_PROSE._
For a long time, and up to our day, the title and dignity of "Father of
English prose" has been borne by Sir John Mandeville, of St. Albans,
knight, who, "in the name of God glorious," left his country in the year
of grace 1322, on Michaelmas Day, and returned to Europe after an
absence of thirty-four years, twice as long as Robinson Crusoe remained
in his desert island.
This title belongs to him no longer. The good knight of St. Albans, who
had seen and told so much, has dwindled before our eyes, has lost his
substance and his outline, and has vanished like smoke in the air. His
coat of mail, his deeds, his journeys, his name: all are smoke. He first
lost his character as a truthful writer; then out of the three versions
of his book, French, English, and Latin, two were withdrawn from him,
leaving him only the first. Existence now has been taken from him, and
he is left with nothing at all. Sir John Mandeville, knight, of St.
Albans, who crossed the sea in 1322, is a myth, and never existed; he
has joined, in the kingdom of the shades and the land of nowhere, his
contemporary the famous "Friend of God of the Oberland," who some time
ago also ceased to have existed.
One thing however remains, and cannot be blotted out: namely, the book
of travels bearing the name of Mandeville the translation of which is
one of the best and oldest specimens of simple and flowing English
prose.
I.
The same phenomenon already pointed out in connection with the
Anglo-Saxons occurs again with regard to the new English people. For a
long time (and not to speak of practical useful works), poetry alone
seems worthy of being remembered; most of the early monuments of the new
language for the sake of which the expense of parchment is incurred are
poems; verse is used, even in works for which prose would appear much
better fitted, such as history. Robert of Gloucester writes his
chronicles in English verse, just as Wace and Benoit de Sainte-More had
written theirs in French verse. After some while only it is noticed that
there is an art of prose, very delicate, very difficult, very worthy of
care, and that it is a mistake to look upon it in the light of a vulgar
instrument, on which every one can play without having learnt how, and
to confine oneself to doing like Moliere's Monsieur Jourdain "de la
prose sans le savoir."
At the epoch at which we have arrived, and owing to the renovation and
new beginnings occasioned by the Conquest, English prose found itself
far behind French. In the fourteenth century, if French poets are poor,
prose-writers are excellent; as early as the twelfth and thirteenth
there were, besides Joinville, many charming tale writers who had told
in prose delightful things, the loves of Aucassin and Nicolette, for
example; now, without speaking of the novelists of the day, there is
Froissart, and to name him is to say enough; for every one has read at
least a few pages of him, and a single page of Froissart, taken
haphazard in his works, will cause him to be loved. The language glides
on, clear, limpid, murmuring like spring water; and yet, in spite of
its natural flow, art already appears. Froissart selects and chooses;
the title of "historian," which he gives himself, is no mean one in his
eyes, and he strives to be worthy of it. The spring bubbles up in the
depths of the wood, and without muddying the water the artist knows how
to vary its course at times, to turn it off into ready prepared
channels, and make it gush forth in fountains.
In England nothing so far resembles this scarcely perceptible and yet
skilful art, a mixture of instinct and method, and many years will pass
before prose becomes, like verse, an art. In the fourteenth century
English prose is used in most cases for want of something better, from
necessity, in order to be more surely understood, and owing to this its
monuments are chiefly translations, scientific or religious treatises,
and sermons. An English Froissart would at that time have written in
Latin; several of the chronicles composed in monasteries, at St. Albans
and elsewhere, are written in a brisk and lively style, animated now by
enthusiasm and now by indignation; men and events are freely judged;
characteristic details find their place; the personages live, and move,
and utter words the sound of which seems to reach us. Walsingham's
account of the revolt of the peasants in 1381, for example, well
deserves to be read, with the description of the taking of London that
followed, the sack of the Tower and the Savoy Palace, the assassination
of the archbishop,[666] the heroic act of the peasant Grindecobbe who,
being set free on condition that he should induce the rebels to submit,
meets them and says: "Act to-day as you would have done had I been
beheaded yesterday at Hertford,"[667] and goes back to his prison to
suffer death. Every detail is found there, even the simple picturesque
detail; the rebels arm themselves as they can, with staves, rusty
swords, old bows blackened by smoke, arrows "on which only a single
feather remained." The account of the death of Edward III. in the same
annals is gloomy and tragic and full of grandeur. In the "Chronicon
Angliae,"[668] the anonymous author's burning hatred for John of Gaunt
inspires him with some fiery pages: all of which would count among the
best of old English literature, had these historians used the national
idiom. The prejudice against prose continued; to be admitted to the
honours of parchment it had first to be ennobled; and Latin served for
that.
Translations begin to appear, however, which is already an improvement.
Pious treatises had been early turned into English. John of Trevisa,
born in Cornwall, vicar of Berkeley, translates at a running pace, with
numerous errors, but in simple style, the famous Universal History,
"Polychronicon," of Ralph Higden,[669] and the scientific encyclopaedia,
"De Proprietatibus Rerum,"[670] of Bartholomew the Englishman. The first
of these works was finished in 1387, and had at the Renaissance the
honour of being printed by Caxton; the second was finished in 1398.
The English translation of the Travels of Mandeville enjoyed still
greater popularity. This translation is an anonymous one.[671] It has
been found out to-day that the original text of the "Travels" was
compiled in French by Jean de Bourgogne, physician, usually called
John-with-the-Beard, "Joannes-ad-Barbam," who wrote various treatises,
one in particular on the plague, in 1365, who died at Liege in 1372, and
was buried in the church of the Guillemins, where his tomb was still to
be seen at the time of the French Revolution.[672] John seems to have
invented the character of Mandeville as Swift invented Gulliver, and
Defoe Robinson Crusoe. Now that his imposture is discovered, the least
we can do is to acknowledge his skill: for five centuries Europe has
believed in Mandeville, and the merit is all the greater, seeing that
John-with-the-Beard did not content himself with merely making his hero
travel to a desert island; that would have been far too simple. No, he
unites beforehand a Crusoe and a Gulliver in one; it is Crusoe at
Brobdingnag; the knight comes to a land of giants; he does not see the
giants, it is true, but he sees their sheep (the primitive sheep of
Central Asia); elsewhere the inhabitants feed on serpents and hiss as
serpents do; some men have dogs' faces; others raise above their head an
enormous foot, which serves them for a parasol. Gulliver was not to
behold anything more strange. Still the whole was accepted with
enthusiasm by the readers of the Middle Ages; with kindness and goodwill
by the critics of our time. The most obvious lies were excused and even
justified, and the success of the book was such that there remain about
three hundred manuscript copies of it, whereas of the authentic travels
of Marco Polo there exist only seventy-five. "Mandeville" had more than
twenty-five editions in the fifteenth century and Marco Polo only
five.[673]
Nothing, indeed, is more cleverly persuasive than the manner in which
Jean de Bourgogne introduces his hero. He is an honest man, somewhat
naive and credulous perhaps, but one who does not lack good reasons to
justify if need be his credulity; he has read much, and does not hide
the use he makes of others' journals; he reports what he has seen and
what others have seen. For his aim is a practical one; he wants to write
a guide book, and receives information from all comers. The information
sometimes is very peculiar; but Pliny is the authority: who shall be
believed in if Pliny is not trusted? After a description of wonders, the
knight takes breathing time and says: Of course you won't believe me;
nor should I have believed myself if such things had been told me, and
if I had not seen them. He felt so sure of his own honesty that he
challenged criticism; this disposition was even one of the causes why he
had written in French: "And know you that I should have turned this
booklet into Latin in order to be more brief: but for the reason that
many understand better romance," that is French, "than Latin, I wrote in
romance, so that everybody will be able to understand it, and that the
lords, knights, and other noblemen, who know little Latin or none, and
have been over the sea, perceive and understand whether I speak truth or
not. And if I make mistakes in my narrative for want of memory or for
any cause, they will be able to check and correct me: for things seen
long ago, may be forgotten, and man's memory cannot embrace and keep
everything."[674]
And so the sail is spread, and being thus amply supplied with oratorical
precautions, our imaginary knight sets out on his grand voyage of
discovery through the books of his closet. Having left St. Albans to
visit Jerusalem, China, the country of the five thousand islands, he
journeys and sails through Pliny, Marco Polo, Odoric de Pordenone,[675]
Albert d'Aix, William of Boldensele, Pierre Comestor, Jacques de Vitry,
bestiaries, tales of travels, collections of fables, books of dreams,
patching together countless marvels, but yet, as he assures us, omitting
many so as not to weary our faith: It would be too long to say all; "y
seroit trop longe chose a tot deviser." With fanciful wonders are
mingled many real ones, which served to make the rest believed in, and
were gathered from well-informed authors; thus Mandeville's immense
popularity served at least to vulgarise the knowledge of some curious
and true facts. He describes, for example, the artificial hatching of
eggs in Cairo; a tree that produces "wool" of which clothing is made,
that is to say the cotton-plant; a country of Asia where it is a mark of
nobility for the women to have tiny feet, on which account they are
bandaged in their infancy, that they may only grow to half their natural
size; the magnetic needle which points out the north to mariners; the
country of the five thousand islands (Oceania); the roundness of the
earth, which is such that the inhabitants of the Antipodes have their
feet directly opposite to ours, and yet do not fall off into space any
more than the earth itself falls there, though of much greater weight.
