and to that of Cork. In 1581, there being a lull in Ireland, he returned
to England. It would appear that he was bent on making his way at Court,
and we all know, and most of us believe, the story of his flinging down
his velvet cloak before his royal mistress, that she might step across
the mire, likewise his writing with a diamond on a window-pane, which
would necessarily attract Elizabeth’s attention:—
‘Fain would I climb, but fear to fall.’
The tale goes on to say that the Queen wrote underneath,
‘If thy heart fail thee, climb not at all.’
We hope to be excused for alluding to stories which, if ‘fables,’ are at
least characteristic of the times.
In 1583 he appeared before the Privy Council to plead his cause in the
matter of a difference that had occurred between him and Lord (Deputy)
Grey de Wilton, when they were together in Ireland.
On this occasion, says Sir Robert Naunton, ‘what advantage Raleigh had
in the controversy I know not; but he had much the better in the telling
of his tale, inasmuch as the Queen and the Lords took no slight mark of
the man, for from thenceforth he came to be known, and have access to
the Lords,’ etc. etc. Naunton goes on to say, ‘that he does not know if
Lord Leicester had recommended him to her Majesty, but true it is,
Raleigh had gotten the Queen’s ear at a trice, and she began to be taken
with his eloquence, and loved to hear his reasons to her demands, and in
truth, she took him for a kind of oracle, which nettled them all.’
Raleigh, whose whole soul was bent on enterprise, made use of his favour
at Court to enable him to prosecute his maritime discoveries. In 1583—in
a ship he had, however, manned and victualled at his own expense, and
named after himself—in company with his brother, he sailed for
Newfoundland. But they were again unfortunate; as Gilbert was returning
to England he was lost, with two of his ships.
Yet Raleigh’s heart never ‘did fail him,’ and the following year he
obtained a grant from Queen and Council, ‘free liberty to discover
remote and barbarous lands.’
He proceeded to Florida, discovered and colonised Virginia, and for
several years prosecuted his voyages, discoveries, and colonisations,
all of which belong to the record of naval history.
In 1584 he was knighted, and honours and dignities of all kinds bestowed
on him, together with good estates from the Queen.
At Sherborne, county Dorset, he built ‘a fine house, with gardens and
groves of much variety and delight.’ Notwithstanding all the favours he
received at her hands, Raleigh never truckled to Elizabeth, and although
she often fell out with him, she invariably in the end listened to her
loyal but independent subject.
He was always ready to intercede for others, and one day, when asking a
service for a friend, the Queen said, ‘When, Sir Walter, will you cease
to be a beggar?’
‘When your Majesty ceases to be beneficent,’ was the reply. But he fell
into disgrace at Court when Elizabeth found out that he was too high in
the good graces of one of her own maids of honour, and although he
married the lady, (Mistress Elizabeth Throckmorton, daughter of Sir
Nicholas of Beddington, county Surrey,) yet the lovers were imprisoned
for some months in the Tower.
Voyages innumerable, fresh projects of colonisation followed, but
unfortunately in two expeditions the Earl of Essex had the chief
command, and he and Raleigh had a deadly quarrel. On their return it was
continued, and there can be little doubt Raleigh hated and worked
against Essex, at a time when there were many intrigues going on, to get
rid of the Queen’s unfortunate favourite. More honours, more places of
trust, were bestowed on Raleigh. In 1600 he went Ambassador to France,
and soon after was named Governor of Jersey; in fact, while Elizabeth
lived, she never swerved in her friendship, but on her death, Cecil, who
was Raleigh’s enemy, undermined his favour with James, who received him
ungraciously, and dismissed him from the offices he held.
Sir Walter, on discovering his secret foe, tried to impress on the
King’s mind that Cecil had been instrumental in the execution of his
mother, but this made no difference in his Majesty’s demeanour, and only
insured the minister’s bitter hatred. So commenced Raleigh’s downfall.
He was accused, with several other noblemen, of a plot to place Arabella
Stuart on the throne, tried for high treason, and in spite of deficiency
of evidence, in spite of his gallant defence, he was found guilty by a
shameful jury, for even Coke, the Attorney-General, who, we are told,
made ‘brutal speeches,’ on the trial, exclaimed, when informed of the
verdict, (not being in Court at the time,) ‘Surely thou art mistaken,
for I only accused him of misprision of treason.’
