Linacre, both of whom 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 45 
 
 had travelled in Italy and been pupils of Demetrius 
 Chalcondylas, an eminent scholar, who, after the fall 
 of Constantinople, settled as a teacher at Florence. 
 Grocyn, who was a fellow of New College and pre- 
 bendary of Lincoln, established himself at Exeter 
 College, Oxford, in 1491, as a lecturer in Greek, 
 devoting his attention chiefly to the study of Aristotle. 
 Linacre, a M.D. of the same university, after his 
 return from Florence, prosecuted his studies in the 
 interest of his profession, and put forth a translation 
 of Galen. ‘The reputation of Oxford as a nursery 
 of Greek scholarship was recognised in 1497, when 
 Erasmus came over from Paris with the special object 
 of becoming a student. Among the friends whom 
 he made during this visit were More, Colet, and 
 Fisher, who were all adepts of “‘the new learning,” 
 as it was called, and with whose names his own was 
 thenceforth illustriously associated. Colet was stimu- 
 lated by his strong devotional feeling to apply his 
 skill to an independent study of the New Testament, 
 which resulted in his partial emancipation from the 
 doctrinal yoke of Romish theology. His lectures 
 on St. Paul’s Epistles, given at Oxford in 1496, fore- 
 shadowed many of the simple and rational con- 
 ceptions of the Christian faith to which the Reformers 
 gave fuller and clearer expression a few years later. 
 The only arts which flourished in England at this 
 period were architecture, sculpture, and music, none 
 of which has left much trace of its indebtedness to 
 foreign influences. Certain exceptions, however, to 
 this rule may be found, such as the effigy of William 
 de Valence, in Westminster Abbey, made of ham- 
 
46 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 mered copper, enriched with champ-levé enamels, 
 which was probably the work of a Limoges artist. 
 
 Our obligation to the Low Countries for one great 
 branch of industry has already been recorded. To 
 Germany we are debtors for a more equivocal boon. 
 The invention of gunpowder, attributed to a German 
 chemist, Schwartz, was communicated to this country 
 in the fourteenth century, and cannon of a rude con- 
 struction were employed in the Scotch and French 
 wars of Edward III. ‘The execution which they 
 wrought at the battle of Crecy greatly contributed to 
 its victorious issue. From one of the Continental 
 states England likewise derived the use of linen 
 paper, which was an earlier invention, but did not 
 become general until the end of the fifteenth century. 
 As ancillary to printing, it materially assisted to the 
 spread of literary culture. 
 
POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 47 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Foreign influences during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries 
 from the accession of Henry VII. to the death of 
 Henry VIII. 
 
 THE accession of Henry VII. to the throne is a 
 memorable landmark in our history, not merely as 
 signalising the termination of the intestinal struggle 
 which had rent the country asunder, but as in- 
 augurating a dynasty which embodied the principal 
 racial elements of the English nation. Of pure 
 Celtic blood by his father’s side, and inheriting the 
 romantic characteristics of the Celtic temperament, 
 Henry was descended upon his mother’s side from 
 John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, whose ancestor, 
 Henry II., united in his veins the blood of the 
 Norman and of the Saxon kings. 
 
 The only incidents in this reign that call for notice 
 are the foreign alliances with Spain and Scotland, 
 which Henry effected by the marriage of his children 
 in 1501 and 1502, both of them destined to have 
 important consequences upon the future history of 
 the nation. ‘The policy of an alliance with Spain, 
 which had recently become united into a strong and 
 settled monarchy by the marriage of Ferdinand 
 of Aragon with Isabella of Castile, was dictated by 
 the hope of obtaining their friendship as a check 
 upon the power of France, together with that of the 
 
48 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Austrian Archduke Philip, who had married their 
 daughter Juana. As the Duke was ruler of the Low 
 Countries, which had descended to him from his 
 mother, Mary of Burgundy, it was not less necessary to 
 secure his aid or neutrality in the event of war with 
 France. ‘This consideration appears to have finally 
 decided Henry’s acceptance of an offer, which 
 Ferdinand and Isabella had made him a few years 
 after his accession, to give their daughter Catherine 
 in marriage to his eldest son, Arthur. When the young 
 Prince died, three months after the wedding, the 
 Spanish monarchs urged that his brother Henry, who 
 was now heir to the throne, should marry Catherine. 
 A dispensation for this breach of canonical law was 
 with some difficulty obtained from the Pope, Julius II., 
 upon assurance being given that the first marriage 
 had not been consummated. Henry’s characteristic 
 caution to avoid a false step induced him, while 
 consenting to the betrothal of his son with the 
 Infanta, to postpone their marriage, and this event 
 did not take place until after the Prince’s accession 
 to the throne as Henry VIII. 
 
 The marriage of Margaret, daughter of Henry VII., 
 with James IV. of Scotland, was memorable as con- 
 stituting the foundation of that claim to the succession 
 of the English crown which her grand-daughter, 
 Mary Stuart, subsequently employed as an engine 
 against the stability of Elizabeth’s government, and 
 which was eventually recognised by the junction of 
 the two kingdoms under one sovereign in the person 
 of James I. of England and VI. of Scotland. 
 
 The racial accessions made during this period 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 49 
 
 were few, and none of them upona large scale.! The 
 most important was the consummation of a result 
 already partly achieved. The tendency of the con- 
 quest of Wales by Edward I., and of the legislation 
 by which he secured its possession, as shown in the 
 last chapter, was to break down the barrier which had 
 existed between the purely Celtic population of the 
 principality and the predominantly ‘Teutonic in- 
 habitants of England; but the amalgamation thus 
 effected was necessarily gradual, and was greatly 
 retarded by the concession of partial independence 
 in point of Jaw and custom which Edward had wisely 
 and humanely yielded to his new subjects. The 
 practical working of this mode of local government, 
 which involved the establishment of a separate 
 exchequer and judicature and the retention of many 
 privileged districts, was attended with so much in- 
 cohvenience that its abolition was decreed in the 
 reign of Henry VIII. By a statute of 1536 the laws 
 of the Principality were assimilated to those of 
 England. The privileged lordships were disfranchised, 
 Monmouth was made an English county, and the 
 Welsh counties and boroughs were enfranchised 
 to return members to the English parliament. 
 The result of this assimilation between the laws and 
 customs of the two countries was to obliterate all 
 social distinction between Celt and Teuton, and bring 
 them into more intimate contact. ‘The accession to 
 the throne of Henry VII. had already gratified the 
 
 ' Occasional immigrations from Scotland during the reign of 
 Henry VIII. are recorded in grants of denization upon the 
 Patent Rolls of Chancery. 
 
 E 
 
OS ee 
 
 50 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 utmost ambition of his compatriots, and thenceforth 
 no avenue was closed to their success. In the 
 illustrious roll of our national statesmen, divines, 
 soldiers, and men of letters, Welshmen from this time 
 forward take equal rank with Englishmen. 
 
 The chief aids to its development which the 
 country derived from without were in the direction 
 of intellectual progress and religious reform. _ The 
 stimulus imparted by ‘‘the new learning” of the 
 Renaissance to the vigorous, earnest natures of such 
 men as Colet and More was fruitful of beneficent 
 work. Colet, who took orders and attained the rank 
 of Dean of St. Paul’s, London, devoted his fortune 
 to the foundation and endowment of a grammar- 
 school in connexion with his church, and placed at 
 its head William Lilly, one of the best Greek scholars 
 of his time. The injunctions of the founder aimed 
 at the union of rational religion with sound learning, 
 at the exclusion of the scholastic logic, and at the 
 steady diffusion of the two classical literatures.! His 
 example was followed by many wealthy and hberal- 
 minded laymen, and the number of grammar-schools 
 which sprang up during the latter part of the reign of 
 Henry VIII. is said to have exceeded those founded 
 during the three centuries previous. At both the 
 universities the study of Greek was prosecuted with 
 an enthusiasm which overcame the opposition of 
 authorities who were wedded to antiquated methods 
 of teaching. Erasmus was summoned to be its ex- 
 ponent at Cambridge, where he remained a short 
 time, and was succeeded by Latimer and Croke. At 
 
 1 Green’s ‘‘ History of the English People,” vol. ii. p. 86. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. St 
 
 Oxford, Fox, Bishop of Winchester, augmented his 
 foundation of Corpus Christi College by the addition 
 of a Greek lecture, and its study held a prominent 
 place in the curriculum of Cardinal College, which 
 was splendidly endowed by Henry’s great minister, 
 Thomas Wolsey. Fostered by the encouragement of 
 the young King, who was himself a scholar of con- 
 siderable acquirements, with a strong theological bias, 
 the new learning found a yet more influential patron in 
 Warham, the enlightened prelate who filled the see of 
 Canterbury. Under the Primate’s auspices, Erasmus 
 came over to England, and was assisted by a yearly 
 pension to prosecute his literary undertakings. His 
 edition of St. Jerome’s works was commenced during 
 his stay at Cambridge, and on its publication was 
 dedicated to the Archbishop. The frankness with 
 which the great scholar in his preface deprecated the 
 establishment of dogmas by the authority of synods 
 and councils, and advocated a return to the simplest 
 creed of Christianity as the best safeguard against 
 heresy, testified to a conviction that Warham shared 
 his belief. A yet more daring step was his production 
 of anew edition of the Greek Testament in 1516, 
 also the outcome of his labours at Cambridge. ‘In 
 itself the book was a bold defiance of theological 
 tradition. It set aside the Latin version of the 
 Vulgate which had secured universal acceptance in 
 the Church. Its method of interpretation was based, 
 not on received dogmas, but on the literal meaning of 
 the text.”! It depreciated the ecclesiastical system of 
 veiling the faith in a web of subtle mystery, which 
 1 Green’s ‘‘ History of the English People,” vol. ii. p. 95. 
 Ee 2 
 
52 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 was obscure to all but a few theologians, in favour of 
 a plain and popular diffusion of the words of Christ 
 himself, and expressed the editor’s fervent wish that 
 they might be translated into all languages, and 
 simplified to the comprehension of the poorest and 
 humblest readers. Notwithstanding its boldness, the 
 work cf Erasmus was warmly approved by Warham, 
 who lent it to one Bishop after another. ‘Two of his 
 brother-prelates, Fox, of Winchester, and Fisher, of 
 Rochester, heartily seconded his endeavours, and the 
 version was widely circulated and as eagerly dis- 
 cussed. 
 
 The serious work of reform which Erasmus had 
 at heart he further strove to aid by the instrument of 
 satire. His “ Praise of Folly,” which impartially 
 ridicules the prevalent errors and mischievous ten- 
 dencies of the age, whether arising from royal 
 ambition or ecclesiastical bigotry, the darkness of the 
 cloister or the narrowness of the schools, was written 
 in England at the house of Sir Thomas More, and 
 owes its Latin title (Moriz Encomium) to a pun 
 upon his host’s name. The “ Utopia” of More 
 (written in 1515-6), which embodied the writer’s 
 ideal of a perfect commonwealth, is animated by the 
 same spirit, and not improbably reflects some of the 
 interchanged brilliancy of thought which the com- 
 panionship of two such congenial intellects would 
 have been sure to evoke. One of the most remark- 
 able features in More’s conception is his anticipation — 
 of the principle of religious toleration, every subject 
 of his imaginary state being at liberty to choose and 
 practise any faith most agreeable to his conscience, 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 53 
 
 and to persuade others to adopt it, provided he 
 abstains from reviling his opponents. This and 
 many another dream of social reform were impossible 
 of realisation for centuries later, but no measures of 
 practical improvement were neglected which the 
 adherents of the new learning thought it possible to 
 carry. Colet was especially energetic in urging upon 
 the clergy the duty of faithfulness to their sacred pro- 
 fession, denouncing in outspoken terms, from his 
 official post at the Convocation of 1512, the “ vicious 
 and depraved lives” of many among them as more 
 fatal to Church and State than heresy, and exhorting 
 the Bishops to initiate the movement of reform by 
 working diligently in their dioceses instead of seeking 
 worldly favours at court. ‘The Dean’s earnest frank- 
 ness brought down upon him the censure of his 
 diocesan, who accused him of heresy; but he was 
 secured by the protection of Warhain and the en- 
 couragement of the young King from any serious con- 
 sequences. 
 
 While these stirrings of new life were agitating the 
 Church in England, a stronger and deeper movement 
 was convulsing it on the Continent. A reaction 
 against the spiritual blindness, intellectual tyranny, 
 and moral insensibility into which the faith of 
 Christendom had fallen under the Papacy, had long 
 been gathering strength, and, headed by such born 
 leaders of men as Luther and Calvin, the army of 
 reform began to muster in force. Luther’s violent 
 rupture with Rome took place in 1520, when, his 
 protest against the system of ‘ indulgences” having 
 been authoritatively condemned by Leo X., he boldly 
 
ae POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 flung the Bull into the fire, and proceeded to repudiate 
 the Papal authority as usurped and fictitious. It is 
 not surprising that a step so daring and uncom- 
 promising as this should at the outset have been 
 discountenanced or reprehended by those in England 
 who were most favourable to the cause of moderate 
 reformation. More, Fisher, and the adherents of the 
 new learning generally, remained steadfast to the 
 traditional faith of Catholic unity, and desired only 
 to purge it from the excrescences which were sapping 
 its vitality. Sympathy from this quarter with the 
 German and Swiss reformers, moreover, was effectually 
 checked by the hostile tone which they adopted in 
 regard to the culture and development of the intellect 
 which it was the leading aim of the Renaissance to 
 effect. Luther’s repudiation of reason as an adequate 
 basis of faith, and his inclination to substitute a new 
 system of subtle and dogmatic theology for the old 
 one which he had rejected, but with no better title to 
 be held authoritative, alienated from him the counte- 
 nance of such men as Erasmus, who had _ hitherto 
 stood his friend. The violent excesses into which 
 some of the Continental reformers were betrayed, and 
 the want of unity apparent in such divergencies of 
 belief as separated the parties of Luther and Carlstadt, 
 further tended to hinder the growth of Protestant 
 sentiment in this country. The ‘ Assertion of the 
 Seven Sacraments,” which was put forth by Henry VIIi. 
 -in answer to Luther, won for its author the Papal 
 honours of a golden Bull and the title of “‘ Defender 
 of the Faith.” The reformer’s intemperate reply to 
 this publication was followed up by counter-attacks 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 55 
 
 from More and Fisher. ‘The antagonism thus engen- 
 dered led to a final breach between the adherents of 
 the new learning in England and the Reformation, 
 but it did not check the spread of that movement 
 among a humbler class, who were content with little 
 more knowledge than sufficed for their spiritual 
 wants. The republication by Luther of Wycliff’s 
 pamphlets revived the traditions of Lollardry, which 
 had perhaps never wholly died out. 
 
 In 1526, the English translation of the New 
 Testament, published by William ‘Tyndale, realised 
 the hope of Erasmus, that the Christian Scriptures 
 might be brought within the reach and comprehen- 
 sion of poor and unlearned readers. ‘The greater 
 part of Luther’s preface to his translation, and most 
 of his marginal references and glosses, are reproduced 
 in Tyndale’s version. Printed at Cologne and Worms 
 by the aid of funds provided by English sympathisers, 
 an edition of 6,000 copies was brought over and 
 extensively circulated. The merchants of the German 
 Hanse were active propagandists of the Lutheran 
 pamphlets in London, and an English association was 
 soon formed, under the name of ‘‘Christian Brethren,” 
 for the dissemination of Protestant literature through 
 the country at large. This association had branches 
 at both the universities. At Cambridge, three leading 
 teachers, Barnes, Latimer, and Bilney, were known 
 to be in accord with the Lutheran party. At Oxford, 
 Clark and other members of Cardinal College secretly 
 held meetings for Scriptural reading and discussion. 
 Attempts were made by Wolsey to stem the move- 
 ment, both in London and Oxford; some of the 
 
56 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Hanse merchants being compelled to submit to a 
 penance at St. Paul’s, at which their Lutheran publi- 
 cations were burnt, and many of the ‘‘ Christian 
 Brethren ” at Oxford being imprisoned; but no severe 
 measures of repression were intended, either by the 
 Cardinal, who was indifferent to all but political 
 objects, or by the King, who was afraid of mischief 
 resulting to the students of the new learning. ‘The 
 circulation of Tyndale’s version was, indeed, for- 
 bidden, its use of such Lutheran terms as ‘‘ con- 
 sregation” and ‘‘elder” (in ‘place- jor y= ehuma. 
 and ‘‘priest”) procuring its condemnation even by 
 Warham and More; but so great was the demand 
 for copies that means were found to evade the 
 prohibition. 
 
 The rapid progress of ecclesiastical reform which 
 signalises the reign of Henry VIII. was brought 
 about by a conjunction of several causes, the most 
 influential of which were personal, rather than political 
 or religious, and were modified, though not called 
 into operation, by external circumstances. Foremost 
 of these personal causes was the desire of the King 
 to put away his Queen, who had borne him one 
 daughter, Mary, but no male heir, and whose claims 
 on his affection had been superseded by the attrac- 
 tions of one of her maids of honour, Anne Boleyn. 
 The doubtful legality of a marriage with his brother’s 
 widow, already adverted to, afforded a plausible 
 pretext for obtaining a divorce, but the negotiations 
 which he opened with Pope Clement VII. for this 
 purpose were doomed to failure. ‘The Pope was not 
 less hampered by-the difficulty of abrogating the 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 57 
 
 dispensation by which his predecessor had made the 
 marriage valid than by the fear of offending the 
 Emperor Charles V., who, as the nephew of Catherine 
 (viz., the son of Philip, Archduke of Austria, and her 
 sister Juana), was pledged to her cause. The unique 
 position which Charles occupied as ruler of Spain, 
 Austria, the Netherlands, Franche Comté, and Naples, 
 and titular representative of the Roman Empire, not 
 only gave him the predominant power in Italy, but a 
 commanding influence throughout Europe, where the 
 Papacy anxiously regarded him as its mainstay against 
 the increasing force of the Lutheran heresy. While 
 Wolsey remained Henry’s minister, his policy was 
 favourable to the preservation of friendly relations 
 between England and the Papacy, in spite of the 
 opposition which the Pope persistently offered to the 
 King’s wishes. But Wolsey had powerful enemies 
 abroad as well as at home, and his influence was 
 waning at the very time when it required to be strong. 
 His rapid rise from a humble origin to be successively 
 Bishop of Lincoln and Winchester, Archbishop of 
 York, Chancellor, Cardinal, and Papal Legate, his 
 towering ambition, vast wealth, and splendid pomp, 
 aroused the envy and hatred of the high-born nobles 
 whom he had displaced. Inthe part that he took in 
 the contest between Charles V. and Francis I., which, 
 occasioned by the elevation of the former to the 
 imperial throne in 1519, convulsed Europe with war, 
 Wolsey seems to have been actuated by two principal 
 motives. The first was to aggrandise Henry’s im- 
 portance, and flatter the idle dream of “recovering 
 his French inheritance,” upon which he wasted two 
 
58 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 inglorious campaigns ; the second was to procure his 
 own elevation to the Papal chair. He pushed these 
 ends by making treaties of alliance with each of the 
 rivals in turn, as their prospects of success fluctuated, 
 so as to throw the weight of England into the winning 
 scale, and rise to fortune by the help of the victor. 
 Charles and Francis, however, were alike too astute — 
 to be deceived by this policy. Henry was discredited 
 by both as an ally, and, when victory declared itself 
 on the side of Charles, his promise to support the 
 Cardinal’s candidature at the next Papal election was 
 unredeemed. ‘The intrigues with France and Rome, 
 by which the wily minister subsequently sought to 
 achieve Henry’s aim of obtaining a divorce and to 
 hold the power of Charles in check, were ultimately 
 foiled. The Pope remained obdurate, a peace was 
 concluded between Charles and Francis, and Wolsey’s 
 diplomacy was again disgraced. His unpopularity at 
 home extended from the nobles to the commons, 
 owing to the zeal with which he attempted to replenish 
 the exhausted exchequer by means of exorbitant taxes 
 and forced benevolences, which were sturdily resisted 
 by laity and clergy alike. His resentment against 
 Catherine for her consistent support of an alliance 
 between England and Spain sharpened his eagerness 
 to forward the King’s project of divorcing her, but his 
 failure to accomplish that purpose without involving 
 an absolute defiance of Papal authority, added to the 
 necessity of making a sacrifice to propitiate the 
 Emperor, with whom Henry was forced to be recon- 
 ciled, precipitated the Cardinal’s fall. 
 
 The breach thus opened between Henry and the 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 59 
 
 Papal see was resolutely kept open and widened by 
 Thomas Cromwell, who rose into power after the fall 
 of Wolsey. It is to him that the chief measures of 
 practical reform in the Church effected during the 
 reign are primarily due. In the personal character 
 and public policy of Cromwell there are traces of 
 indebtedness to foreign influences which cannot be 
 overlooked. ‘The son of an armourer at Putney, he 
 served when a youth in the Italian wars; and then 
 obtained employment as agent to a merchant at 
 Venice ; subsequently trading successfully upon his 
 own account in other parts of the Continent; and, 
 returning to spend his wealth in England, entered 
 political life in the service of Wolsey. With the 
 mastery that he had acquired of the language of 
 Italy, he absorbed many of the principles which 
 actuated the Italian statesmen of the age, of whom 
 the most famous, Machiavelli, was his favourite 
 author, and fearlessly applied them in practice as 
 opportunity offered. The concentration of civil and 
 ecclesiastical power in the hands of the Crown bya 
 gradual succession of encroachments upon the func- 
 tions of Parliament and the authority of the Papal 
 see, the ruthless extirpation of all possible claims to 
 rivalry, and the unscrupulous employment of in- 
 trigue, terrorism, and espionage as agencies to effect 
 his ends, were the prominent features of Cromwell’s 
 policy. Subversive as it temporarily was of the 
 foundations of constitutional liberty, and detestable 
 as were the means employed in its accomplishment, 
 it undoubtedly achieved the conquest of spiritual 
 tyranny of which we are still reaping the benefit. 
 
60 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Before the rupture between Henry and the Papacy 
 “was complete, the strongholds of the Church in 
 England had already been successfully assailed. 
 Upon the petition of the Commons, instigated by 
 the ministers of the Crown, a bill was brought in for 
 restricting the clergy from pluralities and lay employ- 
 ments, and diminishing the fees of the ecclesiastical 
 courts, and, notwithstanding the resistance of the 
 Bishops, it passed both Houses. The power of Con- 
 vocation was the next object of attack. In 1531 
 that body was forced to atone by a heavy fine for a 
 breach of the Statute of Provisors, which forbade 
 the procuring of Bulls from Rome, and to acknow- 
 ledge the King as ‘‘ the chief protector, the only and 
 supreme Lord and Head of the Church and Clergy 
 of England.” The effect of this acknowledgment 
 was apparent in the year following, when a petition, 
 nominally proceeding from the same body, was 
 addressed to the King that all enactments relating 
 to the Church might henceforth be made and exe- 
 cuted by his sole authority, and that the payment of 
 ‘‘first-fruits,” or the yearly proceeds of each see, 
 which a Bishop upon his election used to render to 
 the Pope, might be suspended. ‘The final refusal of 
 Clement VII., backed by the support of the Emperor, 
 to disannul Henry’s marriage with Catherine, which 
 he accompanied by a threat of excommunication un- 
 less Anne Boleyn were put away, was a virtual 
 declaration of war. Cromwell responded by the 
 passing of the Act of Supremacy, which vested all 
 ecclesiastical authority and control in the Crown, 
 reduced the spiritual courts to an equality with the 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 61 
 
 temporal, and formally declared the King to be “the 
 only supreme Head upon Earth of the Church of. 
 England.” The minister was speedily raised by 
 Henry to the post of Vicar-general in ecclesiastical 
 affairs, and proceeded to execute his function with 
 unsparing rigour. By an Act passed at his instance, 
 the Bishops, who since the reign of Edward III. had 
 been appointed by the Pope at the nomination of 
 the Crown, were henceforth to be appointed by the 
 Crown at the formal nomination of the Deans and 
 Chapters, who, however, were restricted to the par- 
 ticular candidates commended to their choice. The 
 religious houses were next attacked. A _ partial 
 suppression of the lesser monasteries had already 
 been effected by Wolsey, but a thousand still re- 
 mained undisturbed. Their absorption of vast 
 wealth and influence was not compensated by a 
 corresponding possession of culture and virtue, the 
 opposition of the monks as a body to the new learn- 
 ing and the laxity of their lives being matters of 
 common repute. The result of a general visitation 
 of the religious houses, instituted by a royal com- 
 mission, which was reported to Parliament in 1536, 
 confirmed the worst suspicions entertained of their 
 moral condition. The long neglect of that due 
 supervision over them which the Papal and diocesan 
 authorities were theoretically bound to exercise, 
 had fostered the growth of self-indulgent and disso- 
 lute habits openly at variance with the life of 
 abstinence and saintliness which was the original 
 ideal of monasticism. About a third only of the 
 number were found to be creditably conducted, the 
 
62 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 bulk being accused of gross, and in some cases 
 monstrous, immorality. After a long parliamentary 
 debate, the dissolution and confiscation of those 
 monasteries whose revenues did not amount to £200 
 a year were enacted in 1536, and this Act was 
 followed by the suppression of the remaining houses 
 ines 39. 
 
 The sweeping character of these measures, and the 
 violence and harshness with which they were often 
 executed, gave offence to the moderate reformers, 
 and provoked a partial reaction in the public mind, 
 which led to some deplorable consequences. Sir 
 Thomas More and Bishop Fisher were both sacrificed 
 to the pitiless rigour with which Cromwell strove 
 to bind individual consciences under the yoke of 
 monarchical supremacy. ‘The revolt in the northern 
 counties, known as “the Pilgrimage of Grace,” was 
 the most important of the symptoms of popular dis- 
 affection, but the determination with which it was 
 suppressed prevented their recurrence. Some of the 
 steps by which Cromwell proceeded to enforce his 
 policy of subordinating all control to that of the 
 Crown, such as ‘‘gagging” the secular clergy and 
 dictating the topics upon which they were to be 
 permitted to preach, were mischievous in themselves 
 and fatal to the cause of reformation, but other of 
 his measures could not have been more temperately 
 conceived had they been projected by Colet or More. 
 The articles of belief which in the King’s name were 
 submitted to Convocation in 1536 embodied the 
 substance of several tenets for which Luther had 
 been contending, and which many devout Catholics, 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 63 
 
 even at Rome, were willing to adopt, viz., the accept- 
 ance of justification by faith, and a modified theory 
 of transubstantiation; the reduction of the seven 
 sacraments to three, viz., baptism, penance, and 
 the mass ; the rejection of the doctrine of purgatory, 
 with its concomitants, the purchase of pardons and 
 masses for the dead; and the observance of existing 
 forms of worship. ‘The suppression of pilgrimages, 
 the diminution of holy-days, and the condemnation 
 of relics and images were successively enjoined by 
 royal proclamation. As a compensation for the 
 prohibition of Tyndale’s version of the New Testa- 
 ment, the Bishops were instructed to prepare a 
 revised translation of the Bible, and, as they delayed 
 its performance, the work was entrusted to Miles 
 Coverdale, a friend of Cranmer (who had by this 
 time succeeded Warham in the see of Canterbury), 
 and it was put forth in 1536 with the express sanction 
 of the King. It is described in the title-page as 
 “translated out of Douche (German) and Latin into 
 English.” 
 
 The Lutheran princes of Germany were now 
 engaged in securing themselves by a defensive 
 alliance against the Emperor, and Cromwell, who 
 discerned the wisdom of making common caus€ 
 with them, persuaded Henry to open negotiations with 
 that object. They were favourably received, but the 
 princes stipulated for an association on the ground 
 of principle as well as policy, and to this the King 
 was constrained to assent. The above-mentioned 
 articles of belief were the formal expression of this 
 agreement, and effect was given to them by the 
 
64 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 appointment to vacant sees of Bishops with Lutheran 
 leanings. 
 
 Notwithstanding these indications that the re- 
 formed Anglican Church was approaching a com- 
 munity of doctrine and ritual with the Lutheran 
 congregations of the Continent, the course of events 
 did not proceed much further in this direction, and 
 the eventual alliance of the Church was with the 
 Calvinistic school, which was as yet in the back- 
 ground. Meantime, the heterodox sects, which also 
 sprang into life at this revolutionary period, more 
 particularly in Germany, were not without adherents 
 and sympathisers in England. After the storming of 
 Miinster in 1535, several of the fugitive Anabaptists 
 took refuge here. ‘Two of their leading preachers, 
 Hoffmann and Niclaes, established congregations ; the 
 latter being the founder of a sect called ‘the Family 
 of Love,” which held Unitarian views. . These 
 memorials are not without interest in connexion 
 with the growth of English Nonconformity. 
 
 Except in Ireland, where the measures of doctrinal 
 and practical reform enacted by the legislature were 
 obstinately disobeyed by the bulk of the clergy and 
 the people, the changes which they effected were 
 acquiesced in by the nation as a whole, and heartily 
 approved by a considerable section of it. As 
 repeatedly happens in such crises, however, the zeal 
 of a few fanatical spirits carried them into excesses 
 which outraged the religious feeling of the moderate 
 party and provoked irritation and alarm in the minds 
 of the King and many leading members of both 
 Houses of Parliament. The violence with which 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 65 
 
 shrines and relics long sacred to popular belief were 
 despoiled and burned, the open breach of their vows 
 of celibacy by the Protestant clergy, the controversial 
 bitterness to which the promulgation of the English 
 Bible everywhere gave rise, the ribaldry of the lan- 
 guage publicly employed during the celebration of 
 the mass, and the insults offered to those who still 
 adhered to the faith and rites of their fathers, suffi- 
 ciently account for the setting-in of a reactionary 
 movement which temporarily checked the progress 
 of the Reformation. By an Act passed in 1539, in 
 spite of the utmost opposition of Cranmer, Latimer, 
 and other Bishops, six articles of belief and worship 
 were enacted to be binding upon the Church, viz., 
 transubstantiation, communion in one kind by the 
 laity, clerical celibacy, the sanctity of monastic vows, 
 private mass, and auricular confession. ‘The severest 
 penalties, culminating in death by the stake, were 
 denounced against those who denied the first doctrine 
 or infringed any of the others a second time. ‘The 
 Act was immediately put into effect, as many as 
 500 persons in London being indicted for breaches 
 of it. Bishops Latimer and Shaxton were thrown 
 into prison, and the former obliged to surrender 
 his see. 
 
 At this point, however, the tide of reaction was 
 stayed by Cromwell, whose policy was really favour- 
 able to the Protestant movement, while he desired 
 to hold it under control. He accordingly let the 
 indictments drop, restrained zealous magistrates from 
 the further prosecution of offenders against the Act, 
 and quietly set the Bishops at liberty. In a short 
 
 F 
 
66 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 time the prohibition of Protestant preaching and 
 literature practically ceased to be enforced. ‘This 
 daring exercise of his power by the great minister 
 brought upon him the suspicion of the King and the 
 hatred of the large body among the clergy to whom 
 the Protestant tenets were obnoxious. From thence- 
 forth they sided against him with the nobles, whose 
 claims to privilege he had contemptuously disregarded, 
 and whose ranks were sorely thinned by his summary 
 suppression of opposition. His defiance of these 
 combined forces was resolutely maintained to the last. 
 A Bull of excommunication and deposition was 
 promulgated by the Pope (Paul III.) against Henry, 
 in 1538, as the penalty of his contumacious in- 
 dependence. Efforts were made to induce the 
 Emperor to recognise this mandate as operative, the 
 chief mover to that end being a zealous Catholic 
 exile, Reginald Pole, younger son of Margaret, 
 Countess of Salisbury, and brother of Lord Mont- 
 acute. Cromwell’s revenge for the blow thus dealt 
 at him through his master was as decisive as it was 
 cruel. Lord Montacute and Courtenay, Marquis of 
 Exeter, both of whom were bitterly hostile to the 
 existing zég7me, were arrested upon a treasonable 
 charge, tried, and executed; the aged Countess of 
 Salisbury being at the same time attainted and im- 
 prisoned. By a second act of severity he strove to 
 terrify the leaders of the ecclesiastical party into 
 submission. In 1539, three abbots, heads of the 
 great monasteries of Reading, Glastonbury, and 
 Colchester, were accused of denying the royal 
 supremacy, and condemned to the scaffold. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 67 
 
 By obtaining the King’s formal sanction to these 
 acts, Cromwell secured his domestic policy from dis- 
 approval, but he fatally erred in a step of foreign 
 policy, taken in order to strengthen Henry’s position 
 by alliances with the Protestant party abroad. The 
 death of the King’s third wife, Jane Seymour, in 
 childbirth, afforded an opportunity of cementing such 
 an alliance by marriage. Cromwell negotiated for 
 and obtained the hand of the Princess Anne of 
 Cleves, who was a connexion of the Elector of 
 Saxony, a prominent Lutheran. Her uncomeliness 
 disgusted the king at their first meeting, but he was 
 pledged to the contract beyond recall, and the mar- 
 riage took place. Besides its personal distastefulness 
 to Henry, it failed to effect the close political union 
 which Cromwell anticipated. His ultimate aim was 
 to band the combined forces of England, France, 
 and the German princes against the Emperor, whose 
 power was the great anchor of the Papacy. But from 
 this conflict both France and the princes drew back, 
 the one from religious scruples, the other from alarm 
 at the risk which it involved. Henry thus found him- 
 self burdened with the sole responsibility of a great 
 war, and vented his wrath upon Cromwell. This 
 favourable opportunity of effecting the minister’s ruin 
 was eagerly seized by his many and powerful enemies. 
 He was immediately arrested on a charge of treason, 
 tried, and executed. The services which he rendered 
 to the Reformation were so valuable that it is im- 
 possible to dissociate his career from its history, but 
 the discredit of the tortuous courses by which he 
 pursued his end must be laid to his charge alone. 
 
 F 2 
 
68 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 The active part in the great Protestant revolt which 
 England had taken under Cromwell’s guidance, 
 ceased with his death. The attempts which, at the 
 instance of the Emperor, were made in 1541, by the 
 Papal Legate Contarini, to bring about a reconciliation 
 between the Lutheran party and the Church, and 
 favourably entertained by the Reformers Bucer and 
 Melancthon, as wellas by some of the leading German 
 princes, received the approval of Henry also, but his 
 hostile relations with the Pope rendered it impossible 
 for him to exert any mediating influence. “The con- 
 ferences held at Augsburg eventually proved abortive, 
 owing to the mutual distrust of the negotiating parties 
 as to the good faith with which their concessions 
 were accepted and to the underhand dealings of the 
 French king, Francis I., who, jealous of the increase 
 of power which would accrue to the Emperor should 
 the reconciliation be effected, professed his sympathy 
 with the Lutheran princes and the Pope in turn, and 
 discouraged each from giving way to the other. The 
 breach was soon widened beyond hope of healing by 
 the fanaticism of the dominant party in Rome, which 
 revived the persecuting spirit of the twelfth century, 
 and established the tribunal of the Inquisition. In 
 Germany, Lutheranism spread apace, the Saxon princes 
 uniting in a Protestant League, which was joined by 
 the Elector of Brandenburg and the Elector-Palatine 
 of the Rhine. Even the dominions of the Empire, 
 which hitherto had remained staunch to Catholicism, 
 became impregnated with “heresy.” The desire of 
 the Emperor to bring about a reform of the Church 
 without schism by means of a General Council, which 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 69 
 
 was held at Trent in 1545, was disappointed by the 
 result of its deliberations. The sentence which it 
 promulgated, condemning the Lutheran tenets of the 
 supreme authority of the Bible and of justification by 
 faith as heretical, closed the door to the possibility of 
 compromise. Charles, in pursuance of his pledge 
 to the Pope, threatened the Protestant League with 
 hostilities, while Henry, who was convinced by the 
 decision of the Council that he had no choice but to 
 make common cause with the Lutheran princes, 
 offered them his aid. It was not accepted, owing to 
 their distrust of his sincerity, but the steady drift of 
 his policy and of the national sentiment in the 
 direction of moderate reform continued unchanged. 
 The attempts of the extreme Catholic faction to 
 enforce the law against heresy were generally dis- 
 countenanced. English versions of the Lord’s Prayer, 
 the Creed, and the Commandments, and manuals of 
 private devotion were published by authority. By 
 an Act passed in 1545, a considerable number of 
 chantries, religious guilds, and hospitals, which had 
 hitherto escaped suppression, were condemned to the 
 fate of the monastic foundations. The close of 
 Henry’s reign was marked by the growing dominance 
 of the Court party, which favoured the extension of 
 religious reform, both in doctrine and ritual, and a 
 closer alliance with the Continental Protestants. 
 Headed by the Earl of Hertford, maternal uncle of 
 the young Prince Edward, and supported by a large 
 number of newly-created peers, who owed their rank 
 and wealth to grants of the monastic estates, this 
 party was already preparing for the share it was destined 
 
7° POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 to take in establishing the Church of England upon 
 its existing basis. 
 
 While the Continental influence most potent upon 
 the religious literature of this period was that of 
 Germany, Italy exercised a new and important in- 
 fluence upon its secular literature, especially in the 
 province. of poetry. Sir Thomas Wyatt, after a dis- 
 tinguished career as ambassador in Spain and the 
 Netherlands, devoted his leisure to the composition 
 of sonnets and lyrics, either modelled upon, or freely 
 translated from, Petrarch, Alamanni, and other Italian 
 writers. Not only the style but the structure of their 
 verse is carefully imitated in these poems, which 
 include some composed in the ¢erza rama of Dante. 
 He also wrote several dalades and rondeaux, after 
 French models. In his Italian and French studies 
 he was followed by Henry, Lord Surrey, who, however, 
 allowed himself greater liberty of choice, departing at 
 pleasure from the strict mechanism of the Petrarchian 
 sonnet, and discarding the French usage that had 
 clung to our rhymed verse since the days of Chaucer 
 of accenting the final e, which would be mute, and 
 the twin vowels zo, which would be slurred, in 
 ordinary speech. He was the first to adopt the 
 recent Italian fashion of unrhymed metre (versé sctoltz), 
 which, under the name of blank verse, has proved so 
 admirably fitted to the conditions of our language. 
 
 Minor contributions to the literature of this age 
 which were derived from foreign sources include a 
 translation of the ‘‘Chronicle of Froissart” by Lord 
 Berners, ‘“‘ Annals of the Reigns of Henry VII. and 
 Henry VIII.” by Bernard André, a French historio- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 71 
 
 grapher resident at the Court, and the Chronicle ot 
 Polydore Vergil, an Italian, who was made Arch- 
 deacon of Wells ; the two last works being in Latin. 
 Besides these may be noticed a metrical translation 
 by Alexander Barclay of a German satire, Brandt’s 
 ‘‘Navis Stultifera,” under the title of the “Ship of 
 Fools,” and the “ Pastime of Pleasure” by Stephen 
 Hawes, an allegory upon the model of the French 
 romances, first imitated by Gower and Chaucer. 
 
 The neo-classical architecture, which had long 
 prevailed in Italy, was introduced here during the 
 reign of Henry VIII. by Italian artists whom he 
 invited to enter his service. The most distinguished 
 of them were Geronimo (or Girolamo) da Treviso, a 
 painter, architect, and engineer, and Giovanni di 
 Padua, an architect whom he appointed to the 
 office of ‘‘ Deviser of His Majesty’s Buildings.” The 
 “Tudor ” modification of Gothic architecture then in 
 vogue admitted of the addition of ornament which 
 would have been incongruous with a severer style, 
 and the change which the Italians effected is first 
 apparent in the florid decoration of several important 
 buildings erected a few years subsequently to their 
 arrival, notably the palaces of Hampton Court and 
 Nonsuch and Hengrave Hall in Suffolk. An attempt 
 to carry the blending of Gothic and Classical features 
 of design still further resulted in that picturesque but 
 debased style known as Elizabethan. 
 
 The love of pictorial art, particularly of portraiture, 
 now recognised among our national characteristics, 
 first showed itself during this period. The eminent 
 Dutch painter, Jan de Mabuse, is known to have 
 
72 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 visited England during the reign of Henry VII., and 
 to have painted portraits of the royal children, among 
 other pictures. Besides Gerard Horebout, of Ghent, 
 and several Flemish artists of less note, whom 
 Henry VIII. invited here, he employed in his service 
 two Italian painters, one of whom, Bartolomeo or 
 Luca Penni, was apparently a pupil in the school of 
 Raffaelle. The most eminent, however, of the artists 
 whom he encouraged was Hans Holbein, probably a 
 native of Augsburg, to whose masterly brush we owe 
 a series of portraits which have preserved the living 
 semblance of his most illustrious contemporaries. 
 Recommended by Erasmus to his friend, Sir Thomas 
 More, Holbein in the year 1526 visited England, 
 where he attracted the King’s notice, and apartments 
 in the palace were assigned to him, together with a 
 yearly pension. His skill was so fully appreciated 
 that he found constant employment, and resided here 
 until his death in 1554. 
 
 The dignity and grace of Italian sculpture were for 
 the first time made known to untravelled Englishmen 
 by the arrival here in 1518 of the great Florentine 
 sculptor, Pietro Torrigiano, who was employed to 
 execute the splendid tomb of Henry VII. in West- 
 minster Abbey. He remained here for two or three 
 years, and other works of his hand are extant. 
 Benedetto da Rovezzano, another sculptor of Florence, 
 and Antonio Cavallari, an artist in gold, of Antwerp, 
 were employed by Cardinal Wolsey in carving and 
 gilding a magnificent sepulchral chapel at Windsor, 
 but it was left incomplete at the time of his fall. 
 
 For the vast accession made to geographical know- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 73 
 
 ledge during this period, the world was partially 
 indebted to English patronage. In March, 1496, 
 Henry VII. granted letters patent to John Cabot, 
 a mariner of Italian extraction, and his three sons 
 (of whom Sebastian became the most distinguished) 
 to navigate the eastern, western, and northern seas, 
 under the English flag, and to take possession of such 
 new countries as they should discover in his name. 
 Their first expedition started from Bristol, in May, 
 1497, and resulted in the discovery of a supposed 
 island, to which they gave the name of Prima Vista, 
 but now known as Labrador. Other voyages were 
 undertaken by the Cabots, during one of which they 
 reached the gulf of Mexico, but the King’s parsi- 
 mony prevented his taking advantage of their 
 discoveries, and they soon relinquished his service. 
 In 1517 Sebastian Cabot returned to England, and, in 
 conjunction with Sir Thomas Perte, sailed on an 
 expedition in search of a north-west passage to the 
 East, in course of which he discovered Hudson’s 
 Bay, and gave to several places on its coast English 
 names. He soon, however, transferred his services 
 to the Spanish Government, and did not revisit 
 England until the following reign. The glory of 
 having sent forth the great expeditions of Columbus, 
 Cortes, and Pizarro, which resulted in the exploration 
 and conquest of America and the West Indies, was 
 reaped by Spain, together with the sumless mineral, 
 animal, and vegetable wealth which they produced. 
 As yet England’s share of the treasure thus dis- 
 covered was limited to the gains of a few vessels 
 from the cod-fishery of Newfoundland. The deep 
 
74 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 interest which reports of the New World excited in 
 the minds of cultivated Englishmen is apparent in the 
 reference made to it by Sir Thomas More, in the 
 opening pages of his ‘‘ Utopia.” The existence and 
 character of this imaginary country he feigns to 
 have learned from the account of a mariner who had 
 been a comrade of Amerigo Vespucci. The narra- 
 tive of that navigator’s voyages was printed in 1507, 
 and More refers to it as “ now abroad in every man’s 
 hand.” The example having once been set them, 
 English mariners were eager to organise new expedi- 
 tions, and some of the most memorable discoveries 
 recorded in the annals of science were eventually 
 due to their enterprise. These, however, belong to 
 a later period, and the royal commissions which were 
 granted by Henry VII. in 1500 and 1502 to an asso- 
 ciation of Bristol merchants and Portuguese mariners, 
 ‘for the discovery and investing of unknown lands,” 
 do not appear to have produced any important 
 results. ‘The mercantile spirit was as yet more enter- 
 prising than the scientific, and several trading voyages 
 were made by west-country mariners to Guinea and 
 Brazil, from the year 1530 down to the end of the 
 reign of Henry VIII. 
 
POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 75 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Foreign influences upon political history during the sixteenth 
 century (from the accession of Edward VI. to the death of 
 Mary). 
 
 THE Reformation of religion in England continued 
 during this period to be largely indebted for its 
 development to the stimulus of foreign influences. 
 Upon the death of Henry VIII. in January, 1547, 
 the Council of Regency appointed by his will assumed 
 the reins of power in the name of the young King 
 Edward, and nominated his uncle, Lord Hertford, 
 who was created Duke of Somerset, Protector of the 
 realm. Supported by Cranmer as Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, whose sympathies with the advanced 
 Protestant party had, for some time past, been much 
 warmer than he had felt it safe to avow, Somerset 
 proceeded to exert all his influence in Parliament 
 and Convocation to effect a thorough reform of the 
 doctrine and ritual of the Church. The Bishops 
 who had favoured the recent reaction to the old 
 faith, were deprived of their sees, and their places 
 filled by trusted reformers. One after another, the 
 ordinances and prohibitions in the statute-book which 
 marked the immemorial affiliation of the Anglican 
 to the Roman Church, and the recent legislative 
 attempts at compromise, which vainly disguised the 
 definitive rupture of their communion, were swept 
 
76 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 away. The Acts repealed included those passed 
 against ‘‘ Lollardry ” and the enactment of the “Six 
 Articles.” By a royal proclamation all pictures and 
 images in churches were ordered to be removed. 
 The injunction of celibacy on the clergy was rescinded 
 by statute. Convocation agreed to a resolution, which 
 Parliament confirmed, that the administration of the 
 Lord’s Supper should henceforth be in both kinds to 
 the laity and clergy alike. Auricular confession was 
 no longer enjoined as incumbent, but might be dis- 
 pensed with at the discretion of the penitent. The 
 Latin ritual of the mass was superseded by an English 
 communion service, and the missal and breviary by 
 the Book of Common Prayer. ‘The refusal of one 
 of the newly-appointed Bishops, John Hooper (after- 
 wards martyred in the Marian persecution), to be 
 consecrated to the see of Gloucester in the canonical 
 habit was a slight but significant indication of the 
 extent to which Protestant sentiment, under the 
 influence of Calvinistic teaching, was proceeding in 
 the direction of what was soon to be known as 
 “ Puritanism.” 
 
 The progress of reform in England coincided with 
 a period of deep depression in the fortunes of the 
 Protestant cause on the Continent. The League of 
 the German princes who had embraced Lutheranism 
 had been severely shaken in the winter of 1547 by 
 the detachment of the Duke of Saxony and other 
 members, and the Emperor found himself strong 
 enough to put it “to the ban of the Empire.” The 
 princes appealed to England for aid, and a subsidy 
 was sent to them by the Council, but it arrived too 
 
fo BM LMIE 
 (INSTITUT 10 
 FOREIGN INFLUENCES. \ AULA © QW 3 
 
 TR Le RE oe SF 
 
 late. In April of the same year they were defeated 
 by the Imperial forces at Muhlberg; the Elector of 
 Saxony being made a prisoner, and the Landgrave of 
 Hesse surrendering himself. The chief Lutheran 
 towns of Germany were besieged and subdued, and 
 an era of persecution set in both there and in the 
 Netherlands which drove large numbers of Pro- 
 testants of all shades of opinion to take refuge in 
 England. Here they were warmly welcomed by 
 Cranmer and the Council, and some of the most 
 distinguished refugees were invited to fill lectureships 
 at the universities. Martin Bucer, an eminent 
 Lutheran, was thus installed at Cambridge; and 
 Peter Martyr, an Italian ex-monk, who had become 
 aconvert to the tenets of Zwingli and Calvin, was 
 appointed to a chair at Oxford. ‘Two bands of 
 fugitive Walloons settled in Canterbury and the 
 metropolis. They were permitted to meet for the 
 celebration of divine service in their own tongue ; 
 and, in London, the church of the Austin Friars, in 
 Broad Street, was assigned for their use, in common 
 with the Huguenot refugees. Fresh immigrations of 
 the latter kept on occurring from time to time, until 
 their numbers became so large that a second church 
 was required for their accommodation, and that of 
 St. Anthony’s Hospital, in Threadneedle Street, was 
 appropriated for the purpose. A learned Pole, named 
 John a’Lasco, nephew of the Archbishop of Posen, 
 who had been driven to exile in England on account 
 of his Protestant zeal, was appointed by the King 
 superintendent of the refugee churches. 
 
 The suppression of the remaining chantries, guilds, 
 
78 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 chapels, and hospitals, which was effected by an Act 
 passed in the first year of Edward VI., completed 
 the work of demolition commenced by Cromwell. 
 The more difficult task of rebuilding the ecclesiastical 
 edifice was, at the same time, zealously prosecuted. 
 Cranmer, who took the foremost part in it, had now 
 definitively adopted the theological system of Calvin, 
 which is unmistakably impressed upon the formu- 
 laries put forth under his direction. The issue of a 
 new Catechism and a Book of Homilies was followed 
 by the publication of a revised Prayer-book, and the 
 compilation of forty-two “ Articles of Religion,” sub- 
 sequently reduced to the existing number of thirty- 
 nine. The “Confessions” of faith now in course of 
 preparation by the German Protestants, in anticipation 
 of a General Council of Christendom which it was 
 the intention of the Emperor to assemble, probably 
 suggested the form of these Articles. The clear ex-: 
 pression of hostility to the Roman doctrine of the 
 mass which these embodied was rendered more 
 emphatic by the proclamation of an order for re- 
 placing the stone altars, which still remained in most 
 churches, by tables of wood. Subscription to the 
 Articles and the use of the - new liturgy eawere 
 enforced upon all the clergy and parish officers,. 
 default of attendance at public worship being punish- 
 able by imprisonment. A portion of the spoil of the 
 dissolved monasteries and chantries was appropriated 
 to the foundation and endowment of grammar-schools, 
 of which eighteen date their origin from this period. 
 Unhappily, the rapidity with which these measures 
 were passed occasioned a feeling of unsettlement in 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 79° 
 
 the public mind, which deprived them of stability. 
 The licence which so often accompanies the recovery 
 of freedom showed itself in many lamentable ex- 
 cesses by fanatical Protestants, which were fatal to 
 the preservation of order in the Reformed Church, 
 and shocked the religious sensibilities: of those still 
 attached to the old faith. The abuse of their newly- 
 acquired power by the landowners who had _pur- 
 chased the estates of the monasteries, more par- 
 ticularly in enclosing commons and open fields, 
 provoked serious discontent throughout the country, 
 and an unconcealed desire in many quarters fora 
 return to the former 7égzme. These causes of trouble 
 were aggravated by the political misgovernment of 
 Somerset, who had embarked the nation in a war 
 with Scotland which was barren of any advantage 
 beyond the winning of one inglorious victory, and 
 entailed the serious consequence of a war with 
 France and the loss of Boulogne, one of the last 
 remnants of its French dominions left to England. 
 A succession of popular revolts broke out in various 
 counties, which were severely suppressed by the Earl 
 of Warwick, to whom the executive government was 
 entrusted by the Council, and who, upon the fall of 
 the Protector, was appointed to his office, but without 
 succeeding better in reconciling the nation to the 
 permanence of the new order of things. An attempt 
 on the part of the young King to force his half-sister, 
 Mary, who was a rigid Catholic, to accept the 
 reformed ritual, was met by her determined re- 
 sistance and a menacing remonstrance on the part 
 of her cousin, the Emperor. Danger of interference 
 
80 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 from this quarter was, indeed, soon at an end, for, 
 early in 1552, the Duke of Saxony, whose secession 
 had broken up the League of the Lutheran princes, 
 suddenly renewed his connexion with it, and turned 
 upon his imperial ally with an overwhelming force. 
 On the eve of presiding over a new Council in Trent, 
 to which the Lutheran states were summoned to 
 send delegates, Charles was obliged to escape for his 
 life, and eventually to sign a treaty at Passau, whereby 
 the German Protestants were established in the pos- 
 session of religious liberty and political privileges as 
 members of the Empire. Had the ministers who 
 then governed England in the young King’s name 
 taken advantage of this crisis to pacify the nation 
 with a wise and tolerant policy, the public sense of 
 security at home and abroad might have averted the 
 reaction which ensued. Intent, however, it would 
 seem, upon securing power and wealth for them- 
 selves, rather than the triumph of the cause which 
 they represented, the leading members of the Council 
 persisted in a course of misrule and aggrandisement. 
 The precarious state of Edward’s health causing 
 grave apprehensions of a speedy demise of the 
 Crown, he was persuaded by his chief advisers, Lord 
 Warwick (now Duke of Northumberland) and the 
 Duke of Suffolk,—notwithstanding the remonstrances 
 of Cranmer and of the bench of Judges,—to set 
 aside his legitimate successor, Mary, in favour of his 
 cousin, Lady Jane Grey, Suffolk’s eldest daughter, 
 who was married immediately to Northumberland’s 
 son, Lord Guildford Dudley. 
 
 Two months afterward the apparent success of this 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 8x 
 
 intrigue was consummated by the King’s death, and 
 Jane was proclaimed Queen by the Council. The 
 illegality of her title, however, was clearly recognised 
 by the people, and a reaction set in, of which Mary 
 and her adherents promptly took advantage. A rising 
 in the eastern counties in support of her cause, 
 which Northumberland marched to suppress, was 
 followed by the adhesion of the troops levied in other 
 counties, as well as of the fleet. The Duke, in his 
 absence, was deserted by his colleagues in the Council, 
 who proclaimed Mary Queen, and her accession to 
 the throne was hailed by the acclamations of all but 
 the Protestant party, who still constituted the minority 
 of the nation. 
 
