fourth and youngest son of king Henry the fourth, was a singular
promoter of literature, just at the dawning of science and learning.
However unqualified this eminent personage was for political intrigue,
and to contend with his malicious and powerful enemies, among whom the
Cardinal Beaufort was the principal, he was nevertheless the common
friend and patron of all the scholars of his time. A sketch of his
character and pursuits, as being closely connected with the progress of
English literature, cannot fail of proving interesting, more especially
as they are peculiarly associated with the subject of the present
inquiry.
About the year 1440, the Duke gave to the University of Oxford a
library, containing six hundred volumes, one hundred and twenty only of
which were valued at more than one thousand pounds of the money of that
day. These books, it need not be observed, were all in manuscript, the
art of printing not having then been discovered; they are called _Novi
Tractatus_, or New Treatises, in the University Register, and are said
to be _admirandi apparatus_. They were the most splendid and costly
copies that could be procured, finely written on vellum, and elegantly
embellished with miniatures and illuminations. Among the rest was a
translation into French of Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Only a single specimen
of these valuable volumes was suffered to remain; it is a beautiful
manuscript, in folio, of Valerius Maximus, enriched with the most
elegant decorations, and written in Duke Humphrey’s age, evidently with
a design of being placed in this sumptuous collection. All the rest of
the books, which, like this, being highly ornamented, looked like
missals, were destroyed or removed by the pious visitors of the
University, in the reign of king Edward the sixth, whose zeal was
equalled only by their ignorance, or perhaps by their avarice. A great
number of classics, in this grand work of reformation, were condemned as
anti-christian, and some of the books, in this library, had even been
before this, either stolen or mutilated. In the library of Oriel
College, at Oxford, we find a manuscript _Commentary on Genesis_,
written by John Capgrave, a monk, belonging to the monastery of St.
Austin, at Canterbury, a learned theologist of the fifteenth century. In
it is the author’s autograph, and the work is dedicated to Humphrey,
Duke of Gloucester. In the superb initial letter of the dedicatory
epistle, is a curious illumination of the author Capgrave, humbly
presenting his book to his patron, the Duke, who is seated, and covered
with a sort of hat. At the end of the volume is this entry, in the
hand-writing of Duke Humphrey “C’est Livre est a moy Humfrey, Duc de
Gloucestre, du don de Frere Jehan Capgrave, quy le me fist presenter a
mon manoyr de Pensherst le jour ... de l’an MCCCCXXXVIII.” This is one
of the books which Humphrey gave to his new library at Oxford, destroyed
or dispersed by the active reformers of the young Edward. He also gave
to the same library Capgrave _Super Exodum et Regum Libros_.
John Whethamstede, a learned abbot of St. Alban’s, and a lover of
scholars, but accused by his monks of neglecting their affairs, while he
was too deeply engaged in studious employments, and in procuring
transcripts of useful books, notwithstanding his unwearied assiduity in
beautifying and enriching their monastery, was in high favour with this
munificent prince. The Duke was fond of visiting this monastery, and
employed Abbot Whethamstede to collect valuable books for him. Some of
Whethamstede’s tracts, manuscript copies of which often occur in our
libraries, are dedicated to the Duke, who presented many of them,
particularly a fine copy of Whethamstede’s _Granarium_, an immense work,
which Leland calls _ingens volumen_ to the new library. The copy of
Valerius Maximus, mentioned before, has a curious table or index, made
by Whethamstede. Many other Abbots paid their court to the Duke, by
sending him presents of books, the margins of which were adorned with
the most exquisite paintings.
Gilbert Kymer, physician to king Henry the sixth, and holding, among
other ecclesiastical preferments, the Deanery of Salisbury and
Chancellorship of the University of Oxford; the latter dignity by the
recommendatory letters of the Duke, inscribed to the Duke of Gloucester
his famous medical system—_Diætarium de Sanitatis Custodia_—in the year
1424.
Lydgate,[12] one of the early English poets, translated Boccacio’s book,
_De Casibus Virorum illustrium_, at the recommendation and command, and
under the protection and superintendance, of Duke Humphrey, whose
condescension in conversing with learned ecclesiastics, and diligence in
study, the translator displays at large, and in the strongest
expressions of panegyric. He compares the Duke to Julius Cæsar, who,
amidst the weightier cares of state, was not ashamed to enter the
rhetorical school of Cicero at Rome. Nor was his patronage confined only
to English scholars. His favour was solicited by the most celebrated
writers of France and Italy, many of whom he bountifully rewarded.