Sir Walter remained at Winchester under sentence of death for a month,
during which time he appealed to the justice and mercy, of a King who
was devoid of both. He was reprieved, and sent to the Tower, where they
held that noble spirit captive for twelve years. He occupied his
melancholy hours with works which would have sufficed to make his name
immortal, had it not already become so by ‘his hairbreadth ‘scapes, and
moving accidents by flood and field.’
It having been made worth his while, Villiers Duke of Buckingham
interceded for Raleigh’s release, and he was accordingly liberated in
1616.
Stripped of all his possessions, and cast entirely on his own resources,
the gallant knight once more embarked for Guiana, James, in the hope of
wealth accruing to himself, granted him a commission, as Admiral.
But on his arrival he found he had been betrayed to the Spaniards, who
were drawn up against him in great numbers. ‘Never,’ he says himself,
‘was poor man more exposed to the slaughter as I was.’ Information was
sent to the King of Spain; the cowardly and cruel James, terrified at
the prospect of a rupture with that monarch, issued a proclamation
setting forth that he had forbid Raleigh to enter on any hostilities,
and threatening severe punishment.
The brave, enterprising, noble-minded sailor returned to England, his
heart bowed down with sorrow, for the loss of his first-born, who had
died on the field of battle.
He was arrested on his road to London, made two ineffectual attempts to
escape, and was once more closely imprisoned in the Tower; he was
brought to the bar of the King’s Bench, and demanded why the former
sentence should not be held good against him. His defence was a model of
manly eloquence, but it did not avail him, and he was beheaded in Old
Palace Yard, Westminster, the 29th of October 1618.
By Elizabeth his wife he had two sons—one killed in South America, and
the other, Carew, who bought an estate called West Horsley, in Surrey,
where, as tradition goes, he kept his father’s head, and in consequence
gained for the quaint old house the reputation of being haunted.
Sir Walter Raleigh, according to his portraits, merits Sir Robert
Naunton’s description of him: ‘He was of a good presence and
well-compacted person. He had a strong natural wit, and was an
indefatigable reader both when at sea and on land.’
He was also remarkable for great magnificence in dress, he tilted in
silver armour, with a belt of diamonds, pearls, and rubies, and his
retinue was most costly. In the portrait before us his costume is
certainly elaborate.
--------------
No. 81.
CATHERINE OF BRAGANZA, QUEEN OF ENGLAND,
WIFE OF CHARLES II.
BY SIR PETER LELY.
BORN 1638, DIED 1705.
_Full length. Seated. Black dress. Jewels. Mantle lined with ermine.
Crown on the table beside her._
SHE was the only daughter of the Duke of Braganza, afterwards Juan IV.,
King of Portugal, by Luisa de Guzman, daughter of the Duke of Medina
Sidonia. Catherine died childless.
--------------
No. 82.
CHARLES II., KING OF ENGLAND.
BY SIR PETER LELY.
BORN 1630, RESTORED 1660, DIED 1685.
_Full length. Seated. Crimson robes. Mantle. Collar of the Garter.
Long flowing wig._
HE was the eldest son of Charles I., by Henrietta Maria of France.
Married Catherine of Braganza, by whom he had no children.
--------------
No. 83.
PETER PAUL RUBENS, WIFE, AND CHILD.
BY HIMSELF.
BORN 1577, DIED 1640.
_Both seated. He is in a black dress, reading; his wife in a red gown,
blue
mantle. The child standing on her lap._
THE family of Rubens was of noble Styrian origin. The father of the
illustrious painter settled in Antwerp about the time of the coronation
of Charles V., Emperor of Germany. He became a magistrate, and married
Maria de Pipelingue of that city; but the religious differences, which
were then very fierce, determined him (being a Roman Catholic) to quit
Antwerp, and take up his abode at Cologne, where many children were born
to him, the youngest of whom was Peter Paul, of world-wide fame.
On the death of Rubens the elder, the widow returned with her family to
her native city. She placed her youngest son as page in the house of the
Countess de Lalain, a noble lady, destining him at a later period for
the magistrature; but neither of these vocations pleased the youth’s
fancy, whose decided bias for art soon declared itself. He had some
difficulty in overcoming his mother’s repugnance to the profession he
had chosen, but she loved him too well to be obdurate. He began his
studies as a painter in the school of Adam van Oort, a man of brutal
manners, who soon disgusted the fine taste and good feeling of young
Rubens. His next instructor was Otho Venius, but the pupil soon threw
both masters into the shade.
