Norwich in the Seventeenth Century.
THIS was a very eventful period in the annals of the city. The century
opened with storms and inundations in the physical world, heralding
commotions in the political world. On April 9th, 1601, a sudden storm of
hail and rain passed over the city, whereby the upper part of the
Cathedral spire, which had been lately repaired, was beaten down. It
fell on the roof of the church, which it broke through, doing great
damage to it as well as to the walls of the choir. The spire was split
on the south-east side from top to bottom.
James I. was proclaimed king on March 24th, 1602; and soon after he was
seated on the throne he granted a general pardon to the mayor, sheriffs,
and commons of this city, for all past offences. The local occurrences
were not very important during this reign of 23 years. There were,
however, great disturbances between the citizens and Dutch strangers
respecting trade rights and privileges.
In 1602, the plague raged with unusual fury in this country. As many as
30,578 persons died in London, and 3076 in Norwich. This visitation was
attended with so great a scarcity of food, that wheat sold for ten, rye
for six, and barley for five shillings per bushel. In the summer of
1609, the city was again visited by the plague, though but few died of
it.
At the assizes held August, 1617, a dispute arose between Sir Henry
Montague, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench, and John
Mingay, Esq., then Mayor, concerning precedence. This was occasioned by
the indiscretion of Sir Augustine Palgrave, Sheriff of Norfolk, who had
imprudently informed the Chief Justice that it was his right to sit in
the chair at the preaching place in the Green yard, with the Mayor on his
left hand. This the Mayor opposed, resolutely asserting his right to the
chair; and the Chief Justice as resolutely insisted, being misled by the
information of the sheriff. But this matter was afterwards set right,
and the sheriff was obliged to acknowledge his error, after having been
severely reprimanded by the Judge for misleading him. On the next day, a
contest of the same kind happened between the High Sheriff and the
Sheriffs of Norwich; when, to prevent any disputes of the like nature in
future, it was determined that only the High Sheriff should attend the
Judges when they are upon the county business, and only the Sheriffs of
Norwich when they are on the city business.
Charles I. was proclaimed king, on March 1st, 1625. The mayor of
Norwich, stewards, justices, sheriffs, and aldermen, were present at the
ceremony.
On March 31st, 1625, Charles I. was proclaimed in Norwich, and on May
13th following, Thomas, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Earl-Marshal of
England, was appointed Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Norfolk, and of
the city of Norwich, and county of the same.
On October 19th, 1625, the citizens petitioned the king to be released of
taxes, on account of their poverty and the ravages of the plague; and in
1641, the citizens petitioned Parliament, to be discharged from paying
£2500 assessed upon them, on account of their great poverty and the
impossibility of raising the money.
In 1626, writs of quo warranto were brought against the mayor, &c., for
refusing to furnish two ships of war demanded of them; and the
corporation, on the trial, which took place in 1629, obtained a verdict
in their favor, having proved that they neither used nor usurped any
privileges but what their charters warranted. During this contest the
city raised a sum of money, and presented to the king by way of loan, as
settled by the lord keeper, lord treasurer, comptroller, and chancellor
of the duchy of Lancaster, who came hither for that purpose.
In 1627, an order arrived for levying 250 foot soldiers in the city of
Norwich and county of Norfolk, of which number the citizens were ordered
to furnish 25; but they would raise no more than 17, that being their
full proportion.
During this reign the plague raged with great violence in the city and
county. On July 12th, 1625, the king issued a commission to the mayor,
&c., to scour the city ditches, to remove all nuisances in and about the
city, to repair the walls and turrets, and to tax all residing in the
several wards, according to their ability, toward the work; it being
thought very necessary, in order to stop the plague which had been
brought from Yarmouth, and begun to spread here. The mayor had
previously requested the bailiffs at Yarmouth to order all the wherrymen
to carry no infected persons dwelling in their town to the city.
Constables of every ward gave notice that no person coming from London
should be entertained without notice given to the aldermen of their ward;
and watch was set at every gate, day and night, to hinder all persons
coming from infected places entering the city, and the carriers were
commanded to bring no such persons, nor any wool whatever.
Notwithstanding all this caution, the plague began to spread, so that on
July 23rd, the aldermen of every ward appointed “Searchers” in each ward,
to be keepers of such persons as were suspected of being infected. The
bellman warned all the citizens to take their dogs and swine outside of
the walls, on pain of being killed. On July 30th, the watch of the gates
ceased, it being known that the plague raged within the city. Twenty-six
persons died of it in that week; and before August 11th, it had so much
increased, that it was resolved that every alderman should have power to
send his warrants to the city treasurers to relieve the infected persons;
and the plague abated that very week. Orders were issued that the doors
of all persons who died of the disease should be nailed up and watched.
Every one who begged about the streets was whipped, because all the poor
were then relieved, so that no one had any excuse for begging for food.