People who start from their own country, and sail always in the same
direction, finally reach a land where their native tongue is spoken:
they have come back to their starting-point.
In the Middle Ages the English were already passionately fond of
travels; Higden and others had, as has been seen, noted this trait of
the national character. This account of adventures attributed to one of
their compatriots could not fail therefore greatly to please them; they
delighted in Mandeville's book; it was speedily translated,[676] soon
became one of the classics of the English language, and served, at the
time of its appearance, to vulgarise in England the use of that simple
and easy-going prose of which it was a model in its day, the best that
had been seen till then.[677]
Various scientific and religious treatises were also written in prose;
those of Richard Rolle, hermit of Hampole, count amongst the oldest and
most remarkable.[678] We owe several to Chaucer; they pass unnoticed in
the splendour of his other works, and it is only fair they should.
Chaucer wrote in prose his tale of the parson, and his tale of Melibeus,
both taken from the French, his translation of Boethius, and his
treatise on the Astrolabe. His prose is laboured and heavy, sometimes
obscure; he, whose poetical similes are so brilliant and graceful, comes
to write, when he handles prose, such phrases as this: "And, right by
ensaumple as the sonne is hid whan the sterres ben clustred (that is to
seyn, whan sterres ben covered with cloudes) by a swifte winde that
highte Chorus, and that the firmament stant derked by wete ploungy
cloudes, and that the sterres nat apperen up-on hevene, so that the
night semeth sprad up-on erthe: yif thanne the wind that highte Borias,
y-sent out of the caves of the contree of Trace, beteth this night (that
is to seyn, chaseth it a-wey, and discovereth the closed day): than
shyneth Phebus y-shaken with sodein light, and smyteth with his bemes in
mervelinge eyen."[679] Chaucer, the poet, in the same period of his
life, perhaps in the same year, had expressed, as we have seen, the same
idea thus:
But right as whan the sonne shyneth brighte
In march that chaungeth ofte tyme his face,
And that a cloud is put with wind to flighte
Which over-sprat the sonne as for a space,
A cloudy thought gan thorugh hir soule pace,
That over-spradde hir brighte thoughtes alle.[680]
Accustomed to poetry, Chaucer sticks fast in prose, the least obstacle
stops him; he needs the blue paths of the air. High-flying birds are bad
walkers.
II.
Under a different form, however, prose progressed in England during the
course of the fourteenth century. This form is the oratorical.
The England of Chaucer and Langland, that poetical England whose prose
took so long to come to shape, was already, as we have seen, the
parliamentary England that has continued up to this day. She defended
her interests, bargained with the king, listened to the speeches,
sometimes very modest ones, that the prince made her, and answered by
remonstrances, sometimes very audacious. The affairs of the State being
even then the affairs of all, every free man discussed them; public life
had developed to an extent with which nothing in Europe could be
compared; even bondmen on the day of revolt were capable of assigning
themselves a well-determined goal, and working upon a plan. They destroy
the Savoy as a means of marking their disapprobation of John of Gaunt
and his policy; but do not plunder it, so as to prove they are fighting
for an idea: "So that the whole nation should know they did nothing for
the love of lucre, death was decreed against any one who should dare to
appropriate anything found in the palace. The innumerable gold and
silver objects there would be chopped up in small pieces with a hatchet,
and the pieces thrown into the Thames or the sewers; the cloths of silk
and gold would be torn. And it was done so."[681]
Many eloquent speeches were delivered at this time, vanished words, the
memory of which is lost; the most impassioned, made on heaths or in
forest glades, are only known to us by their results: these burning
words called armed men out of the earth. These speeches were in English;
no text of them has been handed down to us; of one, however, the most
celebrated of all, we have a Latin summary; it is the famous English
harangue made at Blackheath, by the rebel priest, John Ball, at the time
of the taking of London.[682]
Under a quieter form, which might already be called the "parliamentary"
form, but often with astonishing boldness and eloquence, public
interests are discussed during this century, but nearly always in French
at the palace of Westminster. There, documents abound; the Rolls of
Parliament, an incomparable treasure, have come down to us, and nothing
is easier than to attend, if so inclined, a session in the time of the
Plantagenets. Specimens of questions and answers, of Government speeches
and speeches of the Opposition, have been preserved. Moreover, some of
the buildings where these scenes took place still exist to-day.[683]
First of all, and before the opening of the session, a "general
proclamation" was read in the great hall of Westminster, that hall built
by William Rufus, the woodwork of which was replaced by Richard II., and
that has been lately cleared of its cumbrous additions.[684] This
proclamation forbids each and all to come to the place where Parliament
sits, "armed with hoquetons, armor, swords, and long knives or other
sorts of weapons;" for such serious troubles have been the result of
this wearing of arms that business has been impeded, and the members of
Parliament have been "effreietz," frightened, by these long knives.
Then, descending to lesser things, the proclamation goes on to forbid
the street-boys of London to play at hide-and-seek in the palace, or to
perform tricks on the passers-by, such as "to twitch off their hoods"
for instance, which the proclamation in parliamentary style terms
improper games, "jues nient covenables." But as private liberty should
be respected as much as possible, this prohibition is meant only for the
duration of the session.[685]
On the day of the opening the king repairs to the place of the sittings,
where he not unfrequently finds an empty room, many of the members or of
the "great" having been delayed on the way by bad weather, bad roads, or
other impediments.[686] Another day is then fixed upon for the solemn
opening of the business.
All being at last assembled, the king, the lords spiritual and temporal
and the Commons, meet together in the "Painted Chamber." The Chancellor
explains the cause of the summons, and the questions to be discussed.
This is an opportunity for a speech, and we have the text of a good
many of them. Sometimes it is a simple, clear, practical discourse,
enumerating, without any studied phrases or pompous terms, the points
that are to be treated; sometimes it is a flowery and pretentious
oration, adorned with witticisms and quotations, and compliments
addressed to the king, as is for instance the speech (in French) of the
bishop of St. David's, Adam Houghton, Chancellor of England in 1377:
"Lords and Gentlemen, I have orders from my lord the Prince here
present, whom God save," the youthful Richard, heir to the throne, "to
expound the reason why this Parliament was summoned. And true it is that
the wise suffer and desire to hear fools speak, as is affirmed by St.
Paul in his Epistles, for he saith: _Libenter suffertis insipientes cum
sitis ipsi sapientes._ And in as much as you are wise and I am a fool, I
understand that you wish to hear me speak. And another cause there is,
which will rejoice you if you are willing to hear me. For the Scripture
saith that every messenger bringing glad tidings, must be always
welcome; and I am a messenger that bringeth you good tidings, wherefore
I must needs be welcome."
All these pretty things are to convey to them that the king, Edward
III., then on the brink of the grave, is not quite so ill, which should
be a cause of satisfaction for his subjects. Another cause of joy, for
everything seems to be considered as such by the worthy bishop, is this
illness itself; "for the Scripture saith: _Quos diligo castigo_, which
proves that God him loves, and that he is blessed of God." The king is
to be a "vessel of grace," _vas electionis_.[687] The Chancellor
continues thus at length, heedless of the fact that the return of Alice
Perrers to the old king belies his Biblical applications.
Simon Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury, who was to die such a dreadful
death, from the eighth blow of the axe, after having lost the hand which
he carried to the first wound, spoke in much the same style. He opened
in these terms the first parliament of Richard II.:
"_Rex tuus venit tibi._--Lords and Gentlemen, the words which I have
spoken signify in French: Your king comes to thee.--And thereupon, the
said archbishop gave several good reasons agreeing with his subject, and
divided his said subject in three parts, as though it had been a
sermon."