 One of the Queen’s earliest public utterances 
 assured her subjects that, although herself ‘‘ stayed 
 in matters of religion, she meant not to compel or 
 strain men’s consciences,” or use other than spiritual 
 agencies for their conversion. Her first measures 
 were calculated to confirm the impression generally 
 entertained that she desired to recur to the modicum 
 of religious reform which had satisfied her father 
 and received the sanction of Parliament during the 
 closing years of his reign. His minister, Bishop 
 Gardiner, who had been sent to the Tower under the 
 Protectorate, was installed as her Chancellor, and 
 other Bishops who had been deposed with him were 
 restored to their sees. The most zealous of the 
 Protestant Bishops who had dispossessed them were 
 alone imprisoned, the rest being simply superseded. 
 The laws passed during the last reign for the reform 
 of the liturgy were repealed by Parliament, and the 
 
 G 
 
$2 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 service used in the last year of Henry VIII. was. 
 ordered to be restored. Married priests were forbidden 
 to hold the cure of souls, and the foreign refugees 
 ordered to quit the country. Northumberland paid 
 the penalty of his treason on the scaffold. His inno- 
 cent tools, Lady Jane Grey, her husband, and two 
 other of the Duke’s sons were tried on the same 
 charge, together with Cranmer, who had incurred it 
 by publicly avowing his determination not to abandon 
 the Reformed faith ; but, on their pleading guilty, the 
 recorded sentence of death was not carried into 
 effect. This preliminary moderation was dictated to 
 Mary by the counsels of the Emperor, who gauged 
 more accurately than she herself did the inclinations 
 of the national mind. Her fanatical attachment to 
 the old faith and the purpose which she cherished 
 of re-establishing it throughout her dominions were ~ 
 soon apparent. Against the advice of her Chancellor, 
 she selected for her husband her cousin, Philip, King 
 of Spain, the Emperor’s eldest son, whose religious 
 belief she knew to be as rigid as her own. Eagerly 
 assenting to this proposal, the Emperor promised to 
 settle the Netherlands upon the issue of the union. 
 The rermonstrances of Parliament against her intended 
 marriage were without avail; the only concession 
 which she agreed to make being an undertaking that 
 England should not be called upon to take part in 
 any Continental war to which the exigencies of 
 Imperial policy might hereafter give rise. 
 
 The Protestant party at once recognised the fatal 
 significance of the marriage, and rose in rebellion, 
 with the avowed object of rescuing Mary from mis- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 83 
 
 chievous councillors, but the real intention of placing 
 either Lady Jane Grey or the Princess Elizabeth 
 upon the throne. Three simultaneous outbreaks were 
 planned: one in the midland counties, headed by 
 the Duke of Suffolk ; another in the west, under Sir 
 Peter Carew; and the third in Kent, under Sir 
 Thomas Wyatt, son of the poet. The two former 
 speedily collapsed; but the force at the head of 
 which Wyatt marched upon the capital was largely 
 recruited by deserters from the royal standard, and 
 had not the citizens remained faithful to their alle- 
 giance, would have achieved success. An appeal by 
 the Queen to the loyalty of the Corporation, coupled 
 with the promise that she would submit the question 
 of her marriage to the judgment of Parliament, 
 secured the city gates against the rebels.. Wyatt’s 
 force melted away; he was seized and sent to the 
 Tower. The Queen signalised her triumph by sending 
 to the scaffold not only the leaders of the rebellion 
 and their adherents, but the victims whom she had 
 hitherto spared, Lady Jane Grey, with her husband 
 and father. Elizabeth was sent to the Tower on sus- 
 picion of treasonable designs, and narrowly escaped 
 death. Many prominent members of the Protestant 
 party sought refuge over sea. Ata general election 
 of Parliament, the Court succeeded in returning a 
 majority of members, who pledged themselves to 
 vote for the Spanish marriage, and with the con- 
 sent of both Houses the nuptials were celebrated in 
 July, 1554. 
 
 The characteristics which eventually rendered 
 Philip exceptionally odious to the English nation did 
 
 G 2 
 
84 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 not fully develop themselves during his residence in 
 England as King-consort, and his influence over the 
 Queen, although actuated by merely selfish interests, 
 tended rather to moderate than to inflame her 
 fanaticism. Both were of one mind in aiming at 
 the re-establishment of the Catholic faith; and among 
 the first steps which they took after their marriage 
 was to reconcile England to the Papal see by 
 obtaining the repeal of the Act of Supremacy. At 
 the instance of the Emperor, the reigning Pope, 
 Julius III., had consented to rest satisfied with this 
 token of submission, without insisting upon the sur- 
 render by the landowners of the estates of the 
 Church. Cardinal Pole was despatched as Legate, to 
 accept the homage of Parliament in the name of the 
 nation, and absolve it from its guilt upon these 
 terms. By dint of extreme pressure upon the Com- 
 mons and of lavish gifts to the Peers, the Houses 
 were induced to agree to the conditions prescribed, 
 and the obnoxious statutes were repealed. They 
 further assented, by the special desire of the Queen, 
 to re-enact the statute against Lollardry; but stood 
 firm in refusing to pass the Acts submitted to them 
 for excluding Elizabeth from the throne in the event 
 of Mary’s dying childless, or for postponing her suc- 
 cession until after the death of Philip. The morbid 
 intolerance that dominated the Queen’s mind, and 
 which the counsels both of her husband and his 
 father were unavailing to restrain, showed itself in 
 her eagerness to put the statute against heresy into 
 execution as soon as it was re-enacted. She was 
 persuaded to defer her purpose for a time ; but, pro- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 85 
 
 voked by the defiant attitude of the extreme Pro- 
 testant party, which vented its intemperate zeal in 
 seditious publications and acts of ribald profanity, 
 she commenced, in 1555, that course of ruthless per- 
 secution which has made her name a byword. 
 
 It would transcend the limits of this sketch to 
 narrate the ghastly incidents of the martyrdom which 
 the Reformed Church passed through. ‘That perse- 
 cution, instead of destroying the seeds of liberty, 
 only scattered them more widely and made them take 
 deeper root. The fervid heroism and constancy with 
 which aged men like Latimer and Ridley and boys 
 like William Brown underwent the terrible sufferings 
 of the stake aroused the sympathies and changed the 
 convictions of thousands who had hitherto sided with 
 the Catholic party. Large bodies of Protestant 
 fugitives who found shelter with their co-religionists 
 in Germany, France, and Switzerland, attained during 
 exile a firmer grasp of the principles of their faith 
 than they had held at home. Even the violent and 
 scurrilous manifestations of popular feeling against 
 the mass, which had immediately provoked the 
 persecution, were not restrained by terror, but broke 
 forth in new forms. Undeterred by pity or fear, the 
 Queen persisted in her course, but her attempt to 
 subject the political constitution of the kingdom to 
 Papal control was unexpectedly checked. — Before 
 the formal submission of Parliament to the Holy See, 
 which Cardinal Pole had accepted in his capacity of 
 Legate, could be carried to Rome, Julius III. died. 
 Cardinal Caraffa, who succeeded him as Pope by the 
 title of Paul IV., represented the fanatical Catholics, 
 
86 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 who had been stimulated by the success of the 
 Reformation into organising a “ counter-reformation,” 
 of which the Inquisition and the Society of Jesus 
 were the most powerful instruments. Animated by 
 the spirit of Gregory LV., he repudiated, as insulting to 
 the dignity of the Holy See, the compromise to which 
 the Legate had agreed, and insisted that the English 
 landowners should surrender the estates which they 
 had wrested from the Church as the sole condition ot 
 his absolution. The Queen, in obedience to this fiat, 
 essayed to bring the Houses to assent to the condition 
 proposed, but in vain. It was with the utmost diffi- 
 culty that she succeeded in carrying an Act for 
 restoring to the Church the first-fruits which had been 
 alienated by her father to the Crown. An attempt to 
 enforce upon the lords the surrender of their estates 
 would assuredly have precipitated a revolution. All 
 that she could effect by way of satisfying the Papal 
 demand was to refound one or two of the suppressed 
 monastic bodies, and re-endow them with such of 
 their former possessions as were still in the hands of 
 the Crown. 
 
 The unconcealed hostility which the Queen’s perse- 
 cutions excited in the public mind culminated when 
 Archbishop Cranmer was brought to the stake in 
 March, 1556. The failure of moral courage which led 
 him to recant his real convictions when the sentence 
 of death was passed was atoned for by the manli- 
 ness of his final renunciation, and the dramatic cir- 
 cumstances of his martyrdom left a deep impression 
 upon the memory of his generation. From this time 
 to the end of her reign the nation silently bu 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 87 
 
 effectually revolted from Mary’s rule, and built its 
 hopes upon the speedy succession of hersister. The 
 popular hatred was fed by the violent denunciations 
 of the Protestant exiles who now formed large bodies 
 in different parts of the Continent. Books and 
 pamphlets from the pens of several eminent divines, 
 including Poinet, ex-Bishop of Winchester, and Bale, 
 ex-Bishop of Ossory, were sent over to England 
 and widely disseminated, which urged the duties of 
 rebellion against the Government and of putting the 
 Queen to death as a blood-stained tyrant. These 
 diatribes were echoed from Scotland, where the 
 Reformed faith had early taken firm root, and under 
 the earnest tendance of John Knox was already 
 developing a vigorous growth. One of his most 
 powerful writings was entitled “ The First Blast of 
 the Trumpet against the Monstrous Regiment of 
 Women,” which held Mary up to public execration as 
 a Jezebel for whom a day of vengeance was appointed 
 in the counsels of the Eternal. The ‘‘ Covenant” of 
 the Protestant party against “Anti-Christ,” “ tyranny,” 
 and “idolatry,” which was drawn up at his instance 
 in 1557, was signed by several influential Scotch 
 nobles. The bold stand which they made against the 
 Queen-mother, Mary of Guise, who then governed 
 the country as Regent during the minority of the 
 young Queen (Mary Stuart), not only frustrated her 
 attempts at persecution, but operated as a menace to 
 the English Queen, whom it obliged to guard against 
 the risk of invasion. The alienation of national 
 sympathy which Mary’s religious bigotry had en- 
 gendered was rendered absolute by the disastrous 
 
88 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 result of the political complications entailed by her 
 Spanish marriage. Regardless of the positive pledge 
 given to Parliament, as the condition of its assent 
 tothe union, that England should not be drawn into 
 any Continental wars which Philip might be obliged 
 to undertake, the Queen, at his pressing instance, 
 submitted to her Council in 1557 a proposal to 
 furnish him with military aid in the war which he 
 was then waging with France. The King himself, 
 who had been called away from England to superin- 
 tend the vast territories which his father ceded to him 
 in 1555, returned for the purpose of urging this 
 demand in person. By dint of his influence and of 
 the irritation occasioned by an incursion into York- 
 shire of a band of refugees whom the French had 
 sheltered, the scruples of Mary’s advisers were over- 
 come ; war was declared against France, and a strong 
 military and naval force despatched to the aid of 
 Philip. A temporary success of the English troops 
 in Flanders was followed by a defeat of the fleet in 
 the Orkneys, and the surrender of Calais and Guisnes, 
 the last French possessions which England retained. 
 This calamity, which the Queen, in common with her 
 subjects, took sorely to heart, was partially retrieved 
 by a naval victory off Gravelines, the glory of which 
 was chiefly due to the English contingent ; but the 
 nation was too much disheartened to contribute either 
 men or money towards the further prosecution of the 
 war, 
 
 The ardent hope which Mary cherished of having 
 an heir to succeed to her throne was doomed to 
 repeated disappointment, and when it became obvious 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 89 
 
 that she would die childless, the close captivity in 
 which her sister Elizabeth had been kept since the 
 collapse of Wyatt’s rebellion was somewhat relaxed. 
 For some time her life had been in danger, but the 
 affection with which she was regarded by the people 
 operated as a safeguard which the Queen did not 
 dare to violate. For political reasons, moreover, 
 Philip was interested in keeping her alive, as the 
 succession after her death would fall to Mary Stuart, 
 who was betrothed to the French Dauphin. While 
 he remained in England, his influence was accordingly 
 exerted to secure such favour for Elizabeth as the 
 Queen could be induced to concede, and on embark- 
 ing for the Continent he left written instructions to 
 insure her protection. 
 
 During the last year of Mary’s reign, Elizabeth was 
 surrounded in her retirement at Hatfield by a group 
 of distinguished men, who, holding aloof from a 
 government with whose political and religious aims 
 they had no sympathy, looked forward to the advent 
 of a new zégime with her accession. William Cecil, 
 the most prominent figure in this circle, was already 
 selected as the adviser upon whom she chiefly relied. 
 
 The influences to which the large bodies of 
 Protestant exiles who had fled from Mary’s perse- 
 cution were subjected during their residence in 
 different parts of the Continent contributed to mould 
 the form which religious controversy in England 
 subsequently assumed. Both in Switzerland and on 
 the Rhine the exiles were brought into direct contact 
 with the churches founded by Calvin and his leading 
 adherents. ‘The sympathies of the extreme school of 
 
go POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 English Protestants had long been tending in their 
 
 direction, and the consequence of this contact was 
 to accentuate the difference between them and those 
 who desired to retain in the Reformed Anglican 
 Church as much of the doctrine, the ritual, and the 
 ecclesiastical system of Rome as was consonant with 
 Scriptural Christianity. The democratic theory of 
 church-government which Calvin substituted for the 
 Roman dogma of Catholic unity, the realistic plain- 
 ness of his teaching on the subject of the sacrament, 
 as distinguished from the half-mystical tenet of con- 
 substantiation to which the Lutheran churches ad- 
 hered, and the rigid simplicity of his mode of worship, 
 which discarded the ceremonial that had become 
 associated with superstition, appealed to the mind 
 and conscience of this school as the ideal of Christian 
 faith. Divergences of sentiment upon these questions 
 separated one band of exiles from another, and were 
 aggravated by intemperate zeal into bitter dissensions. 
 At Frankfort, one body, headed by Whittingham, 
 afterwards Dean of Durham, set up a church in close 
 imitation of the Calvinistic pattern at Geneva, and 
 invited other bodies which had settled at Zurich and 
 Strassburg to become members of their congregation. 
 
 These invitations were refused on the ground that an 
 abandonment of “the order last taken in the Church 
 of England” (2.e., according to the reformed system 
 of Edward VI.) was impossible. The Frankfort 
 exiles, thus left to themselves, at the instance of 
 Knox, who was elected as their minister, proceeded 
 to the length of omitting the communion service 
 altogether ; but, having been joined by a fresh band of 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. QI 
 
 English refugees, who preferred the Anglican mode 
 of worship, the extreme Calvinists were in a minority, 
 and, after the departure of Knox, who was banished 
 from the town by the magistrates, on account of a 
 violent attack which he had made upon the Emperor, 
 the English ritual was resumed. The extreme party, 
 headed by Whittingham, thereupon seceded, and 
 founded new congregations at Basle and Geneva. 
 The nickname which one of their opponents gave 
 them of ‘‘the Church of the Purity” is conjectured 
 to have originated ‘their later name of Puritans.” ! 
 
 The term of Protestant exile was drawing to a 
 close when these contentions occurred. Persisting 
 to the end in her relentless persecution of heresy, 
 but unable to fulfil her fervent desire of reconciling 
 England to the Pope, who maintained his claim for 
 the restitution of the Church lands; unloved by her 
 husband, and childless ; alienated from her subjects, 
 who longed for her sister’s succession ; and robbed of 
 “the chief jewel of her realm,” Calais, for the re- 
 covery of which she vainly negotiated with France, 
 Mary experienced during the last year of her reign 
 the misery of disappointment and chagrin. Her 
 health failed, and she was carried off by fever in 
 November, 1558. 
 
 ' Green’s ‘‘ History of the English People,” vol. ii. p. 282. 
 
92 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 CHAPTER. V. 
 
 Foreign influences upon political history during the reign of 
 Elizabeth. 
 
 THE enthusiasm with which the accession of Elizabeth 
 was welcomed by the Protestants was somewhat 
 checked by her cautious procedure in dealing with 
 the subject of religion. Beyond releasing such per- 
 sons as were imprisoned for heresy and putting an 
 end to the horrors of the stake, she took no 
 immediate steps to change the system which Mary 
 had established. The mass continued to be cele- 
 brated and the Queen regularly attended at it, while 
 a proclamation against unlicensed preaching restrained 
 the revival of controversy. Her mental indifference 
 to the questions at issue between the two great parties 
 partly accounted for this caution, but it was mainly 
 due to her political difficulties. The result of Mary’s 
 Spanish marriage had been to entangle the kingdom 
 in a dangerous alliance with Spain and a disastrous 
 war with France. The treasury was almost exhausted 
 by the expenses of the campaign and the restitution 
 of the Church lands. A claim to the English throne 
 had been asserted by Mary Stuart, the young Queen 
 of Scotland, on her recent marriage with the Dauphin 
 of France, and the virtual union of those two coun- 
 tries under one rule exposed England to the double 
 risk of invasion, which neither army nor fleet was 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 93 
 
 available to resist. For Elizabeth to have declared 
 herself definitely upon the Protestant side would 
 have been to alienate her Catholic subjects and incur 
 the hostility of their foreign champions. These 
 considerations dictated the friendly tone of her 
 earliest relations with Philip, who on his part found 
 it his interest to support her against France and 
 Scotland. He even made her a proposal of marriage, 
 but did not urge it when declined, and instructed his 
 ambassadors to support her in the negotiations for 
 the recovery of Calais. The same circumspection 
 prompted the Queen to announce her accession to 
 the Pope (Paul IV.), but the answer which he returned 
 put an end to further overtures of conciliation. He 
 rebuked her for disregarding the decree of his pre- 
 decessor, which had affirmed her illegitimacy, and 
 called upon her to submit her title to his decision. 
 To comply would not only have impeached her 
 mother’s honour and her own, but have subjected 
 the country to a yoke which it had repeatedly thrown 
 off. No alternative was open to Elizabeth but an 
 appeal to Parliament. It responded by declaring her 
 legitimate and establishing her title, which involved 
 a denial of the Papal supremacy and affirmed her 
 own. A bill for repealing the Acts of Mary’s Par- 
 liament and restoring the spiritual jurisdiction of 
 the Crown was accordingly introduced, and though 
 opposed by the Bishops unanimously and by a large 
 body of the Commons, was eventually carried. 
 
 In March, 1559, the negotiations with France 
 resulted in a treaty, signed at Cateau Cambresis, 
 whereby Calais was to be retained in French 
 
Odin POSF NORMAN ERITAIN. 
 
 possession for eight years, and then restored to 
 England, peace being meantime maintained. This 
 relief from the immediate fear of invasion emboldened 
 the Queen and her advisers to make a further con- 
 cession to Protestant feeling. ‘The English prayer- 
 book of Edward VI., with certain modifications, was 
 submitted to the Bishops for discussion, and on their 
 refusal to sanction its use, an Act to enforce it upon 
 the clergy passed both Houses. Beyond this point 
 Elizabeth had no inclination to proceed. She dropped 
 the title of ‘Head of the Church,” and to the-last 
 was desirous to retain the crucifix in churches and to 
 prohibit priests from wedlock. In putting the Act 
 of Supremacy in force she showed reluctance to take 
 extreme measures. The Bishops and other dignitaries 
 who refused the oath were deprived and imprisoned, 
 but few of the parochial clergy who disregarded the 
 summons to take it were punished. For some years 
 after her accession the same system of toleration was 
 pursued. The result was a provisional state of 
 ‘“‘religious chaos,” which slowly settled into order. 
 The position which Elizabeth, within a few years 
 after her accession, definitely assumed as the ruler 
 of a great Protestant state was not of her own seek- 
 ing, but forced upon her by the pressure of foreign 
 influences. The shadowy claim to the English throne 
 preferred by Mary Stuart at the time of her marriage 
 with the Dauphin, and reserved on their behalf in the 
 treaty of Cateau Cambresis, suddenly acquired a 
 menacing aspect by the arrival in Scotland of French 
 troops, avowedly sent to aid the Queen-regent (Mary 
 of Guise) against the Protestant lords who had signed 
 
_ FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 95 
 
 the “ Covenant,” but actually the advanced guard of 
 an army of occupation. Although only suspected at 
 the time, the truth eventually came to light that a 
 few days before her marriage Mary Stuart had made 
 over the kingdom of Scotland to France by a solemn 
 compact. The Protestant lords, already driven into 
 rebellion by the attempt of the Regent to proscribe 
 their preachers of the Reformed faith, were incensed 
 by this invasion into declaring open war, but, defeated 
 in an assault upon the French entrenchments at 
 Leith, they appealed to Elizabeth for help. Acting 
 upon her own conviction of the exigencies of the 
 situation, she responded in January, 1560, by sending 
 a fleet into the Forth. By a subsequent treaty with 
 the lords, she undertook to aid them in expelling 
 the French, and despatched a force of 8,000 men to 
 besiege Leith. The English ambassador in France 
 was at the same time instructed to encourage the 
 resistance which the Huguenots (who had adopted 
 the Protestantism of Calvin) were maintaining, under 
 the leadership of the Bourbon family, against the 
 intolerance of Francis II. and his adviser, the Duke 
 of Guise. 
 
 Having failed in an attack upon the town, the 
 English commander was instructed to reduce it by 
 famine. The siege had lasted some months when the 
 Queen-regent died, and her authority passed into the 
 hands of Francis and Mary. The exhausted condition 
 of the town obliged the French envoys to make one 
 treaty with the lords, whereby they undertook to 
 withdraw their troops and entrust the government of 
 Scotland to a national council, and a second treaty 
 
96 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 with the English ambassador, which admitted the 
 title of. Elizabeth to the throne of England and 
 Ireland. Francis and Mary, indeed, repudiated both 
 treaties when presented for confirmation, and de- 
 nounced as rebellious the proceedings of the 
 Protestant Parliament at Edinburgh, which adopted 
 the Genevan confession of faith as the religion of 
 Scotland, abolished episcopal jurisdiction, and for- 
 bade the worship of the mass. But the domestic 
 dangers of France were too serious to allow of any 
 troops being spared to coerce the Scots, and Francis 
 was forced to content himself with threats until his 
 sudden death put an end to the possibility of execut- 
 ing them. The government of France, passing by 
 this event into the hands of the Queen-mother 
 Catherine de’ Medici (as regent for her son, Charles 
 IX.), whose policy, like that of Elizabeth, inclined to 
 toleration, the risk of French interference in Scotland 
 was for the time removed. 
 
 Encouraged by this security, Elizabeth ventured, 
 in 1561, upon another act which emphasised her 
 acceptance of Protestantism as the State religion. A 
 new Pope was now on the throne (Pius IV.), who, of 
 less exacting temper than his predecessors, made a 
 last effort to heal the schism of the Church by 
 re-summoning the Council of Trent, which he invited 
 the Lutheran princes of Germany to attend, and 
 despatched another Legate to Elizabeth with a similar 
 invitation. Following the example of the German 
 princes, who had already declined the proposal, 
 Elizabeth refused to be represented at a Council in 
 the freedom of whose decision she had no confidence. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 97 
 
 Her refusal convinced the Pope that all hope of 
 restoring England to the Roman Catholic fold. must 
 be abandoned. 
 
 The antagonism of the foreign forces thus shown 
 in action—on the one hand, Rome’s uncompromising 
 assertion of spiritual supremacy, the rivalry of the 
 Scottish Queen, and the interested friendship or the 
 avowed hostility of the Spanish King; on the other 
 hand, the claims of the Continental Protestants to 
 sympathy and alliance,—combined, throughout the 
 remainder of Elizabeth’s reign, to exert an important 
 influence upon the political and religious development 
 of England. 
 
 The danger which Elizabeth discerned in the 
 rivalry of Mary Stuart was intensified in August, 1561, 
 by the return of the latter to Scotland. Under a 
 girlish grace and winsome beauty which won all 
 hearts, and an apparent absorption in frivolous 
 pleasures, Mary concealed an astute statecraft and a 
 cool courage unrestrained by moral scruples. As 
 keenly alive to the difficulties of her own position as 
 to those which surrounded her rival, she set herself to 
 undo the alliance which Elizabeth had established 
 between the Protestantism of England and Scotland, 
 and shake the stability of her rule by fomenting 
 disaffection among the English Catholics. Her first 
 step was to conciliate her Protestant subjects by 
 pretending to accept the religious changes which had 
 been already effected (although still withholding legal 
 confirmation of them) ; claiming only for herself and 
 her French retinue the liberty of worshipping after 
 the Catholic fashion. While thus deluding her sub- 
 
 H 
 
98 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 jects, she was secretly assuring the Pope of her 
 purpose to restore Catholicism both in Scotland and 
 England, and negotiating with Philip for the hand of 
 his son, Don Carlos, to bring about this result. 
 Against Mary’s shafts of fascination and cunning, 
 Elizabeth could only oppose her old policy of patient 
 compromise and watchful self-defence. She would 
 neither assent to recognise Mary as a successor, which 
 would have alienated the Protestant party, nor to set 
 her claims aside by fixing upon another Protestant 
 cousin, for fear of exciting the Catholics into rebellion. 
 The same caution dictated her coquettish treatment 
 of the suitors for her own hand, whose hopes of 
 success she alternately flattered, without definitely 
 pledging herself to either the Catholic Archduke of 
 Austria or the Protéstant Earl of Leicester. The 
 danger of her position was increased by the dis- 
 organised condition of the French Huguenots, upon 
 whose co-operation she had relied. Confident in 
 their growing numbers and the tolerant policy of 
 Catherine, they preferred demands which alarmed 
 Philip, who apprehended that the success of Calvinism 
 in France would lead to a revolt of the Netherlands, 
 where the Inquisition was now in active operation. 
 He accordingly stirred up the French Catholic party, 
 headed by the Duke of Guise, against Catherine’s 
 policy. Her attempt to pacify the contending factions 
 by an edict in 1562 was frustrated by their mutual 
 violence. ‘The massacre of a Protestant congregation 
 at Vassy by the Duke’s orders was followed by his 
 entry into Paris with a force strong enough to seize 
 both the Queen-regent and the young King. The 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 99 
 
 Huguenots, under Condé and Coligni, rose in arms, 
 but their organisation was inferior to that of their 
 opponents, who, reinforced by troops furnished by the 
 Pope and Philip, put them to flight. In their ex- 
 tremity, the leaders applied for help to Elizabeth and 
 the German princes, who both responded to the 
 appeal. By a treaty made with the Huguenots in 
 September, 1562, the Queen undertook to furnish 
 6,000 men and a subsidy of 100,000 crowns, in 
 consideration of the surrender of Havre as a security 
 for the restoration of Calais. Before the English 
 troops could arrive, however, the Huguenot army was 
 severely defeated at Dreux. This disaster was deeply 
 felt in England, but it only nerved the Queen and her © 
 advisers to fresh efforts. ‘The assassination of the 
 Duke of Guise by a fanatic soon afterwards reversed 
 the position of the contending parties. The Hugue- 
 nots, by the aid of their English reinforcements, made 
 themselves masters of Normandy, and Catherine was 
 driven to agree to a treaty by which toleration was 
 restored. 
 
 An act of aggression by the Pope in August, 1562, 
 drove Elizabeth to abandon the policy of toleration 
 she had hitherto observed. A brief was issued which 
 forbade English Catholics to attend church or to use 
 the Book of Common Prayer. Conformity to the 
 established ritual had until now exempted them from 
 any inquisition respecting their creed, but when, in 
 obedience to this brief, they withdrew from church, 
 it was thought necessary to fine them as ‘ recusants.” 
 A still more stringent measure was passed by the 
 Parliament which met in January, 1563. By the 
 
 H 2 
 
Ioo POST NORMAN BRITAIN. . 
 
 Test Act all persons other than peers holding any 
 lay or spiritual offices in the realm were required to 
 take an oath of allegiance to the Queen, and abjure 
 the temporal authority of the Papal see. The Act of 
 Uniformity, which many of the parish clergy had 
 evaded, was directed to be put in force, while Con- 
 vocation agreed to adopt thirty-nine of the Articles of 
 Faith formulated in the reign of Edward VI., which 
 had remained in abeyance since the Queen’s accession. 
 
 Scotland now became a fresh source of danger, in 
 consequence of the strained relations between Mary 
 Stuart and her subjects. Her duplicity had been 
 detected by Knox, who, at the head of the extreme 
 Calvinistic party, denounced her treacherous design 
 of restoring the old faith, and promptly frustrated it 
 by enforcing the penal statutes against the celebration 
 of mass. Her inability to protect the victims of this 
 prosecution estranged from her the English Catholics, 
 upon whose support she counted to effect her purpose 
 of winning Elizabeth’s throne. Fearing that, should 
 the succession become vacant, they would prefer the 
 claim of her Catholic cousin, Henry, Lord Darnley (the 
 grandson of Margaret Tudor, daughter of Henry VII., 
 by a second marriage), she determined to put herself 
 at the head of the party by accepting the hand of 
 Darnley, which had already been offered to her. A 
 dispensation for the marriage was obtained from the 
 Pope, upon the assurance that the Queen and her 
 husband would use their best endeavours to restore 
 Scotland to the Catholic faith. Though strenuously 
 opposed by her half-brother, Lord Murray, and other 
 of the Protestant lords, as well as by Elizabeth, the 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. Iol 
 
 marriage was celebrated in July, 1565. Murray’s 
 attempt to arouse the Protestants to rebellion was 
 foiled by the desertion of the leading members of the 
 party, Lords Morton, Ruthven, and Lindsay, and he 
 was driven to take refuge in England. Mary’s triumph 
 seemed to be complete, and the lofty tone in which 
 she demanded Elizabeth’s acknowledgment of her 
 right to the succession bespoke her consciousness ot 
 power. ‘The announcement of her pregnancy, which 
 soon followed, gave this claim significance by the 
 hopes which it excited in the English Catholics. By 
 the advice of her Italian secretary, Rizzio, who was 
 the agent of all her political intrigues, Mary took the 
 first step towards the restoration of Catholicism by 
 summoning a new Parliament, and recalling several 
 Catholic nobles to Court. But the fulfilment of her 
 designs was frustrated by a counter-intrigue of Darnley, 
 who, jealous of Rizzio’s influence over her, conspired 
 with some of the Protestant lords for his assassination. 
 On March 9g, 1566, the eve of the assembling of 
 Parliament, he was stabbed to death by the con- 
 spirators in the Queen’s presence-chamber. Parlia- 
 ment was dissolved, and Murray, who was privy to 
 the conspiracy, returned from exile. Concealing her 
 purpose of revenge, Mary assumed a return of affection 
 for Darnley, and persuaded him to break away from 
 his allies. By his aid she escaped to Dunbar, where 
 Lord Bothwell, a bold and unscrupulous soldier, met 
 her with 8,000 men, at whose head she marched 
 upon Edinburgh. ‘There she proclaimed an offer of 
 pardon to all but the murderers of Rizzio, affected to 
 be reconciled to Murray, and to recur to her former 
 
102 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 course of toleration. By this means she rallied round 
 her some of the leading nobles who had stood aloof, 
 and regained much of the popularity she had lost. 
 The English Catholics, with whom she was in constant 
 communication, now looked upon her succession to 
 Elizabeth as assured. The birth of her son James in 
 June, 1566, crowned their hopes, and deepened the 
 gloom of the Protestant party. 
 
 But in 1567 her complicity in a tragedy of crime 
 relieved England from the danger of a Catholic 
 restoration. ‘Theaversion with which Mary regarded 
 her husband ripened with the growth of a passion for 
 Bothwell, who took advantage of it to gratify his ambi- 
 tion. Allying himself with the nobles whom Darnley 
 had deserted, he obtained their recall from exile, and 
 organised a conspiracy for his own elevation to power. 
 An isolated house, to which Darnley during an attack of 
 illness had been removed by the Queen’s advice, was 
 one night shattered by an explosion of gunpowder, 
 and his dead body was found in the ruins. Bothwell, 
 to whose agency the storage of the powder was 
 traced, was charged with the murder, but no steps 
 were taken to try him until the chief fortresses of the 
 realm were put into his power, when, attended by a 
 large force, he submitted to trial and obtained an 
 acquittal. His fellow-conspirators were induced to 
 consent to his marriage with the Queen, while the 
 Protestant party were conciliated by her confirmation 
 of the Parliamentary enactments which had estab- 
 lished the Reformed faith. Her pretended capture by 
 Bothwell with a troop of horse, who carried her to 
 Dunbar Castle, whence, after five days’ detention, she 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 103 
 
 was brought to Edinburgh, was followed by a public 
 announcement of her intention to pardon his audacity 
 in consideration of his great services, and exalt him 
 to higher honour. After ridding himself of his wife 
 by a collusive divorce suit, he was married to the 
 Queen on the 15th of May. These scandalous pro- 
 ceedings excited general repulsion. Mary’s Catholic 
 supporters were indignant at her sanction of the 
 Reformation, while Bothwell’s co-religionists  dis- 
 avowed him as unworthy of their communion. ‘Two 
 of the Protestant lords, mustering a large force, 
 marched into Edinburgh and excited a popular revolt. 
 The troops whom Mary and Bothwell summoned 
 to oppose them at Carberry Hill proved disaffected, 
 and Bothwell, seeing that all was lost, fled into exile. 
 The Queen was brought back to Edinburgh amid the 
 execrations of her people, and committed to close 
 imprisonment ; eventually being persuaded to resign 
 the crown in favour of her son, a child of fourteen 
 months old, who was entrusted to the custody of 
 Murray as Regent. A Parliament was then summoned 
 to legalise these changes; the Acts passed in 1560 
 against the doctrine and practice of the Romish 
 Church were re-enacted, and the Reformed faith once 
 more established in Scotland. 
 
 Although saved by the fall of Mary from the most 
 imminent of its dangers, the situation of England, 
 now that Elizabeth’s Protestant policy had been 
 declared, was still extremely critical A new Pope 
 had ascended the throne in 1565 under the title of 
 Pius V., whose previous training as an inquisitor 
 qualified him to undertake the task of restoring 
 
104 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Christendom to the Church, without regard to the 
 nature of the means employed. Intrigue and murder, 
 whether wholesale massacre or secret assassination, 
 were consecrated weapons in such hands. His 
 direction of the strategy of the Catholic powers 
 throughout Europe gave them unity of action. The 
 importance of England as a_ firmly-constituted 
 government and a great centre of trade singled her 
 out as the object of attack. No sooner was she freed 
 from aggression on her northern frontier than the 
 danger was shifted to the east. The doctrines of 
 Calvin had taken deep root in the Netherlands, 
 which formed the richest portion of the Spanish 
 dominions. The chartered privileges of the munici- 
 palities and trade guilds had developed a spirit of 
 independence which was hateful to Philip’s autocratic 
 temper, and their wealth had long tempted his 
 avarice. The spread of heresy in) @themeemias 
 afforded him the desired opportunity of subduing and 
 plundering them. Taking advantage of an outbreak, 
 in which several eminent nobles and citizens were 
 implicated, he assembled in 1567 an army of 10,000 
 men, under the Duke of Alva, which marched into 
 the Netherlands and stamped out every vestige of 
 civil and religious liberty. Many leading statesmen 
 were either beheaded or driven into exile; the cities 
 were overawed by garrisons, and the tribunal of 
 the Inquisition sent numbers of heretics to the stake. 
 The indignation with which the Protestant party in 
 England heard the tidings of Alva’s cruelty increased 
 Elizabeth’s difficulties. ‘To have interfered actively 
 on behalf of the persecuted Dutch would have in- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. I05 
 
 volved a war which she was not prepared to wage, 
 and have paralysed the trade of London, of which 
 Flanders was the chief market. All that it seemed 
 possible to do was to await the progress of events, 
 and give welcome and shelter to the refugees who 
 flocked by hundreds to the English shores. 
 
 The severity of the penal statutes passed by the 
 Scottish Parliament against the Catholics roused them 
 to another effort for their dethroned Queen. In May, 
 1568, an attempt planned for Mary’s escape from 
 Lochleven Castle proved successful, and she was 
 joined by an army of 6,o00 men, headed by several 
 Catholic nobles. Murray quickly took the field with 
 a stronger force, and at Langside inflicted upon her a 
 crushing defeat. Escaping with a few faithful fol- 
 lowers, but finding her cause lost in Scotland, Mary 
 crossed the Solway and sought refuge in the dominions 
 of her rival, upon whose monarchical sympathies she 
 counted for aid to regain the throne. Her presence 
 in England was the most embarrassing difficulty 
 Elizabeth had yet encountered. To take up arms 
 on her behalf, as Mary demanded, would have been 
 to break faith with the whole Protestant party for the 
 sake of benefiting an. enemy. To allow her a free 
 passage to France, which was Mary’s alternative 
 request, was to invite the French Catholics, headed 
 by her relatives the Guises, to invade Scotland ; while 
 to detain her as a prisoner was to create a focus of 
 rebellion in England itself. Elizabeth accordingly 
 negotiated with Murray for her restoration; but as 
 he stipulated that Mary should be first tried and 
 acquitted of the murder of Darnley, and Mary on her 
 
106 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 part refused to submit to trial, no terms of compro- 
 mise could be settled. Meantime, her cause was 
 gaining ground in England, and designs were already 
 on foot for her marriage with the Duke of Norfolk, 
 the premier peer of the realm, whose Protestantism 
 was but nominal. 
 
 The long truce between the two great religious 
 parties in the country was drawing to a close. 
 Elizabeth’s chief adviser, Cecil, who headed the 
 Protestants, urged upon her the wisdom of allying 
 herself with the Reformed Continental Churches, 
 supporting the Dutch against Spain, and delivering up 
 Mary to her accusers. ‘The Catholic party, seconded 
 by many waverers whose interests disposed them to 
 peace, advocated a directly-opposite policy. For a 
 time the Queen was content to steer between these 
 extreme courses. Without declaring war with Spain, 
 she helped the Dutch by putting restrictions upon 
 Spanish trading vessels and capturing a convoy of 
 treasure on its way to Alva, while she showed her 
 sympathy with the Huguenots by sending arms and 
 money to their leader, Condé. She was soon driven 
 to adopt more resolute action by the aggression of 
 Pius V. Early in 1569 a Bull was drawn up, 
 though not at once put forth, which excommunicated 
 her as a heretic, and absolved her subjects from 
 allegiance under pain of anathema. An envoy from 
 Rome announced this to the English Catholics, and 
 Ridolfi, an Italian in London, was entrusted with 
 authority and means to raise a rebellion in the 
 north, and entangle the Duke of Norfolk into 
 matrimonial negotiations with Mary. Weak, am- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. I07 
 
 bitious, and insincere, the Duke was a fitting tool for 
 such an intrigue. ‘Though pledged not to correspond 
 with Mary without Elizabeth’s permission, he soon 
 disobeyed. The great northern nobles, headed by 
 Percy, Earl of Northumberland, and Neville, Earl of 
 Westmoreland, retained their attachment to the 
 Catholic faith, and readily fell in with a design for 
 its re-establishment. The defeat of the Huguenots 
 and the death of their leader, Condé, at Jarnac, 
 occurred at this crisis (March, 1569), and the French 
 Catholics were emboldened to suggest that Philip 
 should join them in invading England, and bring the ~ 
 northern rebellion to a victorious issue. Elizabeth 
 was apprised of her peril in time, and struck the 
 first blow. Norfolk was summoned to Court, and 
 committed to the Tower as a prisoner ; other 
 suspected peers were put under restraint, and Mary 
 was transferred to the custody of a rigid Protestant, 
 Lord Huntingdon. In November, 1569, the Earls 
 of Northumberland and Westmoreland responded to 
 a summons to Court bya precipitate rising. Without 
 raising the standard of Mary, they demanded that 
 her succession should be recognised, the Catholic 
 faith restored, and the Queen’s Protestant ministers 
 dismissed. At the head of a large army they entered 
 Durham, and heard mass before the high altar of 
 the cathedral, proclaiming throughout the north 
 that their aim was to bring back “ the old custom and 
 usage.” But the answer to their appeal was less 
 unanimous than they expected. Many upon whose 
 influence they had counted refused to join them, and 
 others held back from an enterprise not supported 
 
108 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 by Spanish aid. The army of the Earls broke up at 
 the first signs of their irresolution, and with their own 
 flight the rebellion quickly collapsed. 
 
 The severity with which the Queen punished those 
 who had taken part in it testified to the alarm it 
 had occasioned, and the Pope thereupon stimulated 
 the English Catholics to a final effort by promulgating 
 the hitherto deferred Bull of Deposition in March, 
 1570. Its effect was largely to increase the number 
 of ‘recusants,” but, except in the minds of a few 
 fanatics, it failed to sunder the ties of allegiance and 
 attachment which bound her Catholic subjects to 
 Elizabeth’s rule. Disappointed at the failure of its 
 spiritual weapons, the Papal court resorted to baser 
 instruments. The Regent Murray had been assassi- 
 nated by a Catholic zealot in January, 1570, and 
 among the plots submitted for the approval of the 
 Pope by Ridolfi was one for the capture of Elizabeth 
 and her Protestant ministers, to be followed by the 
 elevation of Mary to the throne and her marriage to 
 Norfolk. The Duke, who had been released from 
 prison after the failure of the northern revolt, was 
 soon involved in negotiations with Mary and Philip 
 for the furtherance of this design. Many of the 
 Catholic peers seconded his request for Spanish aid, 
 and it was strongly urged by Ridolfi. But, though 
 fully approving the scheme, Philip hesitated to 
 despatch troops until assured of the success of a 
 Catholic rising and the actual seizure of the Queen’s 
 person. ‘The apprehension of her danger served to 
 quicken the Protestant feeling of Parliament, which 
 enacted penal statutes against the introduction of 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 10g 
 
 Papal bulls and the denial of the Queen’s title to the 
 throne on the pretext of heresy; set aside all 
 claims to the succession asserted during the Queen’s 
 life, and disabled any one from holding a public 
 office who refused to subscribe the Articles of Faith. 
 Norfolk’s intrigues were finally checked by his arrest 
 in 1571, followed by his trial, conviction, and 
 execution. The Earl of Northumberland shared the 
 same fate. 
 
 Though the worst of the danger was over, the 
 excitement of the crisis did not quickly subside. The 
 Calvinistic party, which still maintained communion 
 with their foreign brethren, took occasion to agitate 
 for reforms in the liturgy, and in 1571 a Bill was 
 brought into Parliament which would have assimilated 
 the Prayer-book to the Genevan model. But, 
 against the advice of Cecil, Elizabeth refused to 
 abandon her policy of compromise, and vetoed the 
 Bill. There can be little doubt that her moderation 
 in dealing with religious questions was in accord with 
 the inclination of the bulk of her people. Although 
 Protestants were yearly becoming more numerous, 
 their conversion was being effected by the habit of 
 conformity rather than by change of conviction, and 
 would have been checked by violent attempts at 
 innovation. The fanaticism of a small section, 
 headed by Cartwright, Margaret Professor of Divinity 
 at Cambridge, whose studies at Geneva had 
 imbued him with a bigoted attachment to the 
 Presbyterian system, repelled the alliance of many 
 who would have welcomed a further instalment of 
 reform. 
 
a 
 
 TIO%} POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Act ae 2 
 
 Foréign influences once more operated to intensify 
 the Protestant feeling of England, and to modify 
 the policy of her ruler. In 1572, the prostrate con- 
 dition to which the tyranny of Alva had temporarily 
 reduced the Netherlands was suddenly changed by 
 the capture of the town of Brill, and the repulse of 
 the Spaniards by a small naval force sailing under 
 the flag of the Prince of Orange, the leader of the 
 Dutch Protestants. Fired by this example, the chief 
 cities of Holland rose in a revolt which extended 
 over half the country. The protracted civil war 
 which thus opened, eventually terminated in the in- 
 dependence ‘of the United Provinces; but the issue 
 of their gallant struggle was long uncertain, and for 
 some years William of Orange could count upon no 
 foreign support. At the outset he had a prospect 
 of obtaining it from France, whose young King, 
 Charles IX., under the stimulus of hatred to Spain, 
 showed a disposition to break away from his mother’s 
 guidance, and be ruled by the advice of the Hugue- 
 not leader, Coligni, who promised his aid in invading 
 the Spanish Netherlands. But fear of losing her 
 authority over France drove Catherine into a savage 
 reversal of her habitual policy. Allying herself with 
 the Guises, and persuading the King that Coligni 
 was aiming at supreme power, she obtained his 
 sanction to a plot for massacring all the Huguenots 
 ata blow. It was carried into effect upon St. Bar- 
 tholomew’s Day (August 24), 1572, when nearly 
 100,000 members of the party, including Coligni and 
 other leaders, are believed to have perished. ‘The 
 rejoicing with which the tragedy was celebrated by 
 
é 
 
 FOREIGN INFLUENCES. Lik 
 
 Philip and by Gregory XIII. (who had succeeded 
 Pius V. in the Papal chair) measured the height 
 which religious animosity had now reached, Though 
 sharing the horror which these tidings. excited in 
 England, and the sympathy called forth by the 
 spirited revolt of the Dutch, Elizabeth was not dis- 
 posed to interfere actively on the Protestant side. 
 To her cool political temper the bigotry which in- 
 sisted upon subordinating convictions to one rule 
 of faith and the scrupulousness which refused 
 to conform in the absence of conviction were 
 alike inexplicable. She accordingly gave her sup- 
 port to the proposal of Requesens (who had 
 succeeded Alva in the Spanish government of 
 the Netherlands) that the revolted provinces should 
 be restored to their liberties upon the under- 
 standing that they returned into the fold of the 
 Church. 
 
 Although these terms were refused by the Dutch, 
 Elizabeth’s caution momentarily averted the outburst 
 of Philip’s anger against her. To the urgent appeals 
 of the Pope that he would despatch an army to 
 assist a Catholic rising in England, he responded by 
 deprecating hasty action. But Gregory, whom his 
 emissaries kept informed of the real state of affairs, 
 knew that no time must be lost if the English people 
 were ever to be restored to the Romish faith. Year 
 by year the practice of conformity to the Reformed 
 titual was becoming fixed. ‘The old parish priests, 
 who had acquiesced in the new formularies without 
 really approving them, were gradually superseded by 
 Protestant clergy, whose belief in what they taught 
 
112 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 influenced their younger hearers. The two Universi- 
 ties and the grammar-schools throughout the country 
 were similarly transformed, and diffused the ideas and 
 sentiments which distinguished the new faith from the 
 old. Oxford especially, which had been a Romish 
 stronghold at the outset of the Queen’s reign, was 
 now as strongly Calvinistic, and the sons of the 
 Catholic families had deserted it fora college founded 
 at Douay in 1568. Since the passing of the Act of 
 Uniformity and the publication of the Bull of Depo- 
 sition, this college had been largely recruited from 
 England, and obtained so high a reputation as a 
 religious ‘‘seminary” that the Pope determined to 
 employ a number of the young priests educated 
 there as agents to effect the reconversion of their 
 country. Although the number of these missionaries 
 was at first small, they exercised a sensible influence 
 in impeding that reconciliation which Elizabeth still 
 sought to effect, and she was provoked by the Pope’s 
 aggression into severe reprisals. Hitherto the Test 
 Act had been mildly, but was now rigorously enforced, 
 and Parliament (in which the Protestant element 
 largely preponderated) further enacted that the land- 
 ing upon English shores or the harbouring of a semi- 
 nary priest should be an act of treason. To keep 
 alive a feeling of disaffection to Elizabeth’s rule and 
 foment a Catholic revolt in favour of the imprisoned 
 queen of Scots as her successor were the main 
 objects of the emissaries. In connexion with their 
 efforts, a formidable plot was organised in 1576, 
 under the sanction of Rome, by Don John of Austria, 
 a natural son of Charles V., whom Philip had re- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 113 
 
 cently appointed Governor of the Netherlands. 
 Ambitious of kingly rank, he aspired to pacify the 
 Dutch by timely concessions, and, after employing 
 the forces of Spain thus set free, to effect the con- 
 quest of England, and ascend the throne as the 
 husband of Mary. His design was baffled by the 
 formation of an alliance (known as the “ Pacification 
 of Ghent”) between the Catholic and Protestant 
 provinces of the Netherlands in a common effort to 
 throw off the Spanish yoke, which forced him to 
 renew the war. Her narrow escape from invasion, 
 however, impelled Elizabeth to the active interference 
 from which she had hitherto shrunk, and in 1577 she 
 made a treaty with the Provinces and despatched 
 troops and money to their aid. 
 
 With this step began the long and critical strife 
 between England and Spain which ended in the 
 destruction of the Armada. Philp, who, on his part, 
 had equally hesitated to assume the hostile attitude 
 against Elizabeth which the Pope urged upon him, 
 was roused at last by this overt act. He was further 
 incensed by the negotiations now proceeding for her 
 marriage with the Duke of Anjou, youngest son of 
 Catherine de’ Medici, the consummation of which 
 would have drawn England and France into close 
 alliance. Attacks recently made by vessels sailing 
 under the English flag upon Spanish galleons, ladem 
 with the wealth of his American possessions, furnished 
 fresh cause of exasperation. He accordingly agreed 
 to take part in an elaborate scheme for revolutionising 
 England which was organised at Rome in 1579. Its 
 design embraced a simultaneous rising of the English, 
 
 I 
 
I14 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Scotch, and Irish Catholics, supported by an invasion 
 of Spanish troops, but was only carried into effect in 
 Ireland, where 2,000 Papal mercenaries landed in 
 1580 to reinforce a rebellion, headed by the Earl ot 
 Desmond. But the vigour of the Lord-Deputy (Grey 
 of Wilton) crushed the movement before it could 
 spread. The invaders, having retreated to a fortress, 
 which they were compelled to surrender, were all put 
 to death; and Desmond, who took to flight, was slain 
 by a native chieftain. 
 
 No invasion of England was as yet attempted, but 
 the seminary priests were augmented by a number 
 of Jesuit emissaries, of whom Fathers Parsons and 
 Campian were the most active. Assuming various 
 disguises, they traversed the country, reviving the 
 sinking hopes of the Catholics, and making several 
 new converts. Magnified by rumour and panic, the 
 extent of this success provoked Parliament to enact 
 measures of great severity. By an Act of 1581, it 
 was made unlawful to say mass in a private house ; 
 and all persons pretending to absolve the Queen’s 
 subjects from their allegiance, or converting them to 
 the Romish faith, were, together with their dupes, 
 declared guilty of high treason. The extreme penal- 
 ties were not enacted, except in the case of seminary 
 priests and Jesuits, who were hunted down without 
 mercy, and often subjected to torture to extract con- 
 fession. Father Parsons escaped by flight; but 
 Campian was seized in the summer of 1581, tried 
 for treason, and executed. Two hundred similar con- 
 victions are estimated to have occurred during the 
 next twenty years, and the number of persons con- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, I15 
 
 signed to languish in pestilential prisons must have 
 been considerably greater. Deplorable as was the 
 outburst of religious hatred which this crisis called 
 forth and the suffering it entailed, its effect upon the 
 national character was far from wholly mischievous. 
 The bitter hostility to Elizabeth’s rule now avowed 
 by the Papacy aroused not only among the extreme 
 Protestants, but in that larger section of the people 
 who had hitherto remained neutral, a sentiment of 
 fervid patriotism, coupled with personal loyalty to 
 the sovereign. On the other hand, the evidence of 
 deep spiritual conviction displayed in the constancy 
 of the Catholics when exposed to persecution and 
 martyrdom vindicated the claims of a principle 
 higher than either patriotism or loyalty. ‘Though for 
 the moment maintained by the Catholic alone, the 
 supremacy of conscience was ere long to be the 
 watchword of the Puritan also. 
 
 The blood of the English people was by this time 
 fairly stirred for the war with Spain. The Queen’s 
 caution and coolness in the struggle were put to 
 shame by the boldness and warmth of her subjects. 
 The volunteers who flocked to the standard of the 
 Prince of Orange formed a brigade 5,000 strong. 
 English ports not only harboured Dutch privateers, 
 but sent forth their own vessels under the same flag 
 to attack Spanish merchantmen. The money sub- 
 scribed by the London merchants to replenish the 
 Prince’s treasury far exceeded the dole which he 
 obtained from Elizabeth. Large numbers of Flemish 
 exiles had taken refuge in the Cinque Ports at the 
 outset of Alva’s persecution ; and the ruin which the 
 
 Ie 
 
116 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 war inflicted upon the trade of Antwerp and other 
 cities drove hundreds of their citizens across the 
 Channel. The hospitable welcome accorded to them 
 was extended as heartily to the French Huguenots 
 who fled from the persecution of the Guises. The 
 tales which these exiles told of their sufferings under 
 Catholic oppression, and of the fate of their brethren 
 who had failed to escape, largely swelled the tide of 
 Protestant feeling. 
 