In 1634, under date of March 23rd, a letter signed by the king, was
directed to the mayor, sheriff, and aldermen, requiring their constant
attendance at the sermon preached every Sunday morning, either in the
Cathedral or Green yard, and that they would be there at the beginning of
the service, after the manner observed in the city of London; and that
none be absent without the consent of the bishop. On this point a court
was held, and it was ordered that the mayor and court should constantly
meet at the Free School, and thence proceed to church agreeably to his
majesty’s instructions; the king having great regard for their spiritual
welfare.
THE CIVIL WARS.
The first parliament of the reign of Charles I., in 1625, has been
severely censured on account of the penurious supply which it doled out
for the exigencies of a war in which its predecessors had involved the
king. Nor is the reproach wholly unfounded. A more liberal proceeding,
if it did not obtain a reciprocal concession from the king, would have
put him more in the wrong. But the Puritans in parliament formed a
majority, and were determined not to vote money without a redress of what
they deemed to be grievances. The king finding he could not obtain the
supplies he required from the House of Commons, determined to rule
without a parliament, and to raise money by some other means. Hence the
contests between the king and the parliaments, which were often called
and soon dissolved. This served only to aggravate the embarrassments of
the crown. Every successive House of Commons inherited the feelings of
its predecessor, otherwise it would not have represented the people. The
same men, for the most part, came again to parliament more irritated and
difficult of reconciliation with the sovereign than before. Even the
politic measure, as it was fancied to be, of excluding some of the most
active members from seats, by nominating them sheriffs for the year,
failed of the expected success because all ranks partook of a common
enthusiasm.
In 1642, July 12th, the parliament voted and declared the necessity of
recourse to arms, and on the 29th of the same month, Moses Treswell was
apprehended for attempting to enlist men into the king’s service, after
having been forbidden to do so by the corporation. The citizens
supposing that this act would be deemed a declaration against their
sovereign, ordered a double watch to be set in every ward, and a
provision of all military stores to be made. They received a letter from
the parliament thanking them for their great services in sending up
Captain Treswell, and exhorting them to raise the militia, and to prevent
anyone from levying troops within their jurisdiction without consent of
parliament. Soon afterwards, the king issued proclamations requiring the
assistance of his subjects against the rebels, but no regard was paid to
them in Norwich. On the other hand, the magistrates ordered a general
muster of the trained bands and volunteers, and put the city into the
best state of defence, fearing an attack from the gentlemen of Norfolk
and Suffolk who had declared for the king. As a further proof of their
zeal they sent fifty Dragoons for Colonel Cromwell’s regiment, which
composed part of the troops under Lord Grey of Wark, raised for the
preservation of the peace in the associated counties of Norfolk, Suffolk,
Essex, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, and Huntingdonshire. As soon as
these had marched, the magistrates raised a hundred more dragoons, and to
mount them, gave orders for seizing the horses of those citizens who
favoured the cause of the king, and who were called malignants. On March
13th, the city raised fifty more Dragoons, and on March 26th, 1643, a
hundred men were ordered to be raised and sent to Cambridge to re-enforce
the associated army. The weekly contribution levied by parliament on the
county was £1250 in the following proportions: Norfolk £1129, Norwich
£53, Lynn £27, Yarmouth £34 16s. 5d., Thetford £5 11s. 9d. On April 2nd,
being Easter day, Captain Sherwood marched to Lynn with a hundred
volunteers to secure that town from any sudden surprise by the king’s
forces. On August 12th, a meeting of the associated counties was
appointed on account of the danger with which the city was threatened by
the approach of the enemy, and the castle was ordered to be fortified.
Lincolnshire was also admitted amongst the associated counties. Lynn was
garrisoned by the forces of the parliament, and fortified at the expense
of the Association. On November 18th, four of the Court, representing
the Association, were fined £10 each for want of expedition in collecting
the proposition money, and the Earl of Manchester ordered the immediate
assessing and levying of such sums of money as should have been raised by
any edict of parliament. This stringent commission was carried out by
force of arms.
In 1643, it having been agreed between the English and Scotch
commissioners that £100,000 should be immediately advanced to the Scots,
to enable them to put their army in march for England, an order was sent
down to Norwich for levying £6000, part of the said sum in the following
proportions; in Norwich, £265; in Yarmouth, £174; in Lynn, £132; in
Thetford, £27 18s. 9d., and the remainder in the county of Norfolk.
By order of the Court, on March 9th, 1644, seven pictures, taken from St.