In truth it is a sermon; the Gospel is continually quoted, and serves
for unexpected comparisons. The youthful Richard has come to Parliament,
just as the Blessed Virgin went to see St. Elizabeth; the joy is the
same: "_Et exultavit infans in utero ejus._"[688]
Fortunately, all did not lose themselves in such flowery mazes. William
Thorpe, William of Shareshull, William of Wykeham, John Knyvet, &c.,
make business-like speeches, simple, short, and to the point: "My Lords,
and you of the Commons," says Chancellor Knyvet, "you well know how
after the peace agreed upon between our lord the King and his
adversaries of France, and openly infringed by the latter, the king sent
soldiers and nobles across the sea to defend _us_, which they do, but
are hard pressed by the enemy. If they protect us, we must help them."
The reasoning is equally clear in Wykeham's speeches, and with the same
skill he makes it appear as if the Commons had a share in all the king's
actions: "Gentlemen, you well know how, in the last Parliament, the
king, _with your consent_, again took the title of King of
France...."[689]
These speeches being heard, and the "receivers" and "triers" of
petitions having been appointed,[690] the two houses divided, and
deliberated apart from each other; the Lords retired "to the White
Chamber"; the Commons remained "in the Painted Chamber." At other times
"the said Commons were told to withdraw by themselves to their old place
in the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey,"[691] that beautiful Chapter
House still in existence, which had been built under Henry III.
Then the real debates began, interrupted by the most impassioned
speeches. They were not reported, and only a faint echo has reached us.
Traces of the sentiments which animated the Commons are found, however,
in the petitions they drew up, which were like so many articles of the
bargains contracted by them. For they did not allow themselves to be
carried away by the eloquent and tender speeches of the Government
orators; they were practical and cold-blooded; they agreed to make
concessions provided concessions were made to them, and they added an
annulling clause in case the king refused: "In case the conditions are
not complied with, they shall not be obliged to grant the aid."[692] The
discussions are long and minute in both houses; members do not meet for
form's sake; decisions are not lightly taken: "Of which things," we read
in the Rolls, "they treated at length."[693] In another case, the
Commons, from whom a ready-made answer was expected, announce that "they
wish to talk together," and they continue to talk from the 24th of
January to the 19th of February.[694] Only too glad was the Government
when the members did not declare "that they dare not assent without
discussing the matter with the Commons of their shire,"[695] that is to
say, without consulting their constituents. And this they do, though
William de la Pole and others, sent "by our lord the king from thence
(that is from France) as envoys," had modestly explained the urgency of
the case, and "the cause of the long stay the king had made in these
aforesaid parts, without riding against his enemies,"[696] this cause
being lack of money.
When the Commons have at last come to a decision, they make it known in
the presence of the Lords through the medium of their Speaker, or, as he
was called in the French of the period, the one who had the words for
them: "Qui avoit les paroles pur les Communes d'Engleterre en cest
Parlement."[697] In these replies especially, and in the petitions
presented at the same time, are found traces of the vehemence displayed
in the Chapter House. The boldness of the answers and of the
remonstrances is extraordinary, and from their tone can be conceived
with what power and freedom civil eloquence, of which England has since
produced so many admirable specimens, displayed itself, even at that
distant epoch.
The most remarkable case is that of the Good Parliament of 1376, in
which, after having deliberated apart, the Commons join the other house,
and by the mouth of their Speaker, Peter de la Mare, bring in their bill
of complaints against royalty: "And after that the aforesaid Commons
came to Parliament, openly protesting that they were as willing and
determined to help their noble liege lord ... as any others had ever
been, in any time past.... But they said it seemed to them an undoubted
fact, that if their liege lord had always had around him loyal
counsellors and good officers ... our lord the king would have been very
rich in treasure, and therefore would not have had such great need of
burdening his Commons, either with subsidy, talliage, or otherwise...."
A special list of grievances is drawn up against the principal
prevaricators; their names are there, and their crimes; the king's
mistress, Alice Perrers, is not forgotten. Then follow the petitions of
the Commons, the number of which is enormous, a hundred and forty in
all, in which abuses are pointed out one by one.[698]
Formerly, say the Commons, "bishoprics, as well as other benefices of
Holy Church, used to be, after true elections, in accordance with
saintly considerations and pure charity, assigned to people found to be
worthy of clerical promotion, men of clean life and holy behaviour,
whose intention it was to stay on their benefices, there to preach,
visit, and shrive their parishioners.... And so long as these good
customs were observed, the realm was full of all sorts of prosperity, of
good people and loyal, good clerks and clergy, two things that always go
together...." The encroachments of the See of Rome in England are, for
all right-minded people, "great subject of sorrow and of tears." Cursed
be the "sinful city of Avignon," where simony reigns, so that "a sorry
fellow who knows nothing of what he ought and is worthless" will receive
a benefice of the value of a thousand marcs, "when a doctor of decree
and a master of divinity will be only too glad to secure some little
benefice of the value of twenty marcs." The foreigners who are given
benefices in England "will never see their parishioners ... and more
harm is done to Holy Church by such bad Christians than by all the Jews
and Saracens in the world.... Be it again remembered that God has
committed his flock to the care of our Holy Father the Pope, that they
might be fed and not shorn."[699] The Commons fear nothing; neither king
nor Pope could make them keep silence. In their mind the idea begins to
dawn that the kingdom is theirs, and the king too; they demand that
Richard, heir to the throne, shall be brought to them; they wish to see
him; and he is shown to them.[700]
In spite of the progress made by the English language, French continued
to be used at Westminster. It remained as a token of power and an emblem
of authority, just as modern castles are still built with towers, though
not meant to be defended by cannon. It was a sign, and this sign has
subsisted, since the formula by which the laws are ratified is still in
French at the present time. English, nevertheless, began to make an
appearance even at Westminster. From 1363,[701] the opening speeches are
sometimes in English; in 1399, the English tongue was used in the chief
acts and discourses relating to the deposition of Richard. On Monday,
the 29th of September, the king signed his act of resignation; on the
following day a solemn meeting of Parliament took place, in presence of
all the people, in Westminster Hall; the ancient throne containing
Jacob's stone, brought from Scotland by Edward I., and which can still
be seen in the abbey, had been placed in the hall, and covered with
cloth of gold, "cum pannis auri." Richard's act of resignation was read
"first in Latin, then in English," and the people showed their
approbation of the same by applause. Henry then came forward, claimed
the kingdom, in English, and seated himself on the throne, in the midst
of the acclamations of those present. The Archbishop of Canterbury
delivered an oration, and the new king, speaking again, offered his
thanks in English to "God, and yowe Spirituel and Temporel, and alle the
Astates of the lond."[702] There is no more memorable sign of the
changes that had taken place than the use made of the English language
on an occasion like this, by a prince who had no title to the crown but
popular favour.
III.
All these translators were necessarily wanting in originality (less,
however, than they need have been), and all these orators spoke for the
most part in French. In their hands, English prose could not be
perfected to a very high degree. It progressed, however, owing to them,
but owing much more to an important personage, who made common English
his fighting weapon, John Wyclif, to whom the title of "Father of
English prose" rightfully belongs, now that Mandeville has dissolved in
smoke. Wyclif, Langland, and Chaucer are the three great figures of
English literature in the Middle Ages.
Wyclif belonged to the rich and respected family of the Wyclifs, lords
of the manor of Wyclif, in Yorkshire.[703] He was born about 1320, and
devoted himself early to a scientific and religious calling. He studied
at Oxford, where he soon attracted notice, being one of those men of
character who occupy from the beginning of their lives, without seeking
for it, but being, as it seems, born to it, a place apart, amid the limp
multitude of men. The turn of his mind, the originality of his views,
the firmness of his will, his learning, raised him above others; he was
one of those concerning whom it is at once said they are "some one;" and
several times in the course of his existence he saw the University, the
king, the country even, turn to him when "some one" was needed.
He was hardly thirty-five when, the college of Balliol at Oxford having
lost its master, he was elected to the post. In 1366 Parliament ruled
that the Pope's claim to the tribute promised by King John should no
longer be recognised, and Wyclif was asked to draw up a pamphlet
justifying the decision.[704] In 1374 a diplomatic mission was entrusted
to him, and he went to Bruges, with several other "ambassatores," to
negotiate with the Pope's representatives.[705] He then had the title of
doctor of divinity.