Leonard Aretin,[13] one of the first restorers of the Greek tongue in
Italy, (which language he learned of Emanuel Chrysoloras,[14]) and of
polite literature in general, dedicates to this universal patron his
elegant Latin translation of Aristotle’s _Politics_. The copy presented
to the Duke by the translator, most elegantly illuminated, is now in the
Bodleian library.
To the same noble encourager of learning, Petrus Candidus, the friend of
Laurentius Valla,[15] and secretary to the great Cosmo, Duke of Milan,
inscribed by the advice of the Archbishop of Milan, a Latin version of
Plato’s _Republic_. An illuminated manuscript of this translation is in
the British Museum, perhaps the copy presented, with two epistles from
the Duke to Petrus Candidus.
Petrus de Monte, another learned Italian of Venice, in the dedication of
his treatise—_De Virtutum et Vitiorum differentia_—to the Duke of
Gloucester, mentions the latter’s ardent attachment to books of all
kinds, and the singular avidity with which he pursued every species of
literature.
A tract entitled _Comparatio Studiorum et Rei Militaris_, written by
Lopus de Castellione, a Florentine civilian, and a great translator into
Latin of the Greek classics, is also inscribed to the Duke at the desire
of Zeno, archbishop of Bayeux. It must not be forgotten that our
illustrious Duke invited into England the learned Tito Livio of
Foro-Juli, whom he naturalized and constituted his poet and orator. He
also retained learned foreigners in his service, for the purpose of
transcribing, and of translating from Greek into Latin. One of these was
Antonio de Beccaria, a Veronese, who translated into Latin prose the
Greek poem of _Dionysius Afer de Situ Orbis_; whom the Duke also
employed to translate into Latin six tracts of Athanasius. This
translation, inscribed to the Duke, is now among the royal manuscripts
in the British Museum, and at the end, in his own hand-writing, is the
following insertion:—“C’est Livre est a moi Homphrey Duc le Gloucestre:
le quel je fis translater de grec en latin par un de mes secretaires
Antoyne de Beccara ne de Verone.”
An astronomical tract, entitled, by Leland, _Fabulæ Directionum_, is
erroneously supposed to have been written by Duke Humphrey. But it was
compiled at the Duke’s instance, and according to tables which he had
himself constructed, called by the anonymous author in his preface,
_Tabulas illustrissimi principis et nobilissimi Domini mei, Humfredi,
&c._ In the library of Gresham College, however, there is a scheme of
calculations in astronomy, which bears his name. Astronomy was then a
favourite science; nor is it to be doubted that he was intimately
acquainted with the politer branches of knowledge which now began to
acquire estimation, and which his liberal and judicious attention
greatly contributed to restore.
* * * * *
King Edward the fourth and Henry the seventh greatly assisted the cause
of learning, by the encouragement they gave to the art of printing in
England, and by purchasing such books as were printed in other
countries. William Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, purchased many
valuable Greek manuscripts which had been brought hither by the prelates
and others after the taking of Constantinople by the Turks.
King Henry the eighth may justly be called the founder of the royal
library, which was enriched with the manuscripts selected from the
_scriptoria_ and libraries of the principal monasteries, by that
indefatigable antiquary John Leland.
Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, enriched the library of the
college of Corpus Christi, with a great number of ancient and curious
manuscripts.
In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Sir Thomas Bodley greatly increased the
public library at Oxford, which is now called by his name. This great
benefactor to the literature of his country, quitted the court, and
applied himself wholly to the purchasing of books and manuscripts both
at home and abroad. By these means he had the satisfaction of furnishing
that library with 1294 manuscripts, which by the subsequent liberality
of many great and illustrious persons, has been since increased to more
than eight thousand volumes, including the manuscripts given by Tanner,
Bishop of Norwich, and the valuable library bequeathed by the will of
Dr. Richard Rawlinson.
Considerable augmentations were made to the libraries of the several
colleges in the two universities, as also to those of our cathedral
churches, the palace at Lambeth, the Inns of Court, the College of Arms,
and others; catalogues of which were published at Oxford in 1697 under
the title of _Catalogus Manuscriptorum Angliæ et Hiberniæ_.
Bodley’s great contemporary, Sir Robert Cotton, is also entitled to the
gratitude of posterity for his diligence in collecting the Cottonian
library; he was engaged in the pursuit of manuscripts and records
upwards of forty years, during which time he spared neither trouble nor
expense.