Swithin’s Church, the Angel and Four Evangelists from St. Peter’s, Moses
and Aaron and the Four Evangelists from the Cathedral, and other
paintings, were publicly burnt in the Market Place. A committee was
appointed to “view the churches for pictures and crucifixes,” in
consequence of which, these over-zealous Reformers committed all kinds of
outrages and excesses by destroying monuments in the churches, and
burning valuable paintings, as stated by Bishop Hall in his “Hard
Measure,” a pamphlet on the proceedings of the Puritans. On Christmas
eve, 1645, the mayor issued orders to all the city clergy commanding them
neither to preach, nor to administer the sacrament, in their respective
churches on the day following, and to the inhabitants, charging them to
open their shops as on other days; so little did the Puritans in that age
understand the principles of toleration.
In 1648, a petition was presented to the mayor, &c., signed by 150
persons, praying for a more speedy and effectual reformation, and
complaining that their faithful ministers were discouraged and slighted;
the ejected ministers countenanced and preferred; old ceremonies, and the
service book constantly used, and the directory for worship almost
totally neglected; and further praying, that the ordinances against
superstition and idolatry might be put in strict execution; “so, shall
the crucifix on the cathedral gate be defaced, and another on the roof of
the cathedral neere the west door in the inside, and one upon the free
school, and the image of Christ on the parish house of St. George at
Tombland be taken down, and many parish churches more decently made for
the congregations to meet in.” The mayor, John Utting, paying little
regard to this petition, was sent for to London, and Mr. Alderman Baret
put in his place. After he was gone, the common people, having a great
affection for the mayor, went to the committee house, then on the site of
the present Bethel, where the gunpowder was kept, and set fire to
ninety-five barrels, which killed and wounded about one hundred persons
and greatly damaged the adjacent buildings. For this outrage six of the
perpetrators were hanged in the Market Place.
On January 30th, 1649, King Charles was beheaded at Whitehall. Soon
after the death of the king the House of Commons published a decree to
forbid the proclaiming of Charles Stuart, eldest son of the late king, or
of any person whatsoever, on pain of high treason; and afterwards enacted
that the kingly office should be abolished as unnecessary, burdensome,
and dangerous; and that the state should be governed by the
representatives of the people without king or lords, and under the form
of a Commonwealth.
In 1650, on discovery of an intended insurrection in Norfolk in favour of
King Charles, which was to have broken out on October 7th, several of the
conspirators were apprehended and tried at the new hall, in Norwich,
before three judges, commissioned by the parliament for that purpose.
Their sitting continued from December 20th to December 30th, and they
condemned twenty-five persons, who were all executed, some of them at
Norwich and others in different parts of Norfolk.
On June 24th, 1654, an ordinance was published for the six months’
assessment for the maintenance of the armies and fleets of the
Commonwealth, at the rate of £120,000 per month for the first three
months, and £90,000 per month for the rest. Towards each monthly payment
of the last sum, Norwich raised £240 and Norfolk £4660. On August 29th,
an ordinance was issued for ejecting scandalous and insufficient
ministers and schoolmasters; whose qualifications were to be tried by
commissioners appointed for that purpose in every county. In consequence
of this ordinance many able divines in the kingdom were ejected from
their livings, and their places filled by such as best suited the views
of the ruling party. During the Commonwealth, the city was put in
defence against the royalists, the castle was fortified for the service
of Cromwell, the goods of the bishops and clergy were sequestrated, the
bishops palace was sacked, the cathedral and churches were plundered and
defaced, and Bishop Hall was turned out and driven into retirement at his
palace in Heigham, which is still in existence, being used as a tavern
called the Dolphin. He died there and was buried in the old church in
Heigham. We shall speak more at length of this distinguished prelate in
our notice of “The Eminent Citizens” of the 17th century.
On the death of Oliver Cromwell, which happened on September 3rd, 1658,
the mayor of Norwich, like the mayors of other towns, received letters
from the privy council, notifying that event and the election of his son
Richard Cromwell to the dignity of Protector, and commanding him to
proclaim the said Richard protector of the three kingdoms, which was done
accordingly on the seventh of that month. The new protector’s honours
were, however, but of short continuance; for in the month of April, 1659,
the army obliged him to dissolve the parliament which he had convoked,
and soon afterwards deposed him from his high office. During the fatal
contentions respecting the prerogatives of the crown and the privileges
of parliament, the city suffered less than might have been expected, and
Norfolk less than many other counties.
* * * * *
The citizens, tired of strife and commotion, were among the first to hail
the return of monarchy in the person of Charles II., who was proclaimed
here on May 10th, 1660, and the sum of £1000 was presented to His
Majesty, on behalf of the city, by the mayor, who received the honour of
knighthood. In 1663 the king granted to the city the charter by which,
with little interruption, it was governed till 1835, when the municipal
act came into force. In 1670, Lord Howard presented the corporation with
a noble mace of silver gilt, and a gown of crimson velvet for the mayor.
In 1671, the king and queen and many nobles visited the city, and were
entertained in grand style at the palaces of the bishop and the Duke of
Norfolk.
