Mirror for Magistrates.

Mirror for Magistrates.

EDITED BY
JOSEPH HASLEWOOD.

VOLUME I.

LONDON:
PRINTED FOR
LACKINGTON, ALLEN, AND CO. FINSBURY SQUARE;
AND
LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN, PATERNOSTER ROW.
1815.

VOLUME THE FIRST,

CONTAINING

PART I.
BY JOHN HIGGINS.

PART II.
BY THOMAS BLENER-HASSET.

COLLATED WITH
VARIOUS EDITIONS, AND HISTORICAL NOTES, &c.
By JOSEPH HASLEWOOD.

LONDON:
PRINTED FOR
LACKINGTON, ALLEN, AND CO. FINSBURY SQUARE;
AND
LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN, PATERNOSTER ROW.
1815.

THIS EDITION

OF THE

Mirror for Magistrates:

A

POPULAR PRODUCTION OF THE REIGN OF ELIZABETH

WHICH MERITED REVIVAL,

IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED,

BY HIS OBEDIENT

AND OBLIGED SERVANT,

JOSEPH HASLEWOOD.

INTRODUCTION.

Although the prevailing taste for Bibliography has already drawn forth copious accounts of the various editions of the Mirror for Magistrates, and the industry of preceding Biographers has left little new to say of its authors, yet an entire Reprint of this once celebrated work requires the accompaniment of an Introductory Account of these subjects, even at the hazard of repeating a great deal that has been lately told, unmixed with much that is novel.

The history of the Work divides itself under three several heads; viz. 1. Of its origin. 2. Of the 'primary inventor.’[1] 3. Of the various editions. But before these are separately examined, there may be fitly introduced the following view taken by our admirable historian of English Poetry, of the turbulent period of its first appearance.

“True genius,” Warton says, “unseduced by the cabals, and unalarmed by the dangers of faction, defies or neglects those events, which destroy the peace of mankind, and often exerts its operations amidst the most violent commotions of a state. Without patronage and without readers, I may add without models, the earlier Italian writers, while their country was shook by the intestine tumults of the Guelfes and Guibelines, continued to produce[Pg ii] original compositions both in prose and verse, which yet stand unrivalled. The age of Pericles and of the Peloponnesian war was the same. Careless of those who governed or disturbed the world, and superior to the calamities of a quarrel, in which two mighty leaders contended for the prize of universal dominion, Lucretius wrote his sublime didactic poem On the System of Nature, Virgil his Bucolics, and Cicero his Books of Philosophy. The proscriptions of Augustus did not prevent the progress of the Roman literature. In the turbulent and unpropitious reign of Queen Mary, when controversy was no longer confined to speculation, and a spiritual warfare polluted every part of England with murthers more atrocious than the slaughter of the most bloody civil contest, a poem was planned, although not fully completed, which illuminates with no common lustre that interval of darkness, which occupies the annals of English poetry from Surrey to Spenser, entitled A Mirrour for Magistrates.”[2]

I. After this general character of the work, the first step in our particular discussion leads us to its origin. This was confessedly Lydgate’s Fall of Princes, an origin which is very striking, and still enhances the high merit so eloquently ascribed to it by Warton, when we recollect that the writer to whom it thus owed its foundation, has been pronounced by a shrewd critic one “who disgraced the name and patronage of his master Chaucer.”[3] But so decisive and intimate was this origin of a work, which had so important an effect on our national poetry, that when first planned, it seems intended to have been embodied in the same volume with the translation by Lydgate.

To prove that this is not a mere point of speculative criticism; but, on the contrary, stands on evidence very different from conjecture, I need only cite the words of William Baldwin himself, the original editor: “Whan the printer (he says) had purposed with himselfe to printe Lidgates booke of the fall of Princes, and had made pryuye thereto many both honourable and worshipfull, he was counsailed by dyuers of them to procure to[Pg iii] haue the storye contynewed from where as Bochas left, vnto this present time, chiefly of such as Fortune had dalyed with here in this ylande: which might be as a myrrour for al men as well nobles as others.”[4] From this suggestion the printer, John Wayland, importuned Baldwin to undertake the task; but he describes himself as declining so weighty an enterprise without assistance. On the other hand Wayland, “earnest and diligent in his affairs,” procured, shortly after, divers learned men to consent to take upon them part of the 'travail;’ and early in the year 1555, the Mirror for Magistrates was partly printed in folio, but the proceeding hindered by the Lord Chancellor that then was.[5]

In that suppressed edition the interlocutory parts are given in running lines across the page, and the poems in double columns, the type corresponding and the page imposed of the same size as Wayland’s edition of Lydgate’s translation; wherein the roman numericals have an unusual stop at the end of the seventh book with “leaf clxiij,” and the prologue of the eighth book commences with “fol. 1,” which continues to the end at “fol. XXXVII,” as if it was projected to add to the last portion the Mirror for Magistrates, making a second part or volume in continuance of the work which gave it origin.

From the time of first establishing the English press to the reign of Queen Mary, when the folio, or suppressed, edition was printed, our typographical annals do not show any works in equal estimation with the domestic chronicles. The Fruit of Times, or St. Alban’s Chronicle, Polychronicon, and those others compiled by Fabyan, Grafton, Hall, Harding, Lanquet, &c. were in general repute and extensive circulation, and for that reason fixed upon as fit materials for poetry by Baldwin and his coadjutors.