 In point of numbers and wealth, Spain was 
 enormously superior to its antagonist. With his 
 native inheritance Philip united the two great lord- 
 ships of Milan and Naples, the unrevolted provinces 
 of the Netherlands, and the rich territories of the 
 New World, discovered by Columbus, and conquered 
 by Cortes and Pizarro. In 1580 he acquired, by 
 conquest, the kingdom of Portugal and its fertile 
 colonies. His soldiers were among the best in 
 Europe, and his generals renowned for their strategic 
 ability. His absolute power and reckless ambition 
 were only qualified by an excessive cautiousness, 
 which delayed him in deliberation and crippled him 
 in action. ‘The alertness of Elizabeth’s intellect and 
 temper, on the other hand, stood her in goad stead ; 
 and what was wanting in the material resources of 
 England was made up by the enthusiasm of her Par- 
 liament in maintaining the war and the daring of her 
 soldiers and sailors. Before the actual outbreak of 
 hostilities, the sea-faring class, especially in the western 
 counties, had manifested their Protestant sympathies 
 by carrying on an irregular warfare of their own. 
 Obtaining letters of marque from the Huguenot 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. II7 
 
 leaders in the first instance, the “‘sea-dogs,” as they 
 were called, helped the good cause, and filled their 
 pockets, by attacking and plundering the vessels of 
 Catholic France. When peace was temporarily re- 
 stored in this quarter, the revolt of the Netherlands 
 afforded them an opportunity of assisting the Dutch 
 by pillaging the Spanish galleons. From privateering 
 excursions within the ‘‘ narrow seas,” they proceeded 
 to bolder exploits beyond. In 1577 the greatest of 
 west-country seamen, Francis Drake, undertook an 
 expedition into the Pacific ocean with a single ship, 
 from which, after sailing round the world, he returned 
 in 1580, with a booty of gold, silver, and gems, 
 valued at half a million, gathered from the South 
 American coasts, of which Spain claimed the 
 monopoly. Philip’s anger at this aggression was 
 redoubled on learning that Elizabeth, in spite of a 
 demand for Drake’s surrender, had knighted him, 
 and accepted his present of jewels. 
 
 The actual declaration of war which Philip 
 threatened was delayed by the intervention of 
 France in the Netherlands, where the Protestant 
 remnant of the revolted provinces was still sustaining 
 the contest, under the flag of William of Orange. 
 The skilful diplomacy of the Duke of Parma, who 
 had succeeded Don John in the Spanish command, 
 had sundered the union effected by the Pacification 
 of Ghent, and won back the bulk of the Catholic 
 states to their former allegiance. In their despair 
 the Provinces applied to France for aid, which 
 Catherine agreed to give upon the understanding 
 that her youngest son, the Duke of Anjou, should be 
 
118 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 their king. He was still negotiating for the hand of 
 Elizabeth, who showed more inclination to accept 
 him than any foreign suitor. The triple union of 
 France, England, and the Provinces against their 
 common enemy, which would have resulted from the 
 marriage, was a weighty argument in its favour, but 
 failed to recommend it to the English people. The 
 objections which existed to the Queen’s alliance with 
 a Catholic dynasty responsible for the massacre of 
 St. Bartholomew’s Day found a courtly but frank 
 declaration in the ‘‘Remonstrance” of Sir Philip 
 Sidney, and coarser expression in the pamphlet of a 
 Puritan, named Stubbs. Affecting to be unmoved by 
 these manifestations, Elizabeth still dallied with the 
 Duke’s suit; and the Provinces, regarding him in the 
 light of a prosperous lover, formally tendered him 
 their homage in 1582. But the instinct of the 
 English people had justly divined his character, 
 which he soon betrayed in a treacherous attempt to 
 deprive his new subjects of their liberties. Foiled in 
 this -scheme, he returned,. in 1583;> 40™ Biamce: 
 where, after resigning his pretensions to the hand of 
 Elizabeth, he died in the following year. 
 
 The intention to invade England which Philip’s 
 slowly-deliberating mind at last matured was appa- 
 rent in the mustering of a great fleet of war-ships 
 in the Tagus, in 1584. While the Armada was in 
 process of formation, the agents of Rome were 
 busily engaged in preparing a Catholic insurrection 
 in England to break out on its arrival. The penal- 
 ties imposed for recusancy and the martyrdom of 
 the seminary priests had so far enraged the Catholics 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 11g 
 
 against the Government that the Jesuit emissaries 
 believed them to be thoroughly disloyal, and assured 
 Philip that, at his summons, they would certainly rise 
 in arms. In Scotland, the young King, James VI, 
 weakly lent himself to a plot devised, with the con- 
 nivance of the Guises, for the release of Mary from 
 prison and her restoration to the throne, either alone 
 or in joint sovereignty with himself. His main object 
 was to escape from the Protestant lords, under whose 
 control he chafed; but, having timely notice of the 
 plot, they frustrated it by temporarily seizing his 
 person. Other baits, however, were held out to him 
 by the Guises and by Philip as soon as he regained 
 his freedom, and Elizabeth had to reckon upon the 
 prospect of his joining her enemies at the crisis of 
 invasion. Abroad, the Protestant cause was daily 
 losing ground. Parma’s able generalship had already 
 quelled the revolt of half the Netherlands, and was 
 gradually regaining for Spain the leading towns of 
 Brabant and Flanders. In 1584, the United Provinces 
 suffered an irreparable loss in the death of their great 
 leader, William of Orange, by the hand of an assassin 
 in the hire of Philip; and though they maintained 
 the struggle with unabated courage, the chances of 
 their achieving their independence seemed remote. 
 In France, the Catholic party formed themselves into 
 a League to prevent the accession to the throne of 
 Henry of Navarre, the Protestant heir-apparent of 
 Henry III., who had no issue; and made a compact 
 with Philip that each would aid the other in extir- 
 pating heresy from France and the Netherlands. The 
 French King, who had hitherto upheld his mother’s 
 
I 20° POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 policy of toleration, in alarm at the power of the 
 League, pretended to favour its objects, and rescinded 
 the ordinances under which the Huguenots had 
 escaped persecution, so that on all sides they were 
 beset with enemies. 
 
 In August, 1585, the surrender of Antwerp to 
 Parma’s forces after a long siege drove the United 
 Provinces to make a more urgent appeal for help to 
 Elizabeth. She received their delegates favourably, 
 declining to accept the protectorate which they 
 offered, but promising to send them 8,o00 men, 
 under the command of Lord Leicester, in con- 
 sideration of their placing the towns of Flushing and 
 Brill into her hands as a security for the expenses 
 incurred. To these terms they agreed; and Leicester, 
 accompanied by the flower of the English chivalry, 
 entered on the campaign with a confidence which his 
 conduct of it wholly failed to justify. His personal 
 courage and other soldierlike qualities were marred 
 by his incapacity as a general, and by the arrogance 
 which he displayed in his relations with the Dutch 
 Government. Owing partly to the dissensions thence 
 resulting and partly to the parsimony shown by the 
 Queen in the supply of munitions and stores, the 
 English contingent achieved few feats of arms; the 
 most memorable being the rashly-heroic onset of a 
 band of 500 men against a force of six times their 
 number, wherein the life of Sir Philip Sidney was reck- 
 lessly wasted. An expedition to the Spanish Main, 
 undertaken at the same time by Drake, with a fleet of 
 twenty-five vessels, accomplished, on the other hand, 
 a brilliant success. The cities of Carthagena and 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. Tat 
 
 St. Domingo were burned, in retaliation for the cruel- 
 ties inflicted by the Inquisition upon Englishmen 
 who had fallen into its hands; and a rich booty of 
 treasure was carried off from the coasts of Florida 
 and Cuba. 
 
 In 1586 Elizabeth won a diplomatic victory over 
 Spain by means of a secret undertaking with the 
 Scottish King that his succession to the English 
 throne should be secured, in consideration of his 
 aiding her against Philip by suppressing any Catholic 
 outbreak in the north. But though thus partially 
 protected, she was still in danger. The intrigues of 
 the Jesuit emissaries in England had succeeded in 
 forming plots to assassinate her. ‘The discovery of 
 these plots led to the infliction of fresh severities on 
 the Catholics, and the formation of a Protestant 
 association for the Queen’s safety. Parliament re- 
 sponded loyally to the national feeling by passing an 
 Act which excluded from the succession any one 
 who incited to rebellion, or sought to injure the 
 reigning sovereign. This was expressly aimed at 
 Mary Stuart, whose protracted captivity had not 
 abated her ambition or love of intrigue. Her ap- 
 proval had just been given to a conspiracy, headed 
 by a young Catholic, named Babington, which com- 
 passed the Queen’s death and her own elevation to 
 the throne. The seizure of her correspondence 
 having proved her complicity, a commission of peers 
 was appointed to try her at Fotheringay Castle, 
 and she was found guilty. Parliament petitioned 
 Elizabeth to execute the sentence of death, and its 
 prayer was supported by her Council and echoed by 
 
122 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 the popular voice. For three months the Queen 
 turned a deaf ear to these appeals, till they became 
 too urgent to be resisted, and the warrant was signed. 
 Mary was beheaded on February 8, 1587, retaining 
 her self-possession, and affirming her unshaken 
 attachment to the Catholic faith. 
 
 The immediate effect of this sentence was to aggra- 
 vate the perils which surrounded Elizabeth, and her 
 anger vented itself upon the ministers who had per- 
 suaded her against her will. Mary had made over 
 her rights of succession to Philip as her nearest 
 Catholic heir, and in him the hopes of her adherents 
 now centred. The Pope (Sixtus V.), incensed at the 
 loss of so valuable an instrument, urged the King no 
 longer to delay the invasion of England. The Armada, 
 so long preparing in the Tagus, was now nearly ready, 
 and Parma was instructed to concentrate all the 
 troops and transports that he could muster at Dun- 
 kirk to reinforce the invading army. But another 
 postponement of the expedition, occasioned by the 
 doubtful attitude of France, gave Drake a fresh 
 opportunity of (in his own phrase) ‘‘singeing the 
 Spanish King’s beard.” With a fleet of thirty barks 
 he sailed in April, 1587, for the harbour of Cadiz, 
 where he destroyed a number of galleys and store- 
 ships, and, after pursuing the same ravage along the 
 coast, venturing at last into the Tagus itself, where he 
 attacked and plundered a richly-laden merchantman 
 of great size. This audacious raid delayed the sailing 
 of the Armada until the spring of 1588, when the 
 success of the Duke of Guise in France having re- 
 lieved Philip’s fear of a French invasion of the 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 123 
 
 Netherlands, he gave orders that the expedition 
 should set sail. 
 
 About half of the 132 vessels of which the Armada 
 consisted were of vast bulk and the rest heavily 
 armed. Provided with 2,500 cannon and ample stores, 
 they were manned by 8,oo0 seamen and 22,000 
 soldiers, led by skilful officers under the nominal 
 command of the duke of Medina Sidonia. Parma’s 
 force of 17,000 men was stationed at Dunkirk, where 
 transports had been collected for their passage across 
 the Channel as soon as the Armada was sighted. 
 England, on her side, put forth all her strength. 
 Beacons were fixed on every height to be fired as 
 signals when the Armada came in view. At Tilbury 
 a large camp was formed, where the army, under 
 the command of Leicester, mustered 22,000 foot and 
 2,000 horse. Smaller forces of militia were stationed 
 at different points along the western and eastern 
 coasts. A special levy of 20,o00 men was raised for 
 the protection of the Queen’s person, and London 
 contributed its trainbands, numbering 10,000 strong. 
 The fleet, which was augmented by many volunteers, 
 consisted of eighty vessels, far inferior in size and ton- 
 nage to the Spanish ships, but more than a match for 
 them in speed and lightness, and manned by 9,000 
 tried mariners under such captains as Drake, Hawkins, 
 and Frobisher, with Lord Howard of Effingham for 
 Admiral. But strongest of all the nation’s defences 
 was the resolute spirit which animated it as one man. 
 Differences of social grades and religious opinion 
 were ignored in the presence of a common danger. 
 The assurances given to Philip that the English 
 
I24 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Catholics would welcome and join his troops were 
 falsified by the event. Side by side with the flagship 
 of the Admiral, who himself belonged to a great 
 Catholic family, were vessels contributed by other 
 peers foremost in the Catholic ranks, while the gentry 
 attested equal loyalty and patriotism by marching at 
 the head of their tenantry. 
 
 The memorable story of Lord Howard’s naval 
 victory off Gravelines, his pursuit of the retreating 
 Spaniards northwards, and the terrible storm which 
 decided the fate of the Armada is too familiar to be 
 here repeated. It will suffice to say that of the 
 vessels which composed this vast armament only fifty 
 succeeded in reaching Spain, with a fever-stricken 
 remnant of I0,ooo men. 
 
 Foremost of the advantages which the victorious 
 issue of her great struggle with Spain brought to 
 England was the triumphant assurance of her un- 
 shaken national unity. The vindication of the tolerant 
 policy which the Queen had steadily pursued until 
 driven to deviate from it by the aggressions of Rome 
 was abundantly complete; and justified her protest 
 to the soldiers at Tilbury that she had always, “ under 
 God, placed her chiefest strength and safeguard in the 
 loyal hearts and goodwill of her subjects.” Scarcely 
 less important was the demonstration of England’s 
 title to rank as a great naval power, and the cor- 
 responding degradation of Spain from its boasted 
 pre-eminence. Philip, indeed, bore the loss of the 
 Armada with proud equanimity, and declared that he 
 could readily despatch another as large ; but from this 
 time forth his prestige was impaired and the fortune 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. I25 
 
 of his empire began to decline. The subsequent in- 
 cidents of the war with Spain, which was protracted 
 until the death of Philip in 1598, do not call for 
 notice in these pages as—though full of interest in 
 themselves—they exerted no fresh influence upon our 
 historical development. 
 
 In France, the course of events rendered it impera- 
 tive for Elizabeth to assist the Huguenot cause. After 
 regaining his independence by the assassination of 
 the Duke of Guise, Henry III. was himself assassi- 
 nated in 1589, when Henry of Navarre became King 
 of France. Opposed by the League and by Spain 
 simultaneously, he maintained a gallant contest with 
 little permanent success until 1593, when a national 
 reaction in his favour set in, of which he took advan- 
 tage to effect a reconciliation of parties by announcing 
 his intention to embrace Catholicism, while securing 
 full toleration to the faith which he abandoned. This 
 politic tergiversation excited Elizabeth to a momen- 
 tary outburst of anger, but she was appeased by 
 Henry’s proposal of an offensive and defensive 
 alliance against Spain, in which the United Provinces 
 eventually joined. 
 
 The death of Philip relieved England of her 
 strongest and most implacable foe; and the great war 
 upon whose issue her freedom had depended was 
 scarcely concluded when Elizabeth herself passed 
 away. The opening of her reign found the bulk of 
 Englishmen Catholics and the eventual establishment 
 of the Reformed faith a remote probability. The 
 close not only found Protestantism firmly established, 
 but its extreme type of Puritanism in the ascendant. 
 
126 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Among the causes to which this remarkable change 
 must be assigned, the pressure of foreign aggression 
 stands foremost. No other stimulus could so effec- 
 tually have developed the sterner virtues of our 
 Teutonic race.or welded the nation into so solid a 
 union. ; 
 
POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 127 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Miscellaneous foreign influences from the accession of 
 Edward VI. to the death of Elizabeth. 
 
 THE influx of Dutch and French fugitives into 
 England, which has been more than once referred to 
 in the preceding chapters as contributing to swell 
 the current of Protestant feeling and bring the 
 Puritan party in the Church into fuller sympathy with 
 Continental Calvinism,-must be further regarded as 
 a considerable accession of racial elements. The 
 number of refugees from the Netherlands alone was 
 estimated (by one of Philip’s resident ambassadors 
 here) at 10,000 in 1560, and after the persecution of 
 Alva and the capture of Antwerp by Parma it must 
 have immensely increased. ‘A third of the merchants 
 and manufacturers of the ruined city are said to have 
 found a refuge on the banks of the Thames.”! 
 Similar immigrations of French Huguenots occurred 
 at short intervals during the reigns of Edward VI. 
 and Elizabeth, their number often amounting to 
 several hundreds ata time. They included men and 
 women of all ranks and callings, a large proportion 
 being skilled artisans. The landings usually took 
 place upon the eastern coast—Rye, in Sussex, and 
 Dover, Deal, and Sandwich, in Kent, being the ports 
 
 ' Green’s ‘* History of the English People,” vol. ii. p. 389. 
 
128 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 most frequented. There some settled, while others 
 passed further inland. In some of the Kentish 
 towns, especially Canterbury and Sandwich, the 
 foreign refugees formed recognised colonies. Many 
 intermarried with English families, and eventually 
 became absorbed into the native population. In not 
 a few cases certain exiles can be identified as the 
 founders of distinguished families, notably those of 
 Grote, Van Sittart, Van Mildert, Bouverie, Pusey, 
 Tyssen, Cosway, Houblon, and Hugessen. Vestiges 
 of these immigrations are still traceable in some of our 
 Cinque-port towns, such as the frequency of foreign 
 names, the prevalence of Flemish or ‘‘ crow-stepped ” 
 gables and Dutch-tiled fire-places in the old houses of 
 Deal and Sandwich, and the local term of ‘ polders,” 
 which is applied to the marshes of the Stour. The 
 handicrafts which the refugees brought with them 
 made a sensible addition to the limited stock of 
 native industries. Cloth-making, silk-weaving, and 
 baize-working were thus introduced, the manufacture 
 of Delph pottery was naturalised, and a fresh stimulus 
 given to horticulture. The first market-gardens 
 formed in England are ascribed to the skill of Flemish 
 settlers in the neighbourhood of Sandwich, A 
 survival of their residence there is the cultivation of 
 * canary-grass,” which is said to be “‘ almost peculiar” 
 to that district. Large numbers of the Flemings 
 settled in or near London, chiefly in the districts of 
 Bermondsey, Southwark, Bow, and Wandsworth. 
 From their congregation in one quarter of Bermondsey, 
 it acquired the name of the “Borgney, or Petty 
 Bergundy.” Joiners’ work, felt-making, tanning, 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 129 
 
 brewing, and dyeing were their principal crafts. The 
 first dye-works in England were established at Bow 
 by a Fleming named Kepler, and “ Bow-dyed ” cloth 
 became highly esteemed. The manufacture of brass 
 plates for kitchen vessels and of pendulum or Dutch 
 clocks was carried on by some Flemings at Wands- 
 worth. Some of the French settlers brought with 
 them the arts of making arras and tapestry and of 
 printing paper-hangings, while others were skilful 
 workers in metal. A minority of the foreign refugees, 
 who were men of more substance, became prosperous 
 city merchants. ‘Thirty-eight of them subscribed the 
 sum of £5,o0o0 to the voluntary loan raised by 
 Elizabeth in 1588. 
 
 Similar settlements were made in different parts of 
 England. Norwich at an earlier period had been 
 greatly indebted to the immigration of Flemish 
 weavers and cloth-makers, but, at the instance of 
 certain of the local guilds, had repaid the boon by 
 imposing restrictions upon their industry which drove 
 them elsewhere. <A gradual decay of prosperity was 
 the consequence, which so seriously alarmed the 
 citizens that in 1564 they petitioned the Duke of 
 Norfolk to induce a number of the refugees to settle 
 there. A band of three hundred Dutch and Walloon 
 families responded to his invitation, and speedily 
 restored the city to its pristine wealth. The manu- 
 facture of serges, bombazines, and similar stuffs, the 
 crafts of striping and flowering silks and damasks, 
 and of making beaver and felt hats, which they 
 introduced, became the staple trades of Norwich. 
 Colchester owed much of its prosperity to the manu 
 
 K 
 
130 | POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 facture of sayes and serges, introduced by Flemish 
 workmen. Worcester, Evesham, Kidderminster, 
 Glastonbury, and Stroud were similarly enriched by 
 their settlement. The “coatings” for which Man- 
 chester, Bolton, and Halifax became famous were 
 originally manufactured there by Flemings. The 
 name of ‘“ walken-mill,” which is often used for 
 ‘“fulling-mill” in old descriptions of property, is 
 obviously derived from the Flemish walke. Lace- 
 making was introduced by refugees from Valenciennes, 
 Alengon, and Antwerp, who settled at Cranfield, in 
 Bedfordshire, and Honiton and Colyton, in Devon- 
 shire, whence the manufacture gradually spread over 
 a large area. The prevalence of Flemish and French 
 names in the districts where it is carried on still 
 testifies to its origin. A band of metal-workers from 
 Liege established themselves near Newcastle-on-Tyne, 
 and acquired a high reputation for the excellence of 
 their steel swords and edge-tools. Glass-works were 
 founded in the same neighbourhood by some of their 
 fellow-countrymen, and the manufacture still flourishes. 
 Other Flemish metal-workers settled at Sheffield under 
 the patronage of Lord Shrewsbury, upon the under- 
 standing that they would instruct English apprentices 
 in their art. To the fulfilment of this pledge the 
 great improvement soon manifested in the trade of 
 the town is attributable. The art of herring-curing, 
 of which the Dutch had hitherto a monopoly, was 
 introduced by a colony of Flemish refugees of the 
 seafaring class at Yarmouth, in 1568, and completes 
 the catalogue of industries which England owes to 
 their enterprise. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 131 
 Wherever the refugees settled in large numbers, 
 churches were either assigned for their accommoda- 
 tion or founded by themselves, in which services 
 were conducted by their own pastors. Those of 
 Austin Friars and St. Anthony’s Hospital in London, 
 and the ‘‘ Undercroft,” or crypt, of Canterbury 
 Cathedral, were the largest. ‘The French church at 
 Southampton, which still exists, was converted from 
 a disused hospital, for the use of a band of exiles who 
 had crossed from Dieppe, Valenciennes, and the 
 Channel Islands in the reign of Edward VI. At 
 Dover, Sandwich, Rye, Yarmouth, and Norwich they 
 were allowed to assemble in the parish churches at 
 stated hours, or special buildings were set apart for 
 their worship. 
 
 The chief influences upon the national thought and 
 sentiment derived from German and French sources 
 have already been considered in connexion with the 
 development of the Reformed faith. Side by side 
 with these, and equally profound, although less ex- 
 tensive in their operation, the influences of. the 
 Renaissance, of which Italy was still the main foun- 
 tain, were silently exerting their force. The magnetic 
 attraction of high intellectual culture, to which the 
 Italians were first sensitive, had already subdued the 
 other Latin nations to its sway, and now began to 
 fascinate the Teutonic races also. In literature, in 
 the arts, in modes of thought, of taste, and speech, 
 in morals, manners, and habits of life, the pervasive 
 spirit of “humanism” made itself felt. Not excluding 
 other influences, but subtly intermingling with them, 
 it assumed different forms according to the characters 
 
 K 2 
 
132 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 of those whom it affected. The chivalrous and all 
 accomplished Sir Philip Sidney presents the ideal 
 type of the cultivated Englishman of this period. At 
 once statesman, soldier, courtier, poet, romancist, and 
 critic, patron and friend of philosophers, scholars, and 
 men of letters, whether native or foreign, he conse- 
 crated his culture to none but noble ends, and 
 maintained in his life and death an exalted standard 
 of patriotism, courage, courtesy, and self-sacrifice. In 
 such a character as Sir Walter Raleigh’s, the refine- 
 ment of the scholar and the finesse of the courtier 
 were blended with the adventurous daring of the 
 ““ sea-dog” and the indifference to human life of the 
 ‘soldier of fortune. In natures of a lower type, the 
 ‘superficial varnish of Italian accomplishments, readily 
 -acquired by a year or two of travel, was too often 
 accompanied by a deeper taint of moral corruption, 
 contracted amidst the vicious society of the great 
 cities. The wickedness of ‘‘an Italianate Englishman,” 
 indeed, became proverbial in the very country of 
 which that hybrid was the product. 
 
 The same mixture of good and evil elements may 
 ‘be discerned in the influence of Italian culture upon 
 Elizabethan literature. Early in the reign the study 
 of the Italian classics was in vogue at Cambridge.! 
 Castiglione’s famous treatise on the ideal of statesman- 
 ship, “ Del Cortegiano,” was translated by Thomas 
 Hobby in 1556-61, and Guicciardini’s “ History 
 of Italy” by Geoffrey Fenton in 1579. Arthur 
 Brooke, William Paynter, and George Turberville 
 
 1 és 
 
 Letter-book of Gabriel Harvey” (Camden Society’s 
 Publications, N.S., vol. 33, pp. 78-9). 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 133 
 
 put forth translations of Boccaccio, Bandello, and 
 other Italian novelists, which were the precursors of 
 a long series of such publications. Brooke’s metrical 
 versions of Bandello’s “‘Romeus and Juliet” is note- 
 worthy as having been the groundwork of Shake- 
 speare’s immortal tragedy. Some of Bandello’s other 
 tales are as impure as this is innocent, and his 
 English translators showed little discrimination in 
 their selection from them. ‘The mischief for which 
 they and similar writers were responsible was the 
 theme of an eloquent protest by Roger Ascham, in 
 his ‘“ Schoolmaster,” a treatise on education published 
 in 1570. His warnings were repeated and enforced 
 by John Lyly, in the form of a moral tale which, 
 borrowing its title of ‘‘ Euphues” from a term employed 
 by Ascham, appeared in 1579. The adoption in 
 this work of an over-refined, fantastic mode of speech, 
 abounding in conceits and verbal subtleties, which 
 had come into fashion as an importation from Italy 
 and Spain, gave it the popular name of euphuism. 
 The richer treasures of Italian literature were drawn 
 upon by Edmund Spenser, who at an early age 
 translated some of the ‘‘ Visions of Petrarch,” and by 
 George Gascoigne, whose translation of Ariosto’s 
 comedy, ‘‘ Gli Suppositi,” was represented at Gray’s 
 Inn in 1566. Spenser’s first published poem, ‘The 
 Shepherd’s Calendar,” which appeared in 1579, showed 
 his indebtedness to French literature also, his eleventh 
 and twelfth eclogues being versions of two by Clement 
 Marot, the Huguenot poet; but in the “ Faerie 
 Queene,” which he soon afterwards commenced, he 
 reverted to Italian models. Sir Philip Sidney’s 
 
134 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 ‘¢ Arcadia,” which, though not published until 1590, 
 was written in 1580-1, was suggested partly by 
 Italian, partly by Spanish literature, belonging to the 
 school of pastoral romance, of which the “ Arcadia” 
 of Sannazaro and the “Diana Enamorada” of 
 Montemayor, both medleys cf prose and verse, were 
 prototypes. Among translations from the Italian 
 may be mentioned one by George Whetstone from 
 the “ Hecatommithi” of Giraldo Cinthio, a collection 
 of tales whence Shakespeare drew the plot of 
 “Measure for Measure.” A series of novelettes 
 which Robert Greene the dramatist put forth between 
 1584 and 1592, to judge from the prevalence of 
 Italian names in them, may be referred to the same 
 national source. The plot of his ‘ Pandosto” is 
 identical with that of Shakespeare’s ‘‘ Winter’s Tale.” 
 An English translation of a German “History of 
 Dr. Faustus” supplied Christopher Marlowe with the 
 materials of his ‘‘Tragical History of Dr. Faustus,” 
 the most powerful drama of the pre-Shakespearian 
 stage, which appeared in 1589. 
 
 In 1590 appeared the first three books of Spenser’s 
 ‘“‘Faerie Queene.” ‘Though substantially original in 
 its conception, and essentially English in its tone and 
 diction, its obligations to the two great romantic 
 poets of Italy, Ariosto and Tasso, cannot be over- 
 looked. Many of its episodes are imitated or para- 
 phrased from passages in the “Orlando” and 
 “Gerusalemme.” The nine-lined stanza which Spenser 
 here initiated was a modification of the French form 
 of balade called “‘ Chant Royal,” made by adding an 
 Alexandrine of twelve syllables to its eight ten- 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 135 
 
 syllabled lines. His ‘Complaints,” a volume of 
 miscellaneous poems, published in the following year, 
 included a revised version of his early translations 
 from Petrarch, and paraphrases of some poems by 
 Joachim du Bellay, a popular lyrist of ibs French 
 Renaissance. 
 
 The influence of the Italian lyrists is Aiaaent: in 
 the sonnets of Samuel Daniel, published in 1592 
 under the title of “ Delia.” In 1595 appeared his 
 historical poem on ‘‘ The Civille Warres between the 
 Two Houses of Lancaster and Yorke,” which, besides 
 being composed in the offava rima of Boccaccio, 
 contains several paraphrases from the Italian poets. 
 In the last decade of Elizabeth’s reign complete 
 translations appeared of Ariosto and Tasso. ‘The 
 ‘Orlando Furioso” was translated by Sir John 
 Harrington in 1591; the “‘ Gerusalemme” by Richard 
 Carew in 1594, and by Edward Fairfax in1600. The 
 last-named translation has survived to our own day for 
 the sake of its graceful and harmonious versification. 
 The Huguenot poet, Du Bartas, who, though now 
 forgotten, then enjoyed the highest celebrity, found 
 three or four English translators, of whom _ the 
 ‘ silver-tongued” Joshua Sylvester is the best known. 
 Another French writer of enduring fame, the great 
 essayist, Montaigne, was first ‘done into English” 
 in the last year of Elizabeth’s reign by John Florio, 
 a teacher of languages at Oxford, who had already 
 published translations of Italian proverbs. His 
 version of Montaigne is memorable as one of the 
 few books known to have belonged to Shakespeare, 
 whose familiarity with it is shown by a passage in 
 
136 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 ‘““The Tempest” (act il, scene 1), obviously based 
 upon its language. 
 
 The extent to which foreign influences directly and 
 indirectly affected the marvellous development of 
 dramatic literature which marked this period can 
 only be briefly indicated. The Elizabethan drama 
 may be regarded as an Italian revival of the classical 
 drama, modified by the conditions of its trans- ~ 
 plantation to a different climate. ‘This character is 
 clearly stamped upon the tragedies which first took 
 possession of the English stage. That of ‘‘ Gorboduc,” 
 the production of Thomas, Lord Buckhurst, and 
 Thomas Norton, which was acted before the Queen 
 in 1562, was written in the blank verse introduced 
 from Italy by Lord Surrey, and although the plot 
 was founded upon an early British legend, the 
 language was modelled upon the style of Seneca, 
 a favourite author of the Renaissance. The subjects 
 of Edward’s “Damon and Pythias” (1565) and 
 Whetstone’s ‘Promos and Cassandra” (1578) suffi- 
 ciently speak for themselves. John Lyly (the author 
 of ‘“ Euphues”), who took the lead in catering for 
 the dramatic taste of the Court, chose classical themes 
 for most of his plays and pageants. His successor, 
 Peele, commenced by following in the same path, 
 though he subsequently deserted it to become the 
 precursor of Shakespeare as an historical playwright. 
 As the taste for theatrical entertainments spread from 
 the Court to the people, the dramatists necessarily 
 took a wider range in their choice of subjects. 
 Although classical themes were by no means 
 abandoned, the Renaissance literature of Italy and 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. IaF 
 
 Spain provided a larger stock of attractive plots that 
 could be turned to account. Thomas Kyd’s 
 “Jeronimo,” or “Spanish Tragedy,” and Marlowe’s 
 “Jew of Malta” were among the first successful 
 attempts to dramatise the violent and powerful 
 situations which some of these stories furnished. 
 But it was reserved for the greatest representative 
 of English genius to attest at once the abundant 
 resources of this literature for the service of the 
 stage and his own inexhaustible power of creating 
 new worlds, peopled with living beings, out of the 
 bare outlines of character and motive which he 
 borrowed and adapted. 
 
 “ It cannot be shown,” says a critic of authority, 
 “that in any one instance Shakespeare took the 
 trouble to invent a plot for himself.”! Passing by 
 the series of historical plays, for the materials of 
 which he was indebted either to Plutarch in Sir 
 Thomas North’s translation of Amyot’s version, or 
 to the chronicles of MHollinshed and Hall, his 
 fictitious creations amount to twenty, of which 
 thirteen can certainly be traced (though for the most 
 part by intermediate channels) to foreign sources. 
 The Italian originals of ‘‘Romeo and Juliet,” 
 ‘““ Measure for Measure,” and ‘‘ The Winter’s Tale” 
 have already been indicated. The ‘‘ Hecatommithi”’ 
 of Giraldo Cinthio furnished the plot of “ Othello” 
 also. Bandello’s ‘‘ Novelle” supplied that of ‘‘ Twelfth 
 Night” and (in conjunction with Ariosto’s “ Orlando ”) 
 that of “Much Ado About Nothing.” The “Taming 
 
 1 Shaw’s ‘* History of English Literature,” Patao: 
 
138 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 of the Shrew” was adapted from an earlier piece 
 founded upon Gascoigne’s translation of Ariosto’s 
 “Gli Suppositi.” A story in Boccaccio’s “ De- 
 camerone” was the original of “ All’s Well that Ends 
 Well.” The “Il Pecarone” of Giovanni Fiorentino, 
 among other sources, gave birth to “The Merchant 
 of Venice” and “The Merry Wives of Windsor.” 
 A comedy of Plautus suggested the motive of “A 
 Comedy of Errors.” ‘The Two Gentlemen of 
 Verona” appears to be based upon a translation 
 of Montemayors “La Diana.” The groundwork 
 of the tragedy of ‘‘ Hamlet,” which may perhaps 
 be regarded as a combination of history and 
 fiction, was derived from the Chronicle of Saxo- 
 Grammaticus and a translation from the French of 
 Belleforest. 
 
 Besides the direct obligation to foreign sources 
 thus manifest in the structure of Shakespeare’s 
 greatest works, it is impossible to overlook many 
 indirect evidences of his sensibility to the foreign in- 
 fluences which were agitating the England of his 
 time. No one can doubt the obvious contemporary 
 significance of such language as he puts into the 
 mouth of King John addressing the Papal Legate, 
 Pandulph :— 
 
 From the mouth of England 
 Add thus much more,—That no Italian priest 
 Shall tithe or toll in our dominions ; 
 But as we under Heaven are Supreme head, .... 
 So tell the Pope; all reverence set apart, 
 To him, and his usurp’d authority. 
 
 Equally unmistakable is the political intention 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 139 
 
 of the stirring words with which the play con- 
 cludes :— 
 
 This England never did (nor never shall) 
 
 Lie at the proud foot of a conqueror, 
 
 But when it first did help to wound itself. ... 
 Come the three corners of the world in arms, 
 
 And we shall shock them : nought shall make us rue 
 If England to itself do rest but true. 
 
 His emphatic allusions to England’s insular security 
 and the fervour of the patriotic apostrophes with 
 which he credits the great Englishmen of past ages 
 far transcend the limits of mere dramatic appropriate- 
 ness, and would lose half their force if their oblique 
 reference to the events of his own day were ignored. 
 “©The Comedy of Errors,” one of his earliest works, 
 contains pointed allusions in a satirical vein to the 
 salient characteristics of England’s foreign neigh- 
 bours,—to France, distracted with civil war, “her 
 forehead armed and reverted, making war against 
 her hair”; and to ‘‘the hot breath of Spain,” unto 
 which the gems of the Indies were “declining their 
 rich aspect” (act ill, scene 2). His estimate of the 
 prevalent affectation of foreign euphuism is signified 
 in the ridiculous parts assigned to Armado and 
 Holofernes in “ Love’s Labour’s Lost,” another work 
 of his youth. The incisive portraiture of national 
 types which his maturer works exhibit only occasion- 
 ally possess this special significance, but it would be 
 difficult to mistake the reflection upon Spanish pride 
 conveyed in the Prince of Arragon’s humiliation 
 (“Merchant of Venice,” act ii, scene 9), or the 
 
I40 POST NORMAN BERITAIN. 
 
 censure of Italian perfidy and craft in the characters 
 of Iago and Iachimo. 
 
 Spenser is the only other great Elizabethan in 
 whose writings similar traces of susceptibility to the 
 action of foreign influences are sufficiently marked 
 to deserve notice. His strong Protestant convictions 
 and Puritan sympathies were avowed in his “ Shep- 
 heardes Calendar,” an early work, in which he 
 applauded the course of Archbishop Grindal (under 
 the anagram of Algrind), who had incurred Elizabeth’s 
 displeasure for encouraging ‘‘prophesyings” or clerical 
 meetings for Biblical discussion. ‘The same bias is 
 apparent in the references to the religious contro- 
 versies of his time which abound in “The Faerie 
 Queene.” The Red Cross knight, who in the first 
 book personifies the religion of England, having been 
 temporarily parted from his companion, Una, or 
 Truth, by the wiles of the Evil Spirit, Archimago, is 
 deceived by the semblance of Duessa, a ‘‘ woman 
 clothed in scarlet,” who assumes the aspect of Fidessa, 
 or the True Faith. In the fifth book (cantos nine and 
 ten), Spenser illustrated his meaning more pointedly 
 by making Duessa a type of Mary Stuart, the repre- 
 sentative and instrument of the Church of Rome, and 
 urging the political necessity that existed for her exe- 
 cution. ‘The allusion was so readily understood, that 
 on the publication of this part of the work in 1596, 
 James VI. of Scotland endeavoured to subject the 
 poet to prosecution. ‘‘ Many references,” of the same 
 kind, “in their own time not in the least obscure, to 
 affairs of England, Ireland, France, Spain, Belgium,”! 
 
 1 Morley’s ‘‘ First Sketch of English Literature,”’ p. 456. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. I4I 
 
 may be read beneath the surface of Spenser’s 
 allegory. 
 
 In the theological literature of this period the 
 presence of foreign influences is distinctly traceable. 
 The Calvinistic sympathies of Cranmer and _ his 
 fellow Reformers found expression in the Book of 
 Common Prayer, which they issued in 1549. A 
 revised edition appeared in 1552. A translation by 
 Nicholas Udall of the ‘‘ Paraphrase” of the New 
 Testament composed by Erasmus was published in 
 two volumes in 1548 and 1549. Miles Coverdale, 
 who wrote a preface to the second volume, was the 
 translator from the German of a selection of hymns, 
 which he entitled “‘ Spiritual Songs.” The ‘‘ Geneva 
 Bible,” a translation commenced by Whittingham and 
 other Protestant exiles at Geneva during the reign 
 of Mary, was completed and published in 1560, with 
 a dedication to Elizabeth. It first introduced the 
 division of chapters into verses which has ever since 
 been adopted. Whittingham, who became Dean of 
 Durham, was the brother-in-law of Calvin and a 
 fervent disciple of his teaching. The Geneva Bible 
 was the text-book of the Puritan party, as distin- 
 guished from the “ Bishops’ Bible,” which was a trans- 
 lation entrusted by Archbishop Parker to fifteen 
 divines (of whom many were bishops) in 1564, and 
 published as the authorised version of the Church 
 of England in 1568. It did not, however, supersede 
 the Geneva version, which counted for no less than 
 sixty out of eighty-five editions of the Bible that 
 Were printed” in «the “relgn’ of Elizabeth?=" The 
 “Institutes” of Calvin were translated by Thomas 
 
142 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Norton in 1561, and passed through five editions. 
 “Norton was one of the contributors to the version 
 of the Psalms put forth by “Sternhold, Hopkins and 
 others” in 1562, and appended to the Book of 
 Common Prayer. 
 
 In 1587 a translation of a treatise upon the truth 
 of Christianity by Philip Du Plessis Mornay, one of 
 the leaders of the Huguenot party, and their envoy 
 at the Court of Elizabeth, was published by Arthur 
 Golding. Barnaby Googe’s translations of an Italian 
 polemic against the Papal see, entitled “‘ The Zodiac 
 of Life,” and of a Latin work by Kirchmeyer, on the 
 same subject, called ‘The Popish Kingdom,” de- 
 serve passing mention. 
 
 The arts which flourished in England during this 
 period owed their chief lustre to the stimulus of 
 foreign genius. Sir Antonio Moro, a native of 
 Utrecht, who had studied in Italy and Spain, after 
 Holbein, the most masterly portrait-painter of his 
 time, visited England during the reign of Mary, 
 whose picture he was commissioned to paint for 
 Philip II. of Spain before their marriage. He re- 
 mained here during her reign, and painted several 
 portraits of her and of the leading personages about 
 the court, but withdrew to the Netherlands at her 
 death. Lucas de Heere, a Flemish painter of repu- 
 tation, who also devoted himself to portraiture, was 
 the first to attract attention at the Court of Elizabeth. 
 Several of his works, including more than one por- 
 trait of the Queen, are preserved. Federigo Zucchero, 
 an artist of the Roman school, scarcely less dis- 
 tinguished than his elder brother, Taddeo, arrived 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 143 
 
 in England in 1574. Portraits by his hand are ex- 
 tant of Elizabeth, of Mary, Queen of Scots, Sir 
 Francis Walsingham, and other celebrities of the 
 period. Henry Cornelius Vroom, a native of Haar- 
 lem, was employed to design a set of representations 
 in tapestry of the defeat of the Spanish Armada, com- 
 missioned by the Lord High Admiral. The tapestry, 
 which subsequently decorated the House of Lords, 
 was unfortunately destroyed in the fire of 1834. 
 Marc Gheeraedts, or Gerhard, a Flemish portrait- 
 painter of merit, came on a visit to England about 
 the year 1580, and found such abundant occupation 
 that he remained here until his death in 1635. The 
 beginning of a native school of pictorial art, which 
 dates from this reign, may be traced to the study of 
 the great foreign masters whose visits have been 
 chronicled. Nicholas Hilliard, a jeweller and minia- 
 ture-painter in high esteem with his contemporaries 
 (born in 1547, died 1619), was an avowed imitator of 
 Holbein. Isaac Oliver (died 1617), whose beautiful 
 miniatures are probably more highly valued now than 
 they were in his own time, was a pupil of Hilliard, 
 and also studied under Zucchero. 
 
 In the arts of illuminating on vellum, engraving 
 on precious stones and cameo-cutting, foreign arti- 
 ficers were chiefly employed. Petruccio Ubaldini, an 
 Italian, was in great repute at the Court of Elizabeth 
 for his illumination of books and rolls. A French 
 artist, named Le Moyne, or Morgues, resident in 
 England in the same reign, illustrated a work on 
 Florida at the charge of Sir Walter Raleigh. Valerio 
 Belli, or Vincentino, an Italian, was an eminent 
 
144 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 engraver of gems and cameo-cutter, many of whose 
 works were extant in the last century.! 
 
 The new impulse given to architectural design by 
 the arrival of Geronimo da Treviso and Giovanni di 
 . Padua, in the reign of Henry VIII., continued to 
 modify the style of all the important buildings 
 erected during the three following reigns. ‘The first 
 strictly Italian building in England is believed to 
 have been Somerset House, which Giovanni di Padua 
 was commissioned to erect for the Protector, Duke 
 of Somerset. He is also credited with the design of 
 Longleat, in Wiltshire, which was commenced in 1567. 
 In this and other great houses of the same period, 
 which are typical specimens of Elizabethan archi- 
 tecture, the features of Tudor-Gothic are skilfully 
 blended with those of the classical Renaissance. Of 
 native artists who adopted this method of design, 
 Robert and Huntingdon Smithson and John Thorpe 
 have been recorded as the most eminent. A more 
 rigid conception of the classical revival was enter- 
 tained by an architect of Cleves, named Theodore 
 Havens, who was employed early in the reign of 
 Elizabeth by Dr. Caius to execute the additions 
 that he made to the college in Cambridge which 
 bears his name. The internal decoration of the 
 chief buildings erected attests to the prevalence of 
 Renaissance ideas; cupids and other mythological 
 figures being commonly introduced by way of orna- 
 ment, and Latin mottoes inscribed upon the walls. 
 
 In music alone, of all the arts, native genius appears 
 
 1 Walpole’s ‘‘ Anecdotes of Painting in England,” &c., 
 vol. i. pp. 276-8. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. I45 
 
 to have relied most upon its own unassisted strength, 
 and to have taken the first place in public estimation. 
 The works, however, of one of the great madri- 
 galists of the Elizabethan period, Thomas Morley, 
 “‘certainly betray a familiar acquaintance with the 
 Italian and Flemish masters,” and it is known that 
 his contemporary, John Dowland, who was ‘‘the 
 rarest musician” of his age, “travelled much in 
 France, Italy, and Germany.” ! 
 
 The predominance of Italian models of taste in 
 cultivated English circles during this period was 
 visible in the gardens which surrounded the mansions 
 built by the Elizabethan nobles and gentry. They 
 were usually laid out in terraces, with flights of steps 
 at each end, and in alleys and walks lined with yews 
 fantastically lopped; statues, vases, fountains, and 
 grottoes being interspersed. Bacon’s essays om 
 “Building” and “‘ Gardens,” though probably written 
 after the accession of James I., may be noticed 
 here as affording clear indications of the accepted 
 standard of fashion in such matters. The number 
 of indigenous garden-flowers and fruits was con- 
 siderably increased during this period by importa-. 
 tions from the Netherlands, Italy, and Greece. 
 The Flemish refugees who settled in the eastern 
 counties are credited with having brought over the 
 gillyflower and carnation. New varieties of hops 
 and cherries were also brought into Kent from the 
 Netherlands. Italy furnished us with choicer grafts 
 of plums, and Zante with currants. The _ intro- 
 
 1 ** Pictorial History of England,” vol, iii. p. 563. 
 L 
 
146 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 duction of Dutch clover made a valuable addition 
 to our agricultural crops. 
 
 Fresh impulse was given to mining by the arrival 
 of a number of German and Dutch experts (of 
 whom Cornelius de Vos, Daniel Hechstetter, and 
 Christopher Schutz were the leaders) during the © 
 reign of Elizabeth, from whom they obtained letters 
 patent to dig for alum, calamine, and copperas, as 
 well as the precious metals, quicksilver and copper. 
 Some of these experts were employed as assayers in 
 the Royal Mint. The first manufacture of cannon in 
 England is attributed by a Sussex tradition to Ralph 
 Hogge, resident in 1543 at Buxted, who is said to 
 have been assisted by French and Flemish gunsmiths. 
 According to other authorities, iron ordnance was 
 first manufactured here by a Frenchman in the 
 reign of Edward VI. Gunpowder is said to have 
 been imported by the Hanse merchants until early 
 in the reign of Elizabeth, when it began to be made 
 in England. The exclusive privileges of that great 
 mercantile corporation secured to them by a suc- 
 cession of royal charters, to the serious detriment of 
 native commerce, received a severe shock during the 
 reign of Edward VI. Upon an information brought 
 against them by an English Company of Merchant 
 Adventurers (which had been incorporated by Henry 
 VII., and increased in wealth and importance) that 
 they had violated the conditions of their monopoly, 
 the Council to whom the question was referred 
 decided against them, and adjudged their franchises 
 to be forfeited. In the following reign the Hanse 
 merchants obtained a temporary renewal of their. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 147 
 
 privileges, but gradually declined in power, and in 
 1597 were suppressed in retaliation for a decree made 
 by the German Emperor, Rudolph, which closed 
 the factories of the Merchant Adventurers in his 
 dominions. The vigorous growth of English com- 
 mercial enterprise dates from the collapse of this 
 foreign guild. 
 
 Memorials of our former dependence upon Con- 
 tinental merchants are extant in the commercial 
 terms which they introduced into the language; e¢¢., 
 “sterling” (from Easterling), “ bank,” ‘“ bankrupt,” 
 “exchange,” “‘argosy” (from Ragusa); and in the 
 names of trades and commodities, such as “ milliner ” 
 (from Milan), ‘‘ damask,” ‘‘ hollands,” &c. 
 
 The thirst for geographical discovery aroused by 
 the successful expeditions of Sebastian Cabot in the 
 reign of Henry VIII. was revived, after a temporary 
 abatement, in the following reign, when he re-visited 
 England, and was warmly welcomed by the young 
 King. In 1553 he assisted to form a company of 
 merchants to prosecute the discovery of a northward 
 passage to the East, and was chosen as their governor. 
 The first expedition of three vessels was commanded 
 by Sir Hugh Willoughby, who received instructions 
 from Cabot, and carried letters of recommendation 
 addressed by the King to all the foreign potentates 
 whose dominions might be reached. Willoughby, 
 with two ships, sailed as far as Russian Lapland, 
 where he put into harbour for the winter, but, owing 
 to the rigour of the climate, he and all his companions 
 perished. The third ship, under the command of 
 Richard Chancellor, reached the White Sea. Landing 
 
 Ji 
 
148 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 at Archangel, he proceeded to Moscow, and had an 
 interview with the Czar, who agreed to grant ex- 
 clusive trading privileges to the association whom 
 he represented. The English-Russian Company 
 which was thus founded became a prosperous 
 mercantile body. Cabot continued to direct its 
 undertakings until 1557. The commercial relations 
 which Chancellor had established between England 
 and Russia led the way to political relations. An 
 ambassador from the Czar to Philip and Mary was 
 despatched in one of the Company’s vessels on its 
 voyage back to England in 1556. In the following 
 year he returned to Russia, accompanied by Anthony 
 Jenkinson, an agent of the English-Russian merchants, 
 who then proceeded down the Volga and by way of 
 Astracan and the Caspian Sea to Persia, with the 
 object of opening out a traffic with that country 
 also. He penetrated as far as Bokhara, which was 
 the great market of the Persian, Indian, and Chinese 
 silk-merchants, returning to England in 1560. He 
 subsequently undertook other journeys to the East, 
 and in 1566 obtained trading privileges from the 
 Sophi of Persia. In 1571 he was appointed by 
 Elizabeth her ambassador to the Czar, uniting this 
 diplomatic function with that of agent to the 
 Company. 
 
 The traffic in ivory and gold-dust with the natives of 
 the western coast of Africa, commenced in the reign of 
 Henry VIII., was now extremely lucrative, especially 
 to the merchants of Southampton. In 1562 one of 
 the west-country seamen, John Hawkins, returned 
 with a cargo of negroes, and the fatal example thus 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 149 
 
 set was too eagerly followed when the establishment 
 of English colonies in the New World opened out a 
 suitable field for the employment of slave-labour. 
 
 A series of expeditions, originally prompted by 
 scientific curiosity, but soon diverted to promote the 
 interests of commerce, was commenced in 1576, when 
 Martin Frobisher set forth with two barks of 25 tons 
 each and a pinnace of Io tons to discover a north- 
 west passage to “‘Cathay.” Sailing from Deptford, 
 he proceeded to the Shetland Isles, whence he 
 voyaged westward and sighted the coast of Greenland, 
 but was unable to land. Entering the strait (to which 
 his name has since been given) that leads to Hudson’s 
 Bay, he effected a landing on the adjoining coast, 
 and asserted possession of it in the Queen’s name, 
 entitling the territory Meta Incognita. He returned 
 to England in the same year, bringing with him a 
 piece of stone found upon the newly-discovered 
 land, which was submitted to two refiners, one of 
 whom professed to find in it ‘fa grain of gold” and 
 the other “‘a little silver.” Under the patronage ot 
 distinguished subscribers, headed by the Queen, as 
 joint “‘adventurers,” Frobisher set forth upontwo more 
 expeditions, from which he returned with other large 
 freights of the same kind that, when carefully assayed, 
 proved to be equally worthless. 
 
 The commercial spirit soon prevailed over the 
 scientific, and in February, 1582, when Frobisher’s 
 fourth expedition was on the point of starting, 
 the Queen expressly instructed him that the voyage 
 was to be undertaken ‘only for trade and not for 
 discovery of the passage by the north-east to Catayo,”’ 
 
15° POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 unless tidings of such a passage could be incidentally 
 obtained without hindrance to the main object in 
 view. Foiled by this prohibition from gratifying 
 his thirst for exploration, Frobisher resigned the 
 command to Edward Fenton, who was ordered to 
 proceed to the Moluccas direct. He only succeeded, 
 however, in reaching St. Vincent, and was prevented 
 by the Spaniards from pursuing any trading opera- 
 tions there to advantage. 
 
 An independent attempt to open commercial 
 relations with Turkey and the East was made by an 
 association of London merchants in 1583, one of 
 whose agents travelled by way of Bagdad and the 
 Persian Gulf to Goa, and returned home in 1591, 
 after having visited Agra and other cities of 
 India, Ceylon, and Cochin China. Another ex- 
 pedition was fitted out by the Turkey company, con- 
 sisting of three vessels, one of which, under the 
 command of Captain Lancaster, reached India and 
 Sumatra, where it shipped a cargo of spices, but was 
 wrecked on the voyage home. 
 
 A third expedition, undertaken in 1596, was not 
 more successful. But in spite of these failures, the 
 scarcity and high price of Eastern products, occasioned 
 by the long continuance of the war with Spain and 
 the monopoly which the Dutch merchants retained in 
 their hands, operated as a constant stimulus to the 
 renewal of fresh attempts. In 1599 several wealthy 
 merchants and others subscribed a fund of £30,000 
 for defraying the cost of annual expeditions to the 
 East, and establishing factories at the principal com- 
 mercial centres. ‘The adventurers obtained a charter 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. I51I 
 
 of incorporation in the following year, and assumed 
 the nameof the East India Company, which eventually 
 became the largest and most wealthy trading corpora- 
 tion in the world. Their first expedition of three or 
 four vessels was sent out in 1601, under Captain 
 Lancaster, who carried the Queen’s letters of recom- 
 mendation to the King of Sumatra and other 
 Eastern princes. At Acheen and Bantam, he was 
 cordially welcomed by the native rulers, who granted 
 him ample trading privileges, and sanctioned the 
 establishment of factories. The development of the 
 prosperous course thus inaugurated belongs to the 
 history of a subsequent period. 
 
 Other voyages undertaken by navigators animated 
 by the same enthusiasm as Frobisher to discover a 
 north-western or north-eastern passage to the East 
 were equally unsuccessful, but indirectly led to the 
 acquisition of geographical knowledge. Borough, 
 Davis, and Pet are thus deservedly remembered in 
 connexion with the straits on the North American 
 continent which bear their names. The meed of 
 honour due to English seamen for their share in the 
 discovery of the New World and similar enterprises 
 was worthily claimed by their chronicler, Richard 
 Hakluyt, in two volumes which he published in 
 1582 and 1589. His second work, ‘The Principal 
 Navigations, Voyages, and Discoveries made by the 
 English Nation,” is one of the classics of Elizabethan 
 literature. Its record was carried on in the following 
 reigns by Samuel Purchas, whose ‘“ Pilyrimes ” 
 eventually extended to five volumes. 
 