The noble manuscript library founded by Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford,
and greatly enriched by his son Edward, who inherited his father’s love
of science, claims a distinguished place in every account which may be
given of the literary treasures of antiquity in general, and of this
country in particular. Posterity will ever be indebted to her grace the
Duchess Dowager of Portland, for securing this inestimable treasure of
learning to the public, by authority of Parliament, under the
guardianship of the most distinguished persons of the realm, both for
rank and abilities, whose excellent regulations have made this library,
as also the Royal, Cottonian, Sloanian, and others, now deposited in the
British Museum, easy of access, and consequently of real use to the
philosopher, the statesman, the historian, the scholar, and the
artist.[16]
Footnote 9:
Gildas, called _Badonicus_, because said to be born at Bath, was, for
his singular prudence and the severity of his morals, surnamed the
WISE; he was a monk of Bangor, and his “Description of the state of
Britain,” above alluded to, is the only one of his writings extant, as
we are assured by Archbishop Usher. Gildas wrote this work in Latin,
in a style, according to that age, harsh and perplexed enough. The
first printed edition of it was published by Polydore Virgil, in
octavo, London, 1525, and dedicated to Cuthbert Tunstal, Bishop of
Durham, which, however, was from an incorrect copy. It was reprinted
at Basil, in 12mo, in 1541; and at London, 1548, though Bishop
Nicolson says 1568. It was again printed at London, in 12mo, in 1638,
translated by Thomas Habingdon, of Henlip, in Worcestershire. John
Josseline, secretary to Archbishop Parker, reprinted Gildas more
correctly from two new manuscripts, Basil, 1568, 12mo; and Paris 1576;
but these are little more perfect than the first.—The latest and best
copy of Gildas is in Dr. Gale’s collection of Ancient English
Historians, 2 vols. folio, Oxford, 1687 and 1691; who had the
advantage of a more ancient and better copy, as Bishop Nicolson
observes. Besides Habingdons’s translation above mentioned, there was
another printed during the Cromwell rebellion, in 1652, for the mere
purpose, it has been said, of retailing Gildas’s sharp reproofs of
Kings and Priests.—For an account of this edition, see Oldys’s British
Librarian, and Savage’s Librarian, vol. 1. p. 117.
Footnote 10:
Strutt, in his “Chronicle of England” has given a plate representing a
page of this manuscript, and in Astle’s “History of Writing,” there is
a plate of the same page, coloured, in imitation of the original.
Footnote 11:
Bede, commonly called the Venerable Bede, was the most learned man of
the age in which he lived; he was born at Weremouth, in
Northumberland, in the year 672. Both ancient and modern authors have
bestowed the highest encomiums upon the learning of this extraordinary
man. His works are many, making eight large volumes, in folio, the
principal of which is his Ecclesiastical History of the Anglo-Saxons,
consisting of five books, from whence the more perfect part of our
early history is formed; his other works are the Lives of Saints,
Treatises on the Holy Scriptures, and Philosophical Tracts. This great
man died at his cell at Jarrow, in the year 735, aged 63.
Footnote 12:
Lydgate was commonly called the Monk of Bury, because born at that
place, about the year 1380. After some time spent in the English
Universities, he travelled through France and Italy, in which
countries he greatly improved himself. In addition to his poetical
talents, he is described as being an eloquent rhetorician, an expert
mathematician, an acute philosopher, and no mean divine. He is said to
have been so much admired by his contemporaries, that they said of
him, that his wit was fashioned by the Muses themselves. After his
return from France and Italy, he became tutor to the sons of several
of the nobility, and for his excellent endowments, was much esteemed
and reverenced by them. He wrote a poem, called _The Life and Death of
Hector_, some satires, eulogies, and odes, and other learned works in
prose. He died in 1440, aged sixty, and was buried in his own convent
at Bury. Lydgate is said to have been a disciple of Chaucer.
Footnote 13:
Leonard Aretin, the disciple of Chrysoloras, was a linguist, an
orator, and an historian; the secretary of four successive Popes; and
Chancellor of the Republic of Florence, where he died in 1444, aged
seventy-five. He added a Supplement to Livy on the Punic War, and
wrote the History of Italy, with other valuable works.