The influence and demand for the chronicles also occasioned the sudden revival, after a lapse of twenty-seven years, of The[Pg iv] boke of Iohan Bochas descryuing the fall of Princes, Princesses, and other Nobles, translated by John Lydgate. That work was first printed by Pynson in 1494, also in 1527,[6] and then remained unnoticed until 1554, when Richard Tottell reprinted it under a new title,[7] with the incidental wood-cuts, and appending thereto the singular dance of Machabree.[8]

In the same or following year after this revival an edition was projected and executed by Wayland:[9]—a convincing evidence,[Pg v] as well of the fashionable cast of reading, as of the rapid demand for that work; otherwise even the rivalry of trade would never have hazarded another edition, so soon after Tottell’s copies had supplied the market.

All the authors who joined in enlarging, or completing the part first published of the Mirrour, have but slightly deviated from Lydgate’s model, which was then secure in public approbation; and they therefore, in some instances, may be suspected to have sacrificed genius and imagination at the shrine of perverted taste, in order to obtain a continuance of the same patronage. The Mirrour for Magistrates was, in fact, a common offspring of that class of historical literature, which then flourished widely.[10] The addition of rhyme was the mere variance of a minor[Pg vi] ornament, rather than a change of its substantial nature;[11] though many inferior productions, which its popularity brought forth, seemed afterwards to give it the appearance of forming a main class of our national poetry.[12]

From those historical stores were taken the principal incidents and characters of the princes and nobles, whose vicious lives and tragical ends made them conspicuous as moral examples; and as fit beacons to check rebellion; a purpose which is ably attempted through the whole work. Indeed, so little did any one of this combination of poets venture fame, that novelty was neither attempted in subject, nor manner of composition. The whole selection of matter was from chronicles in universal circulation; as the seven-line stanza was adopted from their precursor Lydgate; and, upon this last point, there may be added, that it is doubtful if Higgins did[Pg vii] not cancel two or three lives, first published in another measure, for the advantage of substituting others, to accord with the original plan and general taste.[13]

[Pg viii]

II. In the next division of inquiry as to the 'primary inventor’ of the Mirror for Magistrates, the discussion arises from the unfounded[Pg ix] application of that term by Warton to that eminent genius Thomas Sackville, afterwards created Lord Buckhurst and Earl of Dorset, and which has been repeated, without examination, by subsequent writers.

[Pg x]

It has been already stated, that the industry of Wayland effected much in obtaining the contributory aid of the popular poets; nor must the labour of Ferrers, who exerted himself in completing the original plan, be left unnoticed; but still the general formation rests principally, if not entirely, with Baldwin. His claim to the air of novelty, so successfully introduced for the purpose of connecting the whole as an unbroken series, by an intermediate and apposite dialogue, has not been disputed, any more than his finally completing the volume with an introductory Epistle and Preface.

The date at which Sackville’s communication was obtained, is decisive against the opinion, that the work found in him “its primary inventor.” If the contributors to the suppressed edition remain, like their articles, unknown and uncertain; the one published in 1559, was a complete volume, and not any communication by Sackville is there inserted. The intervention of the lord Chancellor certainly deferred, but did not destroy the work; and only on the enlargement thereof, by a SECOND PART, in 1563, is his name first mentioned, in the address prefixed to that part by Baldwin, as having “aptly ordered the duke of Buckynghams oracion.” At the distance of a few sheets after this trite notice, appears that beautifully descriptive and highly polished poem called “the Induction,” which served to envelop all the other contributors with the shade of secondary characters.

[Pg xi]

The history of its origin is given, in the intermediate dialogue, thus:

“Then sayd the reader: 'The next here whom I finde miserable are king Edwards two sonnes, cruelly murdered in the Tower of London.’ 'Haue you theyr tragedy?’ 'No surely (q; I) the Lord Vaulx vndertooke to penne it, but what he hath done therein I am not certayne, and therfore I let it passe til I knowe farder. I haue here y^e Duke of Buckingham, king Richarde’s chyefe instrument, wrytten by mayster Thomas Sackuille.’ 'Read it we pray you:’ sayd they. 'Wyth a good wyl (q; I) but fyrst you shal heare his preface or Induction.’ 'Hath he made a preface (q; one) what meaneth he thereby, seeing none other hath vsed the like order?’ 'I wyl tell you the cause thereof (q; I) which is thys: After that he vnderstoode that some of the counsayle would not suffer the booke to be printed in suche order as we had agreed and determined, he purposed with himselfe to have gotten at my handes, al the tragedies that were before the duke of Buckinghams, which he would haue preserued in one volume, and from that time backeward euen to the time of William the Conquerour, he determined to continue and perfect all the story himselfe in such order as Lydgate (folowing Bocchas) had already vsed. And therfore to make a meete induction into the matter, he deuised this poesye; which in my Judgement is so wel penned, that I woulde not haue any verse therof left out of our volume.’—”