 The buccaneering expedition into the Spanish 
 
152 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Main organised by Francis Drake in 1577 
 achieved, over and above its important military and 
 political results, the notable exploit of sailing round the 
 globe, a feat accomplished but once before by the 
 Portuguese navigator, Magelhanes, or Magellan. The 
 same success attended an expedition fitted out and 
 commanded by ‘Thomas Cavendish in 1586. Another 
 voyage to the South Seas, undertaken by Cavendish 
 and Davis in 1591, resulted in the discovery of the 
 Falkland Islands. 
 
 It was by one of the enthusiasts who dreamed of 
 the discovery of a north-west passage that the 
 earliest foundations of our colonial empire were laid. 
 In 1578, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, a half-brother of Sir 
 Walter Raleigh, obtained letters patent authorising 
 him to colonise any parts of North America not 
 already belonging to an ally of the Queen. The 
 first expedition organised by the brothers failed at the 
 outset. The second, which started in 1583 with four 
 vessels, reached Newfoundland, but Gilbert and his 
 ship perished in a storm, and only one of the four 
 returned to England. In the following year, Raleigh 
 repeated the attempt with two ships, having procured 
 a grant to himself of all such lands as he might 
 discover, subject to the reservation of a fifth part 
 of: all precious metals to the Crown. . His enterprise 
 was rewarded by the discovery of the district which 
 now constitutes the States of Virginia and North 
 Carolina, the former title being given to it in honour 
 of the virgin Queen. After obtaining an Act of 
 Parliament to confirm his title, Raleigh despatched 
 seven ships in 1585, under Sir Richard Grenville, 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 153 
 
 who took possession of the territory, and left a 
 colony of upwards of a hundred settlers on the 
 adjoining island of Roanoke. Here they came into 
 collision with the native Indians, and were thankful 
 to take advantage of the opportunity to return 
 home which was afforded them by Drake’s touching 
 at the island in 1586. They brought back samples 
 of the Indian weed, tobacco, which is now one of 
 the most important exports from that country. 
 Several other attempts were made by Raleigh 
 during the reign of Elizabeth to colonise the 
 territory which he had acquired, but the natives con- 
 tinued persistently hostile and all the settlers perished. 
 It was not until the following reign that our first 
 colony there was permanently established. 
 
 Tentative and even abortive as were these early 
 efforts of scientific, commercial, and colonising enter- 
 prise, they attested the vigorous activity of the 
 Elizabethan period. The enlargement of mental 
 horizon, the new ideas of distance, climate, landscape, 
 natural history, and national distinctions which the 
 travellers acquired, and communicated to their un- 
 travelled countrymen, were incontestable gains. 
 Though their tangible profits were as yet scanty, 
 these expeditions afforded a rich promise of the 
 future harvest. Regarded as initial steps in the 
 development of our multiplex system of international 
 relations and our vast colonial empire, they occupy a 
 prominent place among foreign contributions to our 
 growth. 
 
154 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Foreign influences on political history during the reign of 
 James I. 
 
 By the accession of the King of Scots to the throne 
 of Elizabeth, England virtually became subject to a 
 foreign prince. Half English as he was by the tie 
 of blood, the mould of his mind, the colour of his 
 sympathies, the training he had received, and the tradi- 
 tions he had imbibed practically constituted him an 
 alien. His mental ability was considerable, and he 
 had cultivated it highly in more than one field of 
 learning ; but his scholarship was marred by pedantry . 
 and conceit, and the philosophical rules of “king- 
 craft” which he prescribed for his own guidance 
 needed common sense and discretion to apply them, 
 which he did not possess. The sensual weakness 
 and lax moral fibre which he inherited from both 
 his parents rendered him prone to self-indulgence 
 and prodigality, and the easy prey of designing 
 favourites. In youth he had suffered much from 
 the turbulence of party strife among the nobles, who 
 disputed for the regency in his name, and it was 
 only by slow degrees that he attained to independ- 
 ence of their control. The remembrance served to 
 intensify his confidence in his ability to govern alone, 
 without being subjected to the checks which a 
 Council of ministers and a Parliament necessarily 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. is 
 
 impose. Though a Protestant by conviction and 
 skilled in theological controversy, he had contracted 
 a strong aversion to the Calvinistic system, from his 
 experience of the opposition offered by its professors 
 to his government of Scotland. The hierarchical 
 organisation of the Church naturally commended 
 itself to his theory of the divine right and absolute 
 authority of kings. ‘The democratic element which 
 entered into the composition of the local presby- 
 teries and General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland 
 inspired him with such repugnance that from the 
 time he became his own master he never rested until 
 he had restored episcopacy to supreme rank, and 
 succeeded, after a long struggle, in reducing the 
 most stubborn of Knox’s followers into silence, if 
 not submission. It was fresh from the memory of 
 this conflict that he came to the English throne. 
 The want of sympathy between him and his subjects 
 upon the questions which they had most at heart 
 soon became apparent. The bulk of the nation was 
 now strongly Protestant in feeling, with a decided 
 bias in the direction of Puritanism. The policy 
 which Elizabeth had so long pursued of maintain- 
 ing the Protestant cause abroad by a close alliance 
 with the French Huguenots and Dutch Calvinists, 
 and an uncompromising resistance to Rome and 
 Spain, and of repressing the power of Catholicism 
 at home by severe penalties, was cherished by Par- 
 liament and the people. Among the earliest acts of 
 James which aroused their mistrust were his negotia- 
 tions with the Papacy and with Spain and _ his 
 relaxation of the laws against recusancy, while the 
 
156 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 coldness which he showed towards France and the 
 harshness of his language in private concerning the 
 Dutch “rebels” excited much irritation. His real 
 object appears to have been to make his throne safe ; 
 the negotiations with Rome being designed to secure 
 the Catholics from plotting by the promise of a 
 milder végzme, and overtures of peace being addressed 
 to Spain to prevent their looking to its power for aid. 
 But his aim was either not perceived or not appre- 
 ciated, and the course of events forced him to adopt 
 a different policy. 
 
 Our attention being restricted to the operation of 
 foreign influences upon the national progress, a 
 cursory notice is all that can be given to the merely 
 domestic history of this reign. 
 
 After successfully coping with two plots, indicating 
 the existence of discontent in various quarters, which 
 broke out soon after his accession, James came into 
 collision with the Puritan party in the Church upon 
 the questions of eliminating from its ritual the forms 
 which they associated with Romish superstition, such 
 as the cross in baptism, the surplice, and bowing at 
 the name of Jesus; of enforcing a stricter observance 
 of the Sabbath ; issuing a new translation of the Bible, 
 and similar reforms. Though presiding at the con- 
 ference of divines summoned for the discussion of 
 these questions at Hampton Court, he showed no 
 intention of impartially considering them, rating 
 the Puritan delegates in the tone he had adopted 
 towards the presbyteries of Scotland, and closing the 
 discussion by a threat that he would enforce his own 
 system of Church-government against all opposition. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 157 
 
 The only points upon which he and the Bishops (who 
 as a body sided with him) consented to gratify the 
 petitioners were the removal of two or three objec- 
 tionable phrases in the Prayer-book and the issue of 
 a new translation of the Bible, the existing Authorised 
 Version, which was completed in 1611. 
 
 In the same temper James met his first Parliament 
 in 1604. His proposals for concluding peace with 
 Spain and for uniting England and Scotland in one 
 realm of Great Britain were coldly received by the 
 Commons, who were primarily bent upon obtaining 
 religious reform and a mitigation of the severe 
 feudal exactions which the Crown retained. The 
 Bills which they framed with this end having been 
 thrown out by the Lords, at the King’s instance, the 
 Commons addressed him in bold language, which 
 repudiated any “absolute power” residing in the 
 kings of England ‘to alter religion,” or to make any 
 laws concerning it, ‘‘ except by consent of Parlia- 
 ment.” His answer was an angry rebuke, and as the 
 House did not proceed to vote the subsidy he 
 demanded, he adjourned Parliament. His contempt 
 of their resolution that the question of union 
 between England and Scotland should be referred to 
 a commission for inquiry was shown by his imme- 
 diate assumption of the title of King of Great 
 Britain. The Bishops, fortified by his support, took 
 the opportunity of violating the compromise which 
 enabled the Puritan clergy who subscribed such of 
 the Thirty-nine Articles as related to the doctrines 
 and sacraments of the Church to evade subscription 
 to those which concerned questions of discipline. 
 
158 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Pursuant to a_ resolution of Convocation, the 
 Primate Bancroft, who led the anti-Puritan party, 
 required all beneficed clergymen to conform to the 
 prescribed rubrics. The refusal of three hundred 
 Puritan incumbents to comply with this stipulation 
 was punished by their ejection in 1605. 
 
 The remission of the penalties against recusants 
 haying raised the hopes of the Catholics, the number 
 of those who avowed their faith was much increased, 
 and several conversions were reported. Parliament, 
 in alarm, re-enacted the coercive statutes of the last 
 reign, and arumour that the King had himself become 
 a convert irritated him into putting them in force 
 and reviving the fines on recusancy. ‘The frustration 
 of their expectations excited the fanaticism of a few 
 Catholics to strike terror into their enemies by 
 destroying the King and the members of both Houses 
 ata blow. The “Gunpowder Plot” was communi- 
 cated by its authors to several Catholic gentlemen of 
 distinction, and eventually to Father Garnet, the 
 provincial of the English Jesuits. It was discovered 
 by the Government shortly before the day fixed for 
 its execution, by means of a letter written by one of 
 the band to warn a Catholic peer not to be present 
 at the opening of Parliament. The chief conspirators 
 were captured, and after a long examination and 
 trial were sent with their accomplices to the block. 
 Several Catholic peers were arrested on suspicion, 
 fined, and imprisoned. 
 
 The sense of their common danger drew the King 
 and the Parliament into accord, and after a series 
 of penal statutes against the Catholics had been 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 159 
 
 unanimously passed, a subsidy was voted in 1606 for 
 the payment of the heavy charges incurred by his 
 profuse expenditure. ‘This proving insufficient, he 
 resorted to the arbitrary levy of imposts upon exports 
 and imports,—a practice which the Plantagenets had 
 been forced to abandon, and which the Tudors had but 
 rarely revived. As the foreign commerce of Engiand 
 had by this time vastly increased, the revenue thus 
 derived rendered him almost independent of subsidies. 
 Parliament vainly protested against the innovation, 
 and an attempt by a London merchant to dispute the 
 legality of the imposts was defeated by a judgment 
 of the Court of Exchequer. The Commons again 
 came into collision with the King in 1607, upon the 
 subject of the naturalisation of Scotchmen born after 
 his accession. ‘The contention of James, in which he 
 was supported by the opinion of the judges, was, that 
 all such persons had become naturalised Englishmen ; 
 whereas the House, repudiating a conclusion which 
 implied the dependence of the nation on the King, 
 proposed to naturalise all Scotchmen by statute. The 
 King refusing this compromise, the measures which 
 had been under consideration by the Commons for 
 abolishing hostile laws and establishing free trade 
 between England and Scotland were abandoned, and 
 the union of the two countries was postponed for 
 another century. 
 
 In Scotland, James pursued a similar policy of 
 ignoring or over-riding the popular will; silencing the 
 General Assembly by proroguing its meetings year 
 after year; punishing by imprisonment and exile a 
 few daring members who resisted his mandates, and 
 
160 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 enforcing episcopal control over the provincial synods 
 and presbyteries. His theory of “divine right” was 
 now recognised by the hierarchy as a fundamental 
 principle, and the doctrine of ‘‘ passive obedience ” 
 preached from the pulpit and taught in the university. 
 The distrust created by this coalition against public 
 liberty occasioned more than one outburst of Parlia- 
 mentary irritation, and culminated in a definite breach 
 between the King and the Commons in 1610. 
 
 Large as was the revenue which James derived 
 from the imposition of custom-duties, his expenditure 
 so greatly exceeded it that his minister, Robert Cecil, 
 Lord Salisbury, after vainly trying to induce economy, 
 tendered the advice that a subsidy should be de- 
 manded from Parliament. As the son of Burghley 
 and trained in the traditions of Elizabethan states- 
 manship, Cecil viewed with alarm the subversion of 
 that good understanding between the sovereign and 
 the nation upon which the stability of the throne had 
 been based, and directed his efforts to bring about a 
 reconciliation. The condition of affairs abroad added 
 to his uneasiness. He had laboured to maintain the 
 relations with foreign States which Elizabeth’s policy 
 established. With Spain, which, though still strong, 
 was no longer formidable, peace was prudently made; 
 but the Dutch alliance was adhered to, and a friendly 
 though less intimate understanding preserved with 
 France. The war between Spain and the Provinces 
 had been determined by a truce for twelve years, 
 which was concluded in 1609 by the mediation of 
 England and France. ‘The greatest danger that now 
 threatened the Protestant cause in Europe was 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 161 
 
 arising in Germany. The German possessions of 
 Charles V., which had passed with the Imperial crown 
 to his brother Ferdinand, now comprehended the 
 Austrian Duchy, the Tyrol, Hungary, Bohemia, Mo- 
 ravia, and other provinces. The tolerant policy of 
 Ferdinand and his successors had hitherto secured 
 peace between Catholics and Protestants upon the 
 basis of the treaty of Passau made between Maurice, 
 Duke of Saxony, and Charles V. That treaty, while 
 recognising the permanent secularisation of lands 
 formerly belonging to the Church, did not provide for 
 future contingencies. Lutheranism, however, spread 
 rapidly over the Austrian dominions, and in Northern 
 Germany much additional Church-land became secu- 
 larised. The counter-reformation, organised by the 
 zeal of the Jesuits, offered a powerful check to this 
 movement, and the strife between Lutherans and 
 Calvinists strengthened the hands of the Catholic 
 reactionaries. ‘They agitated for the restoration of 
 the Church-lands, and the Emperor Rudolph, at their 
 instigation, attempted in 1606 to enforce Catholic 
 conformity throughout Austria. This policy being 
 maintained by his successor, Matthias, the Calvinistic 
 States of the Palatinate, Hesse and Baden, whose- 
 safety was especially endangered, entered into a Pro- 
 testant Union in 1608,—a step which was immediately 
 checked by the formation of a Catholic League. 
 Spain and France showed intentions of taking part in 
 the dispute, and a European war was imminent, which 
 Cecil held could only be averted by England’s media- 
 tion. ‘This could only be effective if supported by a 
 show of force, for which the means were wanting 
 M 
 
162 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 unless supplied by Parliament. His scheme for 
 bringing about an accord between it and the Crown 
 resolved itself into a bargain or ‘‘contract,” whereby 
 the King was to surrender his feudal rights and his 
 title to levy imposts at will, in consideration of Par- 
 liamentary sanction being given to those already 
 levied, the grant of a subsidy to discharge his debts, 
 and the increase of his revenue by £200,000 a 
 year. 
 
 When the Houses assembled in 1610, the Commons 
 showed themselves in no mood to accept these offers, 
 unless coupled with further concessions. Their 
 complaints against .the Crown embraced temporal 
 and spiritual grievances; not only the levying of 
 imposts, but the attempt to give royal proclamations 
 the force of laws, the establishment of new courts, 
 the deposition of godly ministers on account of 
 scruples to accept the rubrics, the continuance of 
 pluralities, and the inadequate training of the clergy. 
 The King refusing to limit his prerogative in ecclesi- 
 astical matters, and the Commons tenaciously adhering 
 to their resolution, the ‘‘ contract” was abandoned, | 
 and in February, 1611, James dissolved Parliament. 
 The failure of his scheme of reconciliation so dis- 
 appointed Cecil that it is believed to have hastened 
 his death in the following year. He succeeded, 
 however, in an effort to strengthen the accord between 
 English and Continental Protestants by bringing about - 
 a marriage between the King’s eldest daughter, Eliza- 
 beth, and the heir of the Elector Palatine, who 
 headed the Protestant Union. 
 
 The King, now unrestrained by any relic of Eliza- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 163 
 
 bethan traditions, indulged his ambition to be his 
 own minister. Even the Council, which the Tudors 
 had never failed to consult and whose support had 
 given weight to their mandates, was slighted by 
 neglect, and its influence subordinated to that of 
 successive favourites, whose title to the royal regard 
 rested upon their possession of merely personal 
 attractions. The most influential of them was a 
 Scotch youth named Carr, who was raised to the 
 rank of Viscount Rochester and Earl of Somerset. 
 Under his végzme the extravagance of the Court was 
 recklessly increased, and the King’s proclivity to 
 sensual indulgence displayed itself in gross excesses 
 which excited public contempt. The necessity of 
 obtaining a subsidy to supply the deficit occasioned 
 by this waste forced James to summon Parliament in 
 1614, but the new House refused, like the last, to 
 grant supplies until its grievances had been con- 
 sidered. The King rejecting this demand, a deadlock 
 ensued, and, after a fruitless session of two months, 
 resulted in a dissolution. 
 
 In defiance of the protest of the Commons, James 
 continued to levy imposts, issue proclamations, and 
 maintain ecclesiastical abuses. Fora time he obtained 
 some relief from his load of debt by selling to the 
 United Provinces the towns which they had left in 
 the hands of Elizabeth as pledges for the repayment 
 of her loan to them, but this fund proving inadequate, 
 he resorted to the expedient of raising money by 
 “benevolences.” ‘Their exaction being forbidden by 
 a statute of Richard III., letters of request were 
 despatched to the landowners of each county, on the — 
 
 M 2 
 
164 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 pretext that assistance was needed to defend the 
 Protestant cause in Germany. Notwithstanding these 
 efforts, the sum of £60,000 was all that could be 
 obtained from this source during three years. Other 
 expedients were then tried—feudal exactions were 
 rigorously pressed, fines extorted for the breach of 
 royal proclamations, peerages sold to. wealthy bid- 
 ders or forced upon prosperous commoners against 
 their will. These despotic courses alienated the 
 sympathies of almost every classin turn. The climax 
 was reached when the Judges, who had shown the 
 utmost obsequiousness to the King’s will, were driven 
 to protest against his attempt to extend, by an 
 assertion of prerogative, the jurisdiction of the 
 ecclesiastical courts. James met their protest by an 
 angry scolding, which reduced all to submission 
 except the Chief Justice, Sir Edward Coke, who, 
 standing upon the dignity of his office, was deprived 
 of it in 1616, 
 
 The same year witnessed the fall from power of 
 the worthless Somerset, on account of his complicity 
 in a murder committed by his wife, the sequel of an 
 adulterous intrigue at which the King himself had 
 connived. Before his fall Somerset had been sup- 
 planted in the royal favour by a minion equally 
 worthless and even more mischievous, George 
 Villiers, who quickly rose to the rank of Duke of 
 Buckingham and the office of Lord High Admiral. 
 By his brilliant audacity, strong will, and devotion to 
 the service of the Crown, he established a hold over 
 the King’s mind, which was riveted by the affection 
 entertained for him by Prince Charles, now heir to 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 165 
 
 the throne.! During the remainder of the reign the 
 favourite exercised a virtual tyranny in the. King’s 
 name, which he shamelessly abused to the aggrandise- 
 ment of himself and his family, and the sacrifice of 
 the most cherished interests of the nation. 
 
 The European complications which had awakened 
 Cecil’s anxiety were rapidly increasing, and the 
 marriage of the Princess Elizabeth with the heir of 
 the Elector Palatine had produced the effect which he 
 intended of stimulating the sympathy of England 
 with the Protestant cause. The King, though a 
 lukewarm partisan, desired on his daughter’s account 
 to avert the war which threatened the safety of the 
 Union, but his device for securing peace was to ally 
 himself with Spain, whose policy was supposed to be 
 pacific, and the weight of whose influence was strong 
 enough to sway the Catholic States. It had already 
 thrown out suggestions of a possible marriage between 
 Prince Charles and a Spanish Infanta, the idea of 
 which not only gratified the vanity of James, but 
 held out the promise of a rich dowry, which would 
 render him independent of Parliament. ‘That Spain 
 would demand a guid pro quo, by stipulating that 
 English Catholics should be relieved from their restric- 
 tions and that the offspring of the marriage should be 
 trained in the mother’s faith, did not enter into the 
 King’s calculation. In 1614 he made a definite 
 matrimonial proposition to the Court of Spain, which 
 received an indefinite but encouraging reply. The 
 motives that seem to have actuated the Spanish Court 
 
 ' His elder brother, Henry, a youth of great promise, had 
 died in 1612. 
 
166 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 throughout the ensuing negotiations were, by flattering 
 the hopes of James, to secure his inactivity in the 
 impending war, and to obtain some relaxation of the 
 severity which pressed upon his Catholic subjects. 
 Once kindled in South Germany, the flame of war 
 would undoubtedly spread northward to the Rhenish 
 Palatinate, which Spain regarded as the highway from 
 her Italian possessions to the Netherlands, and 
 anxiously desired to keep in friendly hands. Upon 
 all these grounds the Spanish Court was disposed to 
 entertain the overtures of James favourably, without 
 committing itself to their acceptance. 
 
 The negotiations with Spain for the purpose of 
 providing the Prince with a Catholic wife excited 
 deep indignation in England. An ingenious design 
 of luring James by his appetite for gain and em- 
 broiling the two countries in hostility, suggested 
 itself to the mind of Sir Walter Raleigh, who had 
 remained a State prisoner in the Tower since 1603, 
 under a sentence of death recorded against him for 
 alleged complicity ina plot. In one of his voyages 
 he had discovered the existence of a gold-mine on 
 the River Orinoco, which he had never explored, 
 and now solicited the King’s sanction to revisit, and 
 work for the profit of the Crown. James assented to 
 set him at liberty for this purpose, upon condition 
 that no attack should be made upon the territory or 
 subjects of Spain. Having by dint of great pecuniary 
 sacrifices collected a fleet of fourteen vessels, Raleigh 
 sailed in March, 1617, for the coast of Guiana, 
 where one of his officers came into collision with 
 the Spaniards, who were in force at the town of 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 167 
 
 St. Thomas. The governor, a relative of Gondomar, 
 the Spanish envoy in London, was killed on the one 
 side, and Sir Walter Raleigh’s eldest son on the 
 other, and the town was set on fire. After failing 
 to discover the mine and suffering further losses, 
 Raleigh returned to England, where he was _ pro- 
 claimed and arrested. Gondomar clamoured for his 
 death, and was assured by Buckingham, in the King’s 
 name, that the deferred sentence should be executed. 
 Raleigh’s gallant defence and appeal to the royal 
 clemency were unavailing, and in October, 1618, he 
 was beheaded. 
 
 The religious conflict in Germany had already 
 broken out. In 1617 the Bohemian Diet accepted 
 Ferdinand as the successor of their. King, the 
 Emperor Matthias; but his intolerance drove the 
 nobles to a violent demonstration in May, 1618, 
 which was followed by a call to arms. For awhile 
 the war was limited to his dominions; but by the 
 death of Matthias, in 1619, Ferdinand succeeded to 
 the Austrian Duchy, and became a candidate for the 
 Imperial throne. Dissensions between the Lutheran 
 and Calvinistic princes, who, if united, might have 
 defeated him, brought about his election. The 
 Bohemians, renouncing their allegiance to him, 
 offered the throne to Frederick, the son-in-law of 
 James, now Elector-Palatine and a leader of the 
 Calvinistic Union. He accepted the offer, and was 
 crowned at Prague, but met with less support than 
 he expected. His colleagues in the Union were 
 restrained from helping him by the threats of France, 
 which dreaded the neighbourhood of a State whose 
 
168 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 sympathy with the Huguenot party might reopen 
 strife in her midst. James was indignant that his son- 
 in-law should sanction the revolt of the Bohemians, 
 and usurp the throne of their lawful ruler. All his 
 influence was exerted to induce Frederick to retract 
 the step he had taken, and to hinder the Dutch, who 
 heartily approved it, from lending him assistance. 
 The bulk of the English nation warmly advocated 
 Frederick’s cause; and Abbot, who had succeeded 
 Bancroft as Primate, and sympathised with the 
 Puritans, urged the King to come forward as the 
 Protestant champion. James, however, persistently 
 disregarded these counsels, and blindly trusted that 
 by an alliance with Spain he could bring about peace. 
 In 1620 his confidence was rudely shaken by her 
 overt interposition on the side of the Emperor. 
 Spinola, her general in the Netherlands, was ordered 
 to march up the Rhine to assist him with a large 
 force. James, in alarm, allowed a band of 4,000 
 English volunteers, under Sir Horace Vere, to enter 
 the Palatinate ; but their aid did not arrive in time to 
 strengthen the resistance of the Protestant Union. 
 The army-of the Catholic League, under Maximilian, 
 Duke of Bavaria, reinforced that of Ferdinand, and, 
 after reducing Austria to submission, their united 
 forces invaded Bohemia. 
 
 When too late to render the Protestant cause any 
 service, James assented to the popular demand by 
 resummoning Parliament in January, 1621. In the 
 previous November the army of the League had 
 inflicted a crushing defeat upon Frederick before 
 Prague, and drove him, with his wife and children, 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 169 
 
 to take refuge in Holland. The Protestant Union 
 had also been defeated by Spinola, whose troops 
 over-ran the Palatinate. James was strongly urged 
 by the German princes and the King of Denmark 
 to despatch a force to their aid, and supplies for this 
 purpose would willingly have been voted by the 
 Commons. But, from fear of a rupture with Spain, 
 which might frustrate his matrimonial project, he 
 clung to diplomatic action in preference to war. 
 Disappointed of its hope, the House turned for a while 
 to the reform of domestic abuses, the suppression of 
 monopolies, and the punishment of official corruption ; 
 but in the course of the session of 1621, it made a 
 fresh attempt to induce James to intervene on behalf 
 of the Protestant cause. A unanimous resolution 
 was passed, that, “‘ for the recovery of the Palatinate, 
 they would adventure their fortunes, their estates, and 
 their lives.” But beyond negotiations and threats 
 James could not be persuaded to advance; and when 
 both proved fruitless, he fell back upon his old 
 policy of waiting upon the pleasure of Spain. His 
 suit for the Infanta’s hand was eagerly renewed. A 
 petition which the Commons presented to him on 
 their reassembling in the autumn, that he would 
 declare war with Spain and wed the Prince to a 
 Protestant, he regarded as a presumptuous attempt 
 to meddle in the affairs of state with which he 
 was alone concerned ; treating their delegates with 
 mockery, and threatening them with imprisonment. 
 When the House, preserving its dignity under this 
 provocation, passed a resolution: affirming that the 
 liberties of Parliament are the birthright of English- 
 
V7o POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 men, and claiming for its members freedom of speech 
 to debate such affairs as were urgent concerning the 
 Crown, the State, and the Church, the King met its 
 protest by sending for the journal of the House, and 
 erasing the record with his own hand. He shortly 
 afterwards dissolved Parliament. 
 
 While thus disdainful of the Protestant sympathies 
 of the nation, James pursued his own course of 
 endeavouring to effect the restoration of the Pala- 
 tinate by means of a Spanish alliance. To win the 
 hand of the Infanta for the Prince, he was willing to 
 submit to any indignity. A dispensation from the 
 Holy See being necessary to sanction the match, he 
 sent two agents to Rome, and personally corresponded 
 with the Pope on the subject, at the same time 
 making a show of tolerance by liberating hundreds 
 of Catholic recusants. The policy to which he thus 
 clung was not only distasteful to his subjects and 
 opposed to the advice of all his ministers except 
 Buckingham, but had no chance of attaining the end 
 sought. Spain, having already achieved the object 
 for which she consented to negotiate with him, saw 
 no advantage to be gained by carrying the project 
 into effect. Her real designs contemplated the re- 
 establishment of Catholicism in the Palatinate by 
 restoring it to the son of Frederick, and bringing 
 him up as a Catholic at the Emperor’s court. She 
 accordingly instructed her ministers to retreat from 
 the negotiations. The eagerness of James, however, 
 was only increased by the reluctance of Spain. 
 Buckingham, who shared his impatience, suggested 
 to the young Prince that the settlement of the matter 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 171 
 
 would be expedited if he repaired to Madrid, and 
 wooed the Infanta in person. The King opposed this 
 step as imprudent, but unwillingly consented ; and in 
 February, 1623, Charles and Buckingham left England 
 in disguise, under assumed names, and reached 
 Madrid in March. The Spanish Court showed their 
 visitors the utmost courtesy; but when the terms of 
 contract were discussed, the bargaining was all on 
 one side. Charles,-fortified by his father’s pledge in 
 writing to perform every promise that he made, dis- 
 played his readiness to yield all the demands urged 
 upon him. A Catholic chapel was to be erected for 
 the Princess, which all persons were to be at liberty 
 to attend. Her household was to be composed of 
 Catholics, and the children of the marriage educated 
 in her faith. Lastly, the laws which made it penal 
 for Catholics to worship in their own houses were to 
 be repealed. To the arguments addressed to him, 
 with the view of effecting his own conversion, Charles 
 listened in silence. He and Buckingham endeavoured, 
 on the other hand, to obtain some concession in 
 relation to the Palatinate which might compensate 
 England for what had been thus surrendered. Upon 
 this point, however, the Spanish ministers would not 
 yield; and, when pressed, admitted that it was with 
 Spain a maxim of state never to employ force against 
 the Emperor. As, owing to the inaction of James, 
 the Palatinate was now at the mercy of the League, 
 and Frederick’s Electoral title had been declared 
 forfeited and bestowed upon.the Duke of Bavaria, no 
 hope was left of regaining either without recourse to 
 arms. Charles, therefore, regarded Spain’s positive 
 
172 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 refusal upon this point, coupled with her evasive 
 answers upon others, as virtually closing the negotia- 
 tion; but, concealing his mortification at defeat, and 
 affecting to consider his betrothal settled, he and 
 Buckingham returned home. 
 
 The manifestation of delight which greeted’ the 
 return of Charles after his unsuccessful enterprise 
 attested the nation’s hatred of Catholic alliances, and 
 his popularity was only due to its ignorance of how 
 much he had been ready to concede. The anger 
 which he and Buckingham (by whose advice he acted) 
 felt at having failed was soon vented in the shape of 
 a peremptory demand to the Spanish Court, delivered 
 by the English ambassador, that before the marriage 
 contract could be ratified, satisfaction must be given 
 for the surrender of the Palatinate to Frederick, or 
 _ war declared upon the Emperor to enforce it. This 
 being a distinct breach of the understanding to which 
 Spain had agreed, she broke off the negotiations, the 
 English ambassador was recalled, and preparations 
 were made for war. James, though chagrined at 
 losing the rich dowry which he expected with the 
 Infanta, was too much in the power of Buckingham 
 and the Prince to withstand the pressure they put 
 upon him to break with Spain. Parliament was 
 reluctantly resummoned in February, 1624, and a 
 garbled version of the transactions with the Spanish 
 Court laid before the Commons. ‘This answered the 
 purpose of extracting a large subsidy, which the King 
 pledged himself to devote to the expenses of the war. 
 A royal proclamation was then issued, declaring all 
 treaties with Spain at an end. Besides assenting to 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 173 
 
 a petition of both Houses that the statutes against 
 Catholics might be enforced, James announced that 
 he would suffer no indulgence of the prohibited 
 rites. ‘The Prince on his own account added a pledge 
 that, should he wed a Catholic princess, her liberty 
 of worship should be restricted to her own family, 
 and not extended to the recusants. 
 
 The warlike policy upon which the country was 
 now bent, and which Buckingham undertook to con- 
 duct, involved the formation of a treaty with the 
 United Provinces, whose territory the Spaniards had 
 recently invaded with a large force. The Dutch 
 were just then deservedly unpopular in England, on 
 account of the barbarous tortures and judicial murder 
 recently perpetrated, under colour of a charge of 
 conspiracy, by some of their officers, upon several 
 English merchants, whose settlement at Amboyna, one 
 of the Spice Islands, had excited their commercial 
 jealousy. To the demand for inquiry and redress 
 made by the English ambassador at the Hague, a 
 formally-apologetic reply was at last returned. With 
 this, under the political circumstances, England was 
 forced to be content, and four regiments of foot were 
 raised and transported into Holland. An alliance 
 against Spain and Austria was then contracted with 
 the Protestant powers of Denmark and Sweden, and 
 some of the Lutheran princes of North Germany ; 
 eventually being enlarged to include France, Savoy, 
 and Venice. The twofold object of the campaign 
 thus pompously inaugurated was to expel the Spaniards 
 from the Netherlands and to recéver the Palatinate, 
 but the result of all Buckingham’s preparations was 
 
174 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 but disaster and disgrace. The Dutch troops and 
 their English auxiliaries, commanded by Prince 
 Maurice of Orange, were worsted by Spinola in every 
 important engagement, and on the retirement of the 
 Prince into winter quarters many English officers 
 returned home. Another force of pressed recruits 
 was despatched to the Palatinate, under the command 
 of Count Mansfeldt, a partisan of the Elector, but, 
 owing to the inadequate provision made for, their 
 transport, sickness and famine so thinned their 
 numbers that by the time they reached the Rhine 
 they were unavailing for offensive warfare. 
 
 Before the actual rupture of the marriage-treaty 
 with Spain, James set on foot a negotiation with 
 Louis XIII., who (on the murder of his father, 
 Henry IV., in 1610) had succeeded to the throne of 
 France, for the hand of his sister, Henrietta Maria. 
 Under his weak rule the kingdom was virtually 
 governed by his astute minister, Cardinal Richelieu, 
 who was no more disposed than the advisers of Spain 
 had been to assent to a dynastic alliance with a 
 Protestant State without ample guarantees of Catholic 
 toleration. In spite of the solemn pledges to the 
 contrary which James and the Prince had so recently 
 taken to Parliament, they consented, after some hesi- 
 tation, to sign a secret undertaking that, in contem- 
 plation of the intended marriage, all English Catholics 
 should be permitted to enjoy full liberty of worship 
 without molestation. On being further pressed, they 
 agreed to set free all Catholics imprisoned on account 
 of their faith sincethe rising of Parliament, and that 
 the recent fines for recusancy should be repaid. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 175 
 
 Finally, James was induced by the Prince and Buck- 
 ingham to promise that English ships should assist 
 Louis in blockading the town of Rochelle, which had 
 been seized by the Huguenot leader, Soubise, who 
 declared his intention of holding it until security 
 was given for toleration. It is needless to say that 
 the exaction of these conditions was strictly con- 
 cealed from the public ear in England. The pre- 
 liminaries having been thus settled, the Princess 
 prepared for her departure, but the nuptials were 
 delayed by the death of James, which occurred after 
 a short illness, March 27, 1625. 
 
176 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 CHAPTER, Ndit 
 
 Foreigh influences on political history from the accession of 
 Charles I. to the outbreak of the Civil War. 
 
 CHARLES, although born in Scotland three years before 
 his father’s succession to the throne of Elizabeth, spent 
 his youth and early manhood upon English soil, but 
 this training failed to imbue him with English sym- 
 pathies. His congenital bias, the traditions he 
 adopted from his father, and the influence exerted by 
 his confidential advisers, so tinged his character and 
 dictated his policy that he can only be regarded as a 
 foreign ruler. It would be impossible, within the 
 limits of this sketch, to trace in detail the disastrous 
 course of his attempt to impose the yoke of autocracy 
 upon the neck of a free people. It must suffice to 
 dwell upon those incidents of his reign in which the 
 operation of foreign influences is most marked, and 
 to indicate the rest in outline. 
 
 An abiding source of foreign influence was present 
 with Charles from the date of his accession in the 
 person of the French Catholic princess whom he 
 made his Queen. ‘Though while Buckingham lived 
 she had far less power over her husband than she 
 afterwards obtained, she was early recognised by the 
 nation as a visible danger. Besides the Catholic 
 household which the bride brought with her on her 
 arrival in June, 1625, she was attended by twenty- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. wy 
 (INSTI 
 
 nine priests, both regular and secular, together with a, 
 bishop. Mass was celebrated in her apartments,*but 
 no English man or woman was allowed to be present. 
 The priests soon chafed at this restraint, and urged 
 the King to fit up a chapel for their use at St. James’s 
 Palace; but, as he resented their intrusion on his 
 domestic privacy and the injudicious influence which 
 they exercised upon the Queen, whose capricious 
 temper needed control, he paid no heed to the 
 request. The limits of indulgence with which they 
 were discontented were too wide for the satisfaction 
 of the people’s representatives in Parliament. While 
 granting two subsidies for the war to recover the 
 Palatinate, they petitioned the King to put the penal 
 statutes against Catholics into immediate force. ‘To 
 this appeal Charles, with the pledge he had given to 
 Richelieu fresh in his recollection, returned a gracious 
 answer. Upon a cognate question which strongly 
 moved the religious feeling of the Commons he 
 was less conciliating. One of the royal chaplains, 
 Dr. Montague, who had laid stress in his sermons 
 upon the points in which the Anglican Church 
 differed from that of Geneva and those in which it 
 agreed with the Church of Rome, was summoned to 
 answer at the bar of the House the charge of impugn- 
 ing the Articles agreed to in 1562. The King took 
 umbrage at this arraignment, as a violation of his 
 prerogative, and when Montague was committed to 
 prison soon released him, and afterwards promoted 
 him to a bishopric. 
 
 After another disagreement with the Commons re- 
 specting a grant of the duties of tonnage and poundage, 
 
 N 
 
 TION 
 
 a4 
 + PW 
 AY A 
 
 ae 
 
178 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 which, mindful of the arbitrary procedure of James, 
 they limited to a year instead of for life, Charles 
 justified their mistrust by proceeding to exact, on his 
 own authority, an impost of ‘“‘coat and conduct 
 money” for the troops levied for the Palatinate. 
 Public indignation was at the same time aroused by 
 the discovery of the pledge given to France by James 
 that English ships should be employed to reduce the 
 Huguenot stronghold of Rochelle. Richelieu having 
 applied to Charles for the fulfilment of this pledge, 
 he reluctantly complied; but, ashamed to let the 
 destination of the force be known, gave out that it 
 was intended to join the French in attacking Genoa, 
 then an ally of the Empire. The fleet had been 
 grossly neglected under Buckingham’s rule, but one 
 man-of-war and seven large merchant-vessels were 
 fitted out and despatched under Vice-Admiral 
 Pennington. On arriving off Dieppe, the secret of 
 their real destination was learned by the crew, who at 
 once drew up a strong protest, and Pennington was 
 forced to return to the Downs. By dint of a fresh 
 deception, the fleet was once more mustered at 
 Dieppe, where Pennington had received orders to 
 deliver up his own vessel to the French commander, 
 and to enforce obedience, if necessary, from the 
 merchant-captains by firing upon them. He suc- 
 ceeded in intimidating all but one officer to permit 
 the French troops destined for Rochelle to embark, 
 but, having arrived there, the English crews refused 
 to fight, and either deserted to the Huguenots or 
 made their way home. 
 
 The mood in which the House met on reassembling 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 179 
 
 in August was calmly resolute. In reply to the 
 King’s demand for a further subsidy to carry on the 
 war, the Commons claimed their right to discuss 
 grievances before supplies. ‘The continued neglect 
 of the statutes against the Catholics, the maladminis- 
 tration of the navy, the concentration of many high 
 offices of state in Buckingham’s person, and the sale 
 of others to his satellites were gravely denounced 
 by such weighty speakers as Coke and Sir Robert 
 Cotton. But the King’s impatience would not allow 
 time for the presentation of an address embodying 
 these complaints. After a session of twelve days, he 
 abruptly dissolved Parliament. 
 
 To appease the public discontent, Buckingham, by 
 means of forced loans and the suspension of official 
 salaries; contrived to fit out a naval armament, to 
 which the United Provinces contributed a squadron, 
 for a descent upon the coast of Spain, but, with his 
 usual incapacity, he entrusted the expedition to an 
 incompetent general, Lord Wimbledon, who, after 
 losing many men by shipwreck and disease, returned 
 home without having achieved the smallest success. 
 To meet the debt incurred by this enterprise, 
 Buckingham advised the King to summon a new 
 Parliament, but, to guard against the opposition he ex- 
 pected, debarred several leading members of the House 
 from obtaining seats by nominating them as Sheriffs 
 of their counties. He further attempted to conciliate 
 the Puritan party by levying fines upon recusants, 
 and issuing a proclamation against Catholic mission- 
 aries. ‘These tactics proved unavailing to deprecate 
 the hostility of the Parliament which met in February, 
 
 N 2 
 
180 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 1626. The post of patriotic leader was filled by Sir 
 John Eliot, a Cornish country gentleman of high 
 character and culture, fired by an ardent love of 
 liberty. He at once stepped forth as the accuser of 
 Buckingham, to whose evil counsels and maladminis- 
 tration he attributed the disasters which had befallen 
 the nation. ‘The minister’s impeachment was voted 
 by the Commons, and he was summoned to the bar 
 of the Lords. While the proceedings were pending, 
 Charles tried to quash them by arresting Eliot and 
 another member who had drawn up the impeach- 
 ment, but, the Commons refusing to attend to any 
 business in their absence, he was forced to release 
 them. After a month’s delay, Buckingham prepared 
 his defence, but the King would not suffer the trial to 
 proceed, and, rejecting a petition for the favourite’s 
 dismissal, again dissolved Parliament. 
 
 After ordering all copies of the petition recently 
 ypresented by the Commons to be burned, the King 
 “proceeded to levy, by forced benevolences and loans, 
 ‘the subsidies which they had constitutionally with- 
 held. Every device of intimidation was resorted to 
 in order to extort money from the nation. William 
 Laud, Bishop of Bath and Wells, who rose into 
 favour as chief ecclesiastical champion of the royal 
 doctrine of “divine right,” formulated instructions 
 that the clergy should inculcate the duty of lending 
 or giving money to the King, without Parliamentary 
 sanction, as a merit essential to salvation. One of 
 his partisans carried this doctrine to the length of 
 insisting upon the subject’s duty of “passive obe- 
 dience” to commands of the ‘‘Lord’s anointed,” 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 181 
 
 even if contrary to the laws of God or Nature. For 
 refusing to license a sermon of this tenor, the Primate, 
 Abbot, was suspended from his functions. <A similar 
 disgrace was inflicted upon Williams, Bishop of 
 Lincoln, for his opposition, and the Chief Justice, 
 Crewe, who submitted that the levy of forced loans was 
 illegal, was dismissed from his post. Yet, in spite of 
 all the pressure put upon the country, scarcely any 
 funds were forthcoming. Many counties boldly 
 declined to contribute. Several peers protested 
 against the illegality of the levy, and two hundred 
 gentlemen, including John Hampden, a leading land- 
 owner of Buckinghamshire, were brought before the 
 Council and imprisoned for their refusal to lend. 
 
 At this crisis, a rupture which occurred in the 
 relations between England and France led to a 
 change of policy. The King’s sudden dismissal of 
 the Queen’s French attendants, whose insolent be- 
 haviour and intrigues kept the royal household in 
 continual discord, was one cause of offence to the 
 French Court; another was the breach of faith 
 which he committed in persecuting the English 
 Catholics; a third was the evasion of his pledge 
 to assist in reducing Rochelle. The quarrel was 
 aggravated by the influence of Buckingham, whose 
 relations with Henrietta Maria were far from cordial, 
 and who was piqued by an intimation that his 
 presence would be unwelcome in Paris, which he 
 had proposed to visit. Actuated as well by these 
 motives as by the hope of gaining popularity, he 
 collected in July, 1627, a fleet of a hundred vessels, 
 and, assuming the command, sailed to the relief of 
 
182 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Rochelle. Again his incapacity proved fatal to the 
 expedition. After landing his troops on the Isle of 
 Rhé, and fruitlessly besieging the castle of St. Martin, 
 he tried to retreat to his ships over a narrow cause- 
 way under a cross-fire which swept off 2,000 of his 
 men. On his return to England in November with 
 the remnant of his fleet, Charles welcomed him with 
 tokens of unabated regard, which only deepened the 
 national aversion. 
 
 The necessity of obtaining fresh supplies obliged 
 the King to summon a Parliament early in 1628. 
 The elections were generally unfavourable to the 
 Court candidates, and the prominent patriots were 
 again returned ; Eliot’s leadership being ably seconded 
 by John Pym, a Somersetshire gentleman of states- 
 manlike genius and determination. At their instance 
 the House drew up and presented a Petition of Right 
 to the King, setting forth the statutes which forbade 
 taxation without the authority of Parliament, the levy 
 of forced loans, the infliction of arbitrary punish- 
 ments, and praying that the violation of these statutes 
 committed during the past and present reigns might 
 no longer be permitted. When Charles returned an 
 evasive answer to the Petition, Eliot proceeded to 
 move a Remonstrance upon the state of the realm, 
 denouncing Buckingham by name as the cause of its 
 disorders. Though here interrupted by the Speaker, 
 Finch, who was charged by the King to prevent any 
 aspersion upon the minister, the Commons resolved, in 
 defiance of this injunction, that the Duke should be 
 named. Buckingham, who had already despatched 
 another expedition to Rochelle, which proved as fruit- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 183 
 
 less as the last, was hopeful of redeeming his failures 
 by a third attempt, for which he required supplies, and 
 advised Charles to assent to the Petition. The King, 
 having obtained an opinion from the Judges that his 
 prerogative right to levy dues not granted by Parlia- 
 ment would remain intact, assented to the Petition, 
 with this mental reservation. The event was celebrated 
 by a burst of popular rejoicing, and the Commons 
 voted the subsidies demanded. But their Remon- 
 strance, when presented to Charles, was ungraciously 
 received, and the question of voting him the duties 
 of tonnage and poundage for a year had no sooner 
 been mooted than the King, who had reserved these 
 among the taxes he intended to levy at pleasure, 
 hastily prorogued Parliament. Amid ominous signs 
 of his unpopularity, Buckingham, having mustered 
 a large force of men and ships at Portsmouth, was 
 on the eve of starting for a last expedition to Rochelle 
 when a fanatic, named Felton, inflamed by hatred of 
 a public enemy, stabbed him to the heart. 
 
 No change for the better resulted in the ad- 
 ministration of affairs, the place of Buckingham being 
 filled by Weston, one of his creatures. The expedition 
 to Rochelle failed in accomplishing the relief of the 
 Huguenot stronghold, whose defenders were forced 
 to surrender it. In Germany, also, the Protestant 
 cause lay crushed, without the tender of any effectual 
 aid by the nation most in sympathy with it. At home, 
 the Puritan majority saw with indignation that the 
 party in the Church which absorbed the Crown’s 
 favour and patronage was approaching more nearly to 
 the doctrine and ritual of Rome; Laud, now Bishop 
 
184 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 of London, who had the control of ecclesiastical 
 affairs, leading this movement. When Parliament reas- 
 sembled in January, 1629, the reform of the Church 
 was the first subject to which the Commons turned, 
 and, though the King tried to divert their attention, 
 they persisted in reavowing the interpretation of the 
 Articles laid down in the reign of Elizabeth, and 
 repudiating any other. ‘They next dealt with the 
 question of illegal customs. ‘The Crown farmers 
 whom they summoned to the bar of the House 
 having refused to answer the charges brought against 
 them, on the plea of the King’s command, a protest 
 against this evasion was drawn up by the patriot 
 leaders, which the House was about to discuss, when 
 the Speaker intimated that he had orders to adjourn. 
 Determined to maintain their liberties, the door of 
 the House was locked, and the Speaker forcibly kept 
 in his seat, while Eliot denounced the Lord Treasurer 
 (Weston) as responsible for the illegality in question. 
 A series of resolutions was then passed that whoever 
 brought in innovations in religion or advised the levy 
 of subsidies without Parliamentary sanction was ‘‘a 
 capital enemy to the kingdom and commonwealth,” 
 and that every one willingly complying with such 
 unlawful acts was ‘‘a betrayer of the liberty of 
 England.” 
 
 Parliament was immediately dissolved by Charles, 
 and a proclamation announced that, in consequence 
 of the “abuse” of their privileges by the Commons, 
 he must abandon his practice of frequently summon- 
 ing them. For the next eleven years he governed 
 England by the sole authority of his will. Nine of 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 185 
 
 the late Parliamentary leaders were committed to the 
 Tower, their plea that arbitrary imprisonment was 
 contrary to the King’s confirmation of the Petition of 
 Right being overruled by the Judges. Eliot and two 
 other members were sentenced to heavy fines and 
 imprisonment during the King’s pleasure; the former, 
 after a close confinement of three years and a half, 
 dying in the Tower. Urged by the counsel of the 
 Queen, who, now that Buckingham was removed, 
 acquired an influence which soon became paramount,} 
 Charles assumed the vé/e of an absolute sovereign. 
 To free himself from the need of applying to Parlia- 
 ment for subsidies, he studied to make peace abroad 
 and to economise at home. After the fall of Rochelle, 
 he had troops to spare for the aid of Protestantism 
 in Germany, which was now crushed under the heel 
 of the Empire, but he let the opportunity slip. The 
 honour of reviving the hopes of the cause and re- 
 covering the Palatinate was reserved for Gustavus 
 Adolphus, King of Sweden, by whom an appeal was 
 made to him for help at the outset of the campaign, 
 but Charles refused it and made a treaty of peace 
 with Spain in 1630. When Gustavus established 
 his reputation as a victorious general, Charles was 
 willing to share in his success, and sent a con- 
 tingent of Scotch and English troops to take part 
 in the war; but, after the recovery of the Palatinate, 
 when Gustavus stipulated that before handing it 
 
 1 For details respecting the part which the Queen took in 
 influencing her husband’s foreign policy, the reader may 
 consult Mr. Gardiner’s ‘* Personal Government of Charles I.,” 
 passim. 
 
186 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 over to Frederick, Charles should declare war against 
 Spain, he again refused, and withdrew from further 
 action. 
 
 Every expedient was tried that the ingenuity of 
 the Crown officers could suggest to maintain the 
 revenue. Prerogative rights, long disused, were re- 
 vived. Landowners were obliged to compound for 
 not taking upon them the rank of knighthood. The 
 ancient forest-laws were enforced to the uttermost, 
 and large disafforested tracts claimed as encroach- 
 ments. Defective titles were searched out by a 
 commission, and fines exacted for renewing old grants. 
 The jurisdiction of the Court of Star-Chamber was 
 extended to embrace every description of offence, 
 and inflict pecuniary penalties, which brought in 
 enormous profits. Monopolies, which Charles had 
 undertaken to abandon, were granted to farmers, who 
 enhanced the price of the common articles of daily 
 consumption. Custom-duties were levied at the ports, 
 and loans or benevolences exacted from every shire. 
 
 The public discontent which these proceedings 
 excited was partially checked by a prevailing convic- 
 tion of the eventual triumph of justice and by the 
 increase of commercial prosperity that accompanied 
 peace. Many patriots, indeed, could not brook the 
 humiliation of waiting upon a tyrant’s pleasure, and, 
 in despair of regaining freedom, sought a new home 
 beyond the Atlantic. The patience with which the 
 bulk of the nation bore the violation of their liberties 
 probably deceived the King into believing that he 
 might pursue his despotic course with impunity. This 
 belief was not shared by Sir Thomas Wentworth, a 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 187 
 
 statesman who now filled a leading place in the 
 administration of affairs. After a temporary allegiance 
 to the party of patriotism, he abandoned it, and took 
 service under Charles, who soon recognised his ad- 
 ministrative capacity, made him a peer, and admitted 
 him to equality with Laud in the Council. His 
 powerful mind was possessed by the idea of exalting 
 the royal prerogative to a height it had never yet 
 reached in England, and of consolidating its power 
 by such safeguards as would render resistance im- 
 possible. The arena which he chose for carrying out 
 his favourite policy of “thorough” was the govern- 
 ment of Ireland, where he would be less fettered by 
 public opinion than at home. 
 
 The condition of that country, which, after the 
 pacification of a revolt excited by Spain at the 
 close of Elizabeth’s reign, had been dealt with as a 
 reconquered territory, offered a tempting field for 
 further experiments. ‘The old tribal system of land- 
 tenure had been abolished, the chiefs constituted 
 as land-owners, and their clansmen as tenants. The 
 English law of trial by jury had been substituted for 
 the ancient Brehon ‘judicature. Efforts were made 
 to force the people to conform to the Protestant faith, 
 but their only result was to bring the English Catholics 
 of the Pale into closer union with their Celtic co- 
 religionists. 
 
 In 1610 a systematic confiscation of about 
 two-thirds of the land in the north of Ireland was 
 made by the English Government, upon the ground 
 that the owners had taken part in a recent revolt. 
 The territory thus seized was then allotted to a 
 
188 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 number of Scotch and English colonists. The 
 prosperity and loyalty of Ulster still testifies to the 
 local success which attended this measure, but, so far 
 as the rest of Ireland was concerned, it intensified 
 the hatred of the people to English rule, and their 
 memory of the wrong has never died out. To Went- 
 worth, however, who relied upon the power of terrorism, 
 disaffection presented no difficulties. During the five 
 years that followed his appointment as Lord Deputy 
 in 1633, the hierarchy, the nobility, and the gentry 
 in turn were forced to submit to his despotism. While, 
 on the one hand, he made the law respected, re- 
 pressed disorder, and developed commerce; on the 
 other, he coerced juries, stirred up discord between 
 Catholics and Protestants, threatened the Connaught 
 landowners with a ‘‘ plantation” like that of Ulster, 
 and summoned Parliament only to overawe it into 
 voting large subsidies for the support of an army 
 designed for the King’s service in England. If the 
 object of his policy were to convince Charles that 
 it was possible to make a tool of Parliament, he un- 
 doubtedly succeeded, but at the cost of sacrificing 
 his own life and the throne as well as the life of his 
 master. 
 