Various provincial livings were successively bestowed upon him: that of
Fillingham in 1361; that of Ludgarshall in 1368; that of Lutterworth, in
Leicestershire, in 1374, which he kept till his death. He divided his
time between his duties as rector, his studies, his lectures at Oxford,
and his life in London, where he made several different stays, and
preached some of his sermons.
These quiet occupations were interrupted from time to time owing to the
storms raised by his writings. But so great was his fame, and so eminent
his personality, that he escaped the terrible consequences that heresy
then involved. He had at first alarmed religious authority by his
political theories on the relations of Church and State, next on the
reformation of the Church itself; finally he created excessive scandal
by attacking dogmas and by discussing the sacraments. Summoned the first
time to answer in respect of his doctrines, he appeared in St. Paul's,
in 1377, attended by the strange patrons that a common animosity against
the high dignitaries of the Church had gained for him; John of Gaunt,
Duke of Lancaster, and Lord Henry Percy accompanied him. The duke,
little troubled by scruples, loudly declared, in the middle of the
church, that he would drag the bishop out of the cathedral by the hair
of his head. These words were followed by an indescribable tumult.
Indignant at this insult, the people of the City drove the duke from the
church, pursued him through the town, and laid siege to the house of
John of Ypres, a rich merchant with whom he had gone to sup. Luckily for
the prince, the house opened on the Thames. He rose in haste, knocking
his legs against the table, and, without stopping to drink the cordial
offered him, slipped into a boat and fled, as fast as oars could carry
him, to his sister-in-law's, the Princess of Wales, at Kennington.[706]
The summoning of Wyclif thus had no result.
But the Pope, in the same year, launched against the English theologian
bulls pointing out eighteen erroneous propositions contained in his
writings, and enjoining that the culprit should be put in prison if he
refused to retract. The University of Oxford, being already a power at
that time, proud of its privileges, jealous in maintaining solidarity
between its members, imbued with those ideas of opposition to the Pope
which were increasing in England, considered the decree as an excessive
exercise of authority. It examined the propositions, and declared them
to be orthodox, though capable of wrong interpretations, on which
account Wyclif should go to London and explain himself.[707]
He is found, therefore, in London in the beginning of 1378; the
bishops are assembled in the still existing chapel of Lambeth Palace.
But by one of those singularities that allow us to realise how
the limits of the various powers were far from being clearly defined, it
happened that the bishops had received positive orders not to condemn
Wyclif. The prohibition proceeded from a woman, the Princess of Wales,
widow of the Black Prince. The prelates, however, were spared the
trouble of choosing between the Pope and the lady; for the second time
Wyclif was saved by a riot; a crowd favourable to his ideas invaded the
palace, and no sentence could be given. Any other would have appeared
the more guilty; he only lived the more respected. He was then at the
height of his popularity; a new public statement that he had just issued
in favour of the king against the Pope had confirmed his reputation as
advocate and defender of the kingdom of England.[708]
He resumed, therefore, in peace his work of destruction, and began to
attack dogmas. Besides his writings and his speeches, he used, in order
to popularise his doctrines, his "simple priests," or "poor priests,"
who, without being formed into a religious order, imitated the wandering
life of the friars, but not their mendicity, and strove to attain the
ideal which the friars had fallen short of. They went about preaching
from village to village, and the civil authority was alarmed by the
political and religious theories expounded to the people by these
wanderers, who journeyed "from county to county, and from town to town,
in certain habits under dissimulation of great holiness, without license
of our Holy Father the Pope, or of the ordinary of the diocese."[709]
Wyclif justified these unlicensed preachings by the example of St. Paul,
who, after his conversion, "preechide fast, and axide noo leve of Petir
herto, for he hadde leve of Jesus Crist."[710]
From this time forth Wyclif began to circulate on the sacraments, and
especially on the Eucharist, opinions that Oxford even was unable to
tolerate; the University condemned them. Conformably to his own theory,
which tended, as did that of the Commons, towards a royal supremacy,
Wyclif appealed not to the Pope but to the king, and in the meantime
refused to submit. This was carrying boldness very far. John of Gaunt
separates from his _protege_; Courtenay, bishop of London, calls
together a Council which condemns Wyclif and his adherents (1382); the
followers are pursued, and retract or exile themselves; but Wyclif
continues to live in perfect quiet. Settled at Lutterworth, from whence
he now rarely stirred, he wrote more than ever, with a more and more
caustic and daring pen. The papal schism, which had begun in 1378, had
cast discredit on the Holy See; Wyclif's work was made the easier by it.
At last Urban VI., the Pope whom England recognised, summoned him to
appear in his presence, but an attack of paralysis came on, and Wyclif
died in his parish on the last day of the year 1384. "Organum
diabolicum, hostis Ecclesiae, confusio vulgi, haereticorum idolum,
hypocritarum speculum, schismatis incentor, odii seminator, mendacii
fabricator"[711]: such is the funeral oration inscribed in his annals,
at this date, by Thomas Walsingham, monk of St. Albans. By order of the
Council of Constance, his ashes were afterwards thrown to the winds, and
the family of the Wyclifs of Wyclif, firmly attached to the old faith,
erased him from their genealogical tree. When the Reformation came, the
family remained Catholic, and this adherence to the Roman religion seems
to have been the cause of its decay: "The last of the Wyclifs was a poor
gardener, who dined every Sunday at Thorpe Hall, as the guest of Sir
Marmaduke Tunstall, on the strength of his reputed descent."[712]
IV.
Wyclif had begun early to write, using at first only Latin.[713]
Innumerable treatises of his exist, many of which are still
unpublished, written in a Latin so incorrect and so English in its turns
that "often the readiest way of understanding an obscure passage is to
translate it into English."[714] He obviously attracted the notice of
his contemporaries, not by the elegance of his style, but by the power
of his thought.
His thought deserved the attention it received. His mind was, above all,
a critical one, opposed to formulas, to opinions without proofs, to
traditions not justified by reason. Precedents did not overawe him, the
mysterious authority of distant powers had no effect on his feelings. He
liked to look things and people in the face, with a steady gaze, and the
more important the thing was and the greater the authority claimed, the
less he felt disposed to cast down his eyes.
Soon he wished to teach others to open theirs, and to see for
themselves. By "others" he meant every one, and not only clerks or the
great. He therefore adopted the language of every one, showing himself
in that a true Englishman, a partisan of the system of free
investigation, so dear since to the race. He applied this doctrine to
all that was then an object of faith, and step by step, passing from the
abstract to the concrete, he ended by calling for changes, very similar
to those England adopted at the Reformation, and later on in the time of
the Puritans.
His starting-point was as humble and abstract as his conclusions were,
some of them, bold and practical. A superhuman ideal had been proposed
by St. Francis to his disciples; they were to possess nothing, but beg
their daily bread and help the poor. Such a rule was good for apostles
and angels; it was practised by men. They were not long able to
withstand the temptation of owning property, and enriching themselves;
in the fourteenth century their influence was considerable, and their
possessions immense. Thin subterfuges were resorted to in order to
justify this change: they had only the usufruct of their wealth, the
real proprietor being the Pope. From that time two grave questions arose
and were vehemently discussed in Christendom: What should be thought of
the poverty and mendicity of Christ and his apostles? What is property,
and what is the origin of the power whence it proceeds?
In the first rank of the combatants figured, in the fourteenth century,
an Englishman, Richard Fitzralph, archbishop of Armagh, "Armachanus,"
who studied the question of property, and contested the theory of the
friars in various sermons and treatises, especially in his work: "De
pauperie Salvatoris," composed probably between 1350 and 1356.[715]
Wyclif took his starting-point from the perfectly orthodox writings of
Fitzralph, and borrowed from him nearly the whole of his great theory of
"Dominium," or lordship, power exercised either over men, or over
things, domination, property, possession. But he carried his conclusions
much farther, following the light of logic, as was the custom of
schools, without allowing himself to be hindered by the radicalism of
the consequences and the material difficulties of the execution.
The theory of "Dominium," adopted and popularised by
Wyclif, is an entirely feudal one. According to him, all lordship comes
from God; the Almighty bestows it on man as a fief, in consideration of
a service or condition the keeping of His commandments. Deadly sin
breaks the contract, and deprives the tenant of his right to the fief;
therefore no man in a state of deadly sin possesses any of the lordships
called property, priesthood, royalty, magistracy. All which is summed up
by Wyclif in his proposition: any "dominium" has grace for its
foundation. By such a theory, the whole social order is shaken; neither
Pope nor king is secure on his throne, nor priest in his living, nor
lord in his estate.
