* * * * *
[1] BARCLAY'S NATIONALITY
The objection raised to claiming Barclay as a Scotsman, founded on the
ground that he nowhere mentions his nationality, though it was a common
practice of authors in his time to do so, especially when they wrote out of
their own country, appeared to me, though ingenious and pertinent, to be of
so little real weight, as to be dismissed in a parenthesis. Its importance,
however, may easily be overrated, and it may therefore be well to point out
that, apart from the possibility that this omission on his part was the
result of accident or indifference, there is also the probability that it
was dictated by a wise discretion. To be a Scotsman was not in the days of
Henry VIII., as it has been in later and more auspicious times, a passport
to confidence and popularity, either at the court or among the people of
England. Barclay's fate having led him, and probably his nearest relatives
also, across that Border which no Scotsman ever recrosses, to live and
labour among a people by no means friendly to his country, it would have
been a folly which so sensible a man as he was not likely to commit to have
displayed the red rag of his nationality before his easily excited
neighbours, upon whose friendliness his comfort and success depended. The
farther argument of the Biographia Brittannica, that "it is pretty
extraordinary that Barclay himself, in his several addresses to his
patrons, should never take notice of his being a stranger, which would have
made their kindness to him the more remarkable," is sufficiently disposed
of by the succeeding statement, that the Duke of Norfolk and the Earl of
Kent, Barclay's principal patrons, "are known to have been the fiercest
enemies of the Scots." Surely a man who was English in everything but his
birth could not be expected to openly blazon his Scottish nativity, without
adequate occasion for so doing, in the very face of his country's chiefest
enemies, who were at the same time his own best friends. His caution in
this respect, indeed, may be regarded as an additional proof of his
Scottish origin.
[2] BARCLAY'S VOCABULARY
Some of the words, stated in popular fashion to be Scotch--they are of
course of Saxon origin--the usage of which by Barclay is adduced as an
evidence of his nationality, are also to be found in Chaucer, but that does
not invalidate the argument as stated. The employment of so many words of
northern usage must form at least a strong corroborative argument in favour
of northern origin.
[3] THE CASTLE OF LABOUR
It ought to be stated that the modesty of the young author prevented him
from affixing his name to his first production, The Castle of Labour. Both
editions are anonymous. Bale, Pits, Wood, &c., all include it in the list
of his works without remark.
[4] BULLEYN'S DIALOGUE
A notice of the history of this once popular Dialogue, its ever recurring
disappearance, and ever recurring "discovery" by some fortunate antiquary,
would form an interesting chapter in a new "History of the transmission of
ancient books to modern times." Its chances of preservation and record were
unusually favourable. It must have been disseminated over the length and
breadth of the land in its day, having run through four editions in little
more than a dozen years. Maunsell's Catalogue (1595) records the edition of
1578. Antony Wood (1721), and Bishop Tanner (1748) both duly give it a
place in their notices of the productions of its author, without any
special remark. But the Biographia Brittanica (1748) in a long article upon
Bulleyn, in which his various works are noticed in great detail, introduces
the Dialogue as "_this long neglected and unknown treatise_," and gives an
elaborate account of it extending to about five columns of small print. The
now famous passage, descriptive of the early poets, is quoted at length,
and special notice of its bearing on Barclay's nationality taken, the
writer (Oldys) announcing that the dispute must now be settled in favour of
Scotland, "Seeing our author (Bulleyn), a contemporary who lived in, and
long upon the borders of Scotland, says, as above, he was born in that
kingdom: and as much indeed might have been in great measure gathered from
an attentive perusal of this poet himself."
The next biographer of Bulleyn, Aikin (Biog. Memoirs of Medicine, 1780),
makes no discovery, but contents himself with giving a brief account of the
Dialogue (in 1½ pages), in which the description of Chaucer, &c., is duly
noticed. Three years later, in spite of this, and the appearance of a
second edition of the Biographia Brittanica (1778), another really learned
and able antiquary, Waldron, in his edition of Jonson's Sad Shepherd
(1783), comes forth triumphantly announcing his discovery of the Dialogue
as that of a hitherto totally unknown treasure; and in an appendix favours
the curious with a series of extracts from it, extending to more than
thirty pages, prefacing them thus: "Having, among the various Mysteries and
Moralities, whether original impressions, reprinted, or described only by
those writers who have given any account of these Embrios of the English
Drama, _never met with or read of any other copy of the Dialogue, or
Morality, by Bulleyn, than the one_, [which I have used], an account of and
some extracts from it may not be unpleasing." The passage regarding the
poets is of course given _ad longum_.