In 1682, a majority of the corporation surrendered to the king the
charter which he had granted them nine years before, and in lieu of it a
new one was substituted not so favourable to the city; the king having
reserved the right of removing magistrates of whom he did not approve.
In 1687, by the mandate of James II., ten aldermen and nineteen
councillors were displaced; but the arbitrary conduct of that monarch
soon brought about his ruin, and when Henry, Duke of Norfolk, rode into
the Market Place at the head of 300 knights and gentlemen and declared
for a _free_ parliament, the corporation and citizens responded with loud
acclamations. After the glorious revolution of 1688, the first charter
of Charles II. was restored to the city, and the aldermen who had been
removed were reinstated in their offices.
William and Mary, king and queen of England, began their reign on
February 13th, 1688, and during their reign the city flourished
exceedingly, and the country in general was prosperous.
In 1697 the coin was regulated afresh, the old money being called in and
recoined, for which purpose, mints were established in various places,
among others one in this city, which coined £259,371. The quantity of
coin and plate brought in here to be coined was 17,709 ounces.
We may here give the statements of two eminent writers respecting Norwich
and Norfolk in this century. Sir Thomas Browne, jun., in 1662, wrote as
follows about the city and county:—
“Let any stranger find me out so pleasant a county, such good ways,
large heaths, three such places as Norwich, Yarmouth, and Lynn, in
any county of England, and I’ll be once again a vagabond and visit to
them.”
And he wrote so with good reason. Few, if any, of the cities of England
then contained more handsome buildings, or presented so good an
appearance as did the old city of Norwich, while only London and Bristol
surpassed her in the extent and importance of their commerce. Lord
Macaulay, in his graphic History of England thus describes the state of
the city in the 17th century:—
“Norwich was the capital of a large and fruitful province. It was
the residence of a bishop and of a chapter. It was the seat of the
manufacture of the realm. Some even distinguished by learning and
science had recently dwelt there, and no place in the kingdom, except
the capital and the universities, had more attractions to the
curious. The library, the museum, the aviary, and the botanical
gardens of Sir Thomas Browne were thought by the Fellows of the Royal
Society well worthy of a long pilgrimage. Norwich had also a court
in miniature. In the heart of the city stood an old palace of the
Duke of Norfolk, said to be the largest town house in the kingdom out
of London. In this mansion, to which were annexed a tennis court, a
bowling green, and a wilderness extending along the banks of the
Wensum, the noble family of Howard frequently resided. Drink was
served to the guests in goblets of pure gold; the very tongs and
shovels were of silver; pictures of Italian masters adorned the
walls; the cabinets were filled with a fine collection of gems
purchased by the Earl of Arundel, whose marbles are now among the
ornaments of Oxford. Here, in the year 1671, Charles and his court
were sumptuously entertained; here, too, all comers were annually
welcomed from Christmas to Twelfthnight; ale flowed in oceans for the
populace. Three coaches, one of which had been built at a cost of
£500 to contain fourteen persons, were sent every afternoon round the
city to bring ladies to the festivities, and the dances were always
followed by a luxurious banquet. When the Duke of Norfolk came to
Norwich he was greeted like a king returning to his capital; the
bells of St. Peter’s Mancroft were rung, the guns of the castle were
fired, and the mayor and aldermen waited on their illustrious citizen
with complimentary addresses.”
Eminent Citizens of the Seventeenth Century.
_Bishop Hall_.
Dr. Hall, Bishop of Norwich, the first English Satirist, was a noted
character in this century. He was born July 1st, 1574, in Bristow Park,
within the parish of Ashby de la Zouch, in Leicestershire. He was
educated by a private tutor till he was fifteen years of age, when he
removed to Cambridge, and was admitted to Emmanuel College, of which he
was a chosen scholar, and took the degree of Bachelor of Arts. His
satires were published in 1597, 1598, and 1599, and added greatly to his
reputation by their pungency and classical style. They equal the satires
of Juvenal and Persius on similar themes, and in lashing the vices of the
age.
Dr. Hall, in 1624, refused the bishopric of Gloucester, but in 1627 he
accepted that of Exeter, holding with it _in commendam_ the rectory of
St. Breock in Cornwall. At this time he seems to have been suspected of
a leaning to the Puritans, and it must be allowed that his religious
views were more consonant with theirs than with the lax Arminianism of
Laud. But at the same time, Dr. Hall was a zealous supporter of the
church.