Niccols, in the last edition, has ventured, without reason, to sever the Induction from the Legend, before which it was placed, in order to fix it at the head of those collected by Baldwin, although that editor did not suffer the communication of Sackville to alter his original plan. The explanatory Advertisement of Niccols has occasioned the erroneous belief of that author being 'primary inventor’ of the whole work. “Hauing hitherto (he says) continued the storie, gentle Reader, from the first entrance of Brute into this Iland, with the falles of such Princes, as were neuer before this time in one volume comprised, I now proceed with the rest, which take their beginning from the Conquest, whose [pen-men being many and diuers, all diuerslie affected in[Pg xii] the method of this their Mirror, I purpose only to follow the intended scope of that, most honorable personage, who, by how much he did surpasse the rest in the eminence of his noble condition, by so much he hath exceeded them all in the excellencie of his heroicall stile which with a golden pen he hath limmed out to posteritie in that worthy obiect of his minde, the Tragedie of the Duke of Buckingham, and in his preface then intituled Master Sackuil’s induction. This worthie President of learning, intending to perfect all this storie himselfe from the Conquest, being called to a more serious expence of his time in the great State-affaires of his most royall Ladie, and Soueraigne, left the dispose thereof to M. Baldwine,] M. Ferrers, and others, the composers of these Tragedies, who continuing their methode which was by way of dialogue or interlocution betwixt euery Tragedie, gaue it onely place before the Duke of Buckinghams complaint, which order I since hauing altered, haue placed the Induction in the beginning, with euery Tragedie following according to succession and the iust computation of time, which before was not obserued,” &c.

With a knowlege of the statement made by Baldwin, there is not any thing obscure or easily to be mistook in this Advertisement. Niccols has only repeated the intention of Sackville, and that being prevented by more weighty engagements from executing it, he left the Induction at the disposal of Baldwin, Ferrers, &c. who chose to continue their own plan. Of this plan Niccols altered the order, and placed the Induction at the beginning. However the sense of the prefatory article has been much mistaken; probably from a want of some knowlege of the antecedent authority.

Mrs. Cooper, in the Muses Library, 1738, says of Sackville: “It appears to me, by a preface of Mr. Niccols, that the Original Plan of the Mirror for Magistrates, was principally owing to him.”—Collins, in the English Peerage, having transcribed the passage given above in brackets, is referred to by Lord Orford, in the Royal and Noble Authors, as his authority for asserting, that “the original thought was his Lordship’s.” And might not this concatenation of error extend further by the construction of Lord Orford and have misled Warton? That luminous historian of our[Pg xiii] native poetry, says: “More writers than one were concerned in the execution of this piece: but its PRIMARY INVENTOR, and most distinguished contributor, was Thomas Sackville the first lord Buckhurst, and first earl of Dorset. About the year 1557, he formed the plan of a poem, in which all the illustrious but unfortunate characters of the English history, from the conquest to the end of the fourteenth century, were to pass in review before the poet, who descends like Dante into the infernal region, and is conducted by Sorrow. Although a descent into hell had been suggested by other poets, the application of such a fiction to the present design, is a conspicuous proof of genius and even of invention. Every personage was to recite his own misfortunes in a separate soliloquy. But Sackville had leisure only to finish a poetical preface called an Induction, and one Legend, which is the life of Henry Stafford duke of Buckingham. Relinquishing therefore the design abruptly, and hastily adapting the close of his Induction to the appearance of Buckingham, the only story he had yet written, and which was to have been the last in his series, he recommended the completion of the whole to Richard Baldwyne and George Ferrers.”—

“Baldwyne and Ferrers,” it is afterwards observed, “perhaps deterred by the greatness of the attempt, did not attend to the series prescribed by Sackville, but inviting some others to their assistance, among which are Churchyard and Phayer, chose such lives from the newly published chronicles of Fabyan and Hall, as seemed to display the most affecting catastrophes, and which very probably were pointed out by Sackville.”—

The observations of Warton were either written at various times, or he depended too implicitly upon loose extracts from authorities no longer possessed, as he refers to one edition when quoting another.[14]

The hypothesis of Sackville being 'primary inventor,’ &c. shows that he relied upon, and at the same time mistook, the[Pg xiv] meaning of Niccols, (whose corrupt text of the Induction he reprinted,) and never discovered that his position was negatived by the interlocutory matter given above from the edition of 1563, when Sackville made his first and only known communication.

While this circumstantial detail disrobes Sackville of his revived honors, there must not be more than a qualified portion of the character of 'primary inventor’ of the Mirrour for Magistrates transferred to Baldwin. He was the common editor and inventor of the intermediate conversations, but the acknowledged design of himself and associates went no further than to raise another story upon the fabric built by Lydgate in the preceding century.[15]

[Pg xvi]

III. The bibliographical division is classed chronologically by the dates of the editions, and not as to the legends. The first or suppressed edition was entituled

The above title in the same compartment as was used by Wayland on reprinting Lydgate.[16] At the back of the leaf is a copy of his letters patent, as preserved in the note below,[17] to secure a right in the work as having first printed it.

[Pg xvii]

Baldwin in his Epistle dedicatory, in 1559, says: “The wurke was begun, & part of it printed iiii years agoe, but hyndred by the Lord Chancellor that then was.” This hinderance must have arisen from the rigour of Stephen Gardiner, who died, Chancellor, in Nov. 1555. How far the printing had proceeded is unknown.[18][Pg xviii] Three or perhaps four copies of the title leaf may be traced; and two of those are in the possession of Mr. Heber.[19] There is also a fragment of two duplicate leaves in the British Museum, with running title “vnfortunate English Princes,” containing part of the legend of Owen Glendower, and from which the appropriation is now first made of the signature “T. Ch.” to its more certain owner Sir Thomas Chaloner. It maybe added, that I have reason to believe, a still larger fragment exists in a private library.[20]

From the size and manner of the page of this folio edition being upon the same scale as Wayland’s reprint of The tragedies gathered by Ihon Bochas, as noticed already, it appears upon calculation, that if no more than was printed in 1559 had been given,[21] it would not have exceeded twenty-five or thirty leaves, and which may be assigned as a further reason for believing the original intention was to include both works in one volume.