The confusion is all the greater from the fact that a multitude of other
subversive conclusions are appended to this fundamental theory: While
sinners lose all lordship, the good possess all lordship; to man, in a
state of "gratia gratificante," belongs the whole of what comes from
God; "in re habet omnia bona Dei."[716] But how can that be? The easiest
thing in the world, replies Wyclif, whom nothing disturbs: all goods
should be held in common, "Ergo omnia debent esse communia"[717]; wives
should be alone excepted.--The Bible is a kind of Koran in which
everything is found; no other law should be obeyed save that one alone;
civil and canonical laws are useless if they agree with the Bible, and
criminal if they are opposed to it.[718]--Royalty is not the best form
of government; an aristocratic system is better, similar to that of the
Judges in Israel.[719]--Neither heirship nor popular election is
sufficient for the transmission of the crown; grace is needed
besides.[720]--The bequeathing to the Church of estates which will
become mortmain lands is inadmissible: "No one can transmit more rights
than he possesses, and no one is personally possessed of rights of civil
lordship extending beyond the term of life."[721]--If the convent or the
priest make a bad use of their wealth, the temporal power will be doing
"a very meritorious thing" in depriving them of it.[722]
The whole order of things is unhinged, and we are nearing chaos. It is
going so far that Wyclif cannot refrain from inserting some of those
slight restrictions which the logicians of the Middle Ages were fond of
slipping into their writings. In time of danger this was the secret door
by which they made their escape, turning away from the stake. Wyclif is
an advocate of communism; but he gives to understand that it is not for
now; it is a distant ideal. After us the deluge! Not so, answer the
peasants of 1381; the deluge at once: "Omnia debent esse communia!"
If all lordship vanishes through sin, who shall be judge of the sin of
others? All real lordship vanishes from the sinner, answered Wyclif, but
there remains to him, by the permission of God, a power _de facto_, that
it is not given us to remove; evil triumphs, but with God's consent; the
Christian must obey the wicked king and bishop: "Deus debet obedire
diabolo."[723] But the dissatisfied only adopted the first part of the
theory, and instead of submitting to Simon Sudbury, their archbishop, of
whom they disapproved, they cut off his head.
These were certainly extreme and exceptional consequences, to which
Wyclif only contributed in a slight measure. The lasting and permanent
result of the doctrine was to strengthen the Commons of England in the
aim they already had in view, namely, to diminish the authority
exercised over them by the Pope, and to loosen the ties that bound the
kingdom to Rome. Wyclif pointed out that, contrary to the theory of
Boniface VIII. (bull "Unam Sanctam"), there does not exist in this world
one single supreme and unequalled sovereignty; the Pope is not the sole
depositary of divine power. Since all lordship proceeds from God, that
of the king comes from Him, as well as that of the Pope; kings
themselves are "vikeris of God"; beside the Pope, and not below him,
there is the king.[724]
V.
The English will thus be sole rulers in their island. They must also be
sole keepers of their consciences, and for that Wyclif is to teach them
free investigation. All, then, must understand him; and he begins to
write in English. His English works are numerous; sermons, treatises,
translations; they fill volumes.[725]
Before all the Book of truth was to be placed in the hands of everybody,
so that none need accept without check the interpretations of others.
With the help of a few disciples, Wyclif began to translate the Bible
into English. To translate the Scriptures was not forbidden. The Church
only required that the versions should be submitted to her for approval.
There already existed several, complete or partial, in various
languages; a complete one in French, written in the thirteenth
century,[726] and several partial ones in English. Wyclif's version
includes the whole of the canonical books, and even the apocryphal ones;
the Gospels appear to have been translated by himself, the Old Testament
chiefly by his disciple, Nicholas of Hereford. The task was an immense
one, the need pressing; the work suffered from the rapidity with which
it was performed. A revision of the work of Nicholas was begun under
Wyclif's direction, but only finished after his death.[727]
No attempt at elegance is found in this translation; the language is
rugged, and on that account the better adapted to the uncouthness of the
holy Word. Harsh though it be we feel, however, that it is tending
towards improvement; the meaning of the words becomes more precise,
owing to the necessity of giving to the sacred phrases their exact
signification; the effort is not always successful, but it is a
continued one, and it is an effort in the right direction. It was soon
perceived to what need the undertaking answered. Copies of the work
multiplied in astonishing fashion. In spite of the wholesale destruction
which was ordered, there remain a hundred and seventy manuscripts, more
or less complete, of Wyclif's Bible. For some time, it is true, the
copying of it had not been opposed by the ecclesiastical authority, and
the version was only condemned twenty-four years after the death of the
author, by the Council of Oxford.[728] In the England of the
Plantagenets could be foreseen the England of the Tudors, under whom
three hundred and twenty-six editions of the Bible were printed in less
than a century, from 1525 to 1600.
But Wyclif's greatest influence on the development of prose was
exercised by means of his sermons and treatises. In these, the reformer
gives himself full scope; he alters his tone at need, employs all means,
from the most impassioned eloquence down to the most trivial pleasantry,
meant to delight men of the lower class. Put to such varied uses, prose
could not but become a more workable instrument. True it is that Wyclif
never seeks after artistic effect in his English, any more than in his
Latin. His sermons regularly begin by: "This gospel tellith.... This
gospel techith alle men that ..." and he continues his arguments in a
clear and measured style, until he comes to one of those burning
questions about which he is battling; then his irony bursts forth, he
uses scathing similes; he thunders against those "emperoure bishopis,"
taken up with worldly cares; his speech is short and haughty; he knows
how to condense his whole theory in one brief, clear-cut phrase, easy to
remember, that every one will know by heart, and which it will not be
easy to answer. Why are the people preached to in a foreign tongue?
Christ, when he was with his apostles, "taughte hem oute this prayer,
bot be thou syker, nother in Latyn nother in Frensche, bot in the
langage that they usede to speke."[729] How should popes be above kings?
"Thus shulden popis be suget to kynges, for thus weren bothe Crist and
Petre."[730] How believe in indulgences sold publicly by pardoners on
the market-places, and in that inexhaustible "treasury" of merits laid
up in heaven that the depositaries of papal favour are able to
distribute at their pleasure among men for money? Each merit is rewarded
by God, and consequently the benefit of it cannot be applicable to any
one who pays: "As Peter held his pees in grauntinge of siche thingis, so
shulden thei holden ther pees, sith thei ben lasse worth than
Petir."[731]
Next to these brief arguments are familiar jests, gravely uttered, with
scarcely any perceptible change in the expression of the lips, jests
that Englishmen have been fond of in all times. If he is asked of what
use are the "letters of fraternity," sold by the friars to their
customers, to give them a share in the superabundant merits of the whole
order, Wyclif replies with a serious air: "Bi siche resouns thinken many
men that this lettris mai do good for to covere mostard pottis."[732]
It is difficult to follow him in all the places where he would fain lead
us. He terrified the century by the boldness of his touch; when he was
seen to shake the frail holy thing with a ruthless hand, all eyes turned
away, and his former protectors withdrew from him.[733] He did not,
however, carry his doubt to the extreme end; according to his doctrine
the _substance_ of the host, the particle of matter, is not the matter
itself, the living flesh of the body that Jesus Christ had on earth;
this substance is bread; only by a miracle which is the effect of
consecration, the body of Christ is present sacramentally; that is to
say, all the benefits, advantages, and virtues which emanate from it
are attached to the host as closely as the soul of men is united to
their body.[734]
The other sacraments,[735] ecclesiastical hierarchy, the tithes
collected by the clergy, are not more respectfully treated by him. These
criticisms and teachings had all the more weight owing to the fact that
they were delivered from a pulpit and fell from the lips of an
authorised master, whose learning was acknowledged even by his
adversaries: "A very eminent doctor, a peerless and incomparable
one,"[736] says Knighton. Still better than Langland's verses, his
forcible speech, by reason of his station, prepared the way for the
great reforms of the sixteenth century. He already demands the
confiscation of the estates of the monasteries, accomplished later by
Henry VIII.; he appeals at every page of his treatises to the secular
arm, hoping by its means to bring back humility by force into the heart
of prelates.