On November 15th, 1641, he was translated, by the little power left to
the king, to be Bishop of Norwich, but having joined with the Archbishop
of York and eleven other prelates, in a protest against the validity of
such laws as should be made during their compulsory absence from
parliament, he was ordered to be sent to the tower, with his brethren, on
the 30th of January following. Shortly afterwards they were impeached by
the Commons for high treason, and on their appearance in parliament were
treated with the utmost rudeness and contempt. The Commons, however, did
not think fit to prosecute the charge of high treason, having gained
their purpose by driving them from the House of Lords, and Hall and his
brethren were ordered to be dismissed; but upon another pretext they were
again sent to the tower. In June following, Hall was finally released on
giving bail for £5000! He returned to Norwich, and being received with
rather more respect than he hoped for, in the then state of public
opinion, he resumed his duties, frequently preaching to large
congregations, and enjoying the forbearance of the predominant Puritan
party till April, 1643, when the destruction of the church was
contemplated. About this time, the ordinance for sequestrating notorious
delinquents having passed, and our prelate being included by name, all
his rents were stopped, his palace was entered, and all his property was
seized. A friend, however, gave bond for the whole amount of the
valuation, and the bishop was allowed to remain a short time in his
palace. While he remained there, he was continually exposed to the
insolence of the soldiery and mob, who demolished the windows and
monuments of the cathedral. At length he was ordered to leave his
palace, and would have been exposed to the utmost extremity, if a
neighbour had not offered him the shelter of his humble roof. Some time
afterwards, but by what interest we are not told, the sequestration was
taken off a small estate which he rented at Heigham, to which he retired.
The house in which he lived, now called the Dolphin Inn, is still
standing, and should be carefully preserved as a memorial of a great and
good man.
Bishop Hall, in his tract _Hard Measure_, has given a most touching
account of the treatment he experienced. He says in his tract “The
Shaking of the Olive Tree:”—
“It is no other than tragical to relate the carnage of that furious
sacrilege whereof our eyes and ears were the sad witnesses, under the
authority and presence of Linsey, Tofts the sheriff, and Greenwood.
Lord, what work was here; what clattering of glasses, what beating
down of walls, what tearing up of monuments, what pulling down of
seates, what wresting out of irons and brass from the windows and
graves, what defacing of armes, what demolishing of curious stone
work which had not any representation in the world, but only of the
cast of the founder, and skill of the mason; what toting and piping
upon the destroyed organ pipes, and what a hideous triumph on the
market day, before all the country, when, in a sacrilegious and
profane procession, all the organ pipes, vestments, both copes and
surplices, together with the leaden crosse which had been newly sawn
down from over the green yard pulpit, and the service book and
singing books that could be had, were carried to a fire in the public
Market-place; a lewd wretch walking before the train in his cope
trailing in the dirt, with a service book in his hand, imitating in
an impious scorne the tune and usurping the words of the litany
formerly used in the church. Neer the publick crosse all these
monuments of idolatry must be sacrificed to the fire, not without
much ostentation of a zealous joy in discharging ordinance to the
cost of some who professed how much they longed to see that day.”
The good bishop’s sufferings did not damp his courage, for in 1644, we
find him preaching in Norwich whenever he could obtain the use of a
pulpit; and with yet more boldness, in the same year he sent _A modest
offer of some meet considerations in favour of Episcopacy_ addressed to
the Assembly of Divines. During the rest of his life he appears to have
remained at Heigham, unmolested, performing the duties of a faithful
pastor, and exercising such hospitality and charity as his scanty means
permitted. He died, September 8th, 1656, in the 82nd year of his age,
and was buried in the church of St. Bartholomew, in Heigham. In his
will, he says:—
“I leave my body to be buried without any funeral pomp, at the
discretion of my executors, with the only monition that I do not hold
God’s house a meet repository for the dead bodies of the greatest
saints.”
He left a family behind, according to Lloyd, of whom Robert, the eldest
son, was afterwards a clergyman, and D.D. His wife died in 1647. His
prose works were published at various periods in folio, quarto, and
duodecimo. They were collected in a handsome edition of 10 vols.,
octavo, by the Rev. Josiah Pratt, and are his best memorials. The
“Meditations” have been often reprinted. As a moralist, he has been
called the British Seneca.
_Sir Thomas Browne_.
Sir Thomas Browne flourished in this century in Norwich, as a Physician.
Dr. Johnson wrote a memoir of him, from which we learn the following
particulars. He was born in London, in the parish of St. Michael, in
Cheapside, on October 19th, 1605. Of his childhood or youth there is
little known, except that he lost his father very early; that he was,
according to the common fate of orphans, defrauded by one of his
guardians; and that he was placed for his education at the School of
Winchester. He was removed in 1623 from Winchester to Oxford, and
entered a gentleman commoner of Broadgate Hall, which was soon afterwards
endowed and took the name of Pembroke College, from the Earl of Pembroke,
the Chancellor of the University. He was admitted to the degree of B.A.,
January 31st, 1626–7, being the first man of eminence who graduated from
the new college, to which the zeal or gratitude of those that love it
most can wish little better than that it may long proceed as it began.