 A corresponding policy was simultaneously pursued 
 in England by Laud, who, on the death of Abbot, 
 was raised to the primacy. His aim was to elevate 
 the Church of England to equality with that of Rome, 
 both of them being in his view branches of the 
 Universal Catholic Church as it existed in ideal 
 perfection before the Council of Nice. While repu- 
 diating the corruptions which had crept into the 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 189 
 
 Romish doctrine and ritual, he aspired to free 
 Anglicanism from the innovations introduced by 
 Luther and Calvin, whose rejection of episcopacy 
 nullified the claim of the Reformed communions 
 of Germany, Switzerland, Holland, and France, to 
 orthodoxy. He rigorously carried out this theory by 
 sundering the ties of Christian fellowship which had 
 united the English and Continental congregations 
 since the Reformation. The English envoy in Paris 
 was directed not to attend the Huguenot chapel at 
 Charenton; English merchants and_ soldiers in 
 Holland were forbidden to worship in Calvinistic 
 churches. The Huguenot and Walloon refugees 
 were deprived of permission to perform their own 
 services, and ordered to conform to the Anglican 
 ritual. Many of them, rather than comply, abandoned 
 the country. Still greater severity was shown in 
 coercing the Puritan party, by means of the Court 
 of High Commission. ‘The ceremonies most ob- 
 noxious to ultra-Protestant sensibilities were en- 
 forced in every parish church, and the refractory 
 clergy either suspended or deprived. The country 
 gentlemen, with whom some of the ejected in- 
 cumbents found shelter as private chaplains, were 
 deprived of the privilege of keeping them. Vacant 
 benefices were filled by High Churchmen, and an 
 attempt on the part of the Puritans to purchase 
 advowsons, and vest the appointment of suitable 
 ministers in feoffees, was defeated by proceedings in 
 the Star Chamber. ‘The strict observance of Sunday, 
 to which the Puritans adhered, and which a statute 
 had been passed to maintain, was set at nought by 
 
Igo POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Laud’s’ express orders. The “ Book of Sports “ 
 drawn up by James, which declared what pastimes 
 were lawful and desirable on Sabbath days and 
 festivals, was reissued, and the clergy were directed to 
 read it from the pulpit under pain of deprivation. 
 The tendency of Laud’s anti-Puritan crusade to 
 assimilate Anglican doctrine and practice to those 
 of Rome was recognised by the Pope’s secret offer to 
 make him a Cardinal, and, though this was declined, 
 he could hardly have been blind to its significance. 
 One of his Bishops, Montague, was actually a Roman 
 Catholic ; and another, Goodman, made a dying con- 
 fession of that faith. The Romish tenets of the 
 real presence in the Eucharist, of prayers for the 
 dead, and auricular confession were avowed by other 
 of the prelates and clergy. The celibacy of priests 
 was advocated by Laud himself. ‘The elaborate rites 
 and splendid vestments of Romish worship were 
 imitated in his chapel at Lambeth, and introduced 
 into many cathedral and parish churches, all opposi- 
 tion on the part of parsons or churchwardens being 
 put down by legal penalties. As the~ purpose of 
 this religious policy became apparent, the panic it 
 excited was even greater than that aroused by the 
 aggressions upon civil liberty. While the Protestant 
 feeling of the country was thus outraged, the Catholic 
 recusants enjoyed comparative immunity from fines, 
 and were unmolested in their private devotions. 
 The Queen threw open her chapel in Somerset 
 House to all who chose to attend, and some- 
 times took the young Prince with her to mass. 
 The voice of Parliament being silenced, the zealots: 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. Igt 
 
 of the Puritan party found no better means of pro- 
 test than the issue of anonymous pamphlets, which 
 were hawked from door to door. Publications to 
 which the authors ventured to put their names ren- 
 dered them liable to barbarous punishment. Alex- 
 ander Leighton, a Puritan minister, who had written 
 disrespectfully of the Queen and the Bishops, was 
 cited by Laud in the Star Chamber, and condemned 
 to degradation from his office, exposure in the pil- 
 lory, flogging, mutilation, and branding, followed by 
 imprisonment for life.- A similar sentence was in- 
 flicted upon William Prynne, a learned antiquary, for 
 publishing a fanatical tirade against the stage, which 
 indirectly reflected upon the Queen. Puritans of a 
 less violent type, hopeless of contending against such 
 persecutors, accepted the alternative of emigrating to 
 the American colonies of Virginia and New England. 
 During the eleven years that Parliament was in abey- 
 ance, the number of emigrants, of whom the bulk 
 came from the eastern counties, is estimated at 
 20,000. It included men of various callings, asso- 
 ciated by the sympathy of strong religious feeling 
 and narrow but profound convictions. The effect 
 produced by the persecution they had undergone was 
 shown by their abolition of episcopal government 
 and prohibition of the Prayer-book in the worship 
 of their Colonial churches. 
 
 By the economy of Weston, Lord Portland, the 
 arbitrary levying of imposts, and grants of monopo- 
 lies, Charles succeeded in reducing the debts of the 
 Crown and in equalising his revenue and expendi- 
 ture. But no margin was left for extraordinary 
 
192 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 charges, and soon after Weston’s death, in 1635, the 
 need of providing for them arose in connexion with 
 foreign affairs. ‘The alliance between France and 
 Holland, in which England had formerly joined, had 
 grown since the Stuarts abandoned it into a formid- 
 able rivalry against her. The ancient hostility of 
 France had revived; the Dutch were now avowed com- 
 petitors of the English merchants all over the world. 
 A union of the two fleets would have given them com- 
 mand of the Channel, and a project for partitioning 
 the Spanish provinces in the Netherlands was reported 
 to be in contemplation, whereby Dunkirk was to be 
 allotted to France. To foil this project, Charles 
 negotiated with Spain, and agreed to share with her 
 the cost of providing a defensive fleet. At the 
 instance of his law-officer, Noy, he revived an obsolete 
 usage of demanding the provision of ships from the 
 port-towns and sea-board counties, and by dint of 
 fines and imprisonments exacted sufficient money to 
 equip a fleet ; but, Spain having failed to fulfil her 
 contract, Charles would not venture upon the ex- 
 pedition alone. By Laud’s advice, however, he 
 resolved to increase the navy, by extending the levy 
 of ‘“‘ship-money ” to the whole country. ‘This fresh 
 violation of constitutional law gave an increased 
 impetus to emigration, several peers and landowners 
 preparing for settlement in America. Among the 
 number was John Hampden, who had retired to his 
 estate when the Parliament of 1629 was dissolved. 
 But he abandoned the idea of emigration at the 
 bidding of a sudden impulse to withstand the illegal 
 exaction of ship-money in Buckinghamshire, and 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 193 
 
 headed the list of those who refused to pay it. In 
 May, 1637, Hampden was summoned by a writ from 
 the Exchequer to show cause why his lands should 
 not be charged with ship-money, and the matter was 
 argued before the Bench for twelve days in the winter 
 of that year. While the Crown relied upon its pre- 
 rogative, it was proved on behalf of Hampden that 
 the impost had only been levied upon occasions of 
 danger within the maritime counties and sea-ports, 
 and that all arbitrary taxation was disallowed by the 
 Petition of Right. The Court delayed judgment for 
 several months, and in the meantime an opposition 
 to the King’s despotic course from a foreign quarter, 
 which had long been gathering force, assumed a 
 menacing aspect. 
 
 Since the revival by James of episcopal govern- 
 ment in Scotland, and the subjection of the General 
 Assembly to the Crown, that country had remained 
 quiescent. The late King, satisfied with this modicum 
 of authority, and knowing the temper of the people 
 too well to attempt to force the English Liturgy and 
 Canons upon them, had rejected Laud’s advice to 
 that effect. But Charles had more obstinacy and less 
 acumen, and when Laud, now in full power, repeated 
 this counsel, he determined to follow it. The first 
 innovation was cautiously made by directing the 
 Bishops to assume their canonical vestments, but was 
 followed by a royal warrant that all ministers should 
 wear the surplice. Resistance was at once aroused ; 
 parish meetings were held throughout the country, 
 and ministers who obeyed the mandate were aban- 
 doned by their flocks. ‘Though several nobles 
 
 O 
 
IQ4 . POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 supported this opposition, Charles disregarded it. In 
 1636 he issued a Book of Canons, which put the 
 whole government of the Church under episcopal 
 rule, subordinated to the Crown, and in the following 
 year prescribed a new Liturgy, founded upon the 
 Anglican Prayer-book, in place of the Book of 
 Common Order, which Knox had modelled upon 
 the Liturgy of Calvin. In July, 1637, the first attempt 
 to use the new Liturgy in St. Giles’s Church, Edin- 
 burgh, led to a riot, which obliged the authorities to 
 clear the church. After applying to the Judges, who 
 decided that the royal injunction did not require the 
 use of the Liturgy, but its purchase only, the clergy 
 discontinued the service, but were peremptorily 
 ordered by Laud to resume it. Protests against this 
 order were sent in from all parts of the kingdom, the 
 nobles were charged with petitions to the King, and 
 an organised opposition was formed in Edinburgh. 
 
 This revolt emboldened the English Puritans to 
 intemperate denunciations of the tyranny under 
 which they were writhing. Prynne from his prison 
 put forth a tract which reviled the Bishops as wolves 
 and agents of hell, and a clergyman named Burton 
 appealed to the resistance of all Christians against 
 them. The writers were summoned by Laud into 
 the Star Chamber, and sentenced to his favourite 
 punishments of mutilation in the pillory and im- 
 prisonment for life. An immense crowd applauded 
 the victims as martyrs, and groaned at their sufferings, 
 but these symptoms of public discontent only pro- 
 voked Laud to redoubled severities. 
 
 In June, 1638, while the agitation was at its height, 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 195 
 
 the Judges delivered their decision in the case of the 
 King against Hampden, a majority of seven against five 
 pronouncing that all statutes were void which limited 
 the King’s power to tax his subjects at will. Though 
 the obvious effect of this decree was to rivet the yoke 
 of tyranny, it was followed by no immediate outbreak ; 
 the nation, which already watched the progress of 
 affairs in Scotland with keen interest, discerning 
 that the same issue was at stake upon both sides of 
 the Tweed. ‘The resistance organised by the Scots 
 to the enforcement of the new Liturgy took the form 
 of a renewal of the Covenant drawn up on the 
 occasion of Mary Stuart’s intrigues with Spain to 
 overthrow the Reformation and restore the Romish 
 faith. In March, 1638, this was signed by an en- 
 thusiastic assembly in the Grey Friars’ Churchyard, 
 Edinburgh, and subscriptions to it were obtained 
 from all parts of the country. The Marquis of 
 Hamilton, whom the King sent to put down the 
 agitation, was met by a unanimous demand for the 
 withdrawal of the Liturgy and Canons and the resto- 
 ration of freedom to Parliament and the General 
 Assembly. His threats of war were disregarded, and 
 the Lords of the Scottish Council were so alarmed 
 by the aspect of affairs that they advised Charles to 
 yield. Rejecting this advice, he endeavoured to raise 
 money and troops for the work of coercion. After 
 applying in vain to Spain for a loan, or for a small 
 force to enable him to hold Edinburgh, he was 
 obliged to equip a fleet with funds subscribed by the 
 English Catholics. The Scots meantime prepared 
 for a campaign. Many volunteers who had enlisted 
 O 2 
 
196 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 on the Protestant side in Germany were summoned 
 home; a tax was raised throughout the kingdom, 
 and the command of the army entrusted to General 
 Leslie, who had served under Gustavus Adolphus. 
 Their determined attitude forced the King to tem- 
 porise. Hamilton was instructed to promise that the 
 Covenant should be allowed, the Liturgy revoked, 
 and episcopal authority curtailed; that the General 
 Assembly should be immediately summoned, and 
 Parliament convoked in the following year. In 
 November, 1638, the Assembly accordingly met, but 
 no sooner indicated its intention of denouncing 
 episcopal government than it was dissolved by 
 Hamilton. In defiance of his mandate, a majority 
 of the members resolved that the session should con- 
 tinue, and passed a series of Acts which restored 
 Presbyterian Church-government, and set aside the 
 High Commission, Liturgy, and Canons prescribed 
 by Laud as null and void. 
 
 Charles now resolved to put down the rebellion by 
 force, and was vehemently urged to that course by 
 Laud and Wentworth, who dreaded the effect of a 
 successful resistance in Scotland upon the English 
 Puritans. Their sympathy with the rebels was 
 notorious, and it was surmised that the leaders of the 
 two parties were in correspondence. ‘Though Charles 
 mustered an army at York and sent a fleet into the 
 Forth, he hesitated to cross the border. But the 
 resolution of the Scots was firmer than his own. 
 Edinburgh, Stirling, and Dumbarton were seized, and 
 a strong force occupied Aberdeen. As soon as the 
 fleet entered the Forth, Leslie marched to the Tweed, 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 197 
 
 and when the royal troops advanced to meet him 
 put his troops in array of battle. But the King soon 
 found that he could not trust his own army, and was 
 constrained to temporise once more by assenting to 
 the demands of the Scots for a free Assembly and a 
 new Parliament. ‘Their leaders, who put no faith in 
 his promises, prepared for the worst by seeking the 
 aid of France. The favourable reception of their 
 overtures by Richelieu coming to the knowledge of 
 Charles, he sought to turn it to advantage. Wentworth 
 (now raised to be Earl of Strafford) advised him to 
 summon an English Parliament, and appeal to its 
 loyalty, upon the production of this treasonable 
 correspondence, for a large subsidy to suppress the 
 rebellion. The writs were issued, and Parliament 
 met in April, 1640. But its composition and temper 
 were unchanged by the lapse of eleven years, and 
 Charles and his advisers failed to delude the patriot 
 leaders into voting for a war with their Scottish 
 brethren. Before supplies were granted, they insisted 
 upon the redress of the wrongs inflicted on the 
 national faith and liberty. After a vain attempt to 
 bribe the Commons by offering to abandon ship- 
 money, Charles dissolved Parliament. His evil genius, 
 Strafford, persuaded him that, with the aid of 
 Irish troops whom he had collected, the army mus- 
 tered in the north was strong enough to overpower 
 the Scots. But the Covenanter generals, Leslie and 
 Montrose, were already prepared for the campaign. 
 Crossing the border in August, their army encountered 
 the royal troops at a ford of the Tyne, and effected 
 its passage with little resistance, the discomfited 
 
198 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 English retreating first to Newcastle, and thence to 
 York. From Newcastle the Scots sent proposals of 
 peace to the King, praying that their grievances 
 should be considered and a firm peace settled, by 
 the advice of the English Parliament. Unable to 
 rely upon his troops, which proved too undisciplined 
 for active service, Charles was forced to negotiate for 
 a truce. From his difficulties at home no escape 
 seemed possible without resummoning Parliament. 
 A petition to this effect, presented to him by twelve 
 peers, setting forth the disaffected condition of the 
 country, was seconded by the citizens of London and 
 the gentry of Yorkshire. All attempts to raise a loan 
 from the great mercantile bodies failed. A London 
 mob attacked Laud’s palace at Lambeth, and when 
 one of the ringleaders was executed for treason, his 
 followers took reprisals by breaking open the prisons. 
 The newly-levied troops mutinied against their officers 
 who belonged to Laud’s party, and manifested their 
 Puritan sympathies by tearing down the altar-rails in 
 the churches as they passed. Yielding to the neces- 
 sity, Charles convoked a great Council of the peers 
 at York, at which he announced his intention of 
 summoning Parliament, and conferred with them 
 upon the urgency of a settlement with the Scots. 
 Terms were at last arranged whereby the: Scottish 
 army was to retain possession of Durham and North- 
 umberland, and be maintained by the King until a 
 definitive treaty should be signed, the English army 
 meantime remaining undisbanded. 
 
 The new Parliament, known hereafter as the Long 
 Parliament, met on November 3, 1640. Pym, Hamp- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 199 
 
 den, and the patriotic party were strengthened by 
 notable accessions. ‘The nation’s sense of the crisis 
 was attested by a sudden suspension of the tide of 
 emigration to New England, a copious issue of political 
 pamphlets, and an influx into the House of petitions 
 from all parts of the country. ‘The first task of the 
 Commons was to draw up a list of the leading 
 agents of royal misgovernment, and frame indictments 
 against them. Strafford, as the master-spirit and an 
 apostate from the faith of patriotism, headed the 
 list. His impeachment was voted, and he was com- 
 mitted to the Tower. Finch, Lord Keeper, and 
 Windebank, a Secretary of State, fled into exile to 
 escape similar charges. Laud was the next to fall, 
 and Sir Robert Berkeley, one of the Judges who 
 had decreed the legality of ship-money, shared his 
 fate. By a series of Acts the illegality of that impost 
 was affirmed, the judgment in Hampden’s case set 
 aside, and taxation without the consent of Parliament 
 declared invalid. Prynne and other victims of Laud’s 
 cruelty were released from prison, and made a tri- 
 umphal entry into London. Commissioners were 
 despatched into every county to demolish or remove 
 images and other “reliques of idolatry out of all 
 churches and chapels.” The debates of a Com- 
 mittee appointed to consider the question of Church- 
 reform manifested great diversity of opinion, a Pres- 
 byterian section demanding the abolition of episcopal 
 government, and another, led by the younger Sir 
 Harry Vane, being as hostile to Presbyterianism as 
 to Prelacy. The bulk of the House, however, agreed, 
 as a modicum of reform, to the exclusion of the 
 
200 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 Bishops from the House of Lords, and in March, 
 1641, a Bill to that effect was carried. 
 
 The King was, for the moment, too paralysed by 
 the rapidity of these assaults on his prerogative to 
 attempt resistance. Intending to save Strafford’s life 
 he did not interfere with his impeachment; but when, 
 after a fortnight’s trial, the Commons abandoned 
 proceedings the success of which was questionable, 
 and substituted a bill of attainder that was carried by 
 both Houses, Charles saw a chance of intervening. 
 Negotiations for a compromise took place between 
 him and the Parliamentary leaders. The arrange- 
 ment in contemplation would have entrusted them 
 with the chief administration of home and foreign 
 affairs, but all hope of effecting it was soon dispelled 
 by evidence of the King’s bad faith. Urged by the 
 Queen, who was furious at the idea of yielding to 
 rebels against the Crown and the Puritan enemies of 
 her faith, Charles lent a favourable ear to two schemes 
 of intrigue. One was suggested by some of the Scotch 
 lords, who had quarrelled among themselves, that he 
 should head a reactionary movement against the 
 Covenanters. The other was a plot of certain officers 
 of the army, still undisbanded at York, to march to 
 London, set Strafford free, and coerce the Houses 
 to obedience. This last plot became known to Pym, 
 who at once circumvented it. ‘The House of Lords, 
 though leaning to the side of the Crown, was alarmed 
 at the prospect of military terrorism. ‘The Commons 
 insisted that the life of the minister who was the 
 chief representative of tyranny should be forfeited. 
 The King, who had given Strafford a pledge of safety, 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 201 
 
 vetoed the bill of attainder. But once more urged by 
 the Queen, who hoped to make the Earl a scapegoat, 
 Charles yielded. On May 12, 1641, Strafford was 
 beheaded on Tower Hill. A burst of rejoicing 
 attested the nation’s sense of relief from danger. 
 Implacable to those who had thus forced his in- 
 clination, Charles henceforth looked upon the Acts 
 to which he had assented as revocable whenever 
 he regained his freedom. He suffered the chief 
 mstruments of Laud’s tyranny, the Courts of Star 
 Chamber and High Commission, to be suppressed 
 by Parliament without opposition. But he took the 
 earliest opportunity of breaking his thraldom. On 
 the death of Strafford, terms were arranged for the 
 disbanding of both the English and Scotch armies 
 and the settlement of a peace. Seizing the occasion 
 to win popularity in his native land, he started for 
 Edinburgh in August. There he harangued the 
 Parliament, offered to confirm all the Acts of their 
 recent session, and consented to appoint their 
 nominees to vacant offices of state. He was equally 
 complaisant to the General Assembly, attended the 
 Presbyterian worship, and chose a leading Covenanter 
 for his chaplain. Dissensions among the nobles, 
 however, marred his plan of forming a strong Royalist 
 party, and the strict watch kept upon his movements 
 by commissioners despatched by the English Par- 
 hament rendered it impossible to effect a counter- 
 revolution by surprise. While he was in Scotland, 
 news came from Ireland which quickened the ap- 
 prehension of the patriot leaders respecting his real 
 intentions. ‘The state of quiescence to which Straf- 
 
202 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 - ford’s intimidation had reduced that country was 
 changed into anarchy as soon as his fall became 
 known. In October, 1641, a plot, secretly hatched 
 by Sir Phelim O’Neal, resulted in a massacre of the 
 settlers in Ulster, which was followed by scenes of 
 carnage and violence in other parts of the island. 
 As the revolt proceeded, it took the form of a 
 Catholic confederation against Protestant rule, to 
 which some of its leaders gave the semblance of 
 a Royalist movement by means of a forged com- 
 mission purporting to be issued by Charles from 
 Edinburgh. The mistrust which Charles had aroused 
 in England was shown by the credence given to this 
 forgery, and was warranted by the evidence of his 
 intention to turn the revolt to account by raising an 
 army that would overawe Parliament. 
 
 Before the King’s return to London in November, 
 a party in support of his cause had been formed 
 within the House of Commons. Under the leadership 
 of Hyde (afterwards Lord Clarendon) it rallied round 
 him many who, while opposed to the policy of Laud 
 and Strafford, were loyally attached to the Crown and 
 episcopacy, and hostile to the Puritan spirit of inde- 
 pendence. The signs of reaction stimulated Pym and 
 his colleagues to draw up a Remonstrance, which vin- 
 dicated all that they had done upon the ground of 
 principle, disclaimed revolutionary projects, and 
 restricted further reforms to the execution of the 
 statutes against Catholic recusants, the appointment of 
 trusted ministers, and safeguards for the performance 
 of justice. The adoption of this Remonstrance, 
 though hotly contested by the Royalist party, was 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 203 
 
 eventually carried, and approved by the country. 
 Political passion was now stirred on both sides, and, 
 in spite of Pym’s efforts to preserve moderation, 
 broke out into violence upon the question of exclud- 
 ing Bishops from the House of Lords. That House, 
 having thrown out the first Bill passed by the 
 Commons, delayed its consideration when sent up a 
 second time. Popular indignation at the delay found 
 vent in a demonstration against the Bishops as they 
 drove to St. Stephen’s. Eleven of the Bench there- 
 upon absented themselves from Parliament, and pro- 
 tested that all acts done without them would be void. 
 Their conduct was censured by their fellow-peers, 
 who committed them to the Tower, but the incident 
 served to inflame the Royalists against Parliament, 
 and provoke conflict between the troops that were 
 mustered for the war in Ireland and the London 
 populace.!. Urged by the infatuated counsel of the 
 Queen to resort to extreme measures, Charles, in 
 January, 1642, suddenly instructed the Attorney- 
 General to impeach Pym, Hampden, and three other 
 members of the Commons, at the bar of the Lords. 
 After vainly sending a herald to demand their 
 surrender, he visited the House of Commons in 
 person to enforce obedience. As soon as his coming 
 was announced, the five members were directed by 
 the House to withdraw. His angry summons was 
 received in silence ; and, in reply to his question as 
 
 1 The party-names of ‘‘ Cavalier” and ‘* Roundhead ” 
 originated during this conflict, from the prominence of soldiers 
 of fortune among the troops, and of apprentices, who wore 
 closely-cropped hair, among the populace. 
 
204 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 to where they were hidden, the Speaker (Lenthall) 
 protested that he could only see or say what the 
 House commanded him. Charles had to retire dis- 
 appointed, and met with a similar rebuff from the 
 Corporation of London, with whom the five members 
 had taken refuge. His writs for their arrest were not 
 executed by the Sheriff, and a proclamation declaring 
 them traitors was ignored. ‘The fatal mistake he had 
 committed alienated some of his Parliamentary sup- 
 porters, and the threatening attitude of the people 
 intimidated his troops, so that he was for the time 
 powerless. On learning that the five members were 
 about to return to Westminster, escorted by a popular 
 guard, he withdrew to Hampton Court. 
 
 The imminence of war was now recognised by 
 both parties. Lord Newcastle was sent by -the 
 King to raise men in the north, and the Queen 
 crossed the Channel to obtain arms by pledging 
 the Crown jewels. Parliament voted that the 
 Tower, Hull, and Portsmouth should be secured 
 in the national interest, and bodies of mounted 
 volunteers rode up from Kent and Buckingham- 
 shire to offer their services. The House of Lords 
 was constrained to pass the Bill for the exclusion 
 of the Bishops by the evident intention of the 
 Commons to legislate alone, if necessary, and this 
 was the last measure which obtained the royal 
 assent. Charles, having vetoed a Bill for raising a 
 militia, the Parliament, on its own authority, 
 appointed Lord-leutenants with requisite powers. 
 He himself procured troops by commissions of array, 
 but to provide them with arms had to demand 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 205 
 
 entrance into the arsenal of Hull. Its governor, by 
 the instructions of Parliament, declined to admit 
 him, and this incident precipitated the outbreak of 
 war. The Royalist party in both Houses, headed by 
 Falkland and Hyde, withdrew to join the King at 
 York. Freed from their opposition, the patriotic 
 party completed the organisation of the militia, 
 appointed Lord Warwick to the command of the 
 fleet, and applied to the City of London for a loan, 
 which was generously granted. A last effort was 
 made by Parliament to treat with Charles, but the 
 terms proposed, which would have vested in its 
 hands the choice of the chief ministers of state, 
 the appointment of guardians for the royal children, 
 and the general control of ecclesiastical, civil, and 
 military government, were scornfully rejected. His 
 decision was accepted by both parties as conclusive. 
 The Parliamentary and Royalist armies were quickly 
 put into the field, and on October 23, 1642, the first 
 battle of the Civil War was fought at Edge Hill. 
 
206 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 CHAPTER” 1s 
 
 Foreign influences on political history from the outbreak of 
 the Civil War to the Restoration. 
 
 From the date of his final breach with Parliament 
 Charles virtually ceased to reign. ‘The issues for the 
 decision of which the two parties resorted to war were 
 wholly changed before its close. At the outset, all 
 that the Parliamentary party desired was to compel 
 the King to govern constitutionally. A considerable 
 section of his own adherents was animated by the 
 hope that, after the clash of arms, a peaceful recon- 
 ciliation would be concluded. But the original leaders 
 of the patriotic party passed away early in the struggle, 
 Hampden falling on the battle-field in June, 1643, 
 and Pym dying six months afterwards. Their places 
 were filled by new leaders, of whom Cromweil, Vane, 
 and Ireton were the most influential, whose different 
 characters and aims gave an altered aspect to the 
 contest. Lord Falkland, the most distinguished and 
 moderate of the King’s counsellors, also fell before the 
 ultimate issues of the war had become apparent. The 
 fervour of religious enthusiasm which, over-riding 
 
 traditional scruples of loyalty, inspired the ‘‘Iron- — 
 -sides” of Cromwell and carried them on from victory 
 to victory, was the efficient cause by which those 
 issues were determined. Against so potent a force 
 the chivalry and romantic fidelity to the Crown, which 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 207 
 
 were the motive powers of the Royalist party, proved 
 a feeble and unavailing barrier. 
 
 The details of the fratricidal conflict which, after 
 many fluctuations, ended in the triumph of the Par- 
 liamentary over the Royalist forces, and the capture, 
 trial, and execution of the King, do not fall within the 
 scope of this work. It must suffice to refer to such 
 foreign influences as served to modify the course of 
 events. Foremost of them upon the side of the 
 Crown was the personal influence of the Queen, whose 
 haughty temper urged her husband to an obstinate 
 persistence in his fatal career, while her energy in 
 obtaining arms from abroad enabled him to protract 
 the struggle when it was really hopeless. The sup- 
 port which, owing to her exertions, was tendered to 
 his cause by the English Catholics wrought him more 
 harm than good, by confirming the conviction of his 
 opponents that the safety of Protestantism was at stake. 
 Even more disastrous was the aid he sought to obtain 
 from the confederated Irish Catholics, who, after the 
 massacre of the English settlers already narrated, 
 formed themselves into an Assembly, which assumed 
 sovereign power and levied troops for the inde- 
 pendence of the island. While an army commanded 
 by -Lord Ormond was holding them at bay in the 
 King’s name, Charles was carrying on an intrigue with 
 the rebels through the medium of Lord Glamorgan, 
 who succeeded in arranging an armistice. This left 
 Ormond’s force at liberty for employment in England, 
 and Charles followed up the manceuvre by treating 
 with the rebels, who undertook to effect a landing in 
 Argyleshire simultaneously with a rising of the High- 
 
208 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 land clans under Montrose, an ex-leader of the - 
 Covenanters, now one of his adherents. Upon the 
 disclosure of this scheme, many Royalist officers 
 resigned their commissions, and several noblemen 
 who had joined the King at Oxford returned to 
 London. ‘The effect produced upon the Parlia- 
 mentary party in England and the Covenanters in 
 Scotland was to bring them into closer accord. 
 The adoption of the Presbyterian system by the 
 English Church was the one condition which the 
 Scots had demanded from Pym and Vane for assist- 
 ing them at a time when the King’s cause appeared 
 to be gaining ground. ‘The negotiations might 
 have fallen through but for the revelation of the 
 common danger of both kingdoms. The bargain was 
 ratified by the solemn acceptance of the Covenant 
 by the House of Commons in September, 1643, 
 together with a pledge for the union of the two king- 
 doms in firm peace and religious conformity. 
 
 The co-operation of the Scottish army in the war 
 against the King that succeeded this event in 1644 was 
 foremost among the foreign influences upon the side of 
 the Parliament. Its first effect was seen in the victory 
 of Marston Moor, which routed the Royalists in the 
 North. The rising of the Highlanders under Montrose, 
 supported by the landing of the Irish Catholicsin Argyle- 
 shire, soon afterwards recalled the Scottish army to 
 the border, and a series of successes gained by this 
 diversion in the King’s favour threatened for a time 
 to undo the work which the Parliament had accom- 
 plished. But the final defeat of Montrose at Philip- 
 haugh, following upon the rout of the King at Naseby, 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 209 
 
 dispelled any fears of a reaction in Scotland, and set 
 the army of the Covenanters free for interposition in 
 England. ‘The part which it played in the closing 
 scenes of the Civil War cannot be understood without 
 taking into account the operation of other influences 
 whose origin also was more or less foreign. 
 Nonconformity from the Anglican Church, although 
 actually dating from the time of the Reformation, was, 
 for nearly a century afterwards, too obscure to be 
 reckoned as a factor in the national development. 
 During Elizabeth’s reign, when political necessity 
 forced the Government to exact conformity as a 
 guarantee of loyalty, dissidence of opinion upon the 
 subject of ecclesiastical discipline began to appear in 
 the Puritan ranks; and many who refused to con- 
 form took refuge in Holland. There the Calvinistic 
 bias which already characterised them became 
 intensified, and fresh divergences were gradually 
 manifested. One dissenting community,—known as 
 Brownists, from the name of its reputed founder, 
 Robert Brown,—after some years’ residence at 
 Amsterdam, returned to England in 1620, with the 
 intention of thence embarking for the New World. 
 A section of the body, historically famous as the 
 Pilgrim Fathers, sailed in the Mayflower for the 
 coast of Massachusetts, where they founded the 
 colony of Plymouth; and, being afterwards joined 
 by other detachments of the body which had re- 
 mained at home, eventually spread over New England. 
 The claim of each congregation to preserve its own 
 independence as a self-contained church became 
 recognised as a distinctive trait, and originated the 
 p 
 
210 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 sectarian name of Independents. Another sect, 
 which deviated from its Puritan brethren by insisting 
 upon the necessity of adult baptism, acquired the 
 name of Baptists. Taking advantage of the mode- 
 ration of Archbishop Abbot, many dissenting bodies 
 came back to England, but were prevented from 
 making converts under the rigorous rule of Laud. A 
 large increase was made to the Independent sect 
 soon after the opening of the Long Parliament by 
 the return of a number of New England settlers, 
 headed by Hugh Peters. A year later eighty Non- 
 conformist congregations were reckoned in London 
 alone, and many others were dispersed about the 
 country, especially in the eastern counties. Among 
 these miscellaneous congregations, which were largely 
 impregnated with foreign ideas, the seeds of future 
 sectarian developments for the present lay dormant. 
 The Presbyterian system had gradually commended 
 itself to the Puritan party in the Church of England 
 since it was first advocated by Cartwright in the 
 reign of Elizabeth; and the Romish proclivities of 
 Laud and his brother-prelates had disposed a large 
 number of moderate churchmen to countenance the 
 abolition of episcopacy. The acceptance of the 
 Covenant by Parliament and the pledge given to 
 Scotland for the promotion of religious conformity 
 occasioned no public dissatisfaction. Pursuant to 
 that pledge, an Assembly of divines was summoned 
 to sit at Westminster, and instructed to revise the 
 Articles, draw up a confession of faith, a manual of 
 worship, and a scheme of government, which were 
 finally submitted to Parliament, and formulated in 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. aie 
 
 ordinances. But, meantime, the growth of Noncon- 
 formity had rapidly increased, and the chief adherents 
 of its principles were to be found among the stoutest 
 soldiers of the Parliamentary army, the “ Ironside” 
 regiment organised by Cromwell. 
 
 A Puritan gentleman of Huntingdonshire, who had 
 sat in Parliament since 1628, he had already dis- 
 tinguished himself in its debates as a fervid champion 
 of the patriotic cause, but his genius as a leader of 
 men was not disclosed until the opening of the war. 
 Discerning that the London trainbands, of whom 
 the first Parliamentary levies were composed, were 
 far inferior in spirit and breeding to the knights and 
 gentlemen who formed the bulk of the Royalist army, 
 he set himself to bring a new force into play by 
 enrolling a regiment of religious enthusiasts among 
 the Puritan farmers of the eastern counties. Though 
 himself satisfied to accept the Presbyterian trans- 
 formation of the national Church, he recognised the 
 necessity of tolerating those who dissented from any 
 State Church whatever, and did not scruple to admit 
 them into his regiment. The resistless valour of the 
 Ironsides at Marston Moor, Winceby, and Newbury 
 justified all their leader’s confidence. After the 
 passing of the “Self-renouncing Ordinance,” intro- 
 duced by Cromwell and Vane to exclude members 
 of Parliament from military command, the conduct 
 of the war, which had languished in the hands of 
 such generals as Lords Essex and Manchester, was 
 entrusted to men embarrassed by no aristocratic 
 reserve or political timidity. Under Sir Thomas 
 Fairfax as Commander-in-chief and Cromwell and 
 
 P 2 
 
212 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Ireton as his lieutenants, the composition of the 
 Ironside regiment was applied upon a larger scale. 
 “Godly” men of all ranks and all persuasions who 
 were willing to serve were enrolled in the “‘ New 
 Model,” as it was called,—the Act which authorised 
 its formation containing a clause to dispense, upon 
 occasion, with the signature of the Covenant. 
 
 Such open toleration of Nonconformity gave great 
 offence to the London clergy, and excited much 
 opposition in Parliament itself. Still more offensive 
 was it to the Scots, who denounced it as a breach of 
 the international compact. With the view of checking 
 what they regarded as a revolutionary movement, 
 negotiations were opened with the King ; and, though 
 these were abandoned by him, in consequence of the 
 temporary success of his arms, they were actively 
 renewed after his crushing defeat at Naseby. Hoping 
 to benefit by the division in his enemies’ camp, 
 Charles intrigued at once with the Presbyterians and 
 the Independents. Meantime, the army of the New 
 Model was pursuing its triumphant course; and in 
 April, 1646, pressed the King so closely that he had 
 to choose between escaping from England or sur- 
 rendering to one section of his foes. He decided on 
 the latter course ; and, eluding the troops of Fairfax, 
 found his way by a circuitous route into the head- 
 quarters of the Scots at Newark. Relying upon the 
 loyalty of his hereditary subjects and the support of 
 their Presbyterian allies in the English Parliament, he 
 hoped to recover his lost power upon easy terms. 
 The Houses, however, were less yielding than he 
 expected ; stipulating that the command of the army 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 213 
 
 and the fleet should be given up to them for twenty 
 years ; that Royalists who had taken up arms for 
 the King should be excluded from office ; episcopacy 
 abolished, and the Presbyterian system substituted. 
 The Scots, who, with the King in their camp, had 
 retired to Newcastle, urged him to agree to these 
 conditions ; and he was advised to accept them by 
 letters from the Queen herself, who was now a refugee 
 in France. But, counting upon the growth of dis- 
 sension and the action of time in his favour, he 
 refused to do so. The Presbyterian party in the 
 House of Commons, under their leader, Holles, then 
 endeavoured to take the matter into their own hands. 
 Regarding the army of the New Model as the real 
 obstacle to religious uniformity, yet unable to disband 
 it so long as the Scots remained in the field and 
 held possession of the King, they proposed terms to 
 them for surrendering his person and returning home. 
 The Scots, weary of their fruitless efforts to bring 
 about a settlement with the King, eventually agreed 
 (in January, 1647) to take £400,000 in discharge of 
 their claims upon England, transferred Charles into 
 the keeping of a Committee of the two Houses, and 
 recrossed the border. 
 
 Holles and his party, who commanded a majority 
 in the Commons, proceeded to carry out their design 
 of uniformity by establishing presbyteries throughout 
 the country and ordering the officers of the army to 
 subscribe the Covenant. But in attempting to dis- 
 band the New Model they miscalculated their 
 strength. Though for the most part farmers and 
 tradesmen destitute of political ambition, these 
 
214 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 soldiers were animated by a genuine enthusiasm for 
 religious liberty and a resolute purpose not to return 
 to their ordinary callings until their work was accom- 
 plished. A council of ‘‘adjutators,” or assistants, 
 whom they elected in place of their former council 
 of officers, learning that the Parliament was about to 
 remove the King to London, and raise a fresh army 
 in his name, promptly despatched a body of 500 
 troopers, under Cornet Joyce, to Holmby House, 
 Northamptonshire, where Charles was residing, and 
 dispossessed the Parliamentary commissioners who 
 had charge of his person. Cromwell, when accused 
 by the Presbyterian party of having originated this 
 step, disclaimed the responsibility, but seized the 
 opportunity to ally himself with the army, which 
 marched within a few miles of London, and thence 
 issued a manifesto to the Parliament. Disavowing 
 all intention of interfering with civil government or 
 of preventing a settlement of the Presbyterian system, 
 they stipulated for toleration of other religious 
 tenets, until the nation had finally decided upon an 
 established faith; and that Holles and ten members 
 of his party, who were obstacles in the way of a 
 peaceful decision, should withdraw from the Com- 
 mons. After much debate, the obnoxious members 
 retired, and Parliament appointed commissioners to 
 treat with the army and the King. The conditions 
 imposed by Ireton, who conducted the negotiations 
 on behalf of the New Model, were singularly mode- 
 rate, and displayed his grasp of the principles of 
 toleration. Seven leading Royalists were to be 
 banished, and the rest pardoned; Parliament was to 
 
* FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 215 
 
 have the control of the army and navy for ten years, 
 and the nomination of officers of state; the clergy 
 were to be excluded from all but spiritual functions ; 
 belief and worship were to be freed from restraint ; 
 Acts enforcing the Covenant, the use of the Prayer- 
 book, or attendance at church, even upon Catholics, 
 were to be repealed; Parliament was to be sum- 
 moned every three years; the electoral franchise 
 reformed; taxation equalised ; monopolies abandoned ; 
 and legal proceedings simplified. Cromwell gave 
 these proposals the weight of his sanction, and both 
 cherished some hope of bringing the King to an 
 honest acceptance of them. But he was still bent 
 upon pitting one party against another, and deceiving 
 both for his own advantage. While these negotia- 
 tions were in progress, the Londoners, who sympa- 
 thised with the Presbyterian faction, broke into the 
 Commons, and forced them to recall the eleven 
 members who had been expelled; whereupon the 
 Independent party took refuge with the army. 
 Cromwell put a sudden end to the agitation, which 
 Charles had secretly encouraged, by marching at the 
 head of his soldiers to London, and restoring the 
 House of Commons to its previous condition. Foiled 
 in the design of provoking an English diversion in 
 his favour, Charles turned to Scotland, where the 
 bulk of the Presbyterians were indignant at the 
 action of the New Model; and his partisan, the Duke 
 of Hamilton, had secured a majority in the coming 
 Parliament. Deluding Cromwell and Ireton to the 
 last with the hope of a settlement, the King, in 
 November, 1647, suddenly escaped from his guards 
 
216 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 at Hampton Court, and took refuge in Carisbrook 
 Castle. There, while renewing his negotiations with 
 the Parliament, he secretly agreed to re-establish the 
 Presbyterian system in England as the one condition 
 upon which the Scots were willing to support him by 
 an invading army. ‘The tidings of this unexpected 
 aid incited the Royalists to fresh efforts, and insur- 
 rection broke out in several parts of England and 
 Wales. ‘The Presbyterian faction in Parliament took 
 courage to declare its adherence to monarchy, and 
 to pass a stringent statute against the doctrine of 
 toleration. 
 
 The spirit of the New Model was roused to its 
 pristine vigour by the danger of the crisis. Unde- 
 ceived at last by the evidence of the King’s insin- 
 cerity, the army resolved, at a solemn assembly, that, 
 if they returned successful from the task of crushing 
 the revolt, they would call ‘‘ Charles Stuart, that man 
 of blood, to account for the blood he has shed and 
 mischief he has done to his utmost against the Lord’s 
 cause and people.” While Fairfax put down the 
 Royalist risings in Kent and Essex, and besieged 
 Colchester, Cromwell marched into Wales and forced 
 Pembroke to surrender. Meantime, an army of 
 20,000 Scots, under Hamilton, had crossed the 
 border and advanced to Preston. With a force of 
 but half their number, Cromwell utterly routed them, 
 and then made a rapid march into Scotland, where 
 he dispossessed the Royalists, and reinstated the 
 authority of Argyle, who was loyal to the English 
 alliance. Recalled to England by the news that the 
 Presbyterian faction was again treating with the King}; 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 217 
 
 and reinforced by the troops of Fairfax, the army 
 insisted upon its demand for “‘justice on the King”; 
 coupling therewith the stipulation that a new Parlia- 
 ment should be elected. Charles was meantime pro- 
 tracting his negotiations with the Parliamentary com- 
 missioners, in the expectation that a new Royalist 
 movement in Ireland might enable him to set his 
 foes at defiance. ‘The demands of the army excited 
 so much alarm in Parliament that the majority were 
 ready to yield to any terms which the King asked. 
 The decision of the army-leaders was quickly taken. 
 A troop of horse was sent to Carisbrook, where 
 Charles had been virtually a prisoner, and carried 
 him off to Hurst Castle. Another troop, under 
 Colonel Pride, was despatched to the House of 
 Commons, and arrested or expelled 140 members 
 of the Presbyterian faction who constituted the 
 majority. The remainder (subsequently known as 
 the “Rump”), who were in accord with the army, 
 proceeded to carry out its will. A resolution was 
 passed for the trial of the King by the Commons 
 alone (the Lords refusing to concur), and a Court 
 of Commissioners nominated as his judges, with 
 Bradshaw, an eminent lawyer, as their President. 
 On the ground of the incompetency of the Court, 
 Charles refused to plead to the charges of treason, 
 tyranny, and murder brought against him, Thirty- 
 two witnesses were examined in support of them, and 
 after a seven days’ trial, he was found guilty and 
 condemned to death. Much popular sympathy in 
 his favour was evoked by his dignified bearing during 
 the tria!, and the self-possession which he retained to 
 
218 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 the last. The sight of his uplifted head was witnessed 
 by a pitying crowd with sobs and groans. 
 
 The judicial sentence of the Commons upon the 
 King was followed, after short intervals, by the passing 
 of Acts which abolished monarchy, established the 
 people of England as a Commonwealth, and vested 
 supreme authority in its representatives in Parlia- 
 ment. But the reception which the tidings of the 
 King’s execution met with at home and abroad was 
 calculated to shake confidence in the stability of the 
 new government. Public disaffection was shown, 
 not only by Royalist intrigues, but by the retirement 
 from the bench of half the Judges, and the refusal 
 of hundreds of the clergy and civil functionaries to 
 take a pledge of fealty to the Republic. In Scotland, 
 Argyle and his fellow-Presbyterians whom Cromwell 
 had installed in power denounced the abolition of 
 monarchy, and invited Charles, Prince of Wales, who 
 had taken refuge in Holland, to claim the throne. 
 In Ireland, Ormond had dexterously united all parties 
 on behalf of the Crown, and urged the Prince to put 
 himself at their head. On the Continent, the States- 
 General of Holland were foremost in opposing the 
 Commonwealth, recognising Charles II. as King of 
 England, and sanctioning the support promised him 
 by his brother-in-law, the Prince of Orange, who was 
 their Stadtholder. France and Spain were less hostile, 
 but the former withdrew her ambassador, and even the 
 Protestant states of Europe renounced their amity. 
 
 Cromwell’s vigour was never more manifest than 
 in his triumph over these obstacles. After putting 
 down a mutiny in the army, provoked by the 
 
 y jad 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 219 
 
 reluctance of the Rump Parliament to make way 
 for a more representative body, he crossed to Ireland, 
 in. August, 1649, with 9,000 men, and stormed 
 the chief Royalist strongholds in succession,—taking 
 terrible vengeance for the massacre of the English 
 settlers by giving no quarter, and putting all the 
 garrisons to the sword. During his campaign in 
 Ireland the tidings reached him that Charles, having 
 accepted the conditions imposed by the Presbyterian 
 party, that he should subscribe the Covenant and 
 renounce participation in his father’s “tyranny” and 
 his mother’s “idolatry,” had landed in Scotland. 
 Leaving Ireton to complete his work, Cromwell 
 returned to England, where he was received with 
 acclamations, and within a month marched into 
 Scotland at the head of 15,000 men. Leslie opposed 
 him with a larger force, but was utterly routed near 
 Dunbar. Edinburgh and the south of Scotland 
 thereupon submitted, but Charles fell back upon 
 a strong position at Stirling, which resisted the 
 assault of the Parliamentary forces. Affecting to 
 relinquish the attempt, Cromwell marched into 
 Fifeshire, leaving the Prince at liberty to invade 
 England. Against the advice of Leslie, Charles 
 determined upon this step, crossed with the Scots 
 army over the border, and, passing through Lancashire, 
 encamped near Worcester. Cromwell was soon in 
 hot pursuit, and, attacking the town on both sides, 
 defeated the Scots in a desperate engagement, wherein 
 they lost 6,000 men. Charles escaped from the 
 field, and after a series of romantic adventures found 
 his way to France. 
 
220 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 The collapse of the Royalist cause was followed by 
 a settlement of the quarrel between England and 
 Scotland. By the skilful management of Vane, 
 who directed the policy of the Commons, the terms 
 of union of the two kingdoms, arranged by a con- 
 vention of English and Scotch commissioners, were 
 ratified by an Act which provided for the admission 
 of Scotch representatives into the next Parliament. 
 A similar scheme was proposed for a union with 
 Ireland, and eventually carried into effect. 
 
 Owing to Vane’s exertions, a navy had now been 
 raised which, under the command of Robert Blake, 
 cleared the sea of several Royalist vessels which, 
 sheltered by the protection of Holland, had been 
 attacking English merchantmen. ‘The success of the 
 Commonwealth speedily changed the tone of the 
 Dutch, who now made overtures for an alliance; but 
 the English people had never forgotten the Amboyna 
 massacre, and were indisposed for friendly relations 
 with the only nation which disputed their supremacy 
 of the sea. Supported by the majority of the 
 Commons, who passed a Navigation Act aimed at 
 the ‘carrying trade” which was the mainstay of 
 Dutch commerce, Vane fomented the jealousy 
 between the two countries, until it broke out into 
 war. A series of naval engagements ensued between 
 May, 1652, and February, 1653, in which, though the 
 Dutch were superior in numbers, and were com- 
 manded by their great Admiral, Van Tromp, Blake’s 
 fleet won the final prize of victory. 
 
 The refusal of the “Rump” Parliament to fulfil its 
 repeated pledges to the army, that it would give place 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 221 
 
 to a new House of Commons representative of the 
 nation, provoked Cromwell in. April, 1653, to take 
 the arbitrary step of dissolving it by force. It does 
 not fall within our scope to trace the course of 
 events which resulted in the establishment of a 
 Protectorate, and vested in the hands of the great 
 Parliamentary general a power not less absolute than 
 had been wielded by the King whom he displaced. 
 Such features of his government only require notice 
 as were affected by its foreign relations. The con- 
 summation of the union with Scotland and Ireland 
 was realised by the admission of Scotch and Irish 
 representatives into the Parliament of 1654. The 
 Scottish Highlands, which had hitherto lain outside the 
 sphere of settled rule, were reduced into order by the 
 firmness of General Monk and his successor, Deane; 
 a chain of fortresses securing their future tranquillity. 
 Though Presbyterianism was maintained, the General 
 Assembly was suppressed, and protection given to 
 other forms of Protestant worship. The government 
 of Ireland, after Cromwell’s departure in 1650, was 
 conducted by Ireton, Ludlow, and Henry Cromwell, 
 with a merciless rigour which the dictates of para- 
 mount necessity could alone have justified. After 
 thousands of Royalists had been put to the sword, 
 hundreds more transported as slaves to the West 
 Indies, and large numbers of Catholics expatriated, 
 with permission to enlist in the service of Spain 
 or France, a settlement of the country was made 
 upon the lines of the Plantation of Ulster under 
 James I. The Catholic landowners who had been un- 
 friendly to the Parliamentary cause, without actively 
 
222 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 opposing it, were mulcted of a third of their estates. 
 Those who had taken up arms against it were held to 
 have forfeited all rights, but were allotted settlements 
 among the native tribes in Connaught. Protestant 
 settlers from England and Scotland replaced the 
 evicted landowners. By this means, which tem- 
 porarily restored order, but sowed the seeds of future 
 discord, Ireland was brought into a condition that 
 admitted of its union with England, and thirty seats 
 in Parliament were assigned to its representatives. 
 
 In his English policy Cromwell was more faithful 
 to the principles of toleration than he elsewhere 
 showed himself. Although episcopacy had been 
 suppressed, the rights of private patrons of livings 
 were not disturbed, and ministers of divers opinions 
 were appointed tovacant cures, subject to the approval 
 of a Board of Triers that they were worthy of their 
 sacred calling. The newly-founded sect of ‘ Friends,” 
 or Quakers, which other Nonconformist bodies had 
 persecuted, was protected under Cromwell’s rule. 
 A petition of the Jews for permission to return to 
 England, whence they had been banished as a race 
 since the fourteenth century, was referred by him to 
 a commission of ministers and merchants. They 
 reported upon it unfavourably, but it nevertheless 
 received his tacit assent, and the Jewish settlements 
 which thereupon sprang up in London and else- 
 where were regarded as under his sanction. 
 
 His foreign policy was mainly dictated by his 
 strong Protestant bias. Notwithstanding the English 
 jealousy of Holland, and the animosity caused by 
 the fluctuations of a protracted naval contest, Crom- 
 well’s endeavours to bring about amity between two 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 223 
 
 Protestant States ultimately succeeded. The political 
 advantages of the treaty which was signed in 1654 
 were signal. Disheartened by the death of Van 
 Tromp, and the failure of his successor, De Ruyter, 
 to vanquish the fleet of England, the Dutch agreed 
 to acknowledge its supremacy in the Channel, to 
 submit to the Navigation Act, and to exclude from 
 power the family of Orange, whose connexion with 
 the exiled Stuarts made them dangerous to the 
 Commonwealth. Friendly treaties were also made 
 with Sweden and Denmark. With Spain, on the 
 other hand,—which, though now rapidly falling into 
 decay, still represented to the Puritans the hostile 
 power of Romanism,—Cromwell waged war; despatch- 
 ing two expeditions in 1655, under Blake and 
 Venables, one to intercept the American treasure- 
 fleet and the other to attack St. Domingo. Though 
 neither succeeded in its direct object, the second was 
 rewarded by the conquest of Jamaica. 
 
 A treaty of alliance with France, then under the 
 government of Cardinal Mazarin, which Cromwell 
 made in October, 1655, was prompted by political 
 necessity, but turned to account in the service of 
 Protestantism. In 1656 the massacre, by the Duke 
 of Savoy’s orders, of his Protestant subjects in the 
 Canton Vaud, excited passionate indignation in 
 England, and Cromwell demanded redress. Had 
 this been refused, he intended to declare war 
 against Savoy, and subsidise the Swiss Protestant 
 Cantons to take part in it; but the advice of Mazarin 
 induced the Duke to yield. In April, 1657, Blake 
 redeemed the failure of his previous expedition by 
 an attack on the Spanish treasure-fleet, in the harbour 
 
224 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 of Santa Cruz, which completely shattered it. The 
 culminating triumph of Cromwell’s foreign policy was 
 the acquisition of Dunkirk, the importance of which he 
 had long discerned. Stipulating for its surrender as 
 the condition of his assisting France in her invasion 
 of Spanish Flanders, he brought Mazarin to assent. 
 In 1657 an English force took part in the campaign, 
 and contributed to gain the battle of the Dunes, 
 which effected the French conquest, and was followed 
 by the allotment of Dunkirk as England’s share of 
 the spoil. 
 
 But the wisdom of Cromwell’s rule at home and the 
 splendour of his successes abroad failed to reconcile 
 the nation to the submission of its free aspirations 
 and divers interests to the standard of an inflexible 
 will, which recognised the Puritan ideal of life as 
 supreme and rested its title to obedience upon the 
 power of the sword. The closing years of the 
 Protectorate were marked by evidences that, with the 
 exception of the military class which he represented, 
 all parties were increasingly hostiie to his authority 
 and favourably inclined to a restoration of the 
 monarchy. Disappointment at the failure of an aim 
 which, though marred by personal ambition, there is 
 reason to believe was essentially noble, embittered a 
 temper naturally irritable and aggravated by infirm 
 health. His collisions with Parliament led to repeated 
 dissolutions. In August, 1658, on the eve of a new 
 election, he was seized with mortal sickness, and died 
 on the 3rd of September, after nominating his son 
 Richard as his successor. 
 