This title is in an architectural metal border, composed of[Pg xix] four pieces. After the Epistle inscribed by the editor William Baldwin, to the Nobility, and his Brief Memorial addressed to the Reader, follow nineteen legends, viz:

Several of these lives have always been printed without signatures, and, from want of a knowledge of other claimants, are conjecturally supposed to be written by Baldwin. A slight authority for this appropriation is found in the Epistle before the[Pg xx] continuation of the work in the next edition, in the observation: “I have nowe also set furth another parte conteynynge as litle of myne owne, as the fyrst doth of other mens.” With no better testimony, ten of the lives, distinguished above with asterisks, are attributed to his pen, while in another place Baldwin makes questionable his own title. The passage alluded to is found in the preface, and has been hitherto passed over unnoticed. He says: “The numbre of seauen, were through a generall assent at one apoynted time and place, gathered together, to deuise thereupon; (and, he adds) I resorted vnto them.”[23] After this formal annunciation of a company consisting of eight persons, including the Editor, given at the head of the volume, may we not expect to find, that each was a contributor? Yet in the above list, are only six names, viz: Ferrers, Cavil, Chaloner, Phaer, Baldwin, and Skelton; and the last doubtful, as he died as early as 1529; and Baldwin repeats the lines from memory. Perhaps this difficulty may be avoided by adding to the five certain names those of Sackville, Dolman, and Segar; concluding that the Editor had received their assurance of articles in time for another edition, and which are found inserted in the next accordingly. No other name interferes with this disposition, except that of Churchyard, whose communication of Shore’s Wife was no sooner read, than Baldwin observes: “all together exhorted me instantly to procure Maister Churchyarde to vndertake and to penne as manye moe of the remaynder as myght by any meanes be attaynted at his handes.” This presumptively shows that the author was not enumerated as one of the company.

All that can be gleaned from the intermediate prose, upon this subject, is very inconclusive and unsatisfactory. For example, there being no man ready at the meeting,[24] Baldwin said: “I will somewhat doe my part, I will, under your correction, declare the tragedy of Thomas Mowbray, duke of Northfolk.” And to this life, in edition 1571, “T. Ch.” is added, the signature of Sir T. Chaloner. Again, at p. 77, Ferrers is staid by one who briefly said: “To the end, Baldwin, that you may know what[Pg xxi] to say of the Percies,—I will take upon me the person of the Lord Henry Percy,” &c. and this is left without signature, and given to Baldwin. Similar at p. 102, where the Speaker adopting king James, concludes “mark, Baldwin, what I think he may say,” and which also, as wanting signature, has the same appropriation. Several others are contradictory, as being delivered in the person of one of the company, and since assigned to the Editor, by whose indolence, perhaps, in not altering the conversations to suit the fact, after public approbation extinguished the desire of secrecy, and real signatures were added, much of this complexity arises.

This title in the same border as before. In addition to the contents of the preceding article, this has the original Induction by Sackville; and the eight following legends, as a second part, viz.

As well in this as the prior edition, there is a lapse in numbering the folio from xlviii to lix.[25] The other edition is printed on a better paper, and with clearer ink; abounds less in press errors; and has not such frequent inaccuracies in the numbering, though they correspond in leaves to fol. Lxxxv, sig. k i, where “endeth the first parte” in this edition. The opening prose, or conversation, of the second part is addressed to the reader, by Baldwin, in whose hands Ferrers is described, as placing all[Pg xxii] he had brought, having business great and weighty to attend, and knowing he could “do it well inough:” And “dyuers of the rest lykyng hys deuyse, vsed the lyke maner.” The whole controul of this first edition of the second part was evidently given to Baldwin.

At folio Cxvi, or sig. P iii, is the unusual circumstance of a variance being made in two instances, while printing, and here given as they stand in two different copies:

One has:

The Induction.

The tapets torne, and euery blome downe blowen.

The other:

Mayster Sackuilles Induction.

The tapets torne, and euery tree downe blowen.

The effect is considered in Vol. II. p. 309. At the end of the volume is a leaf with “The ¶ contes and Table of the first parte of this Booke. ¶ A prose to the Reader, continued betwene the tragedies from the beginning of the booke to the ende. Tragedies beginning,” &c. as it stands in the former edition; and on the next page “¶ The Contentes of the second parte. ¶ A Prose to the Reader continued through the booke. Complayntes beginning,” &c. Another leaf has “Faultes escaped in the Printing,” which fill two pages.

This edition only varies in the arrangement from the preceding, by the life of the Duke of Somerset being transposed to fall in chronological order. The addition of the signatures of several of the authors, gives a peculiar value to this impression.

