« VorigeDoorgaan »
No. IV. The AUTHOR of EΙΚΩΝ ΒΑΣΙΛΙΚΗ.
AS many tracts have been written to prove that King Charles could not be the Author of EIKIN BAŠIAIKH, and still more to confirm his title to that book; I will transcribe below * an epitome of
* On one side it is said, that in the year 1686, when the Earl of Anglesea's books were selling by auction, this book presented itself among others. The bidders being cold, the company had time to turn over the leaves ; and there they found a declaration under his Lordship's own hand, that King Charles the Second and the Duke of York both assured him that it was not of the King's own compiling, but made by Dr. Gauden, Bishop of Exon. This made a noise ; and Dr. Walker being questioned about it, as known to be very intimate with Gauden, he owned that the Bishop had imparted to him the plan in the beginning, and several chapters actually composed ; and that he, on the other hand, had disapproved the imposing in such a manner on the publick; and in his treatise, intituled, “ A True Account of the Author, &c." Dr. Walker says, “I know and believe the book was written by Dr. Gauden, except the sixteenth and twentyfourth chapters, which were written by Dr. Duppa." Gauden delivered the MS. to Walker, who carried it to the press. A merchant of London, of the name of North, a man of good credit, married the Bishop's son's lady's sister ; and, after young Gauden's death, his papers came into North's hands, being his brother-in-law. There he found one packet relating entirely to EIKIN BALIAIKH, containing, among other things, original letters, and a narrative written by Dr. Gauden's own wife. Bishop Burnet says, that, as he had once an occasion to quote this book, when in conference with King Charles the Second and the Duke of York, in 1673, they both declared that their Father never wrote it, but that it was written by Gauden, whom they rewarded with a Bishoprick. See“ A Letter from Major-general Ludlow to Sir E. S. 1691," 4t0; “ Ludlow no Lvar, 1692," 4to; Walker's “ True Account, &c. 1692,” 4to; Toland's and Richardson's “ Life of Milton," and Bayle's “ General Dictionary;" and more particularly Neal's “ History of the Puritans," vol. II. chap. 10.---To this evidence has been opposed, the public testimony of both Charles II. and James II. to the contrary, · under the great seal, in the patent to Mr. Royston, for printing all the works of King Charles I. And though it is highly probable that neither of these Princes were likely to know any thing of the contents of patents, this circumstance deserves at least as much credit as a private memorandum, unattested, purporting it to be written with a view that it could not answer: “ I assert this," says Lord Anglesea, “ to undeceive others :" but, if his intention · had been “ to undeceive others," why did he leave his declaration in the privacy of his study, on a single leaf, that might be
the controversy ; and add here such new testimonies as have occurred to me from the MSS. of Mr. obliterated or torn out; where indeed it was known to exist but by accident, the slow sale of the books affording time to the company to turn over the leaves ? why did he not authenticate his declaration by proper witnesses, and publish it to the world, or leave it in some trusty hand, with a charge to publish it åt some more convenient season? As to Gauden's pretensions to this book, they are easily to be accounted for, supposing them to be ill-founded. After the death of Dr. Bryan Duppa, Bishop of Winchester, Gauden, presuming on the favour of some persons at Court, solicited, with great eagerness, for the vacant See, though he had openly abjured the whole Episcopal Order, and was said to have advised King Charles II. by letter to suppress it in Scotland. To strengthen his claim to this favour, he is said to have whispered ainong his friends, and attempted, without witness or credit, to persuade the King and his brother the Duke of York, that their father was obliged to him for the credit which he derived from the EIKIN BALIAIKH : but this was 15 years after the death of Charles I. nor was any person then living who could give evidence concerning the book. It is, however, urged, that Dr. Walker, at the age of 70, and 40 years after the King's death, appeared in defence of this fict tion : but must Walker's evidence in favour of Gauden bé deemed indisputable, as has been insinuated, merely because Gauden was his preceptor, and afterwards his intimate? This surely is rather a reason why it ought to be suspected. Besides, Walker's evider.ce is defective, and, in