But he is so far removed from its realisation that his dream dazzles
him, and urges him on to defend chimerical schemes. He wishes the wealth
of the clergy to be taken from them and bestowed upon poor, honest,
brave, trustworthy gentlemen, who will defend the country; and he does
not perceive that these riches would have fallen principally into the
hands of turbulent and grasping courtiers, as happened in the sixteenth
century.[737] He is carried away by his own reasonings, so that the
Utopian or paradoxical character of his statements escape him. Wanting
to minimise the power of the popes, he protests against the rules
followed for their election, and goes on to say concerning the vote by
ballot: "Sith ther ben fewe wise men, and foolis ben without noumbre,
assent of more part of men makith evydence that it were foli."[738]
His disciples, _Lollards_ as they were usually called, a name the origin
of which has been much discussed, survived him, and his simple priests
continued, for a time, to propagate his doctrines. The master's
principal propositions were even found one day in 1395, posted up on the
door of St. Paul's Cathedral, in the heart of London. Among them figure
declarations that, at a distance of three centuries, seem a
foreshadowing of the theories of the Puritans; one for instance,
affirming "that the multitude of useless arts allowed in the kingdom are
the cause of sins without number." Among the forbidden arts are included
that of the goldsmiths, and another art of which, however, the Puritans
were to make a somewhat notorious use, that of the armorers.[739]
At the University, the followers of Wyclif were numerous; in the country
they continued to increase until the end of the fourteenth century.
Energetic measures were adopted in the beginning of the fifteenth; the
statute "De haeretico comburendo" was promulgated in 1401 (but rarely
applied at this period); the master's books were condemned and
prohibited; from that time Wyclifism declined, and traces of its
survival can hardly be found at the period when the Reformation was
introduced into England.
By a strange fate Wyclif's posterity continued to flourish out of the
kingdom. Bohemia had just given a queen to England, and used to send
students every year from its University of Prague to study at Paris and
Oxford. In that country the Wyclifite tenets found a multitude of
adepts; the Latin works of the thinker were transcribed by Czech
students, and carried back to their own land; several writings of Wyclif
exist only in Czech copies. His most illustrious disciple, John Hus,
rector of the University of Prague, was burnt at the stake, by order of
the Council of Constance, on the 6th of July, 1415. But the doctrine
survived; it was adopted with modifications by the Taborites and the
Moravian Brethren, and borrowed from them by the Waldenses[740]; the
same Moravian Brethren who, owing to equally singular vicissitudes, were
to become an important factor in the English religious movement of the
eighteenth century: the Wesleyan movement. In spite of differences in
their doctrines, the Moravian Brethren and the Hussites stand as a
connecting link between Wesley and Wyclif.[741]
FOOTNOTES:
[666] "Historia Anglicana," vol. i. pp. 453 ff. By the same: "Gesta
abbatum monasterii Sancti Albani," 3 vols., "Ypodigma Neustriae," 1 vol.
ed. Riley, Rolls, 1863, 1876.
[667] _Ibid._, vol. ii. p. 27. See above, p. 201.
[668] "Chronicon Angliae," 1328-88, Rolls, ed. Maunde Thompson, 1874,
8vo. Mr. Thompson has proved that, contrary to the prevalent opinion,
Walsingham has been copied by this chronicler instead of copying him
himself; but the book is an important one on account of the passages
referring to John of Gaunt, which are not found elsewhere.
[669] "Polychronicon Ranulphi Higden ... with the English translation of
John Trevisa," ed. Babington and Lumby, Rolls, 1865, 8 vols. 8vo.
[670] See above, p. 195.
[671] "The buke of John Maundeuill, being the travels of Sir John
Mandeville, Knight, 1322-56, a hitherto unpublished English version from
the unique copy (Eg. MS. 1982) in the British Museum, edited together
with the French text," by G. F. Warner; Westminster, Roxburghe Club,
1889, fol. In the introduction will be found the series of proofs
establishing the fact that Mandeville never existed; the chain seems now
complete, owing to a succession of discoveries, those especially of Mr.
E. B. Nicholson, of the Bodleian, Oxford (_Cf._ an article of H. Cordier
in the _Revue Critique_ of Oct. 26, 1891). A critical edition of the
French text is being prepared by the Societe des Anciens Textes. The
English translation was made after 1377, and twice revised in the
beginning of the fifteenth century. On the passages borrowed from
"Mandeville" by Christine de Pisan, in her "Chemin de long Estude," see
in "Romania," vol. xxi. p. 229, an article by Mr. Toynbee.
[672] The church and its dependencies were sold and demolished in 1798:
"Adjuges le 12 nivose an vi., a la citoyenne epouse, J. J. Fabry, pour
46,000 francs." Warner, _ibid._, p. xxxiii.
[673] Warner, _ibid._, p. v.
[674] "Et sachies que je eusse cest livret mis en latin pour plus
briefment deviser, mais pour ce que plusieurs entendent miex roumant que
latin, j'e l'ay mis en roumant par quoy que chascun l'entende, et que
les seigneurs et les chevalers et les autres nobles hommes qui ne
scevent point de latin ou pou, qui ont este oultre mer sachent et
entendent se je dis voir ou non at se je erre en devisant pour non
souvenance ou autrement que il le puissent adrecier et amender, car
choses de lonc temps passees par la veue tournent en oubli et memoire
d'omme ne puet tout mie retenir ne comprendre." MS. fr. 5637 in the
National Library, Paris, fol. 4, fourteenth century.
[675] On Odoric and Mandeville, see H. Cordier, "Odoric de Pordenone,"
Paris, 1891, Introduction.
[676] A part of it was even put into verse: "The Commonyng of Ser John
Mandeville and the gret Souden;" in "Remains of the early popular Poetry
of England," ed. Hazlitt, London, 1864, 4 vols. 8vo, vol. i. p. 153.
[677] Here is a specimen of this style; it is the melancholy end of the
work, in which the weary traveller resigns himself, like Robinson
Crusoe, to rest at last: "And I John Maundeville, knyghte aboveseyd
(alle thoughe I ben unworthi) that departed from oure contrees and
passed the see the year of grace 1322, that have passed many londes and
many isles and contrees, and cerched manye fulle straunge places, and
have ben in many a fulle gode honourable companye and at many a faire
dede of armes (alle beit that I dide none my self, for myn unable
insuffisance) now I am comen hom (mawgre my self) to reste; for gowtes
artetykes, that me distreynen, tho diffynen the ende of my labour,
agenst my wille (God knowethe). And thus takynge solace in my wrecced
reste, recordynge the tyme passed, I have fulfilled theise thinges and
putte hem wryten in this boke, as it wolde come in to my mynde, the year
of grace 1356 in the 34 yeer that I departede from oure contrees.
Werfore I preye to alle the rederes and hereres of this boke, yif it
plese hem that thei wolde preyen to God for me, and I schalle preye for
hem." Ed. Halliwell, London, 1866, 8vo, p. 315.
[678] See above, p. 216.
[679] "Boethius," in "Complete Works," vol. ii. p. 6.
[680] "Troilus," II. 100. See above, p. 306. _Cf._ Boece's "De
Consolatione," Metrum III.
[681] "Et ut patesceret totius regni communitati eos non respectu
avaritiae quicquam facere, proclamari fecerunt sub poena decollationis,
ne quis praesumeret aliquid vel aliqua ibidem reperta ad proprios usus
servanda contingere, sed ut vasa aurea et argentea, quae ibi copiosa
habebantur, cum securibus minutatim confringerent et in Tamisiam vel in
cloacas projicerent, pannos aureos et holosericos dilacerarent.... Et
factum est ita." Walsingham, "Historia Anglicana," vol. i. p. 457
(Rolls).
[682] "Ad le Blakeheth, ubi ducenta millia communium fuere simul
congregata hujuscemodi sermonem est exorsus:
Whann Adam dalfe and Eve span
Who was thanne a gentil man?
Continuansque sermonem inceptum, nitebatur, per verba proverbii quod pro
themate sumpserat, introducere et probare, ab initio omnes pares creatos
a natura, servitutem per injustam oppressionem nequam hominum
introductam, contra voluntatem Dei; quia si Deo placiusset servos
creasse utique in principio mundi constituisset quis servus, quisve
dominus futurus fuisset." Let them therefore destroy nobles and lawyers,
as the good husbandman tears up the weeds in his field; thus shall
liberty and equality reign: "Sic demum ... esset inter eos aequa
libertas, par dignitas, similisque potestas." "Chronicon Angliae," ed.
Maunde Thompson (Rolls), 1874, 8vo, p. 321; Walsingham, vol. ii. p. 32.