Rubens now commenced his travels, to Venice first, and to Mantua, where
the reigning Duke showed him the greatest favour, gave him a place at
Court, appointed him Painter-in-Ordinary, and intrusted him with a
diplomatic mission to Philip III. of Spain.
Our painter afterwards visited Rome, and all the principal cities of
Italy, working as he went on all subjects, religious, historical,
mythological, and making splendid portraits, gaining in fact golden
opinions from Popes, Princes, and Potentates.
When at Genoa he heard of the dangerous illness of his mother, to whom
he was tenderly attached; he started immediately for Antwerp, but the
news of her death arrested him on the road, and he went into retreat
near Brussels, to nurse his grief, design a monument to her memory, and
write her epitaph.
The Governor of the Low Countries, the Archduke Albert, and his wife
Isabella, who admired the painter, and esteemed the man, did all they
could to fix him at their Court in Brussels. They gave him a pension and
the key of Chamberlain, and showed him marked proofs of a friendship
which proved lasting, but Rubens preferred returning to Antwerp, where
he could pursue his art with less interruption. Here he built a splendid
house, and formed a noble collection of pictures, which he sold
afterwards to the Duke of Buckingham, with whom he became intimate at
Paris. He was summoned to the French capital by Marie de Medicis, and
executed for her the well-known decorations of the Luxembourg. His
superb talent, his handsome person, his acquaintance with dead and
living languages, and his noble and genial disposition, made Rubens
welcome in every country, and with every class. He proceeded to England,
ostensibly to paint portraits, but in reality to negotiate a peace
between the Courts of Madrid and London, and we are told how discreetly
and warily he entered on his mission, while Charles I. was sitting for
his picture. The King took the greatest delight in the society of
Rubens, loaded him with princely gifts, knighted him in Parliament, (an
especial honour,) presenting him on the occasion with a sword set in
diamonds; and when the new Knight took leave, Charles hung his own
miniature round the painter’s neck, which Rubens wore till his death. He
was now constantly employed in diplomatic missions of all kinds, and
appears almost always to have been successful; he made Antwerp his
headquarters, usually giving the preference during a pressure of work to
the orders of his own countrymen, particularly as regarded religious
fraternities.
His zeal was unwearied; there is scarcely a town in Flanders that is not
enriched by his glorious talent. He loved literature, and while busy at
his easel, would employ a secretary to read aloud to him, generally
selecting some portion of the classics. He lived well, without excess of
any kind, but had always a love for beautiful surroundings. He was an
excellent horseman, and took great interest in the breeding of horses;
but he had a taste for more serious avocations also, and delighted in
presiding over the education of his children. He was twice married,
first to Isabella Brant, whose charming portrait, sitting on the ground
by her husband’s side, holding his hand, is in the Pinakothek at Munich.
His second wife was the beautiful Helena Forman, whose lovely smiling
face, and full rounded form greet us in every gallery in Europe,
sometimes alone, sometimes with a blooming little child beside her.
Rubens made her his model, and painted her in every shape, and in every
costume, and frequently without any costume at all.
By his first marriage he had two sons, to the eldest of whom the
Archduke Albert stood sponsor, and gave his own name; by the second he
had several children.
Marie de Medicis, in her last exile from France, went to Cologne, bought
Rubens’s house, and died there. For some time before his death he was a
martyr to the gout, which at length proved fatal; he lies buried in the
church of St. James, at Antwerp, where his widow caused one of his most
beautiful pictures to be placed.
He painted himself as St. George presenting his two wives to the
Madonna, who carries the Holy Child in her arms.
--------------
No. 84.
JOHN FISHER, BISHOP OF ROCHESTER.
BORN 1455, EXECUTED 1535.
_Ecclesiastical robes._
BORN at Beverley, in Yorkshire, but little is known of his early years;
having taken his degree at Cambridge, he was appointed confessor to
Margaret, Countess of Richmond, (mother of King Henry VII.), by whom he
was much esteemed, and over whose mind he gained a powerful influence,
which he exerted for no selfish ends.