Having afterwards taken his degree of M.A., he turned his attention to
physic. He practised it for some time in Oxfordshire, but soon
afterwards, either induced by curiosity or invited by promises, he
quitted his settlement and accompanied his father-in-law, who had some
employment in Ireland in the visitation of the forts and castles, which
the state of Ireland then made necessary. He left Ireland and travelled
on the Continent, and was created an M.D. at Leyden. About the year 1634
he is supposed to have returned to London; and the next year to have
written his celebrated treatise, called _Religio Medici_, or, “The
Religion of a Physician,” which excited the attention of the public by
the novelty of paradoxes, the dignity of sentiment, the quick succession
of images, the multitude of abstruse allusions, the subtlety of
disquisition, and the strength of language. At the time when this book
was published the author resided at Norwich, where he had settled in
1636, by the persuasion of Dr. Lushington, his tutor, who was then rector
of Burnham Westgate, in West Norfolk. His practice became very
extensive, and in 1637 he was incorporated Doctor of Physic, in Oxford.
He married in 1641, Mrs. Mileham, of a good family in Norfolk. He had
ten children by her, of whom one son and three daughters survived their
parents. In 1646, Sir Thomas Browne published his “Enquiries into Vulgar
and Common Errors,” which passed through many editions. In 1658, the
discovery of some ancient urns in Norfolk, gave him occasion to write
“Hydriotaphia, Urn-burial, or, a Discourse of Sepulchral Urns;” in which
he treats with his usual learning on the funeral rites of ancient
nations, exhibits their various treatment of the dead, and examines the
substances found in the Norfolcian urns. To this treatise on Urn-burial
was added the “Garden of Cyrus; or, the Quincuxial Lozenge, or Network
Plantation of the Ancients, Artificially, Naturally, Mystically
Considered.” He doubted the Copernican hypothesis, on the same ground as
some divines distrust the Cuvierian system of Geology, as opposed to
Genesis. These were all the tracts which he published, but many papers
were found in his closet. Of these, two collections were published in
1722, and all his works were issued in a cheap form by G. H. Bohn, and
are in the Norwich Free Library. To the life of this learned man there
remains little to be added, but that in 1665 he was chosen Honorary
Fellow of the College of Physicians, as a man “_Virtute et literis
ornatissimus_,” eminently embellished with literature and virtue. In
1671, he received at Norwich, the honour of Knighthood from Charles II.,
a prince, who, with many frailties and vices, had yet skill to discover
excellence and virtue, to reward it with such honorary distinctions, at
least, as cost him nothing.
Sir Thomas Browne, in 1680, wrote a _Repertorium_, or Account of the
Tombs and Monuments in the Cathedral Church of Norwich. The basis of the
work was a sketch hastily drawn up twenty years previously on the
information of “an understanding singing man,” ninety-one years old, in
order to preserve the remembrance of some of the monumental antiquities
which barbarous zeal had destroyed. The reckless character of these
ravages has thus been exhibited in a description made on the spot and at
the moment, by one who suffered in his person, property, and health.
Thus the knight lived in high reputation, till he was seized with a
colic, which, after having tortured him for about a week, put an end to
his life at Norwich, on his birthday, October 19th, 1682, having
completed his 77th year. Some of his last words were expressions of
submission to the will of God, and fearlessness of death. He lies buried
in the Church of St. Peter Mancroft, within the rails at the east end of
the chancel, with this inscription on a mural monument, placed in the
south pillar of the altar:—
M. S.
HIC SITUS EST
THOMAS BROWNE, M.D.
ET MILES.
Ao 1605. LONDONI NATUS
GENEROSA FAMILIA APUD UPTON IN AGRO CESTRIENSI ORIUNDUS.
SCHOLA PRIMUM WINTONIENSI, POSTEA
IN COLL. PEMBR.
APUN OXONIENSES BONIS LITERIS
HAUD LEVITER IMBUTUS.
IN URBE HAC NORDOVICENSI MEDICINAM
ARTE EGREGIA, ET FŒLICI SUCCESSU PROFESSUS,
SCRIPTIS, QUIBUS TITULI, RELIGIO MEDICI
ET PSEUDODOXIA EPIDEMICA ALIISQUE
PER ORBEM NOTISSIMUS
VIR PIENTISSIMUS, INTEGERRIMUS, DOCTISSIMUS;
OBIIT OCTOBR. 19, 1682.
PIE POSUIT MŒSTISSIMA CONJUX
Da DOROTH. BR.
Mr. Simon Wilkin, F.L.S., in a supplementary memoir, states that Dr.