 The instability of the new Protector’s rule was 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 225 
 
 soon manifested by his impotence to control the dis- 
 cord which broke out between Parliament and the 
 army. The desire to throw off the military yoke 
 and return to the freedom of Parliamentary institutions 
 was so generally expressed that the army was forced 
 to yield. Dissensions among the officers completed 
 its downfall. General Monk, who commanded the 
 troops in Scotland, protested against the coercion 
 which General Lambert, who commanded the English 
 army, sought to put upon the Commons. Having 
 summoned a Convention in Edinburgh, and obtained 
 a reinforcement of men and supplies, he crossed the 
 border, and raising the popular cry of “A free 
 Parliament,” marched to London in February, 1660. 
 After an attempt of the army under Lambert to 
 reassert its power, which resulted in defeat, the new 
 Parliament met in April, and commenced to consider 
 the terms upon which the exiled King might be 
 restored. Their discussion had been forestalled by 
 Monk, who was negotiating with Charles. A Declara- 
 tion, dated from Breda, appeared in the King’s name, 
 promising a general pardon to all but those excepted 
 by Parliament, religious toleration, and the satisfaction 
 of the demands of the army. It was received with 
 enthusiasm, and a vote passed by a large majority 
 that the ancient constitution of the realm should be 
 re-established. On the 25th of May Charles landed 
 in England amid general signs of rejoicing. The 
 army alone exhibited silent disapproval as the King 
 passed through its ranks on his way to London, 
 but proceeded to accept the national decision by 
 quietly disbanding itself. 
 Q 
 
226 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 Miscellaneous foreign influences from the accession of James I. 
 to the Restoration. 
 
 / 
 
 ALTHOUGH the accession of James VI. of Scotland 
 to the throne of England failed to bring about a 
 political and legislative union of the kingdoms, it 
 was attended by a considerable influx of Scotchmen 
 into his new dominion, whose naturalisation as English 
 subjects inaugurated the amalgamation of the two 
 peoples which was eventually accomplished. If, as 
 appears probable, the majority of the immigrants 
 were Lowlanders of Saxon or Norman blood, they 
 introduced no fresh racial element into the national 
 organism, and such benefits as they conferred must 
 be reckoned due to moral or intellectual qualities. 
 Unfortunately, they seem to have mainly belonged to 
 the class of all others least likely to be endowed with 
 either. Such needy and rapacious courtiers as Hay 
 (created Lord Carlisle) and Ramsay (created Lord 
 Holderness) are only remembered in our annals for 
 having abused the advantages which they enjoyed as 
 royal favourites to acquire wealth and dignities at 
 the expense of worthier Englishmen. The names of 
 other Scottish families, such as Murray, Levingston, 
 Fullarton, and Maxwell, occupy a disproportionate 
 space in the list of grantees of the Crown lands during 
 this reign. But there were Scotchmen of a wholly 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 227 
 
 different type, such as the statesman, Sir George 
 Hume (created Lord Dunbar), and George Heriot, 
 the goldsmith, by whose residence among them 
 Englishmen might justly be honoured. Another step 
 towards the gradual union of the two nations which 
 followed the accession of James was the appointment 
 of a Commission to maintain peace in the border 
 districts, which had existed for centuries in a condition 
 of chronic warfare. <A signal act of this Commission 
 was the wholesale deportation of the Gremes, one 
 of the most lawless border clans, to Roscommon in 
 Ireland, where a settlement was assigned to them. 
 The political effects which during this period were 
 due to the influence of theological ideas derived from 
 foreign sources have already been considered, but a 
 word remains to be said upon their purely theological 
 aspects. ‘The ecclesiastical party of which Laud was 
 the leader was actuated, as has been seen, by a desire 
 to return to the Catholic unity which the Reformation 
 had broken, and sought to raise the Anglican Church 
 to equality with that of Rome by approaching to an 
 assimilation of doctrine and ritual. In carrying out 
 this aim they were constrained to ignore the pre- 
 dominantly Calvinistic tone of the Articles and 
 Homilies, and forbid discussion by the parochial 
 clergy of the doctrines characteristic of that system. 
 A reaction against those doctrines, particularly that 
 of absolute predestination, had long been agitating 
 the Reformed Church of Holland, and from the 
 name of its most eminent advocate, Hermensen, or 
 Arminius, the anti-Calvinistic view was known as 
 Arminianism. Its adoption by Laud and his followers 
 Qn2 
 
228 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 deepened the aversion with which they were regarded 
 by the Puritan party in England, and, coupled with 
 ‘‘Popery,” Arminianism was conspicuous among the 
 charges brought against them by the Parliamentary 
 leaders in the struggle of 1628-9. The tendency of 
 the political antagonism between the two great national 
 parties which resulted in the Civil War was to in- 
 crease their theological antagonism also, and, while 
 the bulk of the adherents of the Parliament remained 
 ‘Calvinists, the supporters of “Church and King” 
 ‘became identified as Arminians. The Parliamentary 
 ranks, however, were divided, as has been shown, by 
 other theological dissensions. The Independents and 
 Baptists were supported in their protest against the 
 intolerance of the Presbyterians (who sought to en- 
 force uniformity of Calvinistic worship) by a sect 
 known as Erastians, from their adoption of the tenet 
 of the German divine Erastus (1524-83), that the 
 Church should be governed by the State in all matters 
 relating to discipline. This theory, although sub- 
 stantially in harmony with the principle upon which 
 the Reformation in England was based, was fatal to 
 the pretensions of the Presbyterian system, and the 
 importance of the issue at stake explains the 
 passionate intensity with which the question of 
 toleration was debated between the “New Model” 
 rand the Parliamentary majority of 1646-8. The 
 Erastians formed a distinct group in the Westminster 
 Assembly (anfe, p. 210), including among their number 
 the great jurist, Selden, and the learned Rabbinical 
 scholar, Lightfoot. ‘The occurrence of Erastus as a 
 Christian name given to English children at this 
 period, perhaps, implies that Erastianism had a fol- 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 229 
 
 lowing in the country, although the extent to which 
 it prevailed is uncertain. The writings of the German 
 theosophist, Jacob Bohme, or Behmen (1575-1624), 
 became known in England during the reign of 
 Charles I., and his disciples were sufficiently numerous 
 under the Commonwealth to be reckoned asa sect. To 
 the suggestiveness of his teaching was probably due 
 the prevalence of a belief, held in common by several 
 sectarian bodies, which sprang into existence during 
 this period,—such as the Quakers, the Millennarians, 
 and the Muggletonians,—that the human spirit may 
 be the chosen recipient of divine illumination, and 
 that its utterances under that influence are to be 
 regarded as authoritative. It does not diminish the 
 probability that Muggleton, at all events, was in- 
 debted to Bohme, to find that he violently denounced 
 him as an ignorant and fallacious guide. 
 
 A smaller but not insignificant body of dissidents 
 adopted anti-Trinitarian tenets, which, after their 
 forcible extinction in Italy in the fifth century, were 
 revived there at the time of the Reformation, and 
 thence spread to Poland, where Leelius Socinus and his 
 nephew, Faustus, becamethe founders of a considerable 
 sect. From Poland the Socinians were driven, early 
 in the seventeenth century, to Holland, where most 
 of their writings were published. The chief English 
 exponent of these opinions—which ranged between 
 those taught by Arius in the fourth century and those 
 held by modern Unitarians—was John Biddle. Their 
 unpopularity and the severe penalties attaching to 
 their propagation (which subjected Biddle to ceaseless 
 persecution, and, even under the tolerant rule of 
 Cromwell, to close imprisonment) prevented the sect 
 
230 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 from making much visible progress, but it undoubtedly 
 increased, and in the course of the century numbered 
 such distinguished adherents as John Milton, Sir 
 Isaac Newton, and John Locke. 
 
 The bulk of our debt to foreign sources during 
 this, as in the preceding, period was incurred on 
 behalf of literature and art. The obligations of our 
 greatest dramatist to Italian and French sources for 
 the raw material which he transfigured into artistic 
 creations have been considered under the head of the 
 Elizabethan stage, although the most fruitful years of 
 his genius really fall within the reign of James I. The 
 same indebtedness may be predicated of the chief 
 members of the brilliant dramatic group of which he 
 was the centre. Ben Jonson, whose claims to rank 
 next to Shakespeare have been generally conceded, 
 had a longer career of activity, surviving until 1637. 
 The characters and scenery of his first comedy, 
 ‘Every Man in his Humour,” produced in 1596, 
 were originally Italian, but two years later he changed 
 them into English. ‘The typical personages of his 
 ‘Every Man out of his Humour” are for the most 
 part characterised by Italian names—Carlo Buffone, 
 Puntarvolo, Fungoso, Sordido, &c. ‘*Cynthia’s 
 Revels,” his next satire, was directed against the 
 euphuism and pedantic formalism of the Court, 
 which were mainly imitated from foreign fashions ; 
 its purpose being summed up in the opening lines of 
 the Palinode :— 
 
 From Spanish shrugs, French faces, smirks, irpes, and all 
 affected humours, 
 Good Mercury, defend us ! 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 231 
 
 The chief characters of ‘‘Volpone, or the Fox,” brought 
 out in 1605, are Italian, and the scene is laid in 
 Venice. The comedy of ‘‘The Case is Altered,” 
 printed in 1609, is also Italian in its personages and 
 scenery. The rest of Jonson’s plays deal either with 
 classical or English themes, but Italy furnished him 
 with a congenial dramatic form in the Masque, 
 which he handled with more freedom and variety 
 than any of his contemporaries. 
 
 The twin-dramatists, Francis Beaumont and John 
 Fletcher, whose careers belong wholly to the Jacobean 
 era, were among the first to draw upon the newly- 
 opened treasury of Spanish fiction. ‘‘ The Knight of 
 the Burning Pestle,” produced in 1611, was a burlesque 
 upon the extravagant chivalric romances then in 
 vogue, its motive being obviously suggested by the 
 “Don Quixote” of Cervantes, which appeared in 1605. 
 The plot of their comedy of “The Little French 
 Lawyer” was taken from ‘‘ Guzman D’Alfarache,” by 
 Aleman, one of the most popular of Spanish novels. 
 ** Chances,” another comedy, was taken from Cer- 
 vantes’s novel of “The Lady Cornelia”; ‘‘ Love’s 
 Pilgrimage” from his ‘Two Damsels.” ‘‘ The Maid 
 in the Mill” was partly borrowed from a romance of 
 Gonzalo de Cespides, entitled ‘ Gerardo,” and partly 
 from one of the Italian zovelle of Bandello. ‘The 
 Spanish Curate,” “Rule a Wife and have a Wife,” 
 and ‘‘A Wife for a Month” may also be referred to 
 Spanish sources. ‘Two of the “ Four Plays in One” 
 and scenes in the tragi-comedy of ‘‘ Women Pleased ” 
 were founded upon novels by Boccaccio, and ‘‘ The 
 Custom of the Country” owes part of its plot 
 
232 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 to a novel by Malespini. A French romance by 
 Daudiguier was the original of ‘‘The Lover’s Pro- 
 gress.” The exquisite pastoral play of ‘The Faithful 
 Shepherdess,” which proceeded from Fletcher’s pen 
 alone, belongs to the hybrid class of eclogue-drama, 
 originally created by the Italians, and borrowed from 
 them by the Spaniards, of which Tasso’s ‘‘ Aminta ” 
 and Guarini’s “ Pastor Fido” are the best-known 
 examples. : 
 
 Nineteen of the plays of Philip Massinger which 
 now remain (little more than half the number that he 
 wrote) may be referred to Italian, Spanish-Italian, or 
 French sources, either historical or fictitious. Two 
 or three of his lost plays, also, may be presumed 
 from their titles to have dealt with Italian or Spanish- 
 Italian subjects. The “Spanish Gipsy” and “A 
 Game at Chess” of Thomas Middleton deal with 
 Spanish types of character. The latter was a violent 
 attack upon the Court of Spain which gave so much 
 offence that its representation was suppressed. 
 
 The characters and scenes in four out of the ten 
 plays of John Ford now extant, viz., ‘‘ Annabella and 
 Giovanni” (usually known by a coarser title), ‘‘Love’s 
 Sacrifice,” ‘‘The Fancies Chaste and Noble,” and 
 “The Lady’s Trial,” are Italian, the plots being 
 probably taken from zovelle. His ‘‘ Lover’s Melan- 
 choly ” contains a graceful paraphrase of the ‘‘ Con- 
 tention between a Musician and a Nightingale,” by 
 Strada, a contemporary Italian poet. 
 
 Thomas Heywood, another prolific dramatist of 
 the day, appears to have been a diligent gleaner in 
 the same fields. The main plot of his ‘‘ Captives ” 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 233 
 
 is taken from the “ Mostellaria” of Plautus, its 
 underplot from Masuccio’s ‘‘ Novellino.” ‘The under- 
 plot of his “Woman Killed with Kindness” has been 
 traced to a tale by Illicini of Siena. 
 
 Of their fellow-dramatists, it must suffice to name 
 John Webster, as especially indebted to Italian 
 fiction. ‘The plot of his masterpiece, ‘‘ The Duchess 
 of Malfi,” is founded upon a novel by Bandello. To 
 adopt the language of a competent critic in reference 
 to this age of our literature, it may ‘‘ without much 
 hesitation be affirmed that far the greater number of 
 our dramas are founded on Italian novels.”! But 
 the extent to which the Stuart dramatists were affected 
 by foreign influences does not end here. It requires 
 but a superficial acquaintance with the works of 
 Jonson, for example, to see how steeped his mind 
 was in the spirit of the Renaissance. ‘‘ Volpone” 
 alone would suffice to show how familiar was his 
 acquaintance with the history, literature, proverbs, 
 and colloquial speech, as well as the manners and 
 customs, of Italy. Equally unmistakable in the 
 works of Beaumont and Fletcher is the evidence of 
 their intellectual and moral sympathy with the writers 
 to whom they were so largely indebted. This has 
 not escaped the critical discernment of Hallam,? who 
 notes the ‘elevated sense of honour, friendship, 
 fidelity, and love,” which distinguishes “The Two 
 Noble Kinsmen,” as being characteristic of Fletcher, 
 
 * “Introduction to the Works of Ford,” p. xxv. (Murray, 
 1831.) 
 
 ? ‘Introduction to the Literature of Europe,” vol. iii. 
 pp. 321-338. 
 
234 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 ‘who had drunk at the fountain of Castilian romance,” 
 and the language attributed to Maximus, one of the 
 characters in the tragedy of ‘‘ Valentinian,” as framed 
 in ‘‘the Spanish style of perverted honour.” In like 
 manner, the ‘ studiously-protracted indecency incor- 
 porated with” many of Fletcher’s plays, the choice 
 of motives and situations designed to exhibit the 
 working of lust and cruelty in their grossest forms, 
 show but too clearly how completely he had assi- 
 milated the tone of his Italian models. Of Webster, 
 again, it may be truly said that he “was as deeply 
 tainted as his contemporaries with the savage taste 
 of the Italian school.” 
 
 Of the allusions to England’s foreign relations to 
 be found in the dramatic literature of this period, 
 the most noteworthy are those contained in two plays 
 of Massinger’s,—‘“‘ Believe as You List,” produced in 
 1631, and ‘The Maid of Honour,” printed in 1632. 
 In both, the dramatist, under cover of imaginary 
 characters, reflects upon the cowardly desertion of 
 the Elector-Palatine by Charles and his father, and 
 satirises the policy which Weston had recommended 
 to his master, of truckling to the power of Spain and 
 maintaining a shameful peace, instead of actively 
 supporting the Protestant cause in Germany,! 
 
 Turning from dramatic to lyrical poetry, we find 
 the delicate bloom and fragrance of the Italian 
 Renaissance at its prime reproduced in the early 
 poems of John Milton. The “Arcades” and ‘‘Comus” 
 are finished examples of the lyrical and pastoral 
 
 ‘ See Gardiner’s ‘‘ Personal Government of Charles I.,” 
 vol. i. pp. 243-247. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 235 
 
 drama which Jonson and Fletcher had already 
 handled with such success. ‘“ L’Allegro” and “Il 
 Penseroso,” although thoroughly national in tone and 
 colouring, bespeak the influence under which they 
 were composed by their Italian titles, which express 
 the opposite moods that the poet intended to depict 
 more significantly than any English equivalents.! His 
 sonnets, though for the most part dealing with grave 
 themes and charged with Puritan symyathies, are 
 framed in strict accordance with their Petrarchian 
 models. The elegy of ‘‘Lycidas” is perhaps the most 
 perfect example in our poetry of the fusion of neo- 
 classical culture with Christian sentiment. Refined 
 without pedantry, it is animated by a fresh imaginative 
 impulse, chastened by devout and tender feeling, and 
 unstained by a trace of impurity. Wither was another 
 Puritan poet who retained the influence of the same 
 culture, and devoted his exquisite skill to the service 
 of his highest convictions. Herrick, on the other 
 hand, reflects with singular fidelity the strange con- 
 trasts which the Renaissance presents of delicacy and 
 lewdness. No English lyrics are choicer in senti- 
 ment, music, or diction than some of his, while it 
 would be difficult to match the grossness of others. 
 Of the minor poets of this age, Carew and Lovelace - 
 may be named as exhibiting in a less marked degree 
 the influence of the same scholarly refinement and 
 grace of style. ‘The verse of Crashaw manifests his 
 sensibility to a dissimilar influence, also derived from 
 Italy,—the half-mystical, half-sensuous devotion which 
 
 ' See Morley’s “‘ First Sketch of English Literature,” p. 553. 
 
236 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 characterised the Catholic revival in the sixteenth 
 century. The “Divine Emblems” of Francis Quarles 
 imported into our literatitre. that taste for quaint 
 moral allegory which had long been popular on the 
 Continent. The “Emblems” of Alciati, an Italian 
 lawyer, who died in 1550, or the,‘‘ Moral Emblems ” 
 of Jacob Cats, a Dutch statesman, contemporary with 
 Quarles, was probably his model. Among translators 
 of exotic poetry, it 1s enough to name George Chap- 
 man, who Englished the “Iliad” and “‘ Odyssey ” of 
 Homer in vigorous and picturesque verse; Edward 
 Fairfax, whose version of Tasso’s ‘* Gerusalemme 
 Liberata” is perhaps the most graceful in our lan- 
 guage; and Sir Richard Fanshawe, whose translations 
 of the “ Lusiad ” of Camoens, the “ Pastor Fido” of 
 Guarini, and Mendoza’s play of “ Querer per solo 
 Querer ” were highly esteemed. 
 
 In prose fiction, Shelton’s translation from an 
 Italian version of the ‘“ Don Quixote” of Cervantes, 
 published in 1612 and 1620, and Sir Thomas 
 Urquhart’s translation of the “Gargantua and Panta- 
 gruel” of Rabelais, published in 1653, were the most 
 noteworthy contributions from foreign sources. ‘The 
 half-forgotten French romances of D’Urfé, Made- 
 moiselle de Scuderi, and Calprenéde were also 
 translated during the period of the Commonwealth, 
 and gave rise to a few wholly-forgotten imitations of 
 them by English writers. 
 
 Foremost among the literary products of this 
 period, regarded only as a monument of English 
 scholarship, must be reckoned the Authorised trans- 
 lation of the Bible, published in 1611. Whatever 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 237 
 
 exceptions may be taken to it as often inadequately 
 rendering the sense of the original text, the dignity, 
 simplicity, and rhythmical music of its language 
 remain unmatched, and would of themselves suffice 
 to preserve it in reverence as a masterpiece of style, 
 if the Revised version should eventually supersede it 
 in use. 
 
 The greatést English prose writer of this period, 
 Francis Bacon, Lord Verulam, is’ eminent rather on 
 account of the new method of inductive reasoning 
 which he introduced into philosophy and science 
 than for any speculations or discoveries of his own. 
 He was more concerned to demolish the fallacious 
 structures of other builders than to make a better 
 use of their materials. Even in this respect, how- 
 ever, his debt to Aristotle and the schoolmen whom 
 he set himself to confute was necessarily large. In 
 the ‘‘ Advancement of Learning” and the ‘‘ Novum 
 Organum ” he shows considerable acquaintance with 
 the labours of his Continental contemporaries in the 
 study of natural phenomena, speaking with admiration 
 of “‘the wonderful exertions ” of Galileo in inventing 
 the telescope and the ‘‘ noble discoveries ” which had 
 resulted from its employment, although rejecting the 
 Copernican system of astronomy as false and dis- 
 puting Galileo’s explanation of the tides as based 
 upon that unsound foundation. All Bacon’s short- 
 comings and mistakes are condoned by the vastness 
 of the scheme shadowed forth in these great works, 
 which was no less than to make a complete survey of 
 what the human mind had accomplished by means 
 of its ancient instruments, and to demonstrate how, 
 
238 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 by applying right modes of investigation, the yield of 
 knowledge might be rendered incomparably richer. 
 The ample extent of his attainments is evidenced by 
 his frequent citations of ancient and modern authors 
 in all departments of learning and the illustrations 
 which he adduces from recent observations of Eastern 
 and Western travellers. 
 
 Thomas Hobbes, who in youth was one of Bacon’s 
 secretaries, held even a lower estimate than his master 
 of the metaphysics of Aristotle and the schoolmen, 
 and his greatest work, the ‘ Leviathan,” a compre- 
 hensive treatise upon the grounds of knowledge and 
 faith and the theory of political and ecclesiastical 
 government, abounds in caustic references to their 
 fallacies. His speculations appear to have been 
 mainly original, but he was familiar with the writings 
 of two prominent French thinkers of his time,— 
 Gassendi, whose materialistic views he shared, and 
 Descartes, whose idealism he controverted. He was 
 acquainted also with the treatise of the. Spanish 
 Jesuit, Suarez, upon moral law, and with the theo- 
 logical works of Cardinal Bellarmin, the Italian 
 Jesuit, to whose confutation he devotes a section 
 of the “Leviathan.” The classical attainments of 
 Hobbes were remarkable even in this age of scholars. 
 His earliest work was a translation of Thucydides, 
 and one of his latest a metrical version of the 
 ‘‘Tliad” and ‘Odyssey ” of Homer. 
 
 Sir Kenelm Digby, a writer of considerable talent 
 and learning, whose mind ranged over a wide field 
 of speculation and study, showed in his principal 
 work,—a treatise ‘‘Of Bodies and of Man’s Soul,” 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 239 
 
 published in 1645,-—that he had not only mastered 
 the systems of Aristotle and other ancient thinkers, 
 but was acquainted at first hand with the contribu- 
 tions to philosophy and science made by Descartes 
 and Galileo. 
 
 Two other great prose writers, John Milton and 
 Bishop Jeremy Taylor, only come within the scope of 
 this retrospect in virtue of the classical learning 
 which pervades their works. In the case of the 
 former, it had a marked effect in moulding his style, 
 which the latter happily escaped. 
 
 In special provinces of scholarship, which involved 
 a thorough acquaintance with foreign as well as 
 native sources of information, several English writers 
 of this age honourably distinguished themselves, 
 notably Richard Knolles, the historian of the Turkish 
 empire; Sir Henry Savile, the translator of Tacitus 
 and editor of St. Chrysostom ; John Selden, author 
 of a treatise upon natural or moral law, as expounded 
 by the Hebrew jurists, and other works upon English 
 law,—one of which, ‘‘ Mare Clausum,” was an answer 
 to the ‘‘ Mare Liberum” of the Dutch jurist, Grotius ; 
 Sir Henry Spelman, the antiquary and _ glossarist ; 
 Bishop Andrewes, who, as an expert in the history of 
 the Church and the writings of the Fathers, entered 
 into controversy with the learned Jesuit, Bellarmin ; 
 William Chillingworth and Archbishop Usher, who 
 carried on the same warfare with like weapons. 
 
 The laborious and recondite erudition of the 
 Renaissance had its typical English representatives 
 in two prose writers, both men of original power, 
 Robert Burton and Sir Thomas Browne. The 
 
240 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 ‘Anatomy of Melancholy,” by which the former is 
 remembered, is a treasury of curious learning, upon 
 which many succeeding writers have drawn. ‘The 
 quaint observation which it displays redeems its 
 excess of illustration, which would otherwise he 
 tedious. Its sources include both classical and 
 medizval authors, to whose works the author had 
 access in the libraries of the University of Oxford, 
 where he spent his life. The “Religio Medici,” 
 “ Hydriotaphia,” and ‘‘ Pseudodoxia Epidemica ” of 
 Browne are scarcely less erudite, and their style is 
 so much Latinised as to be chargeable with pedantry, 
 but they abound in eloquence of a high order. The 
 ‘“¢ Hydriotaphia,” an essay upon sepulchral urns, is 
 based upon the “De Funeribus Romanorum ” of 
 Kirchmann, a German scholar. 
 
 The ranks of English scholarship received two 
 notable additions from the Continent during the 
 reign of James I., in the persons of Isaac Casaubon 
 and Francis Junius. Casaubon, the most learned 
 classicist of his age, was the son of French Pro- 
 testants, who had settled at Geneva, where he was 
 born. He spent the last four years of his life in 
 England, where he obtained clerical preferment and 
 a pension. His son Meric, who accompanied him, 
 was also preferred:to rank in the Church, and attained 
 some celebrity as a champion of Protestantism. 
 Junius, the son of a Dutch Protestant minister, 
 was born at Heidelburg, and came over to England 
 to be librarian to the Earl of Arundel, a post which 
 he filled for more than thirty years. He devoted 
 his attention to northern philology, and edited the 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 241 
 
 ‘*Paraphrase” of our Saxon poet, Cedmon. An- 
 other foreign settler here, Samuel Hartlib, by birth a 
 Pole, translated, in 1642, two Latin treatises upon the 
 reform of schools, by Komensky, a Moravian pastor, 
 that suggested the tract upon “ Education” which 
 Milton published in 1644, with an inscription to 
 Hartlib. In the following year Hartlib edited a 
 treatise upon ‘Flemish Agriculture,” which is 
 believed to have largely contributed to the improve- 
 ment of that branch of industry in England. The 
 name of another Continental scholar, Saumaise, or 
 Salmasius, who was employed by Prince Charles in 
 1649 to write a ‘‘ Defence” of Charles I., is memor- 
 able on account of the answer which he called forth 
 from Milton, whose ‘‘ Defence of the People of 
 England” is among his most celebrated prose works. 
 
 The fine arts in this country received their greatest 
 stimulus during the first half of the seventeenth 
 century by the advent of several illustrious Con- 
 tinental painters in succession. Paul Van Somer, a 
 native of Antwerp, came over a few years after the 
 accession of James I., and remained here until his 
 death in 1621. A large number of his masterly 
 portraits are preserved in our public and private 
 galleries. Cornelius Jansen, a native of Amsterdam, 
 spent thirty years of his life here, from 1618 to 1648. 
 His reputation as a portrait-painter was deservedly 
 high, and he appears to have been in constant occupa- 
 tion until eclipsed by the fame of Vandyck. Daniel 
 Mytens, another Dutch painter in the same walk of 
 art, visited England during the reign of James I., and 
 obtained the post of Court painter in the next reign. 
 
 R 
 
242 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Several of his works are in the palace of Hampton 
 Court. His fame also declined soon after Vandyck’s 
 arrival, when he returned to the Hague. 
 
 Charles I., whose discriminating knowledge and 
 judicious patronage of art have redeemed his 
 memory as a man from the obloquy he incurred as 
 a king, formed an extensive collection of valuable 
 pictures, and invited the first contemporary artists 
 of all schools to visit his court. Immediately after 
 his attainder and execution, his collection was 
 confiscated to the use of the State, and publicly 
 sold. Many of its treasures were bought by foreign 
 collectors, but a considerable number, including 
 the cartoons of Raffaelle and Mantegna’s ‘“‘ Triumphs 
 of Julius Ceesar,” were retained at the instance of 
 Cromwell, and others were subsequently recovered. 
 Peter Paul Rubens, the greatest painter of his 
 age, visited England upon a diplomatic mission 
 a few years after the accession of Charles, who 
 knighted him in recognition of his eminence, and 
 embraced the opportunity to obtain several examples 
 of his art. Many of his works in private collections 
 were probably painted during this visit. The most 
 illustrious scholar of Rubens, Anthony Vandyck, 
 was invited over by the King in 1632; was soon 
 afterwards knighted, and installed as chief Court 
 painter ; married the daughter of a Scottish peer, 
 and remained here until his death in 1641. If his 
 genius as a religious artist is better exemplified by the 
 pictures which he painted abroad, his consummate 
 skill in portraiture can nowhere be seen to greater 
 advantage than in this country, which abounds in his 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 243 
 
 masterpieces. From his residence here and the 
 inspiration of his works may be dated the real 
 beginning of our native school of portraiture. His 
 contemporaries, Dobson and Cooper, were his avowed 
 imitators, and Highmore, Richardson, and Hudson 
 carried on the tradition of his influence into the 
 following century. 
 
 Among other Dutch painters of mark who visited 
 England during this period may be mentioned 
 Cornelius Polenburg, Henry Steenwyck, and Gerard 
 Honthorst. Of contemporary Italian painters, several 
 received invitations from Charles, but the only one 
 of note who accepted was Horatio Gentilleschi, a 
 skilful decorator of ceilings. Francis Cleyn, a 
 German, who excelled as a designer of grotesques, 
 and Jean Petitot, a famous French enamellist, also 
 found constant occupation under Charles’s patronage. 
 Cleyn was one of the chief artists employed in 
 designing patterns for tapestry, a manufactory of 
 which was set up in the previous reign at Mortlake. 
 John and Martin Droeshout, who appear to have 
 been of Dutch extraction, were resident in London, 
 and actively employed as engravers. ‘The latter 
 was the engraver of the “Chandos” portrait of 
 Shakespeare. Wenceslaus Hollar, a native of Prague, 
 the most eminent engraver of his age, was brought 
 over to England in 1636 by Thomas Howard, Earl 
 of Arundel, a connoisseur of art, scarcely less accom- 
 plished than the King. Some of Hollar’s best works 
 were executed here, where he remained during the 
 greater part of forty years. De Voerst and 
 Vostermans, two Dutch engravers, and Lombart, a 
 
 2 
 
244 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Frenchman, were also in request as reproducers of 
 the works of Vandyck. 
 
 In architecture, it is sufficient to name Inigo Jones 
 as (with one exception) the greatest artist whom this 
 country has produced. It is well known that he only 
 discovered the special bent of his genius after visit- 
 ing Rome and Venice, and the influence of the 
 masters of the Renaissance, especially of Palladio, 
 may be discerned in his finest designs. In sculpture, 
 Gerard Johnson, the son of a native of Amsterdam 
 who settled in England, has obtained celebrity as the 
 artist of Shakespeare’s bust in Stratford Church. 
 Hubert le Sceur, a native of France, was the chief 
 foreign artist employed by Charles I. The King’s 
 equestrian statue at Charing Cross is his best-known 
 work. Nicholas Stone, a native sculptor, in high 
 repute, acquired his skill abroad by a careful study of 
 the antique and of the Italian masters who had 
 caught its inspiration. Of workers in metal, Briot, a 
 Frenchman; Van Vianen, a German; and Fanelli, 
 an Italian, are recorded as enjoying a large share of 
 royal patronage. 
 
 The famous collection of ancient statues, cameos, 
 intaglios, inscriptions, and medals formed by the Earl 
 of Arundel during this period contributed to mould 
 the taste of his contemporaries in all branches of 
 exotic culture. Music, as in the preceding age, 
 continued to be our one art of native growth. 
 Nicholas Lanitre, an Italian by birth, appears to have 
 been the only foreign musician of mark who was 
 extensively patronised. 
 
 The certainty and pallens of the discoveries in 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 245 
 
 physical science made during this period by Con- 
 tinental philosophers, to which Bacon was unhappily 
 blind, were not overlooked by all his English con- 
 temporaries. The truth of the Copernican system 
 of astronomy was advocated by Edward Wright, a 
 mathematician and writer upon navigation, and by 
 William Gilbert, a physician and author of a remark- 
 able Latin treatise upon magnetism. These men, 
 however, who flourished in the sixteenth rather than 
 the seventeenth century, were far in advance of their 
 time, and the system was still comparatively unknown 
 to English thinkers in 1640, when John Wilkins 
 published his “ Discourse concerning a New Planet,” 
 which had for its object the vindication of Galileo, 
 who three years before had been imprisoned by the 
 Inquisition at Rome for promulgating the heretical 
 doctrine that the earth is not the centre of the 
 universe. A few years later witnessed a notable 
 advance in the progress of science in England. A 
 number of thoughtful men, who were saddened by 
 the spectacle of political and religious discord during 
 the Civil War, turned for consolation to the study of 
 Nature, and were drawn into sympathy by the com- 
 munity of their pursuits. The origin of the Royal 
 Society, which dates from the year 1645, was due to 
 the association of these kindred spirits. Wilkins, 
 Hartlib, Wallis, and Ward, the mathematicians ; John 
 Evelyn, the future author of ‘“‘Sylva”; Christopher 
 Wren, the greatest architect of the Restoration ; Robert 
 Boyle, the chemist, and Sir William Petty, the econo- 
 mist, were among its earliest members. ‘Their range 
 of research embraced (to quote the words of one of 
 
246 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 the associates) all the branches of science which had 
 “been much cultivated in Italy, France, Germany, 
 and other parts abroad, as well as with us in 
 England.” Prominently in the list of subjects figure 
 “the Copernican hypothesis” and ‘the Torricellian 
 experiment in quicksilver.” The extension of their 
 acquaintance with the discoveries of Continental 
 savants belongs to the consideration of the succeed- 
 ing period. 
 
 The spirit of commercial enterprise which had 
 characterised the age of Elizabeth continued to 
 animate our countrymen during the seventeenth 
 century. The East India Company made rapid strides 
 towards the goal of wealth and power. By the exertions 
 of a succession of intelligent and courageous agents it 
 acquired trading privileges and permanent ‘“ fac- 
 tories,” or commercial settlements, in several cities 
 within the Indian dominions of the Mogul, in Persia, 
 Japan, Java, Siam, Borneo, Sumatra, and the Spice 
 Islands. ‘Their fleets, commanded by able captains, 
 achieved victories over the Spaniards and Portuguese 
 which mastered their opposition ; but the Company 
 encountered more formidable competitors in the 
 Dutch, whose hostility, at first concealed but after- 
 wards avowed, seriously crippled its operations during 
 the reigns of James I. and Charles I. In spite of this 
 hindrance, which the weakness of these sovereigns 
 allowed to harass it with impunity, the prosperity of 
 the Company continued to grow, until the naval and 
 commercial supremacy of the Dutch was ultimately 
 checked, as has been seen, under the stronger rule 
 of Cromwell. Other trading communities, notably 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 247 
 
 the Levant or Turkey Company and the Muscovy 
 or Russian Company, successfully prosecuted their 
 operations during the same period, the one absorbing 
 a large share of traffic with the East, the other 
 developing the fur trade and the whale fisheries of the 
 northern seas. It must be left to imagination to 
 calculate the extent to which this diversified activity 
 of commercial energy contributed to increase and 
 disseminate a knowledge of geography, botany, and 
 natural history, and to enlarge the scope of our 
 insular ideas concerning the world and its manifold 
 varieties of race, language, poetry, creed, and custom. 
 Of exotic products which were introduced into 
 England during this period, and eventually brought 
 into general use, cotton, potatoes, cane-sugar, coffee, 
 and tobacco were the most important. 
 
 The enlightening influences due to the extension 
 of commerce were further aided by the progress of 
 colonisation, which became extremely rapid during 
 the first half of the seventeenth century. The 
 attempts to form settlements in North America, which 
 had previously failed, were renewed under James I., 
 who in 1606 granted charters to two Companies, 
 organised with the object of planting all the coast 
 between the 34th and 45th degrees of north latitude, 
 comprehending what are now known as the States of 
 Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, 
 Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, 
 and Connecticut. . The agressions upon civil liberty 
 and the persecution of religious belief by which 
 Charles I. and his ministers made England intoler- 
 able to a large number of high-minded and God- 
 
248 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 fearing Puritans consolidated the polity which they 
 founded across the Atlantic. .Warmly attached to 
 their country, but driven into exile for conscience’ 
 sake, they chose to form a new colony, under the pro- 
 tection of the national flag, rather than become 
 naturalised in a foreign state. ‘The development of a 
 distinctively Puritan and Nonconformist community 
 in New England was the fruit of this emigration. 
 Though severed by distance from their co-religionists 
 at home, the colonists preserved unbroken the ties of 
 association and sympathy. An instance of the re- 
 acting influence which a section of the New England 
 Independents were able to exert upon their brethren in 
 the old country during the religious conflict that dis- 
 tracted the Long Parliament has already been noticed. 
 
 In 1632 the persecution of the English Catholics 
 led to their forming another colony on the same 
 continent, under the leadership of Lord Baltimore, 
 who obtained a grant from the Crown of part of 
 Virginia, and gave it, in honour of the Queen, the 
 name of Maryland. At various times during the 
 same reign, other settlements were made, under the 
 authority of royal grants, upon the Bermudas or 
 Somers’ Islands, Acadia (subsequently called Nova 
 Scotia), Barbadoes, St. Christopher’s, Nevis, Antigua, 
 and the Bahamas, and in what are now the States of 
 Georgia, Tennessee, and Louisiana. The conquest of 
 Jamaica under the Commonwealth completed the 
 list of English gains beyond sea. The currents of 
 intercommunication which gradually set in between 
 the mother-country and her offshoots must have 
 nsensibly drifted back to her shores a number of 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 249 
 
 exotic elements which now enter into our national 
 composition. Among these may be mentioned the 
 re-absorption from time to time of returned settlers, 
 who had married women of Indian, Spanish, or negro 
 blood, with their wives and families ; the importation 
 of negro slaves as domestic servants ; the introduction 
 of foreign habits and colloquial phrases ; and ac- 
 quaintance with the worship, mythology, and tradi- 
 tions of many savage races. 
 
 Effects more directly traceable to foreign sources 
 may be discerned in the improvements which took 
 place in English agriculture during this epoch. The 
 service rendered by Samuel Hartlib in making known 
 the Flemish system was seconded by two other 
 writers, Bligh and Weston, who recommended the 
 cultivation of clover and turnips, which had long 
 been grown in Flanders, as food for cattle and sheep. 
 Early in the reign of Charles I. the draining of 
 fen-lands and the reclamation of marshes from the 
 sea by embanking were actively promoted by Lord 
 Bedford and others, who obtained for that purpose 
 the services of an eminent Dutch engineer, Sir 
 Cornelius Vermuyden. The scheme of the ‘‘ Bedford 
 Level,” by which a large portion of the eastern 
 counties was converted from barren swamp _ into 
 fertile tillage, is due to his skill. The culture of 
 trees, flowers, fruits, and vegetables was stimulated by 
 the efforts of John Evelyn, who resided for some 
 years on the Continent during the Civil War, and had 
 ample resources for the gratification of his favourite 
 pursuits. His “French Gardener,” which he speaks 
 of inhis ‘‘ Diary” as the “ first and best” treatise on 
 
250 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 the growth of plants in pots, was published in 1658. 
 His collection for a ‘‘winter garden” was made at 
 Padua. ‘The taste for landscape-gardening which he 
 indulged at Wotton, and was active in diffusing, he 
 probably acquired in Holland. The Dutch love of 
 tulips, which amounted to a mania, was shared by 
 the Parliamentary general, Lambert, who devoted his 
 retirement to their culture. Charles I. was interested 
 in the culture of new fruits, and gave orders a few 
 days before his trial that the seeds of a Spanish 
 variety of melon should be planted in his garden 
 at Wimbledon. Hartlib, writing in 1650, refers to 
 the sowing of cabbages, cauliflowers, turnips, carrots, 
 parsnips, and peas as having been first made in 
 Surrey within living memory, “‘all which at that time 
 were great wonders, we having few or none in England 
 but what came from Holland and Flanders.” 
 
 In manufactures, the chief improvement that 
 may be noticed was due to the arrival of a Dutch 
 dyer, who set up an establishment in 1643, and 
 introduced the method of obtaining the fine scarlet 
 tint for which Continental cloths were celebrated. 
 With the object of encouraging the manufacture of 
 silk-stuffs and competing with the French craftsmen, 
 James I. circulated instructions for rearing silkworms, 
 and directed mulberry-trees to be extensively 
 planted. Although checked by the growing importa- 
 tion of silken materials from India, this industry ‘so 
 far increased that a company of silk-throwsters was in- 
 corporated in 1629, and is stated, in an Act passed a 
 
 year after the Restoration, to have employed 40,000 
 hands. : ; 
 
POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 251 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 
 Foreign influences upon political history from the Restoration 
 to the Revolution, 1660 to 1688. 
 
 THE Parliamentary discords and private intrigues 
 which brought about the Restoration of the monarchy 
 in the person of Charles IT. were the salient symptoms 
 of a general reaction against the attempt of Cromwell 
 to establish his beneficent dictatorship by the aid of 
 military power. The bulk of the English people 
 still remained Puritans. They did not suddenly lose 
 the love of civil liberty and religious moderation 
 which drove them to rebel against Charles I.; and 
 their acquiescence in the restoration of his son was 
 grounded upon a reasonable expectation that he 
 would profit by the lessons of the war and its sequel. 
 The immediate result of the Restoration, however, 
 was to bring into prominence the ultra-Royalist party, 
 which had shed its best blood for the cause of abso- 
 lutism, had shared in its ruin, and suffered bitter 
 indignities under the yoke of the victors. A transient 
 indulgence of retaliation, now that it had gained the 
 upper hand, was naturally to be expected. A similar 
 reaction in the direction of irreligion and profligacy 
 was consequent upon the excess of Puritan fanaticism, 
 which had prescribed too rigid a devotional standard 
 for all consciences alike, and prohibited innocent 
 and vicious forms of entertainment as equally immoral. 
 
252 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Following the lead of a King whose scepticism of all 
 religious belief was only tempered by a secret per- 
 suasion that the Romish communion, which he pro- 
 fessed to abjure, was really possessed of the truth, 
 and who habitually -gave the rein to his passions 
 without scruple or shame, the Court and the aris- 
 tocratic circle round it became notorious for an 
 avowed infidelity and licentiousness which were far 
 from reflecting the temper of the nation at large. 
 Side by side with these degrading tendencies, healthier 
 forces were quietly at work, which gradually vindi- 
 cated the triumph of all that the Reformation and 
 Puritanism had won for English liberty. 
 
 Charles II., although born on English soil, was the 
 son of foreign parents, and inherited the un-English 
 traditions of absolute sovereignty that were ingrained 
 in the minds of his father and grandfather. Veiled 
 under the exterior of an indolent, pleasure-loving 
 temperament, he cherished the determination to assert 
 his prerogative and indulge his caprices without re- 
 gard to the inclination or the welfare of his subjects. 
 Though repeatedly baffled, and to all appearance 
 ready to abandon any purpose which proved un- 
 popular, he steadily pursued these ends. His policy, 
 indeed, only differed from his father’s in being irre- 
 gularly instead of persistently despotic, and the one 
 consideration which curbed his wilfulness was a whole- 
 some fear of being driven (as he phrased it) to “set 
 out on his travels again.” Unable, as he soon found, 
 to impose his will, even upon the Royalist party, 
 beyond narrow limits, and checked by the constant 
 necessity of applying to Parliament for money, he 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. on 
 
 resorted to the base expedient of appealing to ex- 
 ternal aid, and stooped to become the secret minion 
 and pensioner of France. 
 
 The sinister influence which this subserviency exer- 
 cised upon his domestic and foreign policy, and has 
 left the record of his reign the most shameful in our 
 history, can only be roughly indicated. We may pass 
 lightly over the earlier annals of his rule, when its 
 real aims were not detected, and he was.allowed his 
 own way. ‘The dissolution of the union between the 
 three kingdoms effected under the Commonwealth, the 
 re-establishment of episcopal government in Scotland; 
 the restoration of Protestant supremacy in Ireland; 
 the retention in the royal service of a strong guard of 
 cavalry and infantry, which was gradually increased 
 to the dimensions of a standing army ; the violation 
 of his pledge to show mercy to the regicides and 
 republicans, whereby fifteen were brought to the 
 scaffold and twenty others disqualified for public 
 office,—these and similar indications of his purpose, 
 though not wholly unobserved, were submitted to 
 without serious opposition. 
 
 In carrying out his policy, Charles was hampered 
 by the consciousness that his most trusted ministers, 
 with Hyde, now Lord Clarendon, at their head, were 
 constitutional statesmen, who would not countenance 
 his claim to absolute authority or any direct violation 
 of the legal sanctions of liberty. As they represented 
 the Protestant convictions of the bulk of the Royalists, 
 his purpose of securing the fidelity of English Catholics, 
 by granting them the ample toleration he had pro- 
 mised, in return for their loyalty during the Civil War 
 
254 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 and their contributions during his exile, was baffled. 
 Still more impracticable was his scheme of a recon- 
 ciliation between the Churches of England and Rome, 
 in the hope of effecting which he sent a secret embassy 
 to the Pope two years after he came to the throne. 
 A third project of profiting by the dissensions of 
 Protestantism, and playing off Churchmen against 
 Nonconformists, to their mutual discomfiture, pro- 
 mised greater success, but the time was not yet ripe 
 for its execution. He saw no prospect of achieving 
 his aim except by help from without. 
 
 The sources from which it could be obtained were 
 few. With the United Provinces, which had sheltered 
 him in exile and offered to renew their old alliance 
 with England, together with the addition of a large 
 subsidy, he could enter into no engagement, owing 
 to the refusal of Parliament to repeal the Navigation 
 Act, which crippled Dutch commerce. With Spain 
 he could come to no terms, because she insisted 
 upon the cession of the spoils of Cromwell’s victory, 
 Jamaica and Dunkirk. He resolved to apply to 
 France, then the greatest of European States. Pro- 
 fiting by the decrepitude of Spain, by the exhaustion 
 of the German empire after the Thirty Years’ War 
 and its continual struggle with the Turks, and by the 
 comparative weakness of Holland and Sweden, it had 
 grown under Richelieu and Mazarin into a solid, 
 wealthy, and powerful government. Its army, since 
 the accession of Louis XIV., had been increased to 
 nearly half a million, and the strength of its navy 
 now rivalled that of England. The ambition and 
 cupidity of Louis himself, aided by the skill of his 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 255 
 
 statesmen and generals, had already deprived Spain 
 of her old pre-eminence in Europe. ‘The ruin of her 
 empire, which he desired to accomplish, could only 
 be obtained by depriving her of all allies, and Eng- 
 land was the solitary European power whose neutrality 
 had not been secured. Charles had, therefore, chosen 
 a favourable moment for his application, which was 
 readily conceded upon the basis of an understanding 
 that England would tacitly acquiesce in the French 
 schemes. The informal alliance of the two countries 
 was sealed by the double marriage of Louis’s brother, 
 the Duke of Orleans, with Henrietta, the sister of 
 Charles, and that of Charles himself with Catherine, 
 daughter of the King of Portugal, a State whose 
 recent revolt from Spain had deeply wounded her 
 pride and crippled her resources. The acquisition 
 with his bride of a large dowry in money and of two 
 important stations,—Tangier in Africa and Bombay 
 in India,—was a tangible gain that veiled from the 
 English people the real motive of the marriage. 
 
 The Parliamentary ‘‘ Convention,” by whose vote 
 Charles had been restored, which had been mainly 
 composed of Presbyterians, was succeeded by a 
 newly-elected Parliament wherein Royalists and 
 Episcopalians largely preponderated. Its temper was 
 soon shown by a resolution that the “‘ League and 
 Covenant” should be publicly burned, and its repeal 
 of the Act which deprived the Bishops of their seats 
 in the Upper House. At the instance of Clarendon, 
 whose theory of constitutional government was to 
 preserve a balance between the prerogatives of the 
 Crown, the power of the Church, and the liberties 
 
256 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 of Parliament, an Act was then passed which ex- 
 cluded from municipal office any one who refused 
 to communicate according to the Anglican rite, to 
 renounce the League and Covenant, and to affirm the 
 unlawfulness of taking up arms against the King. In 
 1662, a Bill for uniformity in the Church was intro- 
 duced, which extended similar tests to the clergy, 
 disallowed orders not conferred by episcopal hands, 
 and required consent to the entire contents of the 
 Prayer-book and its exclusive use. The Bill was 
 carried and received the assent of Charles, who 
 hoped by subjecting the Dissenters to persecution 
 to convince them of the necessity of tolerating the 
 Catholics. On St. Bartholomew’s Day (August 24), 
 nearly 2,000 Nonconformist clergymen, including 
 divines of such high eminence as Baxter and Howe, 
 were ejected from their benefices. ‘The immediate 
 effect of this measure was to organise the forces of 
 Dissent against the Government. Even Clarendon 
 became apprehensive of an explosion of popular 
 feeling, and concurred with Charles that it was ad- 
 visable to obtain foreign aid. He accordingly as- 
 sented to a disastrous bargain with Louis for the 
 sale of Dunkirk, a station of vital importance to 
 England, as securing her immunity from privateers 
 in the Channel, and the loss of which was severely 
 felt during the naval wars of the next century. 
 
 But the divergent aims of Charles and his chan- 
 cellor soon led to a rupture between them, and a 
 new instrument to carry out the royal scheme of 
 masking despotism under colour of toleration was 
 found in Ashley Cooper, Lord Ashley. Although 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 2E7 
 
 destitute of religious convictions, he attached himself 
 to the Presbyterians from a persuasion that England 
 could only maintain her liberties against the Crown 
 and assert her influence in Europe by the principle 
 which they represented. With this view he had 
 opposed Clarendon’s policy of persecution, and ap- 
 proved the King’s proposals of reversing it. A pro- 
 clamation issued in December, 1662, which promised 
 to exempt from the penalties of the Test Act and 
 the Act of Uniformity all Nonconformists whose 
 tender consciences impelled them to “ perform their 
 devotions in their own way,” was followed by a 
 Bill to give the promise effect. But the measure 
 was resisted by the Church party, and failed to win 
 the approval of the bulk of the Nonconformists, who 
 scrupled to accept an enfranchisement shared by 
 their Catholic enemies. At the instance of Clarendon, 
 Parliament threw out the Bill, pressed the King to 
 withdraw his first proclamation, and issue another 
 for the banishment of Catholic priests; and proceeded 
 to pass the “Conventicle Act,” which subjected to fine 
 and imprisonment all persons above five in number 
 who assembled for divine worship without using the 
 Book of Common Prayer. These penalties inflicted 
 cruel suffering upon the evicted clergy and their 
 Nonconformist congregations throughout England. 
 The existence of domestic discord was fatal to the- 
 maintenance of a united front against foreign foes. 
 The old jealousy of Holland, after temporarily sub- 
 siding, had been revived by England’s acquisition 
 of Bombay and the formation of a West Indian 
 Company, which interfered with Dutch traffic in 
 S 
 
258 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 African gold. Clarendon and the Church party, 
 sensible that their repressive policy could not be 
 maintained during a war, strove to control the irri- 
 tation which the injuries inflicted upon English com- 
 merce by Dutch merchants continually provoked. 
 Ashley and the Presbyterians, on the other hand, 
 saw in the prospect of war and the taxation it would 
 entail a chance of loosening Clarendon’s hold upon 
 public support. Coalescing with the Catholic party, 
 they biassed the King and inflamed popular resent- 
 ment for that purpose. Charles, though averse to 
 applying to Parliament for money, was favourable to 
 a policy which tended to unsettle the republican 
 oligarchy in Holland, and restore his nephew, William 
 of Orange, to that hereditary authority over its councils 
 ‘from which his family had been displaced. In the 
 course of 1664, Parliament was thus persuaded to 
 reject the advice of Clarendon, and declare war with 
 the Dutch. 
 