[Pg xxiii]

This is the best legitimate attempt to enlarge the work published by Baldwin; and the date of the first edition has escaped the research of modern bibliographers.[27] To the Title succeeds the Table of Contents on one leaf; the Epistle dedicatory to the nobility, and the address to the reader. The Authour’s Induction imitates that by Sackville, and is followed by sixteen legends, the sole production of John Higgins.[28]

[Pg xxiv]

Their names follow, viz:

At the end of Nennius the address of “the Author” concludes with the fifth Stanza:[29]

A copy having a title page with the above date is as rare as the preceding article. The particular description, with which it is mentioned in a note by Warton, seemed to make its existence certain, although there was not wanting reason for disbelief on the occasion. Even that writer considered it “improperly entitled The Last Parte,” the existence of our preceding article not being then known.

The Contents are the same as edition 1571.

This is an accurate reprint of the first edition, with an enlargement of “the Author,” at the end of Nennius, by the addition of Eleven Stanzas, and another legend concluding the volume, viz:

This is the edition of 1574, a circumstance that accounts for it being so little known in the original state. The part by Higgins, when it first appeared, no doubt found a rapid demand from those who possessed a copy of that by Baldwin; and therefore in the present instance an altered title, wherein a new date was substituted,[30] served to keep time with the second edition of the part by Higgins.

[Pg xxvii]

The first part of the Mirour for Magistrates.—Imprinted for Thomas
Marshe. 1578.

Mentioned by Ritson in the Bibliographia Poetica, p. 243, and also in a manuscript list made by him of all the editions. It is stated to have contained, as before, seventeen legends. I have never seen it.

Two additional legends were introduced, viz:

In the table of Contents to the edition of 1559, there is entered: “Good Duke Humfry murdered, and Eleanor Cobham his wife banished,” though no articles appear of that nature in the order of reference. What occasioned them to be deferred, it would be in vain now to inquire, or conjecture.

This title is in an elegant architectural compartment, supported by crouching satyrs, and having upon the sill “Goe straight and feare not.”

It contains 12 legends, viz:

The whole was the production of Thomas Blenerhasset, and was, if we may believe the printer’s epistle, published without the knowledge or sanction of the author. In that epistle the writer speaks of “findyng a booke already in print, entituled, The first and third part of the Mirrour for Magistrates;” which appears only a convenient alteration of the two titles already given, there not being any edition distinguished as the Third part.

A short preface, grounded upon the prefatory epistle of 1574, is substituted for that, and followed by a metrical address from Thomas Newton to the reader. Some additional legends by Higgins are introduced in the body of the work; and several others in continuance. Their titles are

On the reverse of folio 108, commences the Part edited by Baldwin. The brief Memorial to the reader is given; and the[Pg xxix] 29 legends already named with the addition of four, viz:

The productions of Baldwin and Higgins are here united with additional matter and corrections; and this being the last printed by either of the original editors, may be characterised, and has been now adopted, as the STANDARD EDITION.

Both titles are found to the same edition. The last appears an attempt to new vamp the remainder of an unsaleable and justly depreciated article. A large part of the volume is formed from the labours of Higgins, Blenerhasset, and Baldwin, and reprinted on the laudable plan of collecting them together, by Richard Niccols. Unfortunately the original spirit and character[Pg xxx] is materially affected, if not destroyed, by his choosing to omit all intermediate matter between the legends, whether prose or verse: for the L’envoy of Higgins, and conversations of Blenerhasset and Baldwin are alike rejected. And his total want of respect for the original text, in addition to a false taste in remodelling it to please his own ear and fancy, has scarcely left a Legend that does not exhibit specimens of this unwarrantable liberty:[31] indeed it has long been known that the only value his collection now retains, is for that part completed by his own pen, which forms the remainder of the volume.

His own explanatory advertisement may be preserved here; it is addressed

To the Reader.

[Pg xxxi]

Niccols in the first division gives the forty legends by John Higgins, and ten of those by Thomas Blenerhasset, the two of Guiderius and Alurede being rejected. Then a new title:

Prefixed to this part is a short prose address from the Editor on his following the supposed plan of Sackville, by placing the Induction at the beginning as a prefatory poem. He has retained twenty-nine of the legends of Baldwin, and others, already noticed, omitting for reasons not assigned the following four; Richard Duke of Gloucester, James Ist and IVth, and the Battle of Flodden Field: and adding that of Lord Cromwell by Michael Drayton.

These reprints occupy 548 pages; the remainder of the volume is original, and in two divisions.

Dedicatory sonnet to the Earl of Nottingham, prose address to the reader, The Induction, and ten legends, viz:

Dedicatory sonnet to Lady Elizabeth Clere, a prose advertisement, The Induction, and the poem of England’s Eliza.

In Five Parts, 1815.

Above three years have elapsed since the present edition was projected. It was then intended to form one of a series of reprints of poetical works of the Elizabethan æra that had ceased to be attainable, though entitled by merit to be rescued from undeserved obscurity, and was to have been attached to a periodical work, which has now ceased its circulation.

To select so voluminous a performance as the Mirror for Magistrates might appear extraordinary, had not a more complete edition than has hitherto appeared, been long wanted. A want, which, as the work combined the desultory productions of many writers, and was interspersed with incidental narrative in prose, could not, although a national poem, be supplied by any collection of the English poets. It is true that Sackville’s Induction and the Legend of Buckingham may be found in Dr. Anderson’s collection: but this was a partial appropriation rather fitting the Elegant Extracts, than a Complete Edition of the English poets, from which such a fragment was of course displaced. There was also wanted a certain list of the many editions, with their various additions: what laboured research had not hitherto supplied, for even the critical and valuable examination of the work by Warton, was known, from the references, to have several errors.