[683] "Rotuli Parliamentorum, ut et petitiones et placita in
Parliamento." London, 7 vols. fol. (one volume contains the index).
[684] Richard restored it entirely, and employed English master masons,
"Richard Washbourn" and "Johan Swalwe." The indenture is of March 18,
1395; the text of it is in Rymer, 1705, vol. vii. p. 794.
[685] "Rotuli Parliamentorum," vol. ii. p. 103.
[686] Ex. 13 Ed. III., 17 Ed. III., "Rotuli Parliamentorum," vol. ii.
pp. 107, 135.
[687] "Rotuli Parliamentorum," vol. ii. p. 361.
[688] "Seigneurs et Sires, ces paroles qe j'ay dist sont tant a due en
Franceys, vostre Roi vient a toy." _Ibid._, vol. iii. p. 3. A speech of
the same kind adorned with puns was made by Thomas Arundel, Archbishop
of Canterbury, to open the first Parliament of Henry IV.: "Cest
honorable roialme d'Angleterre q'est le plus habundant Angle de richesse
parmy tout le monde, avait estee par longe temps mesnez, reulez et
governez par enfantz et conseil de vefves...." 1399, _Ibid._, p. 415.
[689] "Rotuli Parliamentorum." Speech of Knyvet, vol. ii. p. 316; of
Wykeham, vol. ii. p. 303. This same Knyvet opens the Good Parliament of
1376 by a speech equally forcible. He belonged to the magistracy, and
was greatly respected; he died in 1381.
[690] Ex: "Item, meisme le jour (that is to say the day on which the
general proclamation was read) fut fait une crie qe chescun qi vodra
mettre petition a nostre seigneur le Roi et a son conseil, les mette
entre cy et le lundy prochein a venir.... Et serront assignez de
receivre les petitions ... les sousescritz." _Ibid._, vol. ii. p. 135.
[691] _Ibid._, vol. ii. pp. 136, 163. "Fut dit a les ditz Communes de
par le Roy, q'ils se retraiassent par soi a lour aunciene place en la
maison du chapitre de l'abbeye de Westm', et y tretassent et
conseillassent entre eux meismes."
[692] Vol. ii. p. 107, second Parliament of 1339.
[693] "Ils treterent longement," _Ibid._, ii. p. 104.
[694] "Sur quele demonstrance il respoundrent q'il voleient parler
ensemble et treter sur cest bosoigne.... Sur quel bosoigne ceux de la
Commune demorerent de lour respons doner tant qe a Samedi, le XIX. jour
de Feverer." A.D. 1339, "Rotuli Parliamentorum," vol. ii. p. 107.
[695] "Ils n'osoront assentir tant qu'ils eussent conseillez et avysez
les Communes de lour pais." They promise to do their best to persuade
their constituents. A.D. 1339; "Rotuli Parliamentorum," vol. ii. p. 104.
[696] "Et les nuncia auxi la cause de la longe demore quele il avoit
faite es dites parties saunz chivaucher sur ses enemys; et coment il le
covendra faire pur defaute d'avoir." "Rotuli Parliamentorum," vol. ii.
p. 103, first Parliament of 1339.
[697] 51 Ed. III., "Rotuli Parliamentorum," ii. p. 374.
[698] "Rotuli Parliamentorum," vol. ii. p. 323. This speech created a
great stir; another analysis of it exists in the "Chronicon Angliae"
(written by a monk of St. Albans, the abbot of which, Thomas de la Mare,
sat in Parliament): "Quae omnia ferret aequanimeter [plebs communis] si
dominus rex noster sive regnum istud exinde aliquid commodi vel
emolumenti sumpsisse videretur; etiam plebi tolerabile, si in
expediendis rebus bellicis, quamvis gestis minus prospere, tanta pecunia
fuisset expensa. Sed palam est, nec regem commodum, nec regnum ex hac
fructum aliquem percepisse.... Non enim est credible regem carere
infinita thesauri quantitate si fideles fuerint qui ministrant ei" (p.
73). The drift of the speech is, as may be seen, exactly the same as in
the Rolls of Parliament. Another specimen of pithy eloquence will be
found in the apostrophe addressed to the Earl of Stafford by John
Philpot, a mercer of London, after his naval feat of 1378. _Ibid._, p.
200.
[699] "Rotuli Parliamentorum," ii. pp. 337 ff.
[700] June 25, 1376.
[701] The speech of this year was made "en Engleis," by Simon, bishop of
Ely; but the Rolls give only a French version of it: "Le prophet David
dit que ..." &c., vol. ii. p. 283.
[702] "Sires, I thank God, and yowe Spirituel and Temporal and alle the
Astates of the lond; and do yowe to wyte, it es noght my will that no
man thynk yt be waye of conquest I wold disherit any man of his
heritage, franches, or other ryghtes that hym aght to have, no put hym
out of that that he has and has had by the gude lawes and custumes of
the Rewme: Except thos persons that has ben agan the gude purpose and
the commune profyt of the Rewme." "Rotuli Parliamentorum," vol. iii. p.
423. In the fifteenth century the Parliamentary documents are written
sometimes in French, sometimes in English; French predominates in the
first half of the century, and English in the second.
[703] On Wyclif's family, see "The Birth and Parentage of Wyclif," by L.
Sergeant, _Athenaeum_, March 12 and 26, 1892. This spelling of his name
is the one which appears oftenest in contemporary documents. (Note by F.
D. Matthew, _Academy_, June 7, 1884.)
[704] "Determinatio quedam magistri Johannis Wyclyff de Dominio contra
unum monachum." The object of this treatise is to show "quod Rex potest
juste dominari regno Anglic negando tributum Romano pontifici." The text
will be found in John Lewis: "A history of the life and sufferings of
... John Wiclif," 1720, reprinted Oxford, 1820, 8vo, p. 349.
[705] "Ambassatores, nuncios et procuratores nostros speciales." Lewis,
_ibid._, p. 304.
[706] All these details are found in the "Chronicon Angliae," 1328-88,
ed. Maunde Thompson, Rolls, 1874, 8vo, p. 123, one of the rare
chronicles the MS. of which was not expurgated, in what relates to John
of Gaunt, at the accession of the Lancasters. (See above, p. 406.)
[707] This extreme leniency caused an indignation of which an echo is
found in Walsingham: "Oxoniense studium generale," he exclaims, "quam
gravi lapsu a sapientiae et scientiae culmine decidisti!... Pudet
recordationis tantae impudentiae, et ideo supersedeo in husjusmodi materia
immorari, ne materna videar ubera decerpere dentibus, quae dare lac,
potum scientiae, consuevere." "Historia Anglicana," Rolls, vol. i. p.
345, year 1378.
[708] See in the "Fasciculi Zizaniorum magistri Johannis Wyclif cum
tritico," ed. Shirley, Rolls, 1858, 8vo, p. 258: "Responsio magistri
Johannis Wycclifi ad dubium infra scriptum, quaesitum ab eo, per dominum
regem Angliae Ricardum secundum et magnum suum consilium anno regni sui
primo." The point to be elucidated was the following: "Dubium est utrum
regnum Angliae possit legitime, imminente necessitate suae defensionis,
thesaurum regni detinere, ne deferatur ad exteros, etiam domino papa sub
poena censurarum et virtute obedientiae hoc petente."
[709] "Statutes of the Realm," 5 Rich. II., st. 2, chap. 5. Walsingham
thus describes them; "Congregavit ... comites ... talaribes indutos
vestibus de russeto in signum perfectionis amplioris, incedentes nudis
pedibus, qui suos errores in populo ventilarent, et palam ac publice in
suis sermonibus praedicarent." "Historia Anglicana," _sub anno_ 1377,
Rolls, vol. i. p. 324. A similar description is found (they present
themselves, "sub magnae sanctitatis velamine," and preach errors "tam in
ecclesiis quam in plateis et aliis locis profanis") in the letter of the
archbishop of Canterbury, of May 28, 1382, "Fasciculi," p. 275.
[710] "Select English Works," ed. T. Arnold, Oxford, 1869, vol. i. p.
176.
[711] "Historia Anglicana," Rolls, vol. ii. p. 119. Elsewhere, in
another series of unflattering epithets ("old hypocrite," "angel of
Satan," &c.), the chronicler had allowed himself the pleasure of making
a little pun upon Wyclif's name: "Non nominandus Joannes Wicliffe, vel
potius Wykbeleve." Year 1381 vol. i. p. 450.