By his advice and co-operation this Princess, after founding the
Colleges of St. John’s and Christ’s at Cambridge, collected famous
Professors from all parts, to be members of the same. The University was
not ungrateful to Fisher for the part he had taken in the aggrandisement
of Cambridge, and elected him Chancellor in 1504. The King (Henry VII.)
preferred him to the See of Rochester, and it is said by some that he
was made preceptor to Prince Henry (afterwards the Eighth). Certain it
is that that Prince after his accession was very partial to the Bishop,
and showed him much favour.
Until the question arose of the divorce of Catherine of Aragon, to which
step Fisher was strenuously opposed on every account, he was personally
much attached to the Queen, and his creed as a Roman Catholic caused him
to deny the validity of such a proceeding. He was also loud in his
disapprobation of the King’s assumption of spiritual supremacy. It
cannot be wondered at, under these circumstances, that Fisher should
fall into thorough disgrace at Court, or that Henry (who could not bear
to be thwarted) should catch at any pretext to persecute him. Added to
all this, Fisher became mixed up in the affair of the ‘Holy Maid of
Kent,’ as she was called, which plunged him into further trouble. His
goods having been confiscated, he was imprisoned during the King’s good
pleasure in the Tower of London, whence he was only released on the
payment of a heavy fine.
It will be remembered that the ‘Holy Maid of Kent’ (an impostor)
pretended to be possessed of the gift of prophecy, and was made an
instrument by some Roman Catholic priests to denounce the doctrines of
the Reformed religion, and to predict a violent death within one month
for Henry, should he proceed with the divorce suit against the Queen.
The unfortunate woman suffered death with some of her upholders, and
most assuredly her predictions were not verified. Henry, exasperated by
Fisher’s determined refusal to acknowledge him as head of the Church,
once more sent the venerable ecclesiastic to the Tower as a rebel, and
when there, in spite of his age and position, Fisher was treated with
shameful indignity. They stripped him of his priestly garments, and
dressed him in scanty rags. But the old man had a dauntless spirit. He
had already been captive for a year, when the Pope, Paul III., hearing
of his sufferings, chiefly on account of his creed, intimated to him
that he should be raised to the grade of a Cardinal, a fatal step as far
as Fisher was concerned. The King, in a fury, forbade the Hat to be
brought into his dominions, and he sent Thomas Cromwell to the Tower to
inquire whether Fisher intended to accept it. The brave old man replied
it was his duty to accept the honour done him by His Holiness, but he
had neither solicited nor desired it, and such was his indifference to
all human grandeur, that if the Hat were lying on the floor, he would
not even stoop to pick it up.
The King was transported with rage when he learned the details of the
interview, and cried out, ‘Let the Pope send it then, and it shall be
placed on John Fisher’s shoulders, for by the mother of God, I will not
leave him a head to carry it.’ This cruel word was kept; the captive was
tried by corrupt judges, creatures of the tyrant, condemned, and
beheaded immediately after his trial. Fisher was remarkable for his
erudition, his knowledge of Holy Writ, and the writings of the Fathers.
He was likewise an eminent controversialist, and his argumentative
writings against Luther and the doctrines of the Reformation made a
great noise on the Continent. Yet he was honoured even by his opponents,
and Erasmus spoke in the highest terms of his integrity and the purity
of his life. The cruelty to which he was subjected roused the
indignation of many writers, and there is more than one foreign as well
as English biography of this learned and good man. He was deeply
attached to his See of Rochester, and although, when in favour in high
places, he had the offer more than once of translation to other
dignities of a more lucrative nature, he refused to leave his beloved
cathedral. ‘Is she not my dear wife?’ he was wont to say, ‘and how then
can I separate myself from my spouse?’
--------------
No. 85.
HENRY FITZALAN, EARL OF ARUNDEL.
BY HOLBEIN.
BORN 1512, DIED 1579-80.
_Black dress. Gold buttons. Gold chain. Ermine cape._
HE was the only son of William the seventeenth Earl of Arundel, by Anne,
daughter of Henry Percy, fourth Earl of Northumberland, and succeeded to
the title and estates when about thirty years of age, until which time
he had lived apart from public life.
In 1544 he accompanied Henry VIII. to Boulogne, which Brandon, Duke of
Suffolk, was then besieging. With the wonderful precipitancy which
characterised the period, Arundel suddenly found himself raised to the
grade of Field-Marshal in the English army. Nor was the choice
misplaced, for a manœuvre on his part carried the town, which he was the
first to enter by a breach, at the head of his troops.