some instances, scarce consistent; for, though he says Dr. Gauden shewed him the plan, and several chapters actually composed, yet he does not say that they were in the Doctor's hand; and he afterwards exa presses himself doubtfully, whether he read any part of the ma. nuscript, or only saw it with the title of the chapters; though surely, if Gauden shewed him some part, actually composed, as his own work, he could not have mortified him with such cold. ness and want of curiosity as not to read it: besides, for what other purpose was it shewn? and how could Walker be supposed to live at this time in the house with Gauden, and know so much, without knowing more? As to the evidence of Mr. North and Mrs. Gauden, it can stand for little, if the following positive evidence in favour of the book be considered: M. de la Pla, minister of Finchingfield, in a letter to Dr. Goodall, informs bim, that William Allen, a man of repute and veracity, who had been many years a servant to Gauden, declared, that Gauden told him he had borrowed the book ;' and that, being obliged to return it in a certain time, he sate up in his chamber one whole night to transcribe it, Allen himself sitting up with bim, to make up his fire, and snuff his candles. It is also recorded by Sir William Dugdale, who was perfectly acquainted with the transactions of his own times, that these meditations мм 2
had Bowyer. “Mr. Royston, who first printed the book, informed Sir William Dugdale, that, about the beginning of October 1648, he was sent to by the King, to prepare all things ready for the printing some papers, which he purposed shortly after to convey to him; and which was this very copy, brought to him the 23d of December next followhad been begun by his Majesty at Oxford, long before he went thence to the Scots, under the title of Suspiria Regalia; and that the manuscript itself, in the King's own hand-writing, being lost at Naseby, was restored to him at Hampton Court, by Major Huntingdon, who had obtained it from Fairfax. That Mr. Thomas Herbert, [afterwards Sir Thomas, the Trareller, who' waited on his Majesty in his bed-chamber in the Isle of Wight, and William Levet, a Page of the back-stairs, frequently saw it there, read several parts of it, and saw the King divers times writing farther on in that very copy which Bishop Duppa, by his Majesty's direction, sent to Mr. Royston, a bookseller, at the Angel in Ivy-lane, on the 23d of December 16-18, who made such expedition, that the impression was finished before the 30th of January, on which his Majesty died. Lasur, it is improbable that, if this book had been the work of Gauden, King Charles II. would have expressed himself with so little esteem and affection, when he heard of his death. “I doubt not," said he, « it will be easy to find a more worthy person to fill his place.” See “Wagstaffe's Vindication, 1711 ;" Bedford's Appendix to his “ Life of Dr. Barwick;" Dr. Hollingworth's « Defence of Eikoon Basilikè, two parts, 1692, 4to;" another “ Defence," by Thomas Long, B. D. 1693, 4to; and Dugdale's “ Short View.” - John Gauden was born at Mavland in Esser; made Dean of Bocking and Master of the Temple, in the beginning of the reign of Charles I.; Bishop of Exeter in 1660; and translated to Worcester two vears after, which See be enjoyed but four months, dying at his Palace there, Sept. 20, 1669, aged 57.-A portrait of him is given by Dr. Nash, in which his eharacter is strongly marked, though by a bad artist, and taken from a bad bust, placed over his grave in the Cathedral church at Worcester. Gauden published a book, intituled, “ '1caratt, Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ Suspiria : The Tears, Sighs, Complain's, and Prayers of the Church of England." In the frontispiece is drawn a tree, on whose branches is set forth the history and chronology of Episcopacy, Presbytery, and Independency, 33 pretenders to Church Government : the whole book is written something in this style, and is more debased with the pedantry than embellished with the elegances of Learning. Some other of his works are, “ Hieraspistes ;" a Sermon intituled, “ Funerals made Cordials ;" « The Case of the Ministers Maintenance by Tythe ;" some Sermons; and other books.
ing by Mr. Edward Symmons. Mr. Edward Symmons, who conveyed both the copies (viz. that written by Mr. Odart and that by the King) to the press, declared upon his death-bed, that it was the King's work, and assured several of his friends at Fowey, when he sent them some of the books, that he had printed them from the King's own copy *.