[712] L. Sergeant, "The Birth and Parentage of Wyclif," in the
_Athenaeum_ of March 12, 1892.
[713] The Wyclif Society, founded in London by Dr. Furnivall, has
published a great part of the Latin works of Wyclif: "Polemical Works in
Latin," ed. Buddensieg, 1883, 8vo; "Joannis Wyclif, de compositione
Hominis," ed. R. Beer, 1884; "Tractatus de civili Dominio ... from the
unique MS. at Vienna," ed. R. Lane Poole, 1885 ff.; "Tractatus de
Ecclesia," ed. Loserth, 1886; "Dialogus, sive speculum Ecclesie
militantis," ed. A. W. Pollard, 1886; "Tractatus de benedicta
Incarnatione," ed. Harris, 1886; "Sermones," ed. Loserth and Matthew,
1887; "Tractatus de officio Regis;" ed. Pollard and Sayle, 1887; "De
Dominio divino libri tres, to which are added the first four books of
the treatise 'De pauperie Salvatoris,' by Richard Fitzralph, archbishop
of Armagh," ed. R. L. Poole, 1890; "De Ente praedicamentali," ed. R.
Beer, 1891; "De Eucharistia tractatus maior; accedit tractatus de
Eucharistia et Poenitentia," ed. Loserth and Matthew, 1892. Many
others are in preparation.
Among the Latin works published outside of the Society, see "Tractatus
de officio pastorali," ed. Lechler, Leipzig, 1863, 8vo; "Trialogus cum
supplemento Trialogi," ed. Lechler, Oxford, 1869, 8vo; "De Christo et
suo Adversario Antichristo," ed. R. Buddensieg, Gotha, 1880, 4to. Many
documents by or concerning Wyclif are to be found in the "Fasciculi
Zizaniorum magistri Joannis Wyclif cum tritico," ed. Shirley, Rolls,
1858, 8vo (compiled by Thomas Netter, fifteenth century). See also
Shirley, "A Catalogue of the Original Works of John Wyclif," Oxford,
1865, 8vo, and Maunde Thompson, "Wycliffe Exhibition in the King's
Library," London, 1884, 8vo.
[714] R. Lane Poole, "Wycliffe and Movements for Reform," London, 1889,
8vo, p. 85.
[715] On this treatise, and on the use made of it by Wyclif, see:
"Johannis Wycliffe De Dominio divino libri tres. To which are added the
first four books of the treatise 'De pauperie Salvatoris,' by Richard
Fitzralph," ed. R. Lane Poole, 1890. The "De Dominio divino," of Wyclif,
seems to have been written about 1366; his "De Dominio Civili," about
1372.
[716] "Quilibet existens in gratia gratificante, finaliter nedum habet
jus, sed in re habet omnia bona Dei." "De Dominio Civili," chap. i. p.
1.
[717] "De Dominio Civili," chap. xiv. p. 96, chap. xvii. pp. 118-120.
[718] "Vel esset lex superaddita in lege evangelica implicata, vel
impertinens, vel repugnans." "De Dominio Civili," chap. xvii.
[719] The worst is the ecclesiastical form: "Pessimum omnium est quod
prelati ecclesie secundum tradiciones suas immisceant se negociis et
solicitudinibus civilis dominii." Chap. xxvii. p. 195.
[720] Chap. xxx. p. 212.
[721] Chap. xxxv. p. 250.
[722] Chap. xxxvii. p. 266.
[723] A conclusion pointed out as heretical by the archbishop of
Canterbury in his letter of 1382. "Fasciculi," p. 278.
[724] "Kingis and lordis schulden wite that thei ben mynystris and
vikeris of God, to venge synne and ponysche mysdoeris." "Select English
Works," ed. Arnold, vol. iii. p. 214.
[725] The principal ones will be found in: T. Arnold, "Select English
Works of John Wyclif," Oxford, 1869-71, 3 vols. 8vo; F. D. Matthew, "The
English Works of Wyclif, hitherto unprinted," London, Early English Text
Society, 1880, 8vo. (Many of the pieces in this last collection are not
by Wyclif, but are the work of his followers. In the first, too, the
authenticity of some of the pieces is doubtful.) See also: "Wyclyffe's
Wycket, which he made in Kyng Richard's days the Second" (a famous
sermon on the Eucharist), Nuremberg, 1546, 4to; Oxford, ed. T. P.
Pantin, 1828.
[726] S. Berger, "La Bible francaise au moyen age," Paris, 1884, p. 120.
This version was circulated in England, and was recopied by English
scribes; a copy (incomplete) by an English hand is preserved in the
University Library at Cambridge; P. Meyer, "MSS. francais de Cambridge,"
in "Romania," 1886, p. 265.
[727] "The Holy Bible ... made from the Latin of the Vulgate, by John
Wycliffe and his followers," ed. by J. Forshall and Sir Fred. Madden,
Oxford, 1850, 2 vols. 4to. On the share of Wyclif, Hereford, &c., in the
work, see pp. vi, xvi, xvii, xx, xxiv. _Cf._ Maunde Thompson, "Wycliffe
Exhibition," London, 1884, p. xviii. The first version was probably
finished in 1382, the second in 1388 (by the care of John Purvey, a
disciple and friend of Wyclif).
[728] Labbe, "Sacrorum Conciliorum ... Collectio," vol. xxvi. col. 1038.
[729] "Select English Works," vol. iii. p. 100.
[730] "Select English Works," vol. ii. p. 296.
[731] _Ibid._, i. p. 189.
[732] _Ibid._, i. p. 381.
[733] His adversaries, perhaps exaggerating his sayings, attribute to
him declarations like the following: "Quod sacramentum illud visibile
est infinitum abjectius in natura, quam sit panis equinus, vel panis
ratonis; immo, quod verecundum est dicere vel audire, quod stercus
ratonis." "Fasciculi Zizaniorum," p. 108.
[734] "Ille panis est bene miraculose, vere el realiter, spiritualiter,
virtualiter et sacramentaliter corpus Christi. Sed grossi non
contentantur de istis modis, sed exigunt quod panis ille, vel saltem per
ipsum, sit substantialiter et corporaliter corpus Christi; sic enim
volunt, zelo blasphemorum, Christum comedere, sed non possunt....
Ponimus venerabile sacramentum altaris esse naturaliter panem et vinum,
sed sacramentaliter corpus Christi et sanguinem." "Fasciculi," pp. 122,
125; Wyclif's statement of his beliefs after his condemnation by the
University in 1381. Again, in his sermons: "Thes ben to rude heretikes
that seien thei eten Crist bodili, and seien thei parten ech membre of
him, nekke, bac, heed and foot.... This oost is breed in his kynde as
ben other oostes unsacrid, and sacramentaliche Goddis bodi." "Select
English Works," vol. ii. p. 169. This is very nearly the theory adopted
later by Latimer, who declares "that there is none other presence of
Christ required than a spiritual presence; and that presence is
sufficient for a Christian man;" there remains in the host the substance
of bread. "Works," Parker Society, Cambridge, 1844, vol. ii. p. 250.
[735] Auricular confession, that "rowninge in preestis eere," is not the
true one, according to Wyclif; the true one is that made to God. "Select
English Works," vol. i. p. 196.
[736] "Doctor in theologia eminentissimus in diebus illis, in
philosophia nulli reputabatur secundus, in scolasticis disciplinis
incomparabilis." "Chronica de eventibus Angliae," _sub anno_ 1382, in
Twysden, "Decem Scriptores," col. 2644.
[737] "Select English Works," vol. iii. pp 216, 217.
[738] _Ibid._, ii. p. 414.
[739] Conclusion No. 12. "Henrici de Blandeforde ... Annales," ed.
Riley, Rolls, 1866, p. 174.
[740] "The old belief that the Waldenses (or Vaudois) represent a
current of tradition continuous from the assumed evangelical simplicity
of the primitive church has lost credit.... The imagined primitive
Christianity of these Alpine congregations can only be deduced from
works which have been shown to be translations or adaptations of the
Hussite manuals or treatises." "Wycliffe," by Reginald Lane Poole, 1889,
p. 174. _Cf._ J. Loserth, "Hus und Wiclif," Leipzig, 1884.
[741] The great crisis in Wesley's religious life, what he terms his
"conversion," took place on the 24th of February, 1738, under the
influence of the Moravian Peter Boehler, who had convinced him, he says
in his Journal, "of the want of that faith whereby we are saved."