The hallowed voice of 'elden’ critics[32] was uniform in its favour; and to that might be joined the opinion of several literary[Pg xxxiii] friends, who, on the subject being first agitated, by their assistance made the difficulties that appeared unsurmountable, vanish. It is now comprised in two volumes and five parts, as follows:

Part I.—Sixth Edition:

by John Higgins,[33] is reprinted from the standard edition of 1587 collated with those of 1575, and 1610; and contains

In prose.—The Epistle Dedicatory.—*I. Higgins to the Reader.—*A Preface to the Reader.—In verse:—Thomas Newton to the Reader.—The Author’s Induction.—Legends:

Niccols rejected the matter distinguished above with an asterisk, and also the intermediate verses as “L’envoy” that connected the legends, which are now restored; and in the notes are given the variations, as originally printed, under the title of “the authour.” Of the legends No. 9, 13, and 14, the notes contain those as printed in the first edition.

Part II. Third Edition:

by Thomas Blenerhasset,[34] from the edition of 1578, collated with that of 1610. Contains

*The Printer to the Reader.—*The Authour’s Epistle unto[Pg xxxv] his friends.—Legends:

The original intermediate prose inductions are now given, which, as well as the articles that have asterisks affixed, were rejected by Niccols.

Part III. Eighth Edition:

by William Baldwin, and his Assistants, is now printed from the edition of 1587, collated with those of 1559, 63, 71, 75, 78, and 1610; and contains

In prose.—*The Epistle dedicatory.—*William Baldwin to the reader.—Richard Niccols to the reader.—Legends: [Pg xxxvi]

To the further omissions of Niccols in this part, distinguished as before, may be added the intermediate conversations, in their original text, which are here restored.

Parts IV. and V.—Second Edition:

by Richard Niccols,[50] containing A Winter’s Night’s Vision, and England’s Eliza, are from the edition of 1610.

[Pg xlv]

Such is the analysis of the following volumes, of which the bulk required some historical matter, intended for notes, to be suppressed.

No single library could be expected to contain the many editions used in collation; and copies inspected, of value in other[Pg xlvi] respects. The indulgent loan of those stores claims the acknowledgement of my obligation to Mr. Heber, Mr. Douce, the Hon. Mr. Nassau, Mr. Utterson, and Mr. Gilchrist. The like is due to my friend Sir Egerton Brydges, from whom I have also derived much valuable assistance in the course of the undertaking.

Only one hundred and fifty copies are printed beyond the number demandable under a late Act of Parliament; and let it be recorded, that the work was put to press long before that censurable measure was in agitation, whereby it falls with all the weight and injustice of an ex post facto law upon the proprietors.

JOS. HASLEWOOD.

Volume I.

Volume II.

[Pg 3]

To the nobility and all other in office, God graunt the increase of wisedome, with all thinges necessary for preseruation of theyr estates.

Amen.