 The first naval engagement between the two fleets 
 ‘off Lowestoft in 1665 ended in an English victory, 
 but the struggle was prolonged with alternating 
 success and defeat. Other causes intervened to 
 aggravate the crisis. A terrible incursion of the 
 plague decimated London during six months of 
 1665, and was followed in the next year by a 
 calamitous fire, which destroyed the greater part 
 of the city. Fresh political complications threatened 
 to increase the cost of the war, which was already 
 severely felt. Louis, whose scheme of crushing 
 Spain by the conquest of her Flemish possessions 
 was ripe for execution, was hampered by the proximity 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 259 
 
 of the conflict, and vainly offered at the outset to 
 mediate between the combatants. When, after the 
 engagement at Lowestoft, both sides applied to him 
 for aid, he avowed himself constrained by ancient 
 treaty-obligations to give it to the Dutch. His 
 machinations defeated the attempt of Sir William 
 Temple, the English minister in the Netherlands, to 
 form a Spanish alliance. The Protestant States of 
 Sweden and Brandenburg were alienated by similar 
 intrigues, and the negotiations of French emissaries 
 with the English republicans, the Scotch Presbyterians, 
 and the Irish Catholics, raised a counter-agitation. 
 Englishmen were easily roused to a revival of their 
 old antagonism to France, and Parliament did not 
 shrink from the prospect of war. But evidences of 
 the internal dissensions which Clarendon’s policy had 
 promoted were soon- manifest. The traditional 
 sympathy of the Puritans with their co-religionists 
 in Holland was: not yet extinct, and the Republican 
 Government, when alarmed by the endeavour of 
 Charles to excite the Orange faction against it, 
 threatened to land troops in England and stir up 
 a Nonconformist revolt. The signs of disaffection 
 only provoked the intolerance of the Church party 
 to severer repression. By the ‘‘Five-Mile Act,” passed 
 in 1665, every ejected clergyman who refused to 
 abjure the lawfulness of taking up arms against the 
 Crown or of making “any alteration of government 
 in Church or State,” was prohibited from coming 
 within five miles of the place where he had been 
 a minister: the effect being to deprive the Noncon- 
 formist body of all religious instruction. 
 Se 
 
260 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 The exhausting drain of taxation which the war 
 with Holland occasioned made it so difficult to obtain 
 fresh supplies that the losses of the navy could not 
 be repaired. Loyal as the Parliament was, it showed 
 its mistrust of the King by appointing a Commission 
 to inquire into his expenditure, and opposed his 
 inclination to France by a plain avowal of hostility. 
 Meanwhile, he was negotiating for peace through 
 French mediation, and in May, 1667, a Congress met 
 at Breda to consider the terms. The Dutch were 
 also anxious for peace, but, aware of the crippled 
 condition of the English navy, resolved to strike 
 a blow which should paralyse opposition. In June, 
 their fleet, under De Witt, suddenly appeared at the 
 Nore, forced the barrier of the Medway, and sailed up 
 the Thames to Gravesend, burning three men-of-war 
 which lay at anchor, and returned to sail along the 
 coast in triumph. The attack was so unexpected 
 that neither the vessels nor the forts which protected 
 the river were properly manned, and, although the 
 Admiralty was quickly roused from its inaction, 
 England’s degradation was complete. While the most 
 loyal servants of the Crown reflected with shame upon 
 the dignity with which Cromwell had maintained the 
 national honour, Charles only studied how to turn 
 events to his own advantage. By the terms of peace 
 concluded with Holland, each side retained its 
 acquisitions. Parliament visited its indignation upon 
 Clarendon, and in August, 1667, Charles seized the 
 opportunity to dismiss him from office and banish 
 him to France. 
 
 A coalition composed of three or four Presby- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 261 
 
 terians, headed by Ashley, and two unavowed 
 Catholics, Clifford and Arlington, constituted the new 
 ministry, which was known as the Cabal, from the 
 initial letters of their names. However disposed to 
 further the King’s will, they were constrained at the 
 outset to abandon the French alliance. Louis took 
 immediate advantage of the peace between England 
 and Holland to execute his designs upon the Spanish 
 Netherlands. Within three months Flanders and 
 Franche Comté were invaded and occupied by a 
 large army. ‘The capture of the Flemish coast-towns 
 and the appeal of the Dutch for aid impelled England 
 to take active measures. Diplomatic overtures of 
 alliance with Spain, France, and Holland separately 
 were at first tried, but proved unavailing. In 1668, 
 however, Sir William Temple concluded a triple 
 alliance between England, Holland, and Sweden, 
 which constrained Louis to make peace with Spain 
 upon terms which he had himself proposed, without 
 intending to fulfil them. By the treaty of Aix-la 
 Chapelle he retained possession of southern Flanders 
 and a line of fortifications which dominated the 
 remainder of Spanish territory, but was foiled in a 
 scheme of conquest which would have made him 
 master of Europe. The principle involved in the 
 Triple Alliance recognised the maintenance of that 
 “balance of power” which has ever since been held 
 essential to the foreign policy of England. 
 
 The new ministers of Charles substantially agreed 
 with his plan of toleration, and among their first 
 measures were the release of the imprisoned Non- 
 conformists, the re-opening of conventicles, and 
 
262 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 suspension of the Uniformity Act ; but beyond this 
 point they would not venture. A general dread of 
 Catholicism had been aroused by the signs of French 
 ageressiveness, which made it dangerous to weaken 
 any Protestant safeguards. In place of extending 
 toleration to Catholics, they proposed a comprehen- 
 sive union of English Protestants. It was approved 
 by several moderate divines, but the King, to whose 
 scheme it was fatal, rejoiced when the Houses re- 
 jected it. Hoping to obtain more support from a 
 new House of Commons, the ministers urged the 
 King to dissolve, but, apprehensive of being forced 
 to abandon his reliance upon France and the Catho- 
 lics for the recovery of his prerogative, he refused. 
 An event which he had long foreseen, the conversion 
 to the Romish Church of his brother and presumptive 
 heir, James, Duke of York, impelled him to more 
 decisive steps. ‘Though as yet concealed, the Duke’s 
 conversion must soon be discovered, and occasion 
 a demand from Churchmen and Nonconformists alike 
 for his exclusion from the succession to the throne. 
 To avoid a contest which might be ruinous to the 
 dynasty, it seemed safer to precipitate the crisis. 
 Charles threw himself accordingly into the arms of 
 Louis, by offering to accept whatever terms he 
 demanded for an offensive and defensive alliance, 
 with the object of re-establishing Catholicism in 
 England. Clifford and Arlington, the two Catholic 
 members of the Cabal, were admitted into the secret 
 of this negotiation in January, 1669. At a conference 
 with them, in company with the Duke, and two other 
 Catholic peers, Charles avowed his conversion to their 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 263. 
 
 faith, and requested their advice how best to accom- 
 plish the end he desired. That Louis would insist 
 upon England’s withdrawing from the Triple Alliance 
 was well known to the ministers who had been parties 
 -to it, and, in consenting to apply for his aid, they 
 were accomplices in a perfidy which they concealed 
 from their colleagues. After lengthy negotiations, 
 a treaty was secretly contracted at Dover in May, 
 1670, between Charles and his sister, the Duchess 
 of Orleans, who represented the French King. Charles 
 thereby undertook to declare his conversion, to join 
 Louis in attacking Holland by sea and land, and, 
 should the King of Spain die without a son, to sup- 
 port the claim of France to the Spanish Netherlands. 
 Louis, on his part, pledged himself to grant Charles 
 a yearly subsidy of 41,000,000 sterling, to assist him 
 with troops and money in case the announcement 
 of his conversion led to a revolt, and if France 
 succeeded in the conquest of Flanders, to compensate 
 England by allowing it to seize Spanish America. To 
 ensure the fidelity of Charles to this alliance, Louis 
 despatched in the train of the Duchess an attractive 
 and licentious woman, Louise de Querouaille, as his 
 agent. She quickly acquired ascendancy over the 
 other mistresses of Charles, was raised to the rank 
 of Duchess of Portsmouth, and retained to the last 
 a fascination over his will which she employed in the 
 interest of her own country. 
 
 Ashley and the Presbyterian ministers were deluded 
 by the preparation of a mock treaty, which merely 
 provided that England should join France in a war 
 with Holland. This virtual rupture of the Triple 
 
264 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Alliance was cloaked by the pretext that it did not 
 violate the security of the Spanish Netherlands, to 
 which alone the allies were pledged. A promise 
 added by Charles that he would grant toleration to 
 all but Catholics further recommended the treaty to 
 Ashley’s acceptance. Parliament had still to be 
 cajoled by the demand of a subsidy for carrying out 
 the provisions of the Triple Alliance. As soon as it 
 was granted by the Commons, the session was 
 adjourned. 
 
 In March, 1672, an attack upon a Dutch convoy 
 by an English ship was followed by a declaration of 
 war. The necessary supplies were obtained by 
 arbitrarily suspending the payment of public loans. 
 In fulfilment of his pledge, Charles at the same time 
 published a Declaration of Indulgence, dispensing with 
 the penal laws against Nonconformists, and accord- 
 ing liberty of public worship to all but Catholics, 
 who were restricted to private rites. The effect was 
 to re-open scores of chapels whose ministers had 
 been banished and set free hundreds of imprisoned 
 Quakers and other dissidents. But the price paid 
 for this freedom, which involved the ruin of England’s 
 oldest Protestant ally, was too costly to call forth the 
 Nonconformists’ gratitude. 
 
 The French campaign opened with the conquest 
 and occupation of three of the United Provinces. 
 The Dutch fleet, under De Ruyter, held its own 
 against the English, under the Duke of York, in an 
 engagement off the Suffolk coast. But the oligarchy 
 which had ruled the Republic since the deposition of 
 the house of Orange collapsed with the destruction 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 265 
 
 of its old safeguard, the French alliance, and 
 John de Witt, its leader, was sacrificed to popular 
 indignation. ‘The national spirit, which was evoked 
 to resist the insulting demands of Louis, found a 
 fit representative in William, the young Prince of 
 Orange, who was recalled to his hereditary Stadt- 
 holdership. In spite of infirm health, an ungenial 
 disposition, and cold manners, his conspicuous 
 sagacity and daring won the confidence of his 
 countrymen, which was soon justified by his conduct 
 of the war. From the spring of 1673 the current of 
 French conquest was reversed, and though pitted 
 against veteran .-nerals and often baffled of victory, 
 he succeeded in recovering one by one the provinces 
 which France had seized. 
 
 The contest aroused the warm sympathy of 
 Protestant Englishmen, and Charles, who had sig- 
 nalised his triumph by showering honours upon his 
 ministers, found himself undeceived when the ex- 
 penses of the war obliged him in 1673 to resort to 
 Parliament for supplies. His policy excited a pre- 
 vailing fear of the existence of a Catholic conspiracy. 
 Catholic officers had been appointed to commands in 
 the army sent against the Dutch ; the conversion of the 
 Duke of York, who held the office of High Admiral, 
 was more than suspected; and the avowed Catholicism 
 of Lady Castlemaine, one of the king’s favourite 
 mistresses, threw doubts upon his own belief. 
 The mistrust of the Commons was shown by their 
 refusal to grant the subsidy asked for until the 
 Declaration of Indulgence had been withdrawn. This 
 resistance was supported by what was now known as 
 
266 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 the Country party, headed by Lords Russell and 
 Cavendish, which, while favourable to the toleration. 
 of the Nonconformists, subordinated it to the 
 obligation of preserving constitutional liberty. After 
 exhausting his influence to escape the necessity, 
 Charles consented to withdraw the Declaration. 
 The Houses guarded against the recurrence of danger 
 by passing a new Test Act, which imposed the oaths 
 of allegiance and supremacy upon all military and 
 civil officers, and prescribed that they should repudiate . 
 the mass, and take the sacrament according to 
 Anglican rites. To this Act, which shattered his 
 schemes at a blow, Charles was forced to assent, under 
 a threat that the subsidy would be otherwise with- 
 held. 
 
 The imposition of the tests required by the Act 
 confirmed the worst fears of its authors. The Duke 
 of York avowed himself a convert to the Church of 
 Rome, and resigned the High Admiralship. His 
 resignation was followed by that of Clifford, the Lord 
 Treasurer, and hundreds of military and civil officers. 
 The national confidence in the King, whose indolence 
 and gaiety disarmed suspicion of his craft and perfidy, 
 was thenceforth gone. Now that concealment was 
 useless, Arlington revealed to Ashley (recently created 
 Earl of Shaftesbury) the provisions of the treaty of 
 Dover, and the most penetrating of living statesmen 
 found that he had been a dupe and puppet in his 
 master’s hands. ‘The discovery determined him to 
 change his policy, to side with the feeling of the 
 Commons, and put a stop to the war. Charles, 
 however, was still resolved to carry it on, although 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 267 
 
 conscious of the isolated position in which he stood. 
 The unsuccessful conduct of the campaign would 
 alone have justified its unpopularity. The general- 
 ship of William had recovered for the Dutch their 
 lost provinces, and his no less skilful diplomacy 
 brought about an Austrian alliance against France. 
 The English fleet had been long held at bay by the 
 Dutch, and its forced retreat from the Channel after 
 a drawn battle rendered it impossible for the army to 
 effect the intended invasion of Holland. But Charles 
 would not yield without an effort. Provoked by 
 Shaftesbury’s coalition with the Country party, and 
 his instigation of an address protesting against the 
 marriage of the Duke of York with a Catholic 
 princess (Mary of Modena), Charles suddenly pro- 
 rogued Parliament and dismissed the Chancellor 
 from office. 
 
 After fomenting public alarm by reports of a Popish 
 insurrection in London, the landing of a French army 
 in Ireland, and a conspiracy to compass his own 
 assassination, Shaftesbury concerted with the Country 
 party a petition to the King, which was presented on 
 the reassembling of the Houses, for the dismissal of 
 “ Popishly-affected ” ministers. Bills were brought in 
 to forbid Catholics from attending Court, and to 
 exclude from the succession any prince of the blood 
 who should marry a Catholic. Though Parliament 
 threw out the “Protestant Securities ” Bull, as this 
 last measure was called, public feeling in favour of it 
 was too strong to be disregarded. ‘Tidings that the 
 Dutch had secured a new ally in Spain, a contest with 
 whom would be ruinous to English commerce, and a 
 
268 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 threat by the Commons that supplies would be with- 
 held, again forced Charles to yield. He consented 
 to make peace with Holland and to dismiss Arlington 
 and Buckingham, the ministers most obnoxious to the 
 House. But his purpose was unchanged, and he had 
 already devised ascheme of outwitting his opponents. 
 He chose for his new minister Sir Thomas Osborne 
 (whom he created Earl of Danby), a member of the 
 old Cavalier party, who adhered to Clarendon’s policy 
 of preserving a balance between the Crown, the 
 Church, and Parliament. The King’s desire to secure 
 the succession of James by devising due precautions 
 to tranquillise Protestant fears commended itself to 
 Danby’s approval. The Duke’s eldest daughter, 
 Mary, who was presumptive heir to the throne, was 
 accordingly confirmed as a Protestant. William of 
 Orange came next in succession, and his popularity 
 pointed him out as the most eligible husband for the 
 Princess. Negotiations for their marriage were set on 
 foot at the close of 1674. ‘The Church was reassured 
 by the enforcement of the Conventicle Act and the 
 exclusion of Catholics from Court. When Parliament 
 reassembled in 1675, it was conciliated by a pledge 
 that the Test Act should be maintained. So bent, 
 however, were the Commons upon opposing the 
 King’s inclination towards France, that Danby only 
 succeeded by bribery in defeating a motion for the 
 recall of the English troops in the service of Louis. 
 At Shaftesbury’s instance the House retained control 
 of the supplies, which crippled the King’s action. In 
 despair, Charles turned to Louis for pecuniary aid, 
 which would relieve him from dependence on Par- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 269 
 
 liament. He was forced to take Danby into con- 
 fidence upon this matter. A treaty had been pre- 
 pared, whereby, in consideration of a yearly pension 
 payable by Louis, the two monarchs undertook to 
 assist each other in case of internal rebellion and 
 to form alliances with no other States. As Danby 
 pleaded for delay before assenting to such a compact, 
 Charles settled the question by signing it alone. 
 When, after a protracted recess, Parliament re- 
 assembled in February, 1677, an attempt made by 
 Shaftesbury to force on its dissolution by reviving 
 an obsolete statute was defeated by Danby, who 
 prevailed upon the Lords to commit him to the 
 Tower. Buta Bill brought in to appease the Church 
 on the subject of the Protestant succession was 
 rejected by the Commons, and a lavish use of bribery 
 was requisite to obtain a subsidy unchecked by any 
 control over its expenditure. The nation was 
 clamorous for war with France, and both Houses 
 petitioned the King to join the great European 
 Alliance which William had organised. Charles 
 evaded the difficulty by demanding supplies, and when 
 refused them prorogued Parliament for seven months 
 longer, during which the treasury was replenished 
 by a French subsidy. To quiet dissatisfaction, he 
 revived the proposal of a marriage between Mary and 
 William of Orange, which had not yet been seriously 
 entertained by the parties concerned. ‘The Prince 
 was now anxious to agree to it, and came over to 
 England in September, 1677, when the nuptials 
 were celebrated. The prospect of a Protestant 
 succession to James heartily gratified the country, 
 
270 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 but the resentment which Louis showed at the match 
 provoked a fresh outburst of warlike enthusiasm. 
 The overtures of peace made by Charles were 
 rejected by France, and the English ambassador 
 was withdrawn from Paris. When Parliament met 
 in 1678 it responded to the King’s simulated hostility 
 by a genuine utterance, and voted large supplies to 
 support the army raised for the campaign. But the 
 only intention of Charles was to turn these prepara- 
 tions to his own account. He deferred an actual 
 declaration of war, and, while keeping up communi- 
 cations with the Allies, secretly agreed with Louis 
 that, in consideration of a three years’ pension, he 
 would use his influence with them to accept the 
 French terms of peace. Although an English force 
 of 3,000 men actually landed at Ostend, he offered 
 to recall it upon the promise of a further pension. 
 Meantime, Louis, who shared with the Country party 
 a common distrust of Charles, offered them pecu- 
 niary aid to thwart his plans, an offer which, to 
 the dishonour of their righteous cause, they rashly 
 accepted. Owing to these counter-intrigues, the 
 stability of the Great Alliance was so much shaken 
 by England’s bad faith that Louis saw his oppor- 
 tunity of making better terms. One by one the 
 Allies agreed to his demands, and by the peace of 
 Nimeguen, signed in 1678, Louis obtained from Spain 
 the cession of Franche Comté and twelve fortresses 
 in Flanders, and made a favourable exchange of 
 territory with the Empire. Holland, thanks to the 
 vigorous conduct of the war by William of Orange, 
 regained its losses, and acquired fresh’ commercial 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 271 
 
 advantages, but the substantial effect of the Peace 
 was to vest the supremacy of Europe in the hands 
 of France. While England reaped nothing but a 
 memory of shame, Charles found himself possessed 
 of an army of 20,000 men and a French subsidy 
 of nearly 1,000,000 sterling. 
 
 The hopes of the conversion of the three kingdoms 
 to the Romish faith, which the Catholics had built 
 upon the French alliance and the King’s pledges of 
 toleration, although now blighted, had inspired them 
 with so much confidence as to excite a Protestant 
 panic, which was slow to subside. An adventurer, 
 named Titus Oates, availed himself of it to gain 
 notoriety by producing garbled extracts from private 
 letters before a London magistrate upon oath, as 
 evidence of a Popish plot to assassinate Charles 
 and set his brother on the throne. Confirmatory 
 evidence was found in the correspondence of a 
 Jesuit, named Coleman, which had been seized, 
 and disclosed an intrigue between Louis and 
 several members of Parliament to defeat Danby’s 
 measures of repression. The revelation was turned to 
 account by Shaftesbury, now released from prison, 
 who headed the popular movement. The assassination 
 at this juncture of the magistrate before whom Oates 
 had made his affidavit added fuel to the flame. 
 Parliament appointed a committee of inquiry, whose 
 report impeached five Catholic peers in the plot. 
 They, with 2,000 suspected persons, were imprisoned, 
 all Catholics were ordered to leave London, and a Bill 
 to exclude them from a seat in Parliament passed 
 both Houses. Fresh falsehoods, concocted by other 
 
272 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 impostors and improved upon by Oates, implicated 
 the Queen in the plot to assassinate the King, and — 
 excited apprehensions of the landing of a Catholic 
 army and a Protestant massacre. The impeachment 
 of the five peers under arrest was directed by 
 Parliament. Coleman and some of his alleged 
 accomplices were tried and executed. The discovery 
 of a real plot dispelled any doubt from the minds of 
 the Protestant majority that they had solid grounds 
 for suspicion. In revenge for Danby’s hostility 
 Louis brought about his fall. After negotiating with 
 Shaftesbury and the leaders of the Country party, 
 and securing by bribery a larger number of votes than 
 Danby had forestalled, Louis authorised Montagu, 
 late English ambassador at Paris, who had returned 
 home after a dispute with Danby, to. lay before 
 Parliament a despatch which the latter had signed, 
 applying for the subsidy due to Charles for his good 
 offices with the Allies. Astounded by this confirma- 
 tion of its fears that the national honour had been 
 sacrificed, the House immediately impeached Danby 
 for high treason, but Charles, dreading the further 
 revelations which a trial would involve, dissolved 
 Parliament in January, 1679. 
 
 Though wholesale bribery was resorted to during 
 its election, the new House of Commons largely 
 reflected the genuine feeling of the country. The 
 King attempted conciliation; but it was bent upon 
 Danby’s punishment, and a bill of attainder having 
 passed the Lords, he was committed to the Tower. 
 The ministry which succeeded to power included 
 Shaftesbury, the leaders of the Country party, and 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 273 
 
 Sir William Temple, who was recalled from the 
 Hague. It effected some valuable ‘domestic reforms, 
 but the question of the Duke of York’s exclusion 
 from the succession, upon which the Lower House, 
 backed by the city of London, continued to insist, 
 divided the ministerial councils, and induced Charles 
 to resort to his favourite tactics of delay by again 
 dissolving Parliament. Diverging from the leaders of 
 the Country party, who desired to transfer the succes- 
 sion from the Duke of York to his daughter and her 
 husband, Shaftesbury selected as a preferable cand1- 
 date the young Duke of Monmouth, eldest of the 
 King’s natural children, but commonly believed to 
 have been born in wedlock. -Though of weak 
 character and loose life, the youth was popular on 
 account of his personal attractions and reputed 
 courage. After having quelled a formidable revolu- 
 tion of the Covenanters in Scotland, brought about 
 by the persecution of Lauderdale and Archbishop 
 Sharp (whom they murdered in revenge), he had 
 been appointed Captain-general of the forces. These 
 qualifications commended him as a serviceable 
 instrument for Shaftesbury’s designs, but the course 
 of events frustrated their immediate execution. The 
 sudden illness of the King called the Duke of York 
 back to England, and a dispute arose between him 
 and his nephew, which Charles, upon recovering, 
 could only settle by sending both into exile. 
 Shaftesbury attempted to force a change of policy, 
 by fanning the Protestant alarm, prosecuting the 
 victims of the Popish plot, and terrorising the 
 Catholics by espionage; but Charles, observing 
 a 
 
274 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 the divisions in the Council which weakened its 
 strength, took occasion to dismiss him from the 
 Presidency in October, 1679. 
 
 To avoid the necessity of summoning Parienenk 
 the King secretly negotiated with Louis for a fresh 
 subsidy; but his services to France not being re- 
 quired at the moment, such distasteful conditions 
 were attached to the bargain that he could not close 
 it. The effects of the recent panic were shown in 
 the return of a more Protestant House of Commons 
 than the last, but Charles delayed the session for 
 a year longer. Monmouth returned to England, 
 and Shaftesbury conducted an active agitation in 
 support of his claim to the succession. Petitions 
 for the assembling of Parliament were obtained 
 from every county, discoveries were announced of 
 new Catholic conspiracies, and _ street-processions 
 organised to burn the Pope in effigy. But this 
 violence provoked a reaction, which Charles was 
 quick to discern. Public credulity was becoming 
 exhausted, and, in spite of the perjuries of Oates 
 and his fellow-informers, several Catholic prisoners 
 were acquitted. The adherents of the Crown pre- 
 sented counter-addresses, declaring their abhorrence 
 of the designs of its enemies. ‘The growth of the 
 two political factions which thenceforth divided the 
 country sprang out of this agitation; the names of 
 Whig and Tory originating in terms of obloquy ex- 
 changed between the loyalists and the Country party. 
 Charles was encouraged to recall his brother to 
 Court, and accept the resignation of Lord Russell 
 and other members of the Council who supported 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 275 
 
 Shaftesbury. The Earl, on his part, showed no 
 irresolution. By his advice, Monmouth made a 
 progress through England in the character of a 
 Protestant champion, and won much popularity. 
 When Parliament met in October, 1680, an Exclu- 
 sion Bill passed the Lower House without opposition, 
 and it was only by the King’s personal solicitation 
 that the Lords rejected it in favour of a fresh project 
 of Protestant securities. 
 
 But at this juncture Charles was unexpectedly 
 aided by the Prince of Orange, who felt that without 
 the co-operation of England the European Alliance 
 would be powerless against France. Such co-opera- 
 tion Charles now avowed his willingness to lend ; 
 and actually protested against the fresh encroach- 
 ments of Louis in Germany, besides negotiating for 
 the concert of Spain and Brandenburg. Shaftesbury’s 
 project of excluding the Duke of York’s children, as 
 well as himself, from the succession, was fatal to the 
 hope which William entertained of one day governing 
 England in right of Mary and wielding its power 
 against France. The only course open to him, there- 
 fore, was to espouse the cause of his father-in-law. 
 His chief adherent and spokesman in the House of 
 Lords, Savile, Lord Halifax, accordingly came forward 
 with a new Bill of Securities. Shaftesbury, however, 
 persuaded the Commons to reject it, and proceeded 
 to inflame the Protestant frenzy, which found another 
 victim in Lord Stafford, one of the arrested Catholic 
 peers, who was brought to trial and executed. The 
 withholding of supplies at last so incensed Charles 
 that he once more dissolved Parliament. 
 
 Tae 
 
276 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 The new House, which met in March, 1681, proved 
 as hostile to his policy as its predecessors had been, 
 and the temper of both parties became dangerously 
 excited. Monmouth’s progress was resumed, and 
 addresses of welcome greeted him at every stage. 
 Riots in London were ominous of revolution, and the 
 King was thrown back upon his old resource of 
 appealing to Louis for help. Faithless to his pledges 
 to William, he promised to withdraw from the 
 European Alliance and remain at peace with France 
 in consideration of a yearly subsidy. The terms of 
 this bargain enabled him to take a resolute tone, 
 which was strengthened by the disunion and violence 
 of his opponents. The ranks of the Country party 
 were disorganised by a futile attempt of Shaftesbury 
 to obtain Monmouth’s recognition as his father’s 
 successor and by an impracticable Bill of Limitation 
 introduced by Halifax in the interest of William. 
 As soon as the Exclusion Bill was revived, Charles, 
 seeing. signs of a reaction in his favour, dissolved 
 Parliament and appealed to the loyalty of the 
 country. 
 
 His Declaration called forth expressions of un- 
 shaken attachment from the Church and the two 
 Universities, which were strongholds of the Tory 
 party; while the Whigs put forward a “ Defence of 
 the late Parliament” that implicitly charged him with 
 intending to subvert the constitution. Charles re- 
 taliated by indicting Shaftesbury for having fomented 
 insurrection and suborned witnesses to the Popish 
 plot. Dryden’s masterly satire of ‘Absalom and 
 Achitophel,” which was published at this crisis, 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, aT 4 
 
 reflected the conviction of the loyalists that the 
 King’s boldness had averted another civil war. He 
 was not yet master of the situation, for the grand 
 jury of Middlesex threw out the indictment, and the 
 Earl’s release was joyfully celebrated by his adherents. 
 London continued so hostile to the Court that a 
 design of abrogating its chartered liberties was 
 thenceforth contemplated. But the tide of reaction 
 had set in. Strong in the support of Louis, Charles 
 could dispense with Parliamentary supplies, and 
 evaded the renewal of his pledges to William, who 
 visited England with the hope of winning him back 
 to the Alliance. Louis, on his part, secure of Eng- 
 land’s inaction, continued his aggressions upon the 
 frontiers of Germany and Holland, while he crushed 
 disaffection at home by a fresh persecution of the 
 Huguenots. As if in imitation of this policy, Charles 
 gratified the Church party by enforcing the penal 
 statutes against the Nonconformists. James, who 
 had been conducting a similar crusade against the 
 Covenanters in Scotland, was recalled to Court, 
 and Monmouth’s progresses through England were 
 stopped by his arrest. By the aid of an obsequious 
 Lord Mayor of London, who nominated Tory 
 sheriffs, the Court contrived to secure verdicts from 
 packed juries upon indictments for treason. This 
 adroit conquest of the great Whig stronghold drove 
 Shaftesbury to desperate courses. He planned a 
 conspiracy, wherein Monmouth, Lord Russell, and 
 other disaffected peers were to take part, but their 
 reluctance or delay in executing his plans drove 
 him to take flight to Holland in November, 1682, 
 
278 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 where he soon afterwards died. ‘The Whig leaders, 
 still hoping to check the King’s course, held meetings 
 with the view of forcing him to summon Parliament, 
 but were compromised by some of their less scrupu- 
 lous adherents, who concocted a plot for assassinating 
 Charles and his brother, near the Rye House, on 
 their way to Newmarket. Seizing the opportunity of 
 crushing his opponents at once, the King issued a 
 proclamation for their apprehension. Monmouth 
 escaped to Holland, but Lords Russell and Essex, 
 Algernon Sidney, and others were arrested and 
 brought to trial. Essex committed suicide in the 
 Tower ; Russell and Sidney were condemned and 
 beheaded. ‘Their execution was followed by similar 
 severities in Scotland, where several persons of dis- 
 tinction were alleged to be implicated in the 
 conspiracy. ‘The triumph of absolutism was, for the 
 moment, complete. 
 
 Though London and many parts of the country 
 remained faithful to liberty, the loyalty which Charles 
 had evoked found expression in extravagant declara- 
 tions; the University of Oxford even proclaiming 
 ‘‘ passive obedience” to the sovereign as a religious 
 duty. The King was too astute to venture upon a 
 purely despotic rule, and directed his efforts to dis- 
 arm opposition without exciting suspicion. Disre- 
 garding the advice of Halifax and Danby (whom he 
 released from the Tower) to. summon a new Parlia- 
 ment, he depended for a revenue during the rest of 
 his reign upon the customs and the French subsidy. 
 In view of the eventual necessity of applying to 
 Parliament, he made preparations for controlling its 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 279 
 
 activity. The corporations, in whom the borough 
 representation was virtually vested, and whose sym- 
 pathies were predominantly Whig, were attacked by 
 informations of ‘‘Quo warranto” for the abuse of 
 their franchises. Judgments having been obtained 
 against a few of them, the others were terrified into 
 submission. New charters were then granted, whereby 
 ultra-loyalists were appointed to the municipal offices, 
 To provide against the risk of popular disaffection, 
 the forces at the disposal of the Crown were largely 
 augmented, and a reserve of six regiments retained 
 in the service of Holland. 
 
 This skilfully-planned conspiracy against national 
 liberty was thwarted by the fatal illness of Charles, in 
 February, 1685. Just before his death the recon- 
 ciliation with the Catholic communion, which he had 
 so long deferred, was secretly effected by the intro- 
 duction of a priest into his bed-chamber, who, 
 excluding all Protestant bystanders, took his con- 
 fession and gave him the last sacrament. But that 
 his mask of Anglicanism might still deceive the 
 bishops and nobles in attendance, they were imme- 
 diately recalled, and he received absolution from the 
 hands of Bishop Ken. 
 
 The accession of the Duke of York as James II. 
 was unopposed. ‘Though known to be a rigid 
 Catholic, his public assurance that he would preserve 
 the established government in Church and State was 
 accepted as ‘“‘the word of a king,” and so little were 
 his real designs suspected that he was actually 
 supposed to be sensitive to the national honour, and 
 incapable of his brother’s subservience to France. 
 
280 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 He was, in truth, as wedded as any of the Stuarts to 
 a belief in his divine right, and as determined to 
 maintain the prerogative of the Crown at all risks. 
 He only differed from his predecessors in having a 
 duller intellect and a more bigoted attachment to 
 dogmas which derived their sanction from a foreign 
 source and were rejected by the majority of his 
 subjects. Conscious that his twofold object of 
 restraining Parliamentary liberty and establishing 
 Catholic supremacy could only be attained by French 
 aid, he was not less eager than Charles to be the 
 minion of Louis. Though some uneasiness was 
 excited by his throwing open to the public the chapel 
 in which he had privately heard mass and his 
 selecting Catholics for military posts, the new Par- 
 liament which he summoned reflected the national 
 confidence in disregarding these significant indica- 
 tions. Without insisting upon any religious securities, 
 it granted him a revenue of £ 2,000,000 for life. 
 
 A fresh stimulus was soon given to the loyal 
 sentiment which (except in certain Whig strongholds) 
 animated the country at large by the landing of the 
 Earl of Argyle in Scotland and of Monmouth in 
 Dorsetshire, each at the head of a small force. The 
 Earl, who had taken refuge in Holland from a sentence 
 of death recorded against him in 1682, upon an un- 
 founded charge of treason, was an ardent Protestant, 
 and when Monmouth, the avowed champion of the 
 same cause, joined him in exile, they concerted a 
 scheme of simultaneously rallying all opponents of 
 Catholic rule. Though joined by his clansmen, 
 Argyle failed to muster other adherents, and his force 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, . 281 
 
 was weakened by divided counsels. It was quickly 
 dispersed, and he himself captured and sent to the 
 block. Monmouth was warmly welcomed in the 
 western counties, where the Whigs and Noncon- 
 formists were numerous, and soon mustered a force 
 of 6,000 men ; but his assumption of the kingly title 
 alienated many supporters, and his cause was repu- 
 diated by all who were favourable to the claims of 
 Mary and William. Both Houses declared their 
 fidelity to the King, and passed a bill of attainder 
 against Monmouth. The royal guards and local 
 militia were quickly in the field, and, under the 
 conduct of Lord Churchill (the future Marlborough), 
 put the Duke’s army to utter rout upon the plain of 
 Sedgemoor. He fled, but was captured in disguise, 
 and shared the fate of Argyle. A merciless vengeance 
 was inflicted upon his adherents by the instrumentality 
 of Chief Justice Jeffreys, during a ‘ bloody circuit ” 
 of the western counties. His cruelty gained the 
 King’s cordial approval and the Great Seal for a 
 reward. 
 
 James took advantage of the rebellion to’raise his 
 standing army to 20,000 men, who were manifestly 
 intended for home service, as he made no secret of 
 his aversion to the European Alliance against France. 
 Only a week after his accession he assured the 
 French ambassador that he counted upon the pro- 
 tection of Louis, and would take no step without 
 consulting him. The promise of a subsidy, which 
 rewarded this servility, was acknowledged with profuse 
 gratitude. Sunderland, the minister in whom James 
 put most confidence, undertook to break off the 
 
282 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 friendly relations with Holland and Spain which the 
 Parliament desired to maintain, and William was 
 refused permission to visit England. The eyes of 
 the nation were soon open to the danger which these 
 symptoms portended. In October, 1685, the Edict 
 of Nantes, which for a century had secured toleration 
 and liberty of worship to the Huguenots of France, 
 was suddenly revoked by Louis, and a systematic 
 persecution set on foot. Their churches were de- 
 molished, their schools closed, their pastors banished, 
 under pain of being sent to the galleys ; parents were 
 prohibited from teaching their children, and ordered. 
 to have them baptised as Catholics ; while those who 
 attempted to leave France were sentenced, if men, to 
 the galleys, and, if women, to imprisonment for life ; 
 their property being confiscated. Notwithstanding the 
 relentless execution of these edicts and the enforced 
 apostasy of many thousands of terrified Huguenots, 
 nearly half a million made their escape, a large pro- 
 portion of whom (estimated! as upwards of 120,000) 
 took refuge on our shores. The unconcealed satis- 
 faction shown by James when tidings of the persecu- 
 tion reached England increased the indignation and 
 horror with which his subjects regarded it. At the 
 reassembling of Parliament, exception was taken to 
 his appointments of Catholic officers, as an uncon- 
 stitutional exercise of the “ dispensing power.” His 
 haughty declaration that their legality must not be 
 questioned and his demand for supplies to his new 
 regiments provoked resistance. Obsequious as they 
 
 ’ Smiles, ‘* The Huguenots in England,” &c., p. 242. 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 283 
 
 had hitherto been, the Commons by a bare majority 
 resolved to postpone compliance with this demand 
 until the grievance complained of had been redressed. 
 In the Lords, Halifax, who had been dismissed from 
 the Privy Council for refusing assent to a repeal of the 
 Test Act, and Compton, Bishop of London, headed 
 the opposition to the King’s violation of its provisions. 
 Their proposal, that all existing and future appoint- 
 ments should be confirmed by Parliamentary sanction, 
 was rejected by James, who forthwith prorogued the 
 Houses. 
 
 The question of his right to dispense with penal 
 laws he submitted to the decision of the Judges, 
 having first secured its being given in his favour by 
 dismissing four who had the courage to assert their 
 independence. Having obtained an affirmative decree 
 in June, 1686, he proceeded to act upon it to an 
 extent which aroused general alarm. Catholics were 
 appointed in large numbers to civil as well as military 
 offices, four peers being admitted to the Privy 
 Council. Monks, wearing the robes of their several 
 orders, were permitted to walk through the streets. A 
 splendid chapel was fitted up in St. James’s Palace, 
 and a Jesuit school founded in the Savoy. A riot in 
 the city at the opening of a new chapel afforded a 
 pretext for forming a camp of 13,000 men at Hounslow. 
 In Scotland, a violent change was made in the civil 
 government by vesting it in two Catholic perverts, 
 while a third was appointed to the command of 
 Edinburgh Castle. The Scottish Parliament having 
 rejected an Act for the toleration of Catholics, the 
 Judges were directed to treat the penal statutes against 
 
284 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 them as void, a mandate which none dared disobey. 
 In Ireland, Lord Tyrconnell, a Catholic, was placed 
 at the head of the army, which he remodelled by 
 enlisting 2,000 of his co-religionists, and dismissing 
 the Protestant officers. Civil offices were thrown 
 open to Catholics, and they took their seats in the 
 Council. 
 
 To silence opposition by the Church, James had 
 already ordered the clergy to abstain from pulpit- 
 attacks upon Catholicism, and instructed the Bishops 
 to enforce the prohibition. This order they had not 
 obeyed, and the controversial sermons which the 
 metropolitan clergy persisted in delivering testified 
 to the alarm which he had aroused. One such 
 sermon, by the rector of St. Giles, so offended the 
 King that he desired Bishop-Compton to suspend 
 him. Compton’s reply, that he was only able to 
 deal with the case when submitted to him judicially, 
 determined James to revive the Court of High Com- 
 mission (which the Long Parliament had abolished, 
 and the first Restoration Parliament pronounced 
 illegal), and to put at its head the Lord Chancellor 
 Jeffreys. Its earliest act was to suspend Bishop 
 Compton from his functions. Undaunted by the 
 blow, the clergy continued to discuss the questions in 
 dispute between Protestants and Catholics, both in 
 the pulpit and in the press, which swarmed with 
 their pamphlets. 
 
 Even the Catholic party became uneasy at these 
 slgns of resistance, and the Papal nuncio (whom, in 
 defiance of the law which cancelled all relations with 
 Rome, James had received in state at Windsor) 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 285 
 
 advised a more moderate course. ‘The King’s in- 
 fatuation was proof against remonstrances. Aware 
 that his staunchest Tory and High Church adherents 
 would not support his acts, and suspicious of their 
 secret hostility, he dismissed from their offices several 
 who refused to apostatise, including his first wife’s 
 brothers, Lords Clarendon and Rochester, and sup- 
 planted them by Catholics. ‘The refusal of other 
 officials to assent to the repeal of the Test Act was 
 also punished by dismissal. In April, 1687, he 
 published a Declaration of Indulgence, suspending 
 the penalties imposed by that Act, among others, 
 upon both Nonconformists and Catholics, and re- 
 moving their disabilities for office. His expectation 
 that this measure would be sanctioned by Parliament, 
 and ensure him the adherence of all religious dissi- 
 dents, was not realised. Notwithstanding the grateful 
 acknowledgments of a section of the Nonconformists, 
 the majority refused to accept an illegal emancipation. 
 Parliament proving equally hostile to his plans, he 
 dissolved it in July, and writs were issued for a new 
 election. The Lord-lieutenants of each county were 
 instructed to restrict the choice of borough candidates 
 to such as would pledge themselves to the repeal of 
 the Test Act, and sound the magistrates respecting 
 their intentions to vote, those who refused to comply 
 being dismissed. But these devices to coerce the 
 corporations and the magistrates into submission had 
 at last to be abandoned as impracticable. 
 
 Baffled in his hope of obtaining a subservient 
 House of Commons, James turned to the task of 
 controlling the Universities, as the chief Protestant 
 
286 POST NORMAN BRITAIN 
 
 seminaries of the clergy and gentry.. At Oxford, a 
 Roman Catholic was appointed Dean of Christchurch, 
 a recent convert permitted to retain the Mastership 
 of University College, and a third nominated to that 
 of Magdalen. When the Fellows declined to accept 
 the Crown’s nominee, and chose a President from their 
 own body, the Ecclesiastical Commission declared 
 the election void. Upon the refusal of the Fellows 
 to accept a second nominee, special commissioners 
 were despatched, who forcibly installed him, and 
 replaced the Fellows by Roman Catholics. A similar 
 attack was directed against Cambridge, its Vice- 
 Chancellor being expelled for withholding a master’s 
 degree from a monk, nominated by the Crown, who 
 refused to sign the articles. 
 
 The evident determination of his subjects to resist 
 the repeal of the Test Act, and the fear that, even if 
 he succeeded in carrying it, the victory would be 
 reversed at his death, at last drove James to solicit 
 the intervention of his son-in-law. William had been 
 watching with painful interest the increasing diver- 
 gence of the royal policy from the course which he 
 desired. Exasperated by the repeated encroachments 
 of Louis upon their territory, the German princes 
 bound themselves by a treaty at Augsburg, in 1686, 
 to withstand any fresh aggression by force. For the 
 success of a European coalition against France, the 
 help of England was requisite. But since his failure 
 to persuade James to join the Grand Alliance, William 
 had held aloof from English affairs, refusing either to 
 countenance an absolutist scheme of toleration which 
 might be fatal to Protestantism ora resistance to it 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 287. 
 
 which might be fatal to liberty. Many cautiously- 
 worded communications from representatives of various 
 parties in England arrived at the same time as the 
 King’s request for his intervention, assuring him of 
 their sympathy, and warning him against a measure 
 which would strengthen the Catholic cause and 
 imperil Mary’s succession. He accordingly informed 
 James that he was unable to comply with his wish. 
 This refusal determined the King upon making a fresh 
 effort for Parliamentary support. He hoped that the 
 Queen might soon give birth to a son, who would 
 frustrate Mary’s succession ; and to ensure the educa- 
 tion of this heir as a Catholic in the event of his 
 own death, it was necessary to surround the throne 
 with Catholic ministers, whose offices could only be 
 secured by a repeal of the Test Act. Postponing 
 until November the election which had been fixed for 
 February, 1688, he published in April a further 
 Declaration of Indulgence, appealing to the nation 
 on behalf of liberty of conscience. ‘The Declaration 
 was ordered to be read in every parish church on 
 two successive Sundays, but the clergy, headed by the 
 Bishops, refused as a body to read it. Sancroft, the 
 Primate, and six other Bishops addressed a protest 
 to the King against its illegality. Indignant at their 
 presumption, he instructed the Ecclesiastical Com- 
 missioners to suspend them, but was persuaded by 
 Jeffreys to try the safer course of prosecution. They 
 were accordingly committed to the Tower upon a 
 charge of libel. Sympathising crowds attended them 
 on the way, and the sentinels knelt for their blessing 
 at the prison gates. When they were brought to trial 
 
288 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 on June 29, even the subservient Judges and a jury 
 chosen by the Crown dared not brave the storm of 
 public feeling. ‘The acquittal of the Bishops was 
 hailed with tumultuous rejoicing, which resounded 
 through the country, and was echoed in the King’s 
 hearing by his soldiers at Hounslow. 
 
 His obstinacy remained unshaken by the signs of 
 disaffection which alarmed his stoutest adherents. 
 Persisting in his plan of terrorism, he dismissed the 
 Judges who had inclined to the side of the Bishops, 
 and directed the names of the clergy who refused to 
 read the Declaration to be reported to the Commis- 
 sioners. The camp at Hounslow was broken up, 
 the place of the disaffected troops being filled by 
 Irish recruits. Against this last step the Catholic 
 peers who were members of the Council vainly re- 
 monstrated. .The recruits soon became the subject 
 of a satirical ballad with the burden of ‘‘ Lillibullero,” 
 which was sung through the length and breadth of 
 England, and. several officers surrendered their 
 commissions to escape the duty of enrolling them. 
 Popular irritation was further inflamed by the an- 
 nouncement of the Queen’s delivery of a son, which 
 occurred a few days before the trial of the Bishops. 
 In spite of accumulated proofs that the birth had 
 really taken place, it was generally discredited. 
 Whether genuine or fabricated, the announcement 
 precipitated the crisis which had long been immi- 
 nent. 
 
 Ten days afterwards an invitation was addressed to 
 William by Lords Devonshire and Danby, Bishop 
 Compton, and other leading men, both Whigs and 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 289 
 
 Tories, that he should take up arms for the protection 
 of English liberties and the Protestant faith. It was 
 impossible for him to refuse to head a movement 
 upon the issue of which the interests of his wife and 
 the success of his most cherished schemes depended. 
 James had by this time irrevocably sided with Louis 
 against the Allies. In concert with Sweden, he had 
 recently threatened the Dutch, recalled the English 
 and Scotch troops in their service, and accepted a 
 subsidy from Louis for fitting out a fleet to attack 
 their coasts. If victorious over his own subjects, 
 the weight of England would be thrown into the 
 French scale as soon as the great European conflict 
 commenced. If, on the other hand, William declined 
 the proffered leadership, and the rebels triumphed 
 without his aid, they might justly resent his desertion 
 by passing over Mary’s claim to the crown and re- 
 verting to the Commonwealth. Upon all these 
 grounds he decided to accept the offer. Having 
 persuaded the political faction opposed to him in 
 the government of Holland that an alliance of France 
 and England would overwhelm the State, he gained 
 their consent to the muster of a military and naval 
 armament for its defence, and then obtained a promise 
 from Brandenburg that it would send 9,000 men to 
 replace the Dutch troops required for the expedition. 
 Upon the receipt of William’s affirmative answer and 
 the news of his warlike preparations, several of the 
 great Whig and Tory nobles came or sent over 
 representatives to the Hague in token of their ad- 
 herence; while others who remained at home 
 organised the rising upon which he counted for 
 U 
 
2 go POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 support. The vengeance which James had brought 
 upon his own head was so plainly about to fall, 
 that Sunderland, who had intimation of these de- 
 signs, betrayed him, and to escape punishment for 
 complicity in his master’s misdeeds, purchased 
 William’s forgiveness by a voluntary disclosure of 
 State secrets. 
 
 James was still blind to the consequences of his 
 folly, and believed that a threat of war by Louis 
 would suffice to check any attempt of William to 
 invade England. Such a threat was addressed to 
 Holland early in September, 1688, but was not 
 seriously intended, as Louis had already determined 
 upon attacking Germany first. When a few weeks 
 afterwards his forces marched upon the Rhine, the 
 Dutch armaments were approaching completion. The 
 tidings that French aid was no longer available at 
 last opened the eyes of James to his danger, and he 
 made desperate efforts to retrace his steps. The 
 Ecclesiastical Commission was dissolved, and a 
 personal appeal for support made to the Bishops. 
 London and most of the disfranchised boroughs were 
 reinstated. The magistrates whom he had dismissed 
 were restored to office, and the Fellows of Magdalen 
 College replaced. A proclamation was even issued 
 for the closing of Catholic chapels and schools. 
 Sunderland, who was still in power, urged him to 
 summon Parliament at once. But in the present 
 temper of the nation it was almost certain that a new 
 House of Commons would refuse supplies, unless he 
 consented to a war with France and to entrust its 
 prosecution to William. His suspicions of Sunder- 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 290C 
 
 land’s good faith were therefore aroused by this 
 advice, and, dismissing him from office, he reverted 
 to his policy of dependence upon Louis. 
 
 The ‘‘ Declaration” of the Prince of Orange, set- 
 ting forth the object of his expedition, appeared at 
 this crisis. It demanded the redress of the national 
 grievances and the assembling of a free Parliament 
 for the settlement of civil liberty and the Protestant 
 faith; promised toleration to Nonconformists and 
 licence of worship to Catholics; and reserved any 
 questions as to the legitimacy of the alleged Prince 
 of Wales and the succession to the throne for the 
 decision of Parliament. The military and naval 
 armament which was to give effect to this manifesto 
 consisted of 600 transports, carrying 13,000 troops, 
 and convoyed by fifty men-of-war. Besides Dutch, 
 Swedes, and Brandenburgers, this force included 
 three infantry regiments of French Huguenots, and 
 a squadron of cavalry, mostly veteran soldiers, 
 commanded by officers of distinction. ‘Though de- 
 layed by contrary winds and a severe storm, the 
 flotilla sailed round the English coast, unopposed by 
 the royal fleet which lay in the Downs, and anchored 
 at Torbay on the 4th November. Upon the follow- 
 ing day, memorable as a great Protestant anniversary, 
 William landed, and the coincidence was hailed by 
 his adherents as an omen of success. The nobility 
 and gentry of the western counties soon joined his 
 standard, and Plymouth declared for him. When 
 the royal army, which had been increased by Irish 
 and Scotch recruits to the number of 40,000 men, 
 was recalled from the north to meet the invader, its 
 
 [8 Ie 
 
292 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 departure was followed by a general rising. Danby, 
 at the head of the Yorkshire nobles and squires, 
 marched to Derby, where those of the midland and 
 eastern counties were assembled, under Lord Devon- 
 shire. The cry of a free Parliament was echoed 
 by the militia of York, and the garrison of Hull. 
 Norwich, and Oxford welcomed the local magnates 
 who mustered their forces for the Prince, and Bristol 
 opened its gates at his approach. He advanced to 
 Salisbury, where the royal army was concentrated, 
 but the disaffection which permeated its ranks and 
 the mistrust of its officers rendered serious opposition 
 impossible, and it retreated in disorder. Convinced - 
 by the desertion of his best general, Lord Churchill, 
 and many others upon whom he had counted, that it 
 was useless to prolong the struggle, James fled in 
 haste to London, where he learned that his daughter, 
 Anne, had abandoned the palace of St. James and 
 taken refuge with Danby’s force. He was so crushed 
 by these proofs of the ruin of his cause that he 
 determined upon flight. The Queen and her child 
 having escaped to France in disguise, he set out to 
 follow them on the roth December, but the fisher- 
 men of Sheppey, whence he attempted to embark, 
 arrested him as a foreign Jesuit, and conveyed him 
 to Faversham, where he was obliged to announce 
 himself and appeal for aid to the Lord-lieutenant of 
 the county. He was thence conducted back to 
 London by a guard despatched by some of the lead- 
 ing peers and Bishops, who, as soon as his flight 
 became known, had formed themselves into a 
 Provisional Governmept to preserve order. For a 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 293 
 
 few days he clung to the hope of regaining power, 
 and proposed an interview with William at Whitehall 
 to settle the questions which agitated the nation. 
 He was encouraged in this hope by certain of the 
 Tory leaders, who shrank from a change of dynasty, 
 and trusted that he might become reconciled to 
 Parliament by abandoning his scheme of establishing 
 Catholicism. But such a delusion was scouted by 
 the Whigs, who urged upon William the futility of 
 any arrangement which left the government in the 
 hands of James. The Prince, accordingly, remained 
 at Windsor, without replying to the King’s invitation. 
 Dutch troops, however, were sent to Westminster to 
 replace the royal guards, and a deputation of peers 
 waited upon James to intimate the prudence of his 
 choosing another residence. His alarm revived, and, 
 embracing the opportunity of escape which was 
 obviously given him, he left London for Rochester, 
 whence, on the 23rd December he embarked for 
 France. 
 
 On William’s arrival in London, the Provisional 
 Government surrendered its power into his hands, 
 and a convention of both Houses of Parliament 
 met in January, 1689. A resolution passed by the 
 Whig majority in the Commons, that James by his 
 violation of the laws had forfeited the throne, which 
 was now vacant, was rejected by the Tory majority in 
 the Lords. After further discussion, a vote was finally 
 agreed to at the instance of Danby that the succession 
 had become vested in Mary. But this decision 
 neither Mary nor William would accept ; she on her 
 part declining the throne unless it were shared by 
 
294 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 her husband, and he objecting to occupy the sub- 
 ordinate place of consort or regent. In the face 
 of their determination, the Houses had no choice 
 but to acquiesce in their joint sovereignty, and that 
 the functions of government should be exercised by 
 William alone. As a _ precautionary measure, a 
 Declaration of Rights was drawn up and agreed to 
 by both Houses, which, after recounting the illegal 
 acts of which James had been guilty, asserted the | 
 right of all English subjects to free Parliamentary 
 representation and impartial justice; claimed for 
 both Houses the privilege of free debate ; demanded 
 that Protestants’should be secured in the enjoyment 
 of religious liberty, and the sovereign be bound to 
 uphold the Protestant faith and the laws and rights 
 of the nation; expressed the confidence of the 
 Houses that the assurances which William had given 
 of his intention to deliver and preserve those rights 
 from injury would be fulfilled; and finally declared 
 the Prince and Princess of Orange to be King and 
 Queen of England. On the 13th February, 1680, 
 this Declaration having been presented to William 
 and Mary at Whitehall, the Houses, by the voice of 
 Halifax, solemnly tendered the crown to their accept- 
 ance. In the name of himself and his wife, William 
 accepted it with a reiterated assurance of their resolve 
 to maintain the laws of the realm and to govern by 
 the advice of Parliament. 
 
 This impressive ceremony signalised the termination 
 of the long struggle between dynastic absolutism and 
 popular freedom ; the final emancipation, by foreign 
 instrumentality, of a people singularly loyal to the 
 
FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 295 
 
 claims of tradition and usage, but yet more tenacious 
 of its political rights and religious liberties. The 
 pledge thus exacted from a new sovereign, under such 
 exceptional circumstances, constitutes the tenure upon 
 which every succeeding sovereign has held the throne 
 of England. It has never since been broken, and 
 the confidence that its breach is impossible imparts 
 to the nation and the monarch alike an abiding sense 
 of security. 
 
296 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 Miscellaneous foreign influences from the Restoration to the 
 Revolution. 
 