Footnote 14:
Emanuel Chrysoloras was one of the envoys sent by the Greek Emperor
Manuel, at the end of the fourteenth century, to implore the
compassion of the Western Princes. He was not only conspicuous for the
nobleness of his birth but also for the extent of his learning. After
visiting the courts of France and England, in furtherance of his
mission, he was invited to assume the office of a Professor, and
Florence had the honour of this invitation, as it had had a few years
previously that of the first Greek Professor Leo Pilatus, whose mind
was stored with a treasure of Greek learning, with whom history and
fable, philosophy and grammar, were alike familiar, and who first read
the Poems of Homer in the Schools of Florence. Chrysoloras may be
considered as the founder of the Greek language in Italy, and his
knowledge not only of the Greek, but of the Latin tongue, surpassed
the expectation of the Florentine republic. At the same time and
place, the Latin classics were explained by John of Ravenna, the
domestic pupil of the celebrated Petrarch. The Italians, who
illustrated their age and country, were formed in this double school,
and Florence became the fruitful seminary of Greek and Roman
erudition. Chrysoloras was recalled by the Emperor from the college to
the court, but he afterwards taught at Pavia and Rome with equal
industry and applause. He died at Constance on a public mission from
the Emperor to the council. _Gibbon’s Hist._ vol. 12. p. 126.
Footnote 15:
Laurentius Valla, was a native of Placenza, where he was born in 1415;
he revived the Latin language from gothic barbarity, but he was a
rigorous critic. He fell under the displeasure of the Church of Rome,
for the freedom with which he hazarded his opinions respecting some of
its doctrines, and he was condemned to be burnt, but was saved by
Alphonsus, king of Naples. Pope Nicholas the fifth, who was himself
one of the greatest encouragers of learning of his time, and who
highly respected the talents of Valla, invited him to Rome, and gave
him a pension.—This Pope, whose pursuits were in direct association
with our present subject, from a plebeian origin, raised himself by
his virtue and his learning to the highest honours of the Church. The
character of the man prevailed over the interest of the Pontiff, and
he sharpened those weapons which were soon pointed against the
religion of Rome. He had been the friend of the most eminent scholars
of the age, and after his elevation to the chair of St. Peter, he
became their patron. Under Pope Nicholas, the influence of the Holy
See pervaded Christendom, and he exerted that influence in the search,
not of benefices, but of books. From the ruins of the Byzantine
libraries, from the darkest monasteries of Germany and Britain, he
collected the dusty manuscripts of the writers of antiquity; and
whenever the original could not be removed, a faithful copy was
transcribed and transmitted for his use. The Vatican was daily
replenished with precious furniture, and such was his industry, that
in a reign of eight years, he formed a library of five thousand
volumes. To his munificence the Latin world was indebted for the
versions of Xenophon, Diodorus, Polybius, Thucydides, Herodotus, and
Appian; of Strabo’s Geography, of the Iliad, of the more valuable
works of Plato and Aristotle, of Ptolemy, and Theophrastus, and of the
Fathers of the Greek Church.
Footnote 16:
For an account of the following Manuscript Libraries in England, see
Savage’s Librarian, 3 vols. London, 1808-1810—namely, that of the
British Museum, in vol. 1. p. 26; of the Royal Society, p. 71; of the
Heralds Office, p. 73; of the Society of Antiquaries, p. 129; of the
Archbishop of Canterbury’s at Lambeth Palace, p. 133; of Lincoln’s
Inn, p. 183, 225; of the Middle Temple, p. 273; of the Inner Temple,
vol. 2. p. 131; of the Lansdown Collection of Manuscripts, vol. 1. p.
34, and vol. 3. p. 27, and of the Cottonian Manuscripts, vol. 3. p.
31.
The curious reader who is interested in the history of the public
records of his country, will find in the same volumes, the Report of
the Committee of the House of Commons on the State of the Records, in
vol. 1. p. 17, &c.—an account of the Records in the Tower of London,
vol. 2. p. 34, &c. of those in the Rolls Chapel, ibid. p. 185, &c. and
of those in the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey, vol. 3. p. 41, &c.
TORTURE IN ENGLAND.[17]
In the reign of King Henry the Sixth, the RACK or BRAKE, was placed in
the Tower of London, by the Duke of Exeter, when he and the Earl of
Suffolk had formed the design of introducing the Civil Law into England.
It was called “Exeter’s daughter,” and remained afterwards in the Tower,
“where it was occasionally used as an _Engine of State_, more than once
in the _reign of Elizabeth_.”