Amongste the wise (right Honorable) whose sentences (for the moste parte) tende either to teache the attayning of vertue or eschuing of vice, Plotinus. Plotinus that wonderfull and excellent Philosopher hath these wordes: The property of Temperaunce is to couet nothing which may be repented: not to excede the bands of measure, & to kepe Desire vnder the yoke of Reason. Whiche saying if it were so well knowen, as it is nedefull; so well embraced, as is[53] wished; or so surely fixed in minde, as it is printed in his workes: then certis many Christians might by the instruction of an Ethnicke Philosopher, shun great and daungerous perils. For to couet without consideration, to passe the measure of his degree, and to let will run at randon, is the only destruction of all estates. Else howe were it possible, so many learned, polliticke, wise, renoumed, valiaunt, and victorious personages, might euer haue come to such vtter decay? For example, wee haue[54] Quintus Curtius. Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Pompey, Cyrus, Hannibal, &c. All which (by desier of glorye) felte the reward of theire immoderate and insatiable lustes: for if Alexander had beene content with Macedonie, or not beene pufte vp with pride after his triumphes, hee had neuer beene so miserably poysoned. If Cæsar and Pompey had beene satisfied with theire victories, and [Pg 4] had not fell to ciuill discention, the one had not beene slaine in the senate with daggers, nor the other abroade, by their frendes procurement. Iustinus lib. 1. If Cyrus had beene pleased with all Persia, and Media, and not thirsted for bloud, hee had neuer com to so infortunate a fall. Plutarchus. So if Hanniball had not so much Liuius. delited in glorye of warfare, his countrey had neyther fell in ruine, Polibius. nor hee bene miserably forced to poyson himselfe. But you will say, desire of fame, glorye, renowne, and immortalitie (to which all men well nighe by[55] nature are inclined, especially those which excell or haue any singuler gift of fortune or[56] the body) moued them to such daungerous, great, and hardy enterprises, which must needes be confessed[57] as an infallible veritie: and therefore I suerly[58] deeme those Princes aboue specified (considering their[59] fortunes, fame, and exploytes) had neuer come to suche ende, but for wante of temperance. And now[60] sithe there are three other Cardinall vertues which are requisite in him that should bee in authoritye: that is to saye, Prudence, Iustice, and Fortitude, which so wonderfully adorne and beautifie all estates (If Temperaunce bee with them adioyned, that they moue the very enemies with admiration to prayse them) some peraduenture (as affection leades) will commende one, some another: Arist. Cicero. Prudence. as[61] Aristotle the Prince of Philosophers names Prudence, the mother of vertues, but[62] Cicero defines her the knowledge of things which ought to bee desired and followed, and also of them which ought to bee fled and eschewed; yet you shall finde that for want of Temperaunce, some which were counted very wise[63] fell into wonderfull reproche and infamy. But[64] Iustice that incomparable vertue, (as the auncient Ciuilians define her) is[65] a perpetuall and constant will [Pg 5]which giueth to euery man his right, yet if shee be not constant, which is the gifte of Fortitude; nor equal in discerning right from wrong, wherein is Prudence; nor vse proportion in iudgement and sentence, which pertayneth to Temperaunce: shee can neuer bee called equitie or iustice, but fraude, deceite, iniustice and iniurie. And, to speake of Fortitude. Cicero. Fortitude, which Cicero defineth, a consyderate vndertaking of perills, and enduring of labours; if he whome wee suppose stoute, valiaunt, and of good courage, want Prudence, Iustice, or Temperaunce, he is not counted wise, righteous and constant, but sottish, rude and desperate. For Cicero. Temperance. Temperaunce (sayth Cicero) is of reason[66] in lust and other euel assaultes of the minde, a suer and moderate dominion & rule. This noble vertue is deuided into three[67] partes, that is Continency, Clemencie, and Modestye, which well[68] obserued and kept (if grace bee to them adioyned) it is impossible for him that is endued with the aboue named vertues euer to fall into the infortunate snares of calamity, or misfortune. But Ambition which is immoderate[69] desire of honour, rule, dominion, and superioritie, (the very distruction of nobility and common weales, as among the Romanes; Sylla, Marius, Carbo, Cinna, Cateline, Pompey, and Cæsar, are witnesses) hath brought great decay to[70] our contrey, and countreymen. Which Master Baldwin hath so touched[71] in his Epistle of the laste[72] volume of this booke, that I nede not therewith deale any further.[73] I haue here (right honorable) in this booke[74] only reproued foly in those which are heedelesse: Iniurie in extortioners, rashnes in venterers, [Pg 6][trecherie in traytours, riote in rebelles,][75] and excesse in such as suppresse not vnruly affections. Now[76] I truste you will so thinke of it (althoughe the style deserue not like commendation) as you thought of the other parte. Which if you shall, I doubt not but it may pleasure some; if not, yet geue occasion to others which can do better, either to amend these, or to publish their owne.[77] And thus wishing you Prudence to discerne what is meete for your callings, Iustice in the administration of your functions, Fortitude in the defence of your Countrey, and Temperaunce in moderation of all your affections, with increase of honours, and euerlasting felicity: I bid you in Christ Iesu farewell.[78] At Winceham the vii. day of December.

1586.

Your most humble in
the Lord,
Iohn Higins.[79]