Browne steadily adhered to the royal cause in perilous times. He was one
of the 432 principal citizens, who, in 1643, refused to subscribe towards
a fund for regaining the town of Newcastle. Charles II. was not likely
to have been ignorant of this, and he had, no doubt, the good feeling to
express his sense of it by a distinction which was, no doubt, gratifying
to Sir Thomas Browne. Sir Thomas is supposed to have lived in the last
house at the south end of the Gentleman’s Walk, where the Savings’ Bank
now stands. Blomefield asserts that he lived where Dr. Howman then
lived, (1760) and that he succeeded Alderman Anguish in that house; and
Mr. Simon Wilkin says that he ascertained by reference to title deeds,
that the last house at the southern extremity of the Gentleman’s Walk,
Haymarket, belonged, in Blomefield’s time, to Dr. Howman. This house was
for many years a china and glass warehouse, and tradition has always
asserted it to be Dr. Browne’s residence. The last occupier was Mr.
Swan, and the house was pulled down to make room for the Savings’ Bank.
It contained some spacious rooms. In the drawing room there was, over
the mantel-piece and occupying the entire space of the ceiling, a most
elaborate and richly ornamented carving of the royal arms of Charles II.,
no doubt placed there by Sir Thomas to express his loyalty, and to
commemorate his knighthood. In Matthew Stevenson’s poems, 12mo, 1673,
there is a long poem on the progress of Charles II. into Norfolk, in
which the honour conferred on Browne is thus noticed:—
“There the king knighted the so famous Browne,
Whose worth and learning to the world are known.”
Early in October, 1673, Evelyn went down to the Earl of Arlington’s, at
Euston, in company with Sir Thomas Clifford, to join the royal party.
Lord Henry Howard arrived soon afterward, and prevailed on Mr. Evelyn to
accompany him to Norwich, promising to convey him back after a day or
two. “This,” he says, “as I could not refuse I was not hard to be
persuaded to, having a desire to see that famous scholar and physician,
Dr. T. Browne, author of the _Religio Medici_, and _Vulgar Errors_, &c.,
now lately knighted.” After arriving in Norwich, Evelyn says:—
“Next morning I went to see Sir Thomas Browne, with whom I had some
time corresponded by letter, though I had never seen him before. His
whole house and garden being a paradise and cabinet of rarities, and
that of the best collections, especially medails, books, plants, and
natural things. Amongst other curiosities, Sir Thomas had a
collection of the eggs of all the foule and birds he could procure,
that country (especially the promontory of Norfolk) being frequented,
as he said, by severall kinds, which seldome or never go further into
the land, as cranes, storkes, eagles, and a variety of water foule.
He led me to see all the remarkable places in this ancient city,
being one of the largest, and certainly, after London, one of the
noblest in England for its venerable Cathedralle, number of stately
churches, cleanesse of the streets, and buildings of flints so
exquistely headed and squared, as I was much astonished at; but he
told me they had lost the art of squaring the flints in which they
once so much excelled, and of which the churches, best houses, and
walls are built. The Castle is an antique extent of ground which now
they call Marsfield, and would have been a fitting area to have
placed the ducal palace in. The suburbs are large, the prospects are
sweete, with other amenities, not omitting the flower gardens, in
which all the inhabitants excel.”
At that time the hamlets of Thorpe, Lakenham, and Heigham, were all
fields or cultivated grounds and gardens, and the city was interspersed
with gardens.
_Dr. Samuel Clarke_.
Samuel Clarke, D.D., was the son of Edward Clarke, one of the Aldermen of
Norwich, where he was born in 1675, and where he was educated at the
Grammar School, his father being at that time one of the representatives
of the city in parliament. In 1691, he was entered as a student in Caius
College, Cambridge, where his great capacity for learning was soon
developed, and where he became distinguished as a metaphysician,
mathematician, and divine. He was the author of many works, the chief of
which was a “Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God.” Upon his
entering into holy orders, he became Chaplain to the learned Dr. Moore,
Bishop of Norwich, with whom he lived in great esteem, having the
advantage of the fine library of that prelate. In 1704, he was called to
an office worthy of all his learning, namely, that of lecturer on Mr.
Boyle’s foundation. He preached sermons concerning the Evidences of
Natural and Revealed Religion, which will always be highly esteemed.
Soon afterwards, he was presented to the living of St. Bennet’s, near
Paul’s Wharf, London, and where he constantly preached without notes. In
the same year he translated the _Optics of Sir Isaac Newton_ into elegant
Latin, which was so acceptable to that great philosopher, that he
presented £500 to the divine, being £100 for each of his children. He
was soon after made one of the Chaplains in Ordinary, and in 1709, Queen
Anne presented him to the Rectory of St. James’, Westminster, when he
went to Cambridge and took his degree of Doctor of Divinity. He died on
May 17th, 1729, aged 54 years.
_Robert_, _Viscount of Yarmouth_.