The next notice of the Dialogue occurs in Herbert's Ames (1786), where two
editions, 1564 and 1578, are entered. Dibdin (1819), in addition, notices
the edition of 1573. In the biographical accounts of Bulleyn in
Hutchinson's Biographia Medica (1799), Aikin's General Biog. Dict. (1801),
and its successor, Chalmers's Biog. Dict. (1812), due mention is preserved
of the Dialogue in enumerating the works of its author. Sir Walter Scott
alludes to it in the Introduction to the Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border
(1802) as a "mystery," but his only knowledge of it is evidently derived
from Waldron. Chalmers's Life of Lindsay (Poetical Works, 1806) has also
kept it prominently before a considerable class of inquirers, as he gives
that part of the description of the poets relating to Lindsay a conspicuous
place, with the following note: "Owing to the very obliging temper of Mr
Waldron I have been permitted to see that _rare book_ of Dr Bulleyn, with
the second edition of 1569, which is remarkably different from the first in
1564." To this use of it by Chalmers we owe the references to it in Lord
Lindsay's Lives of the Lindsays, i. 261 (1849), Seton's Scottish Heraldry,
480 (1863), and Notes and Queries, 3rd s., iv. 164 (1863). It was also
probably Chalmers that drew the attention of the writer of the Memoir of
Barclay in the Lives of the Scottish Poets (1822), to the possibility of
there being also in the Dialogue notice of that poet. At any rate, he
quotes the description of the early poets, showing in his preliminary
remarks considerable familiarity with Bulleyn's history, pointing out the
probability of his having known Barclay at Ely, and arguing that whether or
not, "from living in the same neighbourhood he had an opportunity of
knowing better than any contemporary whose evidence on the subject is
extant, to what country Barclay was, by all about him, reputed to belong."
He precedes his quotations thus: "As the whole passage possesses
considerable elegance, and has been so _universally overlooked_ by the
critics, the transcription of it here will not probably be deemed out of
place." No mention is made of the title of the book from which the
"Allegorical Description of the Early English Poets" is taken; hence it is
impossible to say whether the quoter made use of a copy of the Dialogue, or
of Waldron's Notes. The spelling is modernised.
In various well-known bibliographical publications the existence of this
fugitive Dialogue is carefully registered, and its title, at least, made
known to all inquirers,--in Watt's Bibliotheca Britt. (1824), in Lowndes'
Bibliog. Manual (1834), and in Atkinson's Medical Bibliog. (1834); and by
the published Catalogues of the British Museum (1813), the Douce Collection
(1840), and the Bodleian Library (1843), it is made known that there are
copies of it preserved in these great collections. In Warton's Hist. of
Eng. Poetry (ed. 1840), it is also recorded by Park, in his notes to the
chapter on Gower, in which he refers to Bulleyn's visionary description of
that poet. Cooper's Athenæ Cantabrigienses, art. Bulleyn (1858), also
carefully notes the Dialogue and its editions. And in 1865 Collier's
well-known Bibliographical Account of Early English Literature again gives
an account (two pages long) of the much neglected production, in which the
passage relating to the poets is once more extracted in full, with the
preliminary remarks as quoted at p. xxvii. _supra_, but without the usual
announcement that the work has hitherto been unknown.
But in 1873, by the very last man from whom we might have expected it (F.
J. Furnivall, the Atlas on whose shoulders all our projects for the
preservation of our early literature rest, in Notes and Queries, 4th s.,
xii. 161), we are again introduced to this ever disappearing, ever
reappearing Dialogue as a fresh find in early English literature: "Few
things are pleasanter in reading old books than to come on a passage of
praise of our old poets, showing that in Tudor days men cared for the
'makers' of former days as we do still. To Mr David Laing's kindness I owe
the introduction to the following quotation from a rare tract, where one
wouldn't have expected to find such a passage," and then follows once more
the whole passage so often quoted for the first time. Dr Rimbault, in an
interesting note in a succeeding number of Notes and Queries (p. 234), is
the first one acquainted with the Dialogue to state that "this amusing old
work is perfectly well known, and has often been quoted from." So
henceforth we may presume that this interesting and long-fertile field of
discovery may be regarded as finally worked out.
[Illustration]
* * * * *
A