The King, delighted with the success of the undertaking, granted Lord
Arundel the government of Calais, and subsequently the Comptrollership
of the royal household.
Not long after, Arundel was appointed one of the Commissioners to
negotiate a treaty with the Scots, when it so happened that the terms
proposed were distasteful to the King, although unanimously approved by
his Ministers. Henry sent no less a person than William Cecil
(afterwards Secretary) to tell Arundel that whatever he (the King) might
write by letter, his royal pleasure was that the treaty should be
broken.
Cecil demurred, but was ordered off to Scotland.
Whatever impartial opinions may decide as to the honesty of the
proceeding, Arundel gained the King’s approbation, insomuch as he
followed his master’s injunctions, and that with so much discretion as
to take the _onus_ upon himself. Henry defended him when censured by the
Government, ordered his pardon to be drawn up, and not only made him
Lord Chamberlain, but named him one of the guardians to his successor,
the youthful Edward.
After some attempts to remain or appear neutral during the struggle for
power between the Protector Somerset and the Earl of Warwick, Arundel at
length joined the party of the latter nobleman, and was chosen one of
the six Lords intrusted with the custody of the King’s person. We are
told that he was ‘circumspect and slow,’ and ‘a man of integrity.’ Such
a character was not likely to be acceptable to Warwick; Lord Arundel was
deprived of his Chamberlain’s staff and his seat at the Privy Council,
and some frivolous accusations were brought against him, on the strength
of which he was sent to the Tower. He was, moreover, subjected to a
heavy fine, and banished into the country.
‘Doubtless,’ says Sir John Hayward, ‘the Earl of Warwick had good reason
to suspect that they who had the honesty to disapprove his purpose,
would not want the heart to oppose it.’
Arundel remained on his own estates till the King’s death, when he came
forward as a zealous supporter of Mary’s claim to the Crown. At a
meeting of the friends of that Princess he made a most stirring and
impressive speech, nor did he lose the opportunity thus offered him of
attacking the Duke of Northumberland (the Earl of Warwick) for his
conduct, past and present, namely, his disloyalty in the reign of
Edward, and his actual treason in setting up his daughter-in-law, Jane
Grey, as Queen.
Arundel took upon himself to make promises to the Protestants in Mary’s
name which she unfortunately did not fulfil. But his speech was received
with such enthusiasm that at its conclusion the whole assembly escorted
the speaker to the city, and summoning the Lord Mayor and Aldermen,
proceeded then and there to proclaim Mary Tudor Queen of these realms.
Lord Arundel immediately took horse and rode down into Suffolk to
announce in person to Mary herself the success of the exertions made in
her behalf, and at Cambridge he arrested his old enemy, the Duke of
Northumberland, and led him a prisoner to the Tower of London.
These proceedings only occupied three days, and were completed by the
21st of July 1553. The Queen was becomingly grateful; she made Arundel,
Steward of her household and President of her Council.
In 1558 he was elected Chancellor of the University of Oxford, but in
1560 was obliged to resign that dignity on account of his creed, when
the Protestant faith was re-established. In spite, however, of the
difference of their religious views, Queen Elizabeth treated Lord
Arundel with marked distinction, continued him in his office of Lord
Steward, and named him, in addition, High Constable and High Steward of
England at her coronation.
He appears to have thought himself higher in the good graces of the
royal coquette, than was actually the case, and finding himself somewhat
slighted by her and by other friends at Court, we are told he grew
‘troubled in mind, and to wear off his grief, asked leave to travel.’
Accordingly, he went abroad, returned for a short time, and then
repaired to Italy, where he resided for some years. He contracted ‘a
great fondness for foreign fashions,’ and on coming home introduced
many, and in particular the use of coaches, the first known in England
being the property of the Earl of Arundel.
He remained unemployed until the year 1569, when he was named one of the
Commissioners to inquire into the murder of Henry Darnley, King of
Scots. He pleaded Mary’s cause, (believing firmly in her innocence,) and
spoke out boldly in her behalf to Elizabeth herself, at the Council
table when he considered the proceedings unjust. He never failed in his
loyalty to the English Queen, although the intercourse he held with
‘Mary’s friends,’ as they were called, rendered him an object of
distrust.
In 1572 he suffered a brief imprisonment in the Tower, and on his
release found he had forfeited the royal favour, which he did not go the
right way to regain, by his resolute opposition to the proposed marriage
with the Duke of Anjou.