Though the use of the Rack does not appear to have been known in this
country until the 26th year of Henry the Sixth, and though it was never
authorized by the law, yet to borrow the expression of Mr. Justice
Blackstone, it was occasionally used as an “Engine of State,” to extort
confession from State Prisoners confined in the Tower, from the time of
its introduction, until finally laid aside in consequence of the
decision of the judges in Felton’s case. One Hawkins was tortured[18] in
the reign of Henry the Sixth; and the case of Anne Askew,[19] in that of
Henry the Eighth,[20] cannot escape the recollection of every reader of
English history. The Lord Chancellor Wriothesely (I blush for the honour
and humanity of an English Judge while I write his name) went to the
Tower to take her examination, and upon the Lieutenant’s refusing to
draw the cords tighter, _drew them himself_ till every limb was
dislocated, and her body nearly torn asunder. In Mary’s reign several
persons were racked in order to extort confessions, which was upon
account of Sir Thomas Wyat’s rebellion. And Barrington mentions that in
Oldmixon’s History of England (p. 284,) one Simpson is said to have been
tortured in 1558, and a confession extorted.
In the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth,[21] the Rack was used upon
offenders against the State, and among others, upon Francis Throgmorton;
in 1571, upon Charles Baillie an attendant upon the Bishop of Ross,
Mary’s ambassador, and upon Banastre, one of the Duke of Norfolk’s
servants; and Barker, another of his servants was brought to confess by
extreme fear of it. In 1581, Campion, the Jesuit, was put upon the
rack,[22] and in 1585, Thomas Morgan writes to the Queen of Scots, that
he has heard D. Atslow was racked in the Tower, twice about the Earl of
Arundel. This is the last instance of the actual application of torture
to extort confession.
For the greater part of this reign the application of torture in the
examination of State offenders seems to have been in common use, and its
legality not disputed. Mr. Daines Barrington says,[23] that among the
manuscript papers of Lord Ellesmere, is a copy of instructions to him,
as Lord President of the Marches, to use the torture on the taking of
some examinations at Ludlow; and Sir Edward Coke himself,[24] in the
year 1600, (the 43d of Elizabeth’s reign) then being Attorney General,
at the trials of the Earls of Essex and Southampton, boasted of the
clemency of the Queen, because, though the rebellious attempts were so
exceedingly heinous, yet out of her princely mercy “no person was
racked, tortured, or pressed to speak any thing further than of their
own accord.” And in the Countess of Shrewsbury’s case (10 James 1st)
when Sir Edward was Chief Justice, in enumerating the privileges of the
nobility, he mentions as one, that their bodies were not subject to
torture _in causa criminis læsæ majestatis_. Barrington justly
observes[25] there was a regular establishment for torture, for at his
trial,[26] in the first year of James the first, Sir Walter Raleigh
stated that Kemish had been threatened with the rack, and the keeper of
the instrument sent for. Sir William Wade, who, with the Solicitor
General had taken his examination, denied it, but admitted they had told
him he deserved it, and Lord Howard declared, “Kemish was never on the
rack, _the king gave charge that no rigour should be used_.”
Barrington mentions[27] that Sir John Hayward, the historian, was
threatened with the rack, which Dr. Granger confirms; and the former
also remarks that it is stated in King James’s works, that the rack was
shewn to Guy Faukes when under examination.
Down to this period we do not find the legality of the practice
questioned, though it has been said by high authority, as will be stated
presently, that some doubts had been suggested to Queen Elizabeth. State
Prisoners were confined usually in the Tower, and commissioners,
attended by the law officers of the crown, were sent to examine them,
who applied the rack at their own discretion, or according to the order
of the privy council, or the king’s, without any objection being made to
their authority.
In the third year of King Charles the first, Felton was threatened with
the rack by the Earl of Dorset in the Tower, and Laud, then bishop of
London, repeated the threats in council, but the king insisted upon the
judges being consulted as to the legality of the application, and they
being unanimously of opinion that it was illegal, it was never attempted
afterwards. The answer which Felton made to Laud’s threats, is well
worthy of attention; when Laud told him “if he would not confess he must
go to the rack,” he replied “if it must be so, he could not tell whom he
might nominate in the extremity of torture, and if what he should say
then was to go for truth, he could not tell whether his Lordship
(meaning the bishop of London) or which of their Lordships he might
name, for torture might draw unexpected things from him.”