In 1683 died the Rt. Hon. Robert, Viscount of Yarmouth, Baron of Paston,
Lord Lieutenant of Norfolk and Norwich. He was buried at Oxnead. His
funeral sermon was preached by the Rev. John Hildeyard, LL.D., then
rector of Cawston, and it was afterwards published. At page 27 there is
the following passage, referring to the deceased viscount:
“Great was his love to the ancient, loyal, and honourable corporation
of Norwich, because the members of that body, generally speaking,
loved the king; they found him their friend and, _maugre_ the blast
of calumny, the _new charter_ shall remain a token of it. He spared
no cost nor pains, as themselves can witness, to make the world
believe that he loved them. Most of the tables of his house were
spread together for their entertainment, and all his friends employed
to bid them welcome; nay, his very sleep was ofttimes broken to find
out ways how best to serve them, and he commended the care of the
city with his last breath, to all his best friends, and the blessing
of God.”
Happy corporation, that had such a friend; but Blomefield says,
“Whatever the Dr. (Hildeyard) might think of it, the effects of the
new charter now began to be too visible, for Mr. Nic Helwys was
chosen mayor, and eleven common council in room of those eleven of
the sixty common council appointed by the charter, which were not
qualified; but such choice was of no force till confirmed by the
king, who sent a letter under the privy seal, dated at Windsor, May
17th, signifying by the Earl of Arundel that he approved of them, and
the names of the two elected sheriffs were signified to the Lord
Lieutenant, and that they were persons of loyalty, and therefore they
desired his lordship to give his gracious Majesty information thereof
in order to his approbation.”
_Dr. John Cosin_.
John Cosin, D.D., was born in this city in 1594, and finished his studies
in Caius College, Cambridge, where he took his last degrees. When he
entered into holy orders he was presented to a Prebendary in the
Cathedral Church of Durham, and appointed Archdeacon of the East Riding
of Yorkshire. But the civil wars breaking out, and he being an active
Papist, he was obliged to seek refuge abroad till the Restoration in
1660, when he returned, and was promoted first to the Deanery of
Peterborough, and then to the Bishopric of Durham. He died at Durham,
aged 78, in 1672.
_Dr. John Pearson_.
John Pearson, D.D., was the son of a Clergyman in Norwich, where he was
born in 1613. He received the first rudiments of learning at Eton,
whence he was removed to King’s College, Cambridge, where he finished his
studies, and took his degrees. His first ecclesiastical preferment was a
Prebendary of Salisbury; and soon afterwards he was chosen Rector of St.
Clements, East Cheap, where he remained till 1660, and where he wrote his
learned explanation of the Creed. At the Restoration, he was appointed
Archdeacon of Surrey, and afterwards he was promoted to the See of
Chester, where he continued till his death, in 1686.
_John Goslin_.
John Goslin, a native of Norwich, flourished in the 17th century. He was
first Fellow and then Master of Caius College, in Cambridge, Proctor of
that University, and thrice Vice Chancellor thereof, a general scholar,
eloquent Latinist, and a rare physician, in which faculty he was Regius
Professor. He was a great benefactor to Catherine’s Hall, but left his
native city only the honour of his name. He died in 1625.
_The Rev. John Carter_.
The Rev. John Carter was an eccentric character in the city during this
century. He was born at Bramford, in Suffolk, in 1594, and became upper
minister of St. Peter Mancroft, Norwich, which position he held from 1638
to 1653. He preached three extraordinary sermons before the corporation,
preparatory to the guild day festival in 1644, 1647, and 1650. The title
of the first is “The Nail Hit on the Head, and Driven into the City and
Cathedral Wall of Norwich;” of the second, “The Wheel Turned by a Voice
from the Throne of Glory;” and the third, “A Rare Sight; or, the Lyon
Sent from a Far Country, and Presented to the City of Norwich in a Sermon
upon the Solemne Guild Day, June 18th, 1650.” The third sermon fills 150
pages, is the length of several modern sermons, and must have occupied
two hours and a half in the delivery; a terrible long grace to a guild
day dinner. It is ornamented with many wood cuts, among which is the
lion in various attitudes, couchant, guardant, rampant, passant, &c.,
giving the preacher opportunities of displaying his knowledge of, at
least, the terms of heraldry, and sarcastically to apply them to the
magistracy. He says:—
“In one respect, your city arms do very well befit you. It is a lion
with a castle over it. Many of you can be like lions, very
courageous, so long as you have a castle over you for protection and
countenance; but take away the castle, and who will expose himself to
danger? What a sordid thing is this! There is a lion couchant, but
never did I hear of a lion crouchant, or current, a fearful and
dastardly lion. Who among you will strike down a disorderly
ale-house, if the brewer that serves it be an alderman, a rich man,
or a friend?”
The rest of the discourse is replete with coarse expressions, biting
sarcasms, and party prejudices, not likely to have edified, and much less
to have pleased the congregation.