 Ir is impossible to gainsay the verdict of history that 
 the deterioration which the moral tone of English 
 society underwent during the reign of Charles II. was 
 mainly due to a natural reaction against the excessive 
 constraint of the Puritan véezme. The form which 
 that deterioration assumed was, however, determined 
 by special rather than general causes, and of these 
 the influence of France was undoubtedly the strongest. 
 The King inherited from both parents a strain of 
 vicious blood which drew its contamination from 
 France. His ancestress, Mary Stuart, had been bred 
 at the corrupt court of Catherine de’ Medici, and 
 there learned how to reconcile a strict religious creed 
 with the indulgence of sensual delights which led 
 to her ultimate ruin. His mother was the daughter 
 of a king whose libertinism was notorious, and her 
 own reputation was not irreproachable. ‘The circum- 
 stances under which his youth was passed precluded 
 the exercise of an adequate restraint upon his pro- 
 pensities. So recklessly did he gratify them during 
 his exile that by the time he came to the throne, 
 profligacy had become an inveterate habit which he 
 made no attempt to check or disguise. The close 
 political relations into which Charles entered with 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 297 
 
 Louis XIV. encouraged him in assimilating the 
 practices of the Court of London to those of Paris. 
 If any inducement to that end had been lacking, it 
 would have been supplied by the instalment of 
 Louise de Querouaille as his favourite mistress, under 
 whose ascendancy the influence of France continued 
 paramount to the end of his reign. The licentious 
 example set by Charles was but too faithfully copied 
 by his courtiers, and thence transmitted to the circles 
 roundthem. After the wont of copyists, the defects 
 of their model were chiefly selected for imitation, 
 and exaggerated. The veil of decorum which con- 
 ceiled the evidences of impurity from the public gaze 
 in Paris was cast aside in London, and vice in its 
 grossest forms flaunted in the face of day. Men of 
 rank and breeding, such as Rochester and Sedley, 
 vied with each other in inventing fresh extravagances 
 of debauchery. Religion and virtue were held up to 
 ridicule, and the breach of their most sacred obliga- 
 tions paraded. Nor was the spread of this mischievous 
 epidemic confined to morals and manners. The 
 debased taste, splendid luxury, and frivolous pleasures 
 of the French Renaissance were imported to England 
 en bloc. Language, literature, art, the drama, even 
 the ceremonial music of the Church, were all infected 
 “by the prevailing contagion. To interlard his con- 
 versation with French phrases became the ambition of 
 every fine gentleman. Even so masculine a writer as 
 Dryden was not ashamed to choose a French word 
 when its English equivalent would have expressed 
 his meaning as well. The domination which the 
 French critics and dramatists exercised over our own 
 
298 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 forms a subject of itself which must be reserved for 
 separate consideration. 
 
 France, however, has always been remarkable 
 for strangely-composite characteristics, and if this 
 period exhibits her as a source of pollution and 
 disease, it reveals her also as a fountain of pure and 
 fertilising waters. The immigration of Huguenot 
 refugees, consequent upon the revocation of the 
 Edict of Nantes, in 1685, made a contribution to our 
 national strength, the importance of which, whether 
 considered as an accession of racial, moral, or indus- 
 trial elements, it would be difficult to overrate. 
 Among the 120,000 persons who are estimated to 
 have settled here, there was a great diversity of in- 
 tellectual power, professional occupation, and social 
 rank. They included such savants as Solomon de 
 Caus and Papin, illustrious for their researches and 
 experiments respecting the motive-power of steam ; 
 Desaguliers, who became the demonstrator and 
 curator of the Royal Society ; and De Moivre, the 
 mathematician, whose ‘‘ Doctrine of Chances” 
 afforded a basis for the system of life-assurance. 
 Prominent among scholars and men of letters were 
 Rapin-Thoyras, the historian; Du Moulin, after- 
 wards Professor of history at Oxford; Gagnier, the 
 orientalist; Motteaux, the translator of Cervantes and 
 Rabelais ; and Boyer, the lexicographer. ‘The list of 
 divines numbered Abbadie, Saurin, Allix, Dela Motte, 
 Drelincourt, and others distinguished for their piety 
 and eloquence. Among soldiers and statesmen were 
 Marshal Schomberg, who became the hero of the 
 battle of the Boyne; the Marquis de Ruvigny, after- 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 299 
 
 wards Earl of Galway; Jean Cavalier, the famous 
 Camisard leader ; and Jean Louis Ligonier, created 
 Earl Ligonier, the future veteran of Malplaquet, 
 Dettingen, and Fontenoy. Less famous in their 
 own persons than in their descendants were the 
 ancestors of families as honourably remembered in 
 our annals as those of Bosanquet, Labouchere, 
 Lefevre, Romilly, Boileau, Portal, Layard, Gambier, 
 Martineau, Austin, Newman, Trench, Faber, Dollond, 
 De la Rue, Courtauld, and Fourdrinier. Men of 
 such mark in their respective callings as David 
 Garrick, the actor ; Baron Maseres, the judge; Jortin, 
 the biographer of Erasmus ; Romaine, the Calvinistic 
 divine ; Maturin, the dramatist ; Albany Fonblanque, 
 the journalist ; Marryatt and Chamier, the novelists ; 
 Sydney Smith, the wit and essayist; and Sir George 
 Cornewall Lewis, the statesman, all claimed descent, 
 either on the father’s or the mother’s side, from 
 Huguenot refugees. The list might probably be 
 prolonged but for the change of name adopted by 
 many of the immigrants on becoming naturalised, 
 which has rendered their identification difficult. 
 Diversified and invaluable as were the mental qualities 
 contributed by the immigrants, the new moral fibre 
 which they imparted to our organism must be 
 reckoned as the most precious of their gifts. The 
 loyalty to conscience, the zeal for truth, which nerved 
 men and women of all ranks and ages to sunder the 
 strongest ties of affection, patriotism, and interest, 
 and begin the labour of life afresh in a foreign 
 land, are heroic virtues of which Englishmen, though 
 never lacking them, cannot possess too much. 
 
300 POST NORMAN BRITAIN, 
 
 The number of manufacturers and skilled workmen 
 in various branches of industry who were driven into 
 exile by the Revocation was so large (amounting 
 according to one calculation to 100,000) as practically 
 to shift the centre of commercial activity from France 
 to England. ‘The demands of the English world 
 of fashion for foreign articles of dress, upholstery, 
 and wivfu, to which the French had almost exclu- 
 sively ministered, were henceforth supplied at home, 
 and the necessity of importing such commodities at 
 a great cost was superseded. The bigotry of Louis 
 thus wrought its own Nemesis; the exhaustion of 
 his most prosperous provinces serving to enrich the 
 poverty of his bitterest foe. In northern France, 
 more especially in Normandy and Brittany, many 
 manufactures were actually extinguished by the 
 wholesale emigration of masters and men. Great 
 numbers of the immigrants settled in London, chiefly in 
 the districts of Soho, Spitalfields, and Bethnal Green, 
 where they proceeded to open factories and carry on 
 their several industries. The most thriving was the 
 silk-manufacture established at Spitalfields by a band 
 of weavers from Lyons and Tours, who brought with 
 them the art of making lustrings, taffeties, figured 
 silks, velvets, and other stuffs, of which France had 
 hitherto preserved the secret and enjoyed a monopoly. 
 Calico-printing, button-making, hat-making,  lace- 
 making, glass-making, and paper-making, some of 
 which had been introduced into England by small 
 bodies of refugees in the preceding century, but up to 
 this time continued to be practised upon a large 
 scale almost exclusively in France, were now carried 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 301 
 
 by the new settlers into various parts of England, 
 Scotland, and Ireland, where, after achieving in many 
 instances the prosperity of their founders, they 
 eventually became naturalised crafts. The manufac- 
 ture of brocades, tabinets, &c., for which Norwich 
 was long celebrated, the lace-making of Buckingham- 
 shire and adjoining counties, and the flax and poplin 
 factories of Ireland were originated or stimulated into 
 fresh activity by Huguenot exiles. The paper-mills 
 now standing upon the rivers Darent in Kentand Itchin 
 in Hants were thus established, the latter remaining in 
 the possession of a descendant of the Huguenot family 
 by whom they were erected. Many of the technical 
 terms still used in the manufacture both of paper and 
 glass are obviously of French origin, and their intro- 
 duction is believed to date from this period. The 
 industrial enterprise and inventive skill of the new- 
 comers were further attested by the number of 
 patents which they took out for improved processes 
 of manufacture. ‘The recurrence of French names 
 is very marked upon the records of the Patent Office 
 for several years after the Revocation. 
 
 A large accession to the French Protestant churches 
 was required for the accommodation of the immi:. 
 grants, and at the beginning of the last century these 
 numbered not less than thirty-five in London and its 
 suburbs alone. Many of them still exist, but, owing 
 to the gradual absorption of the exiles into the body 
 of the English people, the majority have been con- 
 verted to other uses. 
 
 The French Renaissance has left such obvious 
 proofs of its dominating influence over our Restora- 
 
302 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 tion literature as to distract attention from any other, 
 but the masterpieces of the greatest poet of this 
 period evince a profound antagonism to its spirit. 
 In the ‘Paradise Lost” of Milton, published in 
 1667, and in his ‘Samson Agonistes,” published in 
 1671, there are abundant evidences that he had 
 drunk deeply at the fountains of Greek and Roman 
 art, but the draught had invigorated and refreshed 
 his mind without polluting it. Of his presentment 
 of the Hebrew epos, which was his first theme, it 
 has been well said that ‘‘the stern idealism of 
 Geneva is clothed in the gorgeous robes of the 
 Renaissance: 2h.75 The . ‘ Paradise Lost pate 
 is the epic of Puritanism. Its scheme is the problem 
 with which the Puritan wrestled in hours of gloom 
 and darkness—the problem of sin and redemption, 
 of the world-wide struggle of evil against good.” ! 
 Its historical interest is heightened by the poet’s 
 striking and pathetic references to the circumstances 
 under which it was written ; to the blindness which he 
 had contracted by his devotion to official duty as 
 Secretary of the Commonwealth Government; to 
 the perils by which he was surrounded sited the 
 Restoration ;— 
 _ though fall’n on evil days, 
 
 On evil days though fall’n, and evil tongues ; 
 In darkness, and with dangers compass’d round ;— 
 
 to the open debauchery and violence that prevailed 
 under the new 7égime,; and to the degradation to 
 
 ' Green’s ‘‘ History of the English People,” vol. ii. 
 Ps 379: : 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 303 
 
 which ecclesiastical government had been reduced 
 in days, when into God’s 
 
 Church lewd hirelings climb. 
 
 For his choice of a subiect and the method of 
 handling it, some critics have surmised that Milton 
 was indebted to the Dutch poet, Vondel, whose 
 “Lucifer” appeared fourteen years before the publi- 
 cation of ‘“ Paradise Lost,” but it is questionable 
 whether he was likely to be acquainted with Dutch 
 literature, or if the resemblances that exist between 
 the two works amount to more than coincidences. 
 
 In “Samson Agonistes,” it is not improbable 
 that Milton designed to typify the fate of slavery 
 and scorn which the great cause of Puritanism 
 temporarily suffered under the yoke of the Cavalier 
 reactionaries, and the revolutionary Nemesis which 
 he foresaw would avenge it. One of the choric 
 passages contains a pointed allusion to the penalties 
 which had fallen upon the surviving adherents of the 
 Commonwealth :— 
 
 Or else captivated ; 
 Or to the unjust tribunals, under change of times, 
 And condemnation of the ingrateful multitude... 
 >, ee causeless suffering 
 The punishment of dissolute days. 
 
 The revulsion of national sentiment which pro- 
 duced the Restoration gives historical importance to 
 the ‘ Hudibras” of Samuel Butler, a coarse but 
 pungent satire upon such of the superficial aspects of 
 Puritanism as were unworthy and ridiculous. The 
 first part appeared in 1663, and the second in the 
 
304 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 following year. Its motive was obviously suggested 
 by that of ‘‘Don Quixote,” which had been made 
 known to English readers by Shelton’s translation. 
 
 The unabated force of the Puritan movement 
 found expression in the “ Pilgrim’s Progress” of 
 John Bunyan, of which Part I. was published in 
 1678 and Part II. in 1684. Its dramatic allegory 
 and incisive delineations of character might of 
 themselves have sufficed to give it literary celebrity, 
 but its immense popularity could only have been 
 attained by its appeals to a large class of homely 
 readers, already familiar with the themes of which it 
 treated and in sympathy with the teaching it 
 conveyed. 
 
 The first important poem by which John Dryden 
 made his mark upon English literature, ‘‘ Annus 
 Mirabilis,” commemorated the naval war between 
 England and Holland, as prominent among the 
 striking events of 1666. The temporary triumph of 
 the national flag which justified his poem was disas- 
 trously reversed in the following year, when the 
 Dutch fleet sailed unopposed up the Thames. 
 
 Dryden’s ‘‘ Absalom and Achitophel” has already 
 been referred to as a political satire, called forth by 
 the agitation of 1681. Its object was to stimulate 
 the reaction of loyalty provoked by Shaftesbury’s 
 violence, and to which Charles had adroitly appealed. 
 In selecting a Scriptural narrative for the subject of 
 his apologue, Dryden may have been actuated by 
 the hope of engaging the sympathies of some of 
 Shaftesbury’s Presbyterian supporters. David repre- 
 sented the King; Absalom, his rebellious son, Mon- 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 305 
 
 mouth; Achitophel, Shaftesbury; Zimri, Buckingham; 
 and Corah, Oates; the Roman Catholics figuring 
 as Jebusites, and the Nonconformists as Levites. 
 The fluctuations of religious strife by which the 
 nation was distracted during the last decade of the 
 Stuarts’ rule are mirrored in two other of Dryden’s 
 best-known poems, ‘‘ Religio Laici” and ‘‘ The Hind 
 and Panther.” The former, published in 1682, 
 recorded the poet’s adherence to the Anglican 
 Church as a via media between the pretensions of 
 the Church of Rome to supremacy over the pre- 
 rogatives of the Crown and the revolt against 
 authority, which enlisted Nonconformists and Re- 
 publicans under the same banner. Five years later, 
 the publication of the ‘Hind and Panther” 
 announced his conversion to the Romish com- 
 munion, and his desire to promote the union between 
 it and the Established Church upon which James II. 
 was bent. 
 
 The stage, to which Dryden devoted the best years 
 of his life, although his natural genius disposed him 
 to work in other fields, was the chief instrument and 
 index of the revolution in taste and morals effected 
 by the influence of the French Renaissance. Since 
 the time of Ronsard and Malherbe, the literary activity 
 of France had become concentrated in attention to 
 metrical form and purity of diction. Though carried 
 to an excess of pedantic affectation and absurdity 
 which provoked the criticism of Boileau and the 
 mockery of Moliére, this formalism was reduced by 
 Corneille and Racine into strict canons of dramatic 
 art, which obtained general acceptance and ruled 
 
 X 
 
306 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 the stage for two centuries afterwards. Unity of 
 action, unity of time, and unity of place were thereby 
 prescribed as essential to the structure of tragedy, 
 and the rhyming couplet of ten-syllabled lines as the 
 measure alone suited to heroic themes. In comedy, 
 Corneille and his school were mainly influenced by 
 the study of the Spanish dramatists, Lopé de Vega 
 and Calderon ; making use of the same motives of 
 love-intrigue and adventure upon which the machinery 
 of their plots almost invariably turns. The low moral 
 standard of a society regulated by the dissolute court 
 of Louis XIV. encouraged the choice of vicious 
 motives and characters which distinguishes this 
 comedy, and dictated the tone of suggestive impurity 
 that pervades its dialogue. The artistic canons and 
 the immoral types of the French stage naturally com- 
 mended themselves for imitation to English dramatists, 
 who depended upon the patronage of such a sovereign 
 as Charles II. and the aristocratic circle over which 
 he presided. His disposition to set up a French model 
 of taste for his own capital was shown by his sending 
 Betterton, the leading actor of the day, over to Paris 
 for the purpose of observing the stage-management 
 at its principal theatres, and borrowing such improve- 
 ments as were readily adaptable. The love of dramatic 
 representations, which had characterised the English 
 people since the middle of the sixteenth century, 
 was but little checked by the Puritan restrictions, 
 and only revived the more keenly at the Restoration. 
 Even under the Commonwealth, Sir William Davenant 
 contrived to evade its interdict upon stage-plays 
 by opening a house in 1656 for the performance 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 307 
 
 of ‘‘operas,” in which recitative was interspersed 
 with musical accompaniments, songs, and choruses. 
 This form of entertainment was of Italian origin, 
 but had recently been introduced into France, 
 whence Davenant imported it. After the Restora- 
 tion, he obtained a patent for the Duke of York’s 
 company of players, who acted in Lincoln’s Inn 
 Fields, and by a special clause was permitted to 
 employ actresses in female parts, hitherto played by 
 youths. Thomas Killigrew, who was appointed 
 manager of the King’s Company in Drury Lane, 
 was well acquainted with the Continent, and made 
 it his boast that of the nine plays which he 
 published in 1664 eight were written in foreign 
 cities. 
 
 Dryden, whose connexion with the stage began 
 with the production of his “Wild Gallant,” in 
 February, 1663, although repudiating his obligation 
 to French influence, practically recognised it by 
 adopting the ten-syllabled rhymed couplet in “ The 
 Indian Queen,” which he wrote a few months later 
 in concert with Sir Robert Howard. In the preface 
 to his third play, ‘‘ The Rival Ladies,” he laboriously 
 defended the substitution of rhyme for blank verse, 
 as better suited to the dignity of tragedy, and argued 
 that, admitting it to be an innovation, it was unrea- 
 sonable to ‘oppose ourselves to the most polished 
 and civilised nations of Europe.” In an essay upon 
 dramatic poetry written in the form of a dialogue, and 
 published in 1667, he maintained this preference 
 against the animadversions of Sir Robert Howard, 
 and in a subsequent essay appealed to contemporary 
 
 2 
 
308 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Opinion as so manifestly in favour of rhyme, that 
 “very few tragedies in this age shall be received 
 without it.” The three unities of time, place, and 
 action formulated by the French tragedians were 
 also the subject of discussion by the speakers in 
 Dryden’s. dialogue. In the mouths of Lisideius 
 (Sir Charles Sedley) and of Neander (himself) argu- 
 ments were put to prove that these rules were drawn 
 from the ancients, and had already been practised 
 by the greatest English dramatists ; but, while thus 
 challenging the credit of the French to their inven- 
 tion, the duty of observing them was tacitly admitted. 
 The extravagantly-heroic sentiments and the stilted, 
 inflated language which characterise the tragedies of 
 Dryden and the Restoration writers generally, cannot 
 be attributed to their French dramatic models, but 
 were probably imitated from the romancists, whose 
 works continued in vogue. The degradation of public 
 taste which, with the glories of the Elizabethan drama 
 still in remembrance, could tolerate the exhibition of 
 rant and bombast, was manifested in the mutilation 
 of sorne of Shakespeare’s masterpieces and in the 
 preference avowed by even such cultivated men as 
 Pepys for the French imitations which disputed pos- 
 session of the stage. 
 
 In comedy, the signs of decadence were still more 
 evident. Discarding the superficial decorum and 
 polish which veiled the ignoble motives and impure 
 suggestions of their models, the comic dramatists of 
 the Restoration vaunted their contempt of all moral 
 restraint. Decency was abandoned, marriage made 
 the subject of ridicule, and the coarsest debauchery 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 309 
 
 represented as the normal and permissible practice 
 of society. ‘The mischief effected by this perversion 
 of a valuable intellectual and moral agency to the 
 basest uses has not been confined to the age which 
 wrought it. Its consequences are still felt in the 
 unavoidable interdiction to young students of the 
 dramas of so great a writer as Dryden, which, in 
 spite of their grave blemishes, abound in passages 
 of striking vigour and beauty. 
 
 Besides their obligation to French influences for 
 the structure, motives, and style of their plays, the 
 Restoration dramatists freely availed themselves of 
 the plots and characters of popular French or Spanish 
 pieces by way of adaptation or translation. Dryden’s 
 “Sir Martin Marr-all,” produced in 1667, is a version 
 of Moliere’s “ L’Etourdi”; his ‘An Evening’s Love” 
 was drawn from Thomas Corneille’s ‘‘ Le Feint As- 
 trologue” and Moliére’s “‘ Le Dépit Amoreux.” The 
 suggestion of his ‘‘ Conquest of Granada” was ob- 
 tained from Mdlle. de Scuderi’s “ Almahide,” and 
 one of its chief characters, Almanzor, admittedly 
 modelled in part upon Calpreneéde’s Artaban. Shadwell 
 took his “Miser” from Molitre’s “‘L’Avare”; Crowne 
 his.’ Siri Courtly Nice” from; the ““ NotPuede:Serz’ 
 of the Spanish comedian, Moreto; Settle his ‘‘ Ibra- 
 ham” from a novel of Scuderi’s. Otway borrowed 
 the plots of ‘‘ Don Carlos” and ‘ Venice Preserved ” 
 from a novel and an historical romance by the Abbé 
 de St. Real; his ‘‘Titus and Berenice” was a version 
 of Racine’s ‘‘Berenice”; and his ‘‘Cheats of Scapin ” 
 of Moliere’s comedy of that name. Wycherley’s 
 “‘Country Wife” is based upon Moliere’s “ L’Ecole 
 
310 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 des Femmes,” and his “ Plain Dealer” upon “Le 
 Misanthrope.” 
 
 In 1673, Boileau, whose satires upon the vapid 
 extravagance of the fashionable French romancists 
 and the pedantic purism of the Academicians 
 had established his reputation, published “ L’Art 
 Poétique,” in which his theory of poetical criticism is 
 elaborately formulated. Inspired by Horace’s ‘ Ars 
 Poetica,” it assumed the classical literature of Greece 
 and Rome as an authoritative standard by which to 
 measure the work of every modern poet; prescribed 
 rational “ good sense” and a strict attention to form 
 as the first requirements of art; and implicitly 
 excluded passion, imagination, and fancy as super- 
 fluous elements. Accepted by general consent in 
 France as a critical code from which there was no 
 appeal, and enforced by the advocacy of Bossu, 
 Rapin, and other able writers, it long continued to 
 dictate the conditions to which the poetic genius of 
 the race must conform. Overlooking the fact that, 
 while French belongs to the Latin family of languages, 
 English is structurally Teutonic, Dryden, Lords 
 Roscommon and Mulgrave (afterwards Duke of 
 Buckinghamshire), applied Boileau’s rules to their 
 own literature. In the preface to his revised version 
 of Shakespeare’s ‘Troilus and Cressida,” Dryden 
 outlined an ideal of poetical perfection which sub- 
 stantially agrees with the rules laid down by Boileau, 
 and cited, with approval, the arguments by which 
 Bossu and Rapin had supported them. His own 
 practice, and that of his chief disciple, Pope, estab- 
 lished these principles so firmly that for nearly a 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. ae 
 
 century afterwards English poetry scarcely deviated 
 from the same lines. 
 
 An increased number of translations from the 
 Latin classics indicated the growth of a literary 
 demand created by their acceptance as an artistic 
 standard. Dryden largely ministered to this demand 
 by his translations of Virgil, Ovid, Horace, Juvenal, 
 and Persius, published in a series of miscellanies, to 
 which other hands also contributed. Translations of 
 Lucretius by Creech, of Seneca and Cicero by 
 Roger L’Estrange, were in contemporary repute. 
 The Greek classics were not altogether neglected ; 
 Cowley translating two of Pindar’s odes, and com- 
 posing a series of original odes in the Pindaric 
 manner which invited many inferior imitators. 
 Specimens of Homer and Theocritus were also 
 included among Dryden’s miscellanies. 
 
 Translations of several celebrated French works 
 were published during this period, of which the 
 best-rremembered are Montaigne’s ‘‘ Essays,” by 
 Charles Cotton; Rochefoucauld’s “ Maxims,” and 
 ‘‘ Fontenelle’s ‘“ Plurality of Worlds,” by Aphra Behn, 
 pudeetomeiles,«( Foraces: andew, Pompec aw 
 Katherine Philips (Orinda). 
 
 Continental scholarship was represented in England 
 during the reign of Charles II. by Isaac Vossius, a 
 native of Leyden, whose reputation for classical 
 learning almost equalled that of his father, Gerard. 
 He came over in 1670, was made a Canon of Windsor, 
 and provided with apartments in the castle, where he 
 remained until his death in 1688. In the united fields 
 of philosophy and scholarship, the chief interme- 
 
312 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 diaries of foreign influences were Henry More, Ralph 
 Cudworth, and Joseph Glanvil. More devoted his 
 life to expounding a system of Christian Platonism, 
 derived partly from the study of Plato’s doctrines, as 
 modified by the Alexandrian neo-Platonists and the 
 Italian humanists, and partly from the writings of the 
 Jewish cabbalists and of Tauler and other German 
 mystics. He corresponded with the French meta- 
 physician, Descartes, and was in partial agreement 
 with his philosophical principles. Cudworth, who 
 was professor of Hebrew at Cambridge, was a leading 
 member of the school of Latitudinarian divines 
 who generally adopted Arminian tenets. His best- 
 known work, on ‘The Intellectual System of the 
 Universe,” was designed as an answer to the material- 
 istic theories of Hobbes, which he confuted by an 
 investigation of ancient philosophical systems “in 
 order to show the unity of a supreme God to have 
 been a general belief of antiquity.”1 He was 
 acquainted with the theories of Gassendi and 
 Descartes, whose works he cites, although rarely with 
 approval. Glanvil, whose chief work is known by 
 the names of “The Vanity of Dogmatising” and 
 ‘‘Scepsis Scientifica,” which he gave to the two 
 editions respectively published in 1661 and 1665, 
 set himself to accomplish the emancipation of thought 
 from scholastic tyranny which Bacon had inaugurated. 
 He substantially accepted the system of Descartes, 
 to whom he refers in terms of warm praise. 
 
 The “Royal Society for Improving Natural Know- 
 
 } Hallam’s ‘‘Introduction to the Literature of Europe,” 
 vol. iv. p. 66. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 313 
 
 ledge” sprang out of the meetings of scientific 
 observers held in London and Oxford during the 
 Civil War, already mentioned. It was incorporated in 
 April, 1662, and fostered by the patronage of Charles 
 II., who inherited a measure of his father’s cultivated 
 tastes, and of Prince Rupert, who was himself a 
 skilful chemist. Besides a foreign secretary, Henry 
 Oldenburg, a native of Bremen, it numbered foreign 
 savants among its members and correspondents, and 
 the discoveries of Huyghens, Torricelli, Malpighi, 
 and others in astronomy, physics, physiology, &c., 
 were repeatedly subjects of discussion. It cannot 
 be doubted that to the active communication of 
 thought which such minds as Flamstead, Halley, 
 Wallis, Sydenham, Willis, Wilkins, Woodward, Ray, 
 Grew, Morrison, Boyle, Hooke, and Wren, inter- 
 changed with their more advanced fellow-labourers 
 on the Continent, the rapid strides made by English 
 science during this period are largely due. The 
 greatest savant whom England has produced, Isaac 
 Newton, was a student at Cambridge during the 
 early years of the Royal Society, of which he did 
 not become a member until 1671. The mathematical 
 studies on which his future discoveries were based 
 embraced the writings of Descartes upon algebraic 
 geometry and mechanics, which were then in use at 
 Cambridge. Thomas Sydenham, by whose observations 
 and experiments medicine is held to have been first 
 raised to the dignity of a science, visited the medical 
 school at Montpellier before practising in London. 
 The recognition of Peruvian bark, or ‘Jesuits’ 
 powder,” as a specific for ague, which, although 
 
314 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 introduced into England in 1653, was long con- 
 demned by the faculty as a quack medicine, is 
 believed to be owing to his persistent employment 
 and advocacy. 
 
 In the pictorial art of this period foreign influences 
 were still paramount. The most fashionable portrait- 
 painter of the Restoration was Sir Peter Lely, a native 
 of Westphalia, but of Dutch parentage. He came to 
 this country in 1641, and, stimulated by the study 
 of Vandyck, abandoned landscape and _ historical 
 painting, to which he had hitherto devoted himself, 
 for portraiture alone. His success induced him to 
 reside here until his death in 1680. ‘The statesmen, 
 wits, and beauties of the Restoration still live upon 
 his canvas, The characteristics of his manner are 
 too well known to require notice. Greenhill, Daven- 
 port, and others are enumerated among his English 
 pupils and imitators. Simon Varelst, a Dutch artist, 
 who excelled as a flower-painter, but also applied 
 himself to portraiture, was in high repute here during 
 the reign of Charles II. William Vandevelde the 
 elder and his yet more eminent son of the same 
 name visited England during that reign, and, having 
 been appointed marine painters to the Crown, spent 
 the rest of their lives here. Many of the latter’s 
 best works are to be found in our public and private 
 collections. Other Dutch painters were employed at 
 the same time, the most notable being Netscher, a 
 pupil of Terburg, a skilful artist of small portraits, 
 and Griffiere, whose artificial landscapes still find 
 admirers. The statements of some writers upon art 
 that Rembrandt, Teniers, and Terburg were also 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. 315 
 
 visitors here require verification. Godfrey Kneller, 
 a native of Lubeck, who studied under both Dutch 
 and Italian masters, but can scarcely be ranked in 
 either school, came over in 1674, and rapidly attained 
 success, as a portrait-painter. His reputation, how- 
 ever, culminated under William III. and Anne, with 
 the chief celebrities of whose reign his brush has 
 familiarised us. Italian art, now in its decline, was 
 represented by Antonio Verrio, a Neapolitan, who 
 obtained ample employment in painting mythological 
 and allegorical designs upon the ceilings and stair- 
 cases of the royal palaces. 
 
 The invention of the art of mezzotint engraving 
 has been usually attributed to Prince Rupert, but 
 doubts have recently been thrown upon his claim. 
 He at all events introduced it into England, and by 
 the success with which he cultivated it established 
 its reputation. William Faithorne, the chief English 
 engraver of this period, was a pupil of the French 
 artist, Nanteuil, whose style, however, he considerably 
 modified. He is said to have acquired from the 
 same master the art of crayon-drawing, which he 
 also practised. Loggan, a native of Dantzic, Bloote- 
 jing and Valek, both Dutchmen, and Vanderbank, 
 a native of France, but probably of Dutch extraction, 
 were the principal foreign engravers employed. 
 
 In sculpture, the only artist of distinction who was 
 undoubtedly of foreign extraction was Gabriel Cibber, 
 a Dane, who came to England during the Common- 
 wealth and found employment under Stone until his 
 merits became recognised. The statues of Melancholy 
 and Raving Madness, in front of Bethlehem Hospital, 
 
316 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 are his best-known works. The greatest artist in 
 wood of his own, or perhaps of any age, Grinling 
 Gibbons, some of whose exquisite carvings belong to 
 this period, according to one early account of him, 
 was born in London, of Dutch parentage ; accord- 
 ing to another, was the child of English parents, but 
 born in Holland. The art of graving in metal was 
 followed by a family of French medallists, named 
 Rotier, five in number, who were employed in the 
 Royal Mint, of whom John was esteemed the best 
 artist. The original design, representing the Duchess 
 of Richmond as Britannia, upon the reverse of a 
 medal struck for Charles II., is attributed to another 
 brother, Philip Rotier. 
 
 The architecture of the Renaissance found its 
 highest English representative in Sir Christopher 
 Wren, and developed new dignity and _ beauty 
 from the modifications which he introduced. The 
 calamitous fire of London was converted into a 
 national benefit by the opportunity it afforded him 
 of rebuilding the principal metropolitan churches ; 
 of which St. Paul’s, St. Mary-le-Bow, and St. Stephen’s, 
 Walbrook, are his acknowledged masterpieces. Green- 
 wich Hospital, a considerable portion of Hampton 
 Court Palace, and the library of Trinity College, 
 Cambridge, are among his stateliest works elsewhere. 
 
 Music was one of the arts which Charles II. — 
 patronised. His tastes in this, as in other respects, 
 inclined him to French usages, and he introduced 
 a violin orchestra into the Chapel Royal in imitation 
 of one which performed before Louis XIV. Laniére, 
 already named, held the office of Director of the 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES. oie 
 
 King’s music for some years after the Restoration ; 
 and two Frenchmen, named Cambert and Grebus, or 
 Grabut, are named among his successors. Pelham 
 Humphrey, who was in high esteem with the 
 King as a composer of songs and anthems, was a 
 pupil of Lulli, an Italian settled in France. Italian 
 music also was much in vogue, and Gio. Baptista 
 Draghi, a composer of some merit, was in the service 
 of Queen Catherine. The experiment of introducing 
 the opera upon our stage, which was tried by 
 Davenant under the Commonwealth, was renewed 
 after the Restoration by Thomas Killigrew, who 
 collected an Italian company for the purpose. 
 Evelyn, in his diary, records his being present at 
 the first performance of an Italian opera, in January, 
 1674. Both his diary and that of Pepys contain 
 frequent references to celebrated Italian singers and 
 players upon the violin, harpsichord, and other 
 instruments, whose concerts they attended. 
 
 The growth of our foreign commerce during this 
 period may be measured by the progress made by the 
 East India Company, whose annual exports amounted 
 in 1677 toabout £430,000 and their imports to about 
 4,860,000. In addition to these returns, the private 
 trade carried on by the shipowners, officers, seamen, 
 and factors of the Company amounted in exports to 
 upwards of £120,coo and in imports to more than 
 £,230,000. The annexation to England of the island 
 of Bombay, in 1669, opened out fresh channels of 
 profit to the Company. The loss which befel them 
 in 1683 and 1687 of their factories at Bantam in 
 Java and Hooghly in Bengal was compensated by 
 
318 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 the acquisition of a new settlement in Sumatra, which 
 enabled them to retain the spice trade, and of another 
 on the east bank of the Ganges, which developed 
 into the city of Calcutta. The island of St. Helena, 
 which had been granted to the Company by their 
 charter of 1661, was afterwards wrested from them 
 by the Dutch, but, having been regained in 1672, 
 was confirmed in their possession. China was in- 
 cluded within the scope of their enterprise in 1680. 
 The prohibition of trade with France, which was 
 enacted in 1678, does not appear to have worked the 
 mischief it was calculated to cause, the loss of so im- 
 portant a purchaser being probably counter-balanced 
 by the growing demands of the American colonists. 
 An extensive commerce was carried on with Turkey, 
 Italy, Spain, and Portugal; and the shipping em- 
 ployed by the African Company in their trade with 
 Guinea amounted, together with that of the American 
 trade, to 40,000 tons. 
 
 Among the imports brought into use at this period, 
 two deserve special mention. Tea was introduced 
 as early at least as 1660, when Pepys records his 
 having drunk it asa novelty. <A few years later he 
 refers to it as being recommended to his wife by her 
 medical attendant. Its consumption, however, was 
 not large, and did not become fashionable until after 
 the Revolution. Coffee was introduced from the 
 East, under the Commonwealth, by a Turkey mer- 
 chant, and soon after the Restoration came into 
 vogue as a favourite beverage. The coffee-house soon 
 became a place of social, literary, and eventually poli- 
 tical resort, and from the middle of the reign of 
 
MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN INFLUENCES, 319 
 
 Charles II. took rank as a characteristic feature of 
 English life, answering in many respects to the club 
 of our own day. 
 
 The settlement of some Dutch dyers in England 
 in 1666 introduced to us their process of dressing 
 woollen cloths, and an improved weaving-loom was 
 imported from Holland not long afterwards. Fine 
 linens were manufactured at Ipswich by a company 
 of French Protestants in 1669. Some Venetian glass- 
 makers, who were brought over by the Duke of 
 Buckingham in 1670, improved our knowledge of its 
 manufacture. ‘The process of tinning plate-iron was 
 introduced from Germany during the same period 
 by some workmen employed by Andrew Yarranton, 
 the author of an important work upon English handi- 
 crafts. A Dutchman is said to have set up a mill 
 at Sheen, at which wire was first made in England. 
 The stimulus imparted to almost every branch of 
 industry by the advent of Huguenot refugees, con- 
 sequent upon the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 
 1685, has already been noticed. 
 
 The addition to our national sports of the game of 
 ‘ néle-méle,” a description of tennis, imported from 
 France, which has given its name to a _ principal 
 London thoroughfare, and of skating, which was first 
 performed, as Evelyn records, in 1662, “after the 
 manner of the Hollanders,” may be mentioned among 
 the minor foreign contributions of this epoch. 
 
 Socially, as well as politically, the term at which 
 this retrospect concludes may be regarded as the 
 threshold of our modern history. Widely as the 
 England of the revolutionary period seems, at first 
 
320 POST NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 sight, to differ from the England of to-day, the 
 difference will be seen, upon closer inspection, to 
 be of degree and not of kind. The organisation 
 of political parties, the cleavage of religious sects, 
 the divergent aims of statesmen and divines, the 
 rivalries of commercial enterprise and industry, the 
 subjects of scientific, literary, and artistic interest, 
 the tastes and amusements of society, the conditions 
 and habits of daily life, were substantially the same 
 as they are now, and the interval of two centuries 
 has done little more than develop the growth of 
 the tendencies which were then in germ. 
 
mee D EEXe 
 
 AFRICA, relations with, 74, 
 148, 255, 318 
 
 Almain, Hanse of, 15, 32, 55, 
 146 
 
 ‘America, exploration of, 73, 
 149; emigration to, 191, 209, 
 247-8 
 
 Aristotle, works of, 21, 44, 
 237 
 
 Armada, Spanish, 123 
 
 Arminianism, 227, 312 
 
 BACON, Francis, 145, 237 
 
 Bacon, Roger, 21 
 
 Baptists, 210 
 
 Bible, translations of, 41, 63, 
 141, 157, 236 
 
 Bohme, Jacob, 229 
 
 Brandenburg, relations with, 
 259, 275, 289, 291 
 
 Breton immigration, 10 
 
 CALVIN, influence of, 53, 78, 
 Bg,7100, 112, *141;°155, 209, 
 228 
 
 Cambridge University, 50, 55, 
 77; 109, 286 
 
 Catholics, English Roman, 
 Be etO0-7112,.114,, 118,121, 
 124, 156, 158, 165, 174, 179, 
 207, 248, 253, 262, 267, 271, 
 283 
 
 Caxton, 43 
 
 Charles I., 164, 169-218, 242 
 
 Charles II., 190, 218-19, 225, 
 251-79, 296 
 
 Chaucer, 37-42 
 
 Colonisation, 152, 247-8 
 Cromwell, Oliver, 211-224 
 Cromwell, Thomas, 59-67 
 Crusades, influence of, 20, 24-5 
 
 DENMARK, relations with, 169, 
 173, 223 
 
 Dryden, 276, 297, 304-311 
 
 Dutch United Provinces, re- 
 lations with, I10, 113, 120, 
 125, 160, 163, 168, 173, 218, 
 220, 223, 254, 257, 264-267, 
 270, 275, 279, 282, 289 
 
 EAST, the, commercial rela- 
 tions with, 15, 147, 246, 317 
 
 Edward I., wars and policy of, 
 13, 26,25 
 
 Edward III., wars and policy 
 of, 14, 29-31, 35 
 
 Elizabeth, Queen, 83-4, 89, 
 92-125 
 
 England, Reformed Church of, 
 60-65, 69, 75-78, 90, 94, 100, 
 III 
 
 English language, 34, 40, 70 
 Erasmus, 50 
 Frastians, 228 
 
 FLEMISH art, influence of, 71, 
 142, 241, 314; immigra- 
 tion, 15,31, 315, £275.319% 
 industries, influence of, 15,31, 
 127-130, 145, 241, 2495 319 
 
 France, att. Of 22 4450014 3. 
 
 Me 
 
322 POST 
 243, 315 ; industries of,. 129, 
 146, 249, 298, 319 ; literature 
 Of,-22; 35-41, 70, 133, -232, 
 
 236, 305; political relations |. 
 
 with, 58, 93, 125, 173, 178, 
 223, 254-6, 258, 261-5, 269- 
 76, 280- 280 ; ; wars with, 29, 
 57> 88, 95>. I8I, 270 : 
 
 Friars, Dominican and Fran- 
 ciscan, 19 
 
 GEOGRAPHICAL discovery, 72,. 
 
 147 
 
 Germany, Empire of, relations 
 with, 57, 79, 82, 168; in- 
 ventions of, 43, 46, 319; 
 literature of, 44;--71,7, 441, 
 240; merchants of, 15, 32, 
 146; Protestant States of, 
 63, 67, 76, 161, 167; theo- 
 logy of, 53, 64, 228, 312 
 
 Gower, 36 
 
 Greece, literature of, 21, 
 50,236, 301 
 
 43; 
 
 HENRIETTA MARIA, Queen, 
 176, 185, 190, 207 
 
 Henry III., 8, 9 
 
 Henry V., 30 
 
 Henry VII.5473/72 
 
 Henry VIII., 50, 53, 56-72 
 
 Holbein, 72 
 
 Huguenots, immigrations of, 
 77 pI LG, S127, {260.0 208 ; 
 massacres of, 98, 110; polli- 
 tical relations with, 95, 98, 
 106, 181, 291 
 
 INDEPENDENTS, 209, 212 
 
 India, relations with, 150, 246, 
 250, 255, 317 
 
 Indies, West, 221, 223, 257 
 
 Ireland, Government of, 29, 64, 
 187, 220, 284; rebellions i in, 
 114, 187, 201, 207 
 
 NORMAN BRITAIN. 
 
 Italy, art of, 23, 71-2, 142, 243, 
 315 + literature of, 39, 44, 
 70; 131, 230 ; merchants of, 
 32; morals and-manners of, 
 132 ; priests of, 9 173 state- 
 craft of, 59 
 
 JAMES 1 102, 119,° 2r, 140, 
 
 154 
 James IT., 262, 267, 273, 277; 
 279-93 - 
 Jesuits, 114, 119, 121, 161, 
 271, 253 
 Jews, expulsion of, 16; 
 admission of, 222 
 Jonson, 230 
 
 re-. 
 
 Knox, John, 87, 90, 100 
 
 Louis XIV., 254, 258, 268- 
 277, 280, 286, 289, 207 
 
 Luther, influence of, 53, 63, 
 68, 77, 161 
 
 MARINER’S COMPASS, 24 
 Mary, Queen, 79, 81 
 Mary, Queen of Scots, 92, 94, 
 97, 100-104, I2I 
 Merchants, foreign, 15, 32, 146 
 Metaphysics, Continental, in-- 
 fluence of, 22, 41, 237, 312 
 Milton, 234, 239, 241, 302 
 Montfort, Simon de, 12 
 Muggletonians, 229 | 
 
 NETHERLANDS, immigrations 
 from, 15, 77, 105, 127; po- 
 litical relations with, 31, 113, 
 120. Vide Dutch and Flem- 
 ish 
 
 Nonconformists, 64, 209, 228, 
 254, 256, 261, 264, 266, 277, 
 
 ~ 285 
 
 Normandy, loss of, 7 
 
OPERA, Italian, 307,-317 
 
 Orange, William, Prince of, | 
 PIO TIS, 110.47 102 Wil: 
 liam HI." 
 
 Oxford University, 20, 22, 45, 
 
 51,55) 77,112, “286 
 
 PAPACY, aggressions of, 9, 33, 
 86, 99, 103, 106, 108, 112; 
 political relations with, 58, 
 93, 96, 155, 170, 254, 284 
 
 Paris, University of, 20 
 
 Persia, relations with, 148, HG 
 
 - Plato, works of, 44, 312 
 
 Poitevin, immigration, 10 
 
 - Portugal, relations with, 32, 
 
 Sages oe 
 Presbyterians, 109, 155, 193, 
 201, 208, 210, 219, 221, 228, 
 255» 257, 304 
 
 Printing, invention of, 43 
 
 Protestantism. V2de Sats gb 
 tion 
 
 Puritanism, 91, 100, ra; 155, 
 168, 189, 194, 224, 248, 251 
 
 QUAKERS, 222, 264 
 
 REFORMATION, Protestant, 
 53,69, 75, 87, 89 
 
 Renaissance, French, 297, 301, 
 395; Italian, 39; 44, 59; 131, 
 
 233, 302, 316 
 Rome, Church of, corruption 
 
 of, 18, 34, 533 counter- 
 reformation of, 86,161. Vide 
 Papacy. 
 
 Rome, literature of, 21, 37, 
 239, 311 
 
 Rubens, 242 
 
 Russia, relations with, 147, 
 247 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 | Spain, 
 
 Re 
 
 SCHOOLMEN, 22, 41 
 
 Science, Continental, influence 
 of, 237, 239, 244, 298, 313 
 
 Scotland, immigrations from, 
 49, 226; political Telations 
 with, 28, AS,= 70; 04,0 Lal; 
 159, 193, 201, 208, 212, 215, 
 219, 277, 283 ; Reformation 
 in, 87, 96, 100, 103 
 
 Shaftesbury, Lord, 256, 26I- 
 278 
 
 Shakespeare, 134, 137 
 
 Socinians, 229 
 
 literary influence of, 
 134, 137; 231, 304, 306, 309; 
 Philip 11., king of, 82, 83, 
 88, 104, 108, III; political 
 relations with, 47, 82, 88, 
 155, 165, 192, 259, 261 ; 
 wars with, 113,179, 223 
 
 Spenser, 133, 140 
 
 Sweden, relations with, 173, 
 185, 223, 259, 261, 289 
 
 Switzerland, Reformation in, 
 
 89 
 TORIES, 274, 276, 289, 293 
 UNITARIANS, 64, 229 
 
 VALENCE, Aymer de, 13 
 Vandyck, 241-3, 314 
 
 WALES, Conquest of, 26 ; con- 
 solidation with England, 49 
 
 Whigs, 274, 276, 280, 2809, 
 293 
 William III. (Prince of 
 
 Orange) 258, 265, 267, 269, 
 275, 281, 286, 288 
 
 Wolsey, 51, 57 
 
 Wycliff, 22, 34, 41, 55 
 
 i AT Sten. 
 
¥ & os : 
 r shi Sa t ‘ 
 . a 
 | GREAT QUEEN 
 if Ba 
 
PUBLICATIONS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. 
 
 FATHERS FOR ENGLISH READERS. 
 
 A Series of Monographs on the Chief Fathers of the Church, the 
 Fathers selected being centres of influence at important 
 periods of Church History and in important 
 spheres of action. 
 
 Feap. 8vo., cloth boards, 2s. each. 
 
 LEO THE GREAT, 
 By the Rev. CHARLES GORE, M.A. 
 
 GREGOR VWaIlHE GREAT, 
 By the Rev. J. BARMBY, B.D. 
 
 SAINT AMBROSE : his Life, Times, and Teaching. 
 By the Rev. ROBINSON THORNTON, D.D. 
 
 SAINT AUGUSTINE. 
 By the Rev. E. L. CUTTS, B.A. 
 
 SAINT BASIL THE GREAT. 
 By the Rev. RICHARD T. SMITH, B.D. 
 
 SPAINIgsibuAk st OF POrTIERS, AND SAINI 
 MARTIN OF TOURS, 
 By the Rev. J. GIBSON CAZENOVE, D.D. 
 
 SAINT JEROME. 
 By the Rev. EDWARD L. CUTTS, B.A, 
 
 SAINT JOHN OF DAMASCUS. 
 By the Rev. J. H. LUPTON, M.A. 
 
 THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. ) 
 By the Rev. H. S. HOLLAND. 
 
 THE DEFENDERS OF THE FAITH; or, The 
 Christian Apologists of the Second and 
 
 Third Centuries. 
 
 By the Rev. F. WATSON, M.A. 
 
 THE VENERABLE BEDE. 
 By the Rev. G. F. BROWNE, 
 
PUBLICATIONS OF THE SOCIETY 
 
 NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIOUS SYSTEMS. 
 
 A Series of Manuals which furnish in a brief and popular form an accurate 
 account of the great Non-Christian Religious Systems of the World. 
 
 Feap. 8vo., cloth boards, 2s. 6d. each. 
 
 Buddhism—Being a Sketch of the Life and Teachings of Guatama, 
 the Buddha. 
 By T. W. Ruys Davips. With Map, 
 
 Buddhism in China. 
 By the Rev. S. Beat. With Map. 
 
 Confucianism and Taouisn. 
 By Professor RoperT K. Douctas, of the British Museum. With Map. 
 
 Hinduism. 
 By Professor Monier Wititiams. With Map. 
 
 Islam and tts Founder. 
 By J. W. H. Stopart. With Map. 
 
 The Corén—Its Composition and Teaching, and the Testimony ae 
 bears to the Holy Scriptures. 
 By Sir Wittram Murr, K.C.S.I. 
 
 THE HEATHEN WORLD AND ST. PAUL. 
 
 This Series ts intended to throw light upon the Writings and Labours of the 
 Apostle of the Gentiles. 
 
 Feap. 8vo., cloth boards, 2s. each. 
 
 St. Paul in Greece. 
 By the Rev. G. S. Davizs. With Map. 
 
 St. Paulin Damascus and Arabia. 
 at the Rev. GEorGE Rawtinson, M.A., Canon of Canterbury. With 
 ap. ; 4 
 
 St. Paul at Rome, : Er 
 By the Very Rev. CHartes MERIvALE, D.D., D.C.L., Dean of Ely. 
 With Map. 
 St. Paulin Asia Minor and at the Syrian Antioch. 
 By the Rev. E. H. PLumprre, D.D. With Map. 
 
FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. 
 
 THE HOME LIBRARY. 
 
 A Series of Books illustrative of Church History, &c., specially, but not 
 exclusively, adapted for Sunday Reading. 
 
 Crown 8vo., cloth boards, 3s, 6d, each. 
 
 Black and White. Mission Stories. 
 By H. Forpe. 
 
 Charlemagne. 
 By the Rev. E. L. Cutts, B.A. With Map. 
 Constantine the Great: The Union of Church and State. 
 By the Rev. Epwarp L. Cutts. ‘ 
 Great English Churchmen ; or, Famous Names in English Church 
 LTistory and Literature. 
 By W. H. Davenport ADAMs. 
 John Hus. The Commencement of Resistance to Papal Authority 
 on the part of the Inferior Clergy. 
 By the Rev. A. H. WRATISLAW. 
 udea and her Rulers, from Nebuchadnezzar to Vespasian, 
 By M. Bramston. With Map. 
 Mihtary Religious Orders of the Middle Ages ; the Hospitallers, the 
 Templars, the Teutonic Knights, and others. 
 By the Rev, E. C. WoopHousE. 
 
 Mitslav ; or, the Conversion of Pomerania. 
 By the late Right Rev. R. Mitman, D.D. 
 
 Narcissus: A Tale of Early Christian Times. 
 By the Right Rev. W. Boyp CARPENTER. 
 Richelieu. 
 By GusTavE Masson, Esq. 
 Sketches of the Women of Christendom. 
 By the Author of “‘ The Chronicles of the Schénberg-Cotta Family.” 
 
 The Churchman’s Life of Wesley. 
 By R. Denny URLin, Esq. 
 
 The Church in Roman Gaul. 
 By the Rev. R. T. Smiru. With Map. 
 The House of God the Home of Man. 
 By the Rev. Canon JELF. 
 The Inner Life, as Revealed in the Correspondence of Celebrated 
 Christians. 
 Edited by the Rev. T. ErsKINE. 
 The Life of the Soul in the World: Its Nature, Needs, Dangers, 
 Sorrows, Aids, and Joys. 
 By the Rev. F. C. WooDHoUSE. 
 The North African Church. 
 By the Rey. J. Ltoyp, With Map. 
 Thoughts and Characters; being Selections from the Writings of 
 the Author of ‘‘ The Chronicles of the Schénberg-Cotta Family.” 
 
PUBLICATIONS OF THE SUCIFIY. . 
 
 CONVERSION OF THE WEST. 
 
 A Nseries of V olumes showing how the Conversion of the Chief Res of the 
 West was brought about, and their condition before this occurred. 
 
 Feap. 8vo., cloth eat ee each. 
 
 The Celts. 
 
 By the Rev. G. F. MaciEar, D. D. With Two Maps. 
 The English. 
 
 By che above Author.. With Two Maps. 
 The Northmen. 
 
 By the above Author. With Map. 
 The Slavs. 
 
 By the above Author. With Map. 
 
 The Continental Teutons. 
 By the Very Rev. Dean MeERivALe. With Map. 
 
 ANCIENT HISTORY FROM THE MONUMENTS. 
 
 This Series of Books ts chiefly intended to tltustrate the Sacred Scriptures by 
 the results of recent Monumental Researches in the East. 
 
 Feap. 8vo., cloih boaras, 2s, each. 
 Assyria, from the Earliest Times to the Fall of Nineveh. 
 
 By the late GkorGE SmiTH, Esq., of the British Museum. 
 
 Sinai: from the Fourth Egyptian Dynasty to the Present Day. 
 _ By Henry S. Patmer, Major R.E., F.R.A.S. With Map. 
 
 Babylonia (The History of). 
 
 By the late GzorGE SmiTuH, Esq. Edited by the Rev. A. H. Sayce. 
 Greek Cities and Islands of Asia Minor. 
 
 By W. S. W. Vaux, M.A. 
 Egypt, from the Earliest Times to B.C. 300. 
 
 By S. Brrcn, LL.D. 
 Persia, from the Earliest Period to the Arab Conquest. 
 
 By W. S. W. Vaux, M.A. 
 
 DEPOSITORIES: 
 NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, CHARING CROSS, W.C.; 
 43, QUEEN Vicrorta STREET, E.C. ; 26, Str. GeorGe’s PLacz, S.W. ~ 
 BRIGHTON: 135, NorRTH STREET. 
 
ste 
 
v1 
 
 30112 1