There were seventeen editions printed of the book in 1648, without the Prayers; and twelve inore in 1649, in which year there were at least six editions go with the Prayers. These were first printed by Dugard, who was Milton's intimate friend, and happened to be taken printing an edition of the King's book. Milton used his interest to bring him off, which he effected by the means of Bradshaw, but upon this condition, that Dugard should add Pamela's prayer to the aforesaid book he was printing, as an atonement for his fault, they designing thereby to bring a scandal upon the book, and blast the reputation of its authority*. To the same purpose Dr. Bernard, who (as well as Gill) was Physician to Hills, Oliver's Printer, and told him this story; adding, that he had often heard Bradshaw and Milton g laugh at their inserting this prayer
* Dean Swift, speaking of the Eixwo Basilica', says, it is 2 poor performance, and unworthy of the reputed author. Archbishop Herring, comparing the work with Anti-Machiavel, says, “ In my opinion, this book of the King of Prussia is much more in the style and character of a great Prince than the celebrated EIKNN BALIAIKH, unless we are to suppose every Christian Prince to support the two characters of King and Priest; for the book last nientioned is more agreeable to the sacred function, as, I believe, in real truth, it was the work of one of us." Letters to Mr. Duncomte.
† The sixth is said, in the title, to be printed by W. D. in R, M. Anno Dom. 1649." There were fifty editions, in various languages, within twelve months.
Dr. Gill's Letter to Mr. Wagstaffe, § “ Milton,” says his greatest Biographer, “ is suspected of having interpolated the book called Icon Basilikè, wnich the Council of State, to whom he was now made Latin secretary, employed him to censure, by inserting a prayer taken from Sid. ney's Arcadia, and imputing it to the King; whom he charges, ' in his Iconoclastes, with the use of this prayer as w.th a heavy
out of Sir Philip Sydney's Arcadia.' These Prayers are said in their title to have been delivered to Dr. Juxon,' &c. If so, they must have been handed to the press by the King's enemies ; for Dr. Juxon and all his papers were immediately seized upon the King's death; even the minutest scraps were examined, the King's cloaths, cabinets, and boxes, were rifled. They were first printed at Dugard's press, and afterwards were quickly translated to Mr. Royston's, for every thing that was supposed to come from the King quickened the sale of the impression. Mrs. Fotherly, of Rickmansworth in Hertfordshire, daughter of Sir Ralph Whitfield, first Serjeant-at-law to King Charles I. and grand-daughter to Sir Henry Spelman, declared to Mr. Wagstaffe, that within two days after the King's death, she saw, in a Spanish leather case, three of these prayers, said to be delivered to the Bishop of London at his death, from whom they were taken away by the Officers of the Army; and it was from one of those Officers, in whose custody they then were, that she had the favour to see them; and that the person who shewed her those prayers, shewed her also the George with the Queen's picture in it, and two seals which were the King's. Three of the prayers therefore were the King's, the other added by the publisher.” W. BOWYER. · Dr. John Burton, in an Appendix to “ The Genuineness of Lord Clarendon's History," &c. has crime, in the indecent language with which prosperity had emboldened the advocates for rebellion to insult all that is venerable and great : “Who would have imagined so little fear in him of the true all-seeing Deity -- as, immediately before his death, to pop into the hands of the grave bishop that attended him, as a special relique of his saintly exercises, a prayer stolen word for word from the mouth of a heathen woman praying to a heathea god?' The papers which the King gave to Dr. Juxon on the scaffold, the Regicides took away, so that they were at least the publishers of this prayer; and Dr. Birch, who examined the question with great care, was inclined to think them the furgers. The use of it by adaptation was innocent; and they who could 80 noisily censure it, with a little extension of their malice coud contrive what they wanted to aceuse."!