“Amongst diuers and sondry chronicles of many nations, I thinke there are none (gentle reader) so vncertaine and brief in the beginning as ours: at which I cannot but maruayle, sith at all tymes our Ilande had as learned wryters (some singuler men excepted) as any nation vnder the sunne. Againe, those which now are our best chroniclers as they report, haue great antiquities; but what they publish of late yeares may be enlarged in many places by chronicles of other nacions: whereby it is manifest they are either ignoraunt of the tongues, or els not giuen to the studie of that, which they most professe. For if they were, me-thinkes it were easie for them, with such antiquities as they brag they haue, to fetche our histories from the beginning; and make them as ample, as the chronicles of any other country or nation. But they are faine, in steede of other stuffe, to talk of the Romains, Greekes, Persians, &c. and to fill our histories with their facts and fables. This I speake not to the end I wold have ours quite seperate from other, without any mention of them; but I would haue them there only named, where th’ affayres of both countries, by warre, peace, truce, mariage, trafique, or some necessary cause or other, is intermixed. I haue seen no auncient antiquities in written hand but two: one was Galfridus of Munmouth, which I lost by misfortune; the other, an old chronicle in a kind of Englishe verse, beginning at Brute and ending at the death of Humfrey Duke of Gloucester; in the which, and diuers other good chronicles, I finde many thinges not mentioned in that great tome engroced[Pg 8] of late by Maister Grafton; and that, where he is most barraine and wantes matter. But as the greatest heades, the grayest hayres, and best clarkes, haue not most wytte; so the greatest bookes, titles, and tomes, contayne not most matter. And this haue I spoken, because in wryting the Tragedies of the first infortunate princes of this Isle, I was often fayne to vse mine owne simple inuention, yet not swaruing from the matter: because the chronicles (although they went out vnder diuers men’s names) in some suche places as I moste needed theyr ayde, wrate one thing, and that so brieflye, that a whole prince’s raigne, life, and death, was comprysed in three lines; yea, and sometimes mine olde booke, aboue mentioned, holpe mee out when the rest forsoke mee. As for Lanquet, Stowe, and Grafton, [they] were alwayes nighe of one opinion: but the Floure of Histories somewhat larger: some helpe had I of an old chronicle imprinted the yeare 1515. But surely methinkes, and so do most which delite in histories, it were worthely done, if one chronicle wer drawne from the beginning in such perfect sort, that al monuments of vertuous men (to the exalting of God’s glory) and all punishments of vicious persons (to the terrour of the wicked) might be registred in perpetuall remembraunce. To which thing the right reuerende father in God Matthew [Parker] Archbishop of Canterbury, and Metropolitane of Englande, hath brought such ayde, as wel by printing as preseruing the written chronicles of this realme; that by his grace’s studie and paynes, the labour, in tyme to come, wil be farre more easy to them, that shall take such trauayle in hand. But to leaue with these, and declare the cause of my purpose. As I chaunced to reade the Mirour for Magistrates, a worke by all men wonderfully commended, and full of fitte instructions for preseruation of eche estate: taking in hand the chronicles and minding to conferre the times, meethoughte the liues of a number euen at the beginning, the like infortunate princes offered themselues vnto mee as matter very meete for imitation, the like admonition,[Pg 9] miter, and phrase; and seing Baldwine by these woordes moued mee somewhat thereto; It were (saith hee) a goodly and a notable matter to searche and discourse our whole storye from the beginning of the inhabiting of this Isle, &c. I read the storyes, I considered of the princes, I noted their liues, and therewith conferred their deathes. On this, I tooke penne in hande, minding nothing lesse than to publishe them abroade, but onely to trye what I could do if neede were, or time and leasure were giuen mee to bestowe in such wyse. I wrote the twoo first, euen as they now are, and because I would not kepe secrete my first labours in this kinde of study (though I might well haue blushed at the basenes of my style) I shewed them to a friend of myne, desiring his vnfayned iudgement in this matter; which when he had read, he neuer left intreating me to wryte other, til I had ended all to the byrth of Christ: and yet not so content; he desired mee t’ accomplish the residue til I came to the Conquest, (which were wel nighe fiftie Tragedies): but, wearied with those which I had written, I desired him pause on this, till tyme and leasure were giuen mee. Yet hee, making relation to other his frendes what I had done, left mee not quiet till they likewyse had seene them: whose perswasion, as it seemed without any suspition of assentation or flattery, so hath it made mee bolder at this present then before. “Although (sayd they) your Tragædies be simple, and not comparable to those which the other before haue written; yet when men consider that many wrote those, but one these; that they are graue writers, you are but yong; the perfection of those stories, and the imperfection of these: finally, the good wil you beare to your country, the commendation of vertue, the detestation of vice, the fal of ambition, the horrible end of traytours, harlots, tyrauntes, adulterers, enchaunters, murderers, and such like; When men (said they) consider these things, they cannot, (how simple soeuer your verse bee,) but thinke well of the matter.” At length, with these perswasions[Pg 10] and suche like, I was contente (good reader) to publishe them for thy behoufe, and the publique weale of my countrye; at which if thou enuie, I minde not therefore to enuie my selfe, and staye my penne. But (God willing) thou shalt, as fast as I can prepare them, haue other bookes from my handes, which maye please thee againe; and thus with all my harte I bidde thee hartely farewell.

Thy friende
I. H.”[80]

[Before the edition 1587.]

Aboute a twelue yeares since (gentle reader) when I tooke vpon mee for exercise sake, only to make proofe in English verse what I could do, & had read the Mirour for Magistrates which Maister Baldwins set forth, (a booke both well penned and also well commended) I perused the Chronicles, I noted the times, I conferred the Princes, and me thought that a nomber euen at the firste inhabiting of this Islande, offered them selues the like haplesse impes of Fortune, with matter very meete for imitation, and like admonition, meeter and phrase. And sith Maister Baldwine in these words of his preface moued mee somewhat thereto: It were (sayth hee) a goodly and a notable mater to search, and discours our whole storie from the beginning of the inhabiting of this Isle, &c. I read agayne the stories, I considered of the Princes, I noted theire liues, and therewith conferred their falles: on this I tooke penne in hande, and wrote a fewe of the firste euen as they since were imprinted, minding nothing lesse then to publish them abroade: and because I woulde not keepe secret my first laboures in this kinde of studie, (although I mighte haue blushed at the basenes of my style) I shewed them to some frendes of myne, desired theire vnfayned iudgementes herein, who not only perswaded mee that they were well, but also desired mee to followe the same order till I came to the birth of Christe: which when I had done, yet they willed mee to proceede with the falles of the like vntill the conqueste, which I coulde not doe, being called away by other studies of more importaunce, but the rest which I wrot after that time and[Pg 12] at leisure since by the perswations of some worshipfull, and my very good frendes; I haue here set downe, and agayne corrected those which I wrot before, euen for the profit of my natiue countrey. Now I desire thee (gentle reader) so well to accept of my paynes and good will herein bestowed, as I was well willing by this edition to doe thee ease, and pleasure. And so whishing thee the feare of God, the loue of thy Prince and countrey, and after this lyfe the fruition of perfecte felicitye, I doe bid thee hartely in Christe Iesu farewell.

Thy frende,

Iohn Higins.[81]

in the behalfe of this Booke.

1587.

Thomas Newtonus,

Cestreshyrius.[82]

L’ENVOY[232].

[Pg 52]

LENVOY.

LENVOY.

LENUOYE.

[Pg 85]

LENUOY.

[Pg 90]

LENUOY.

LENUOY.

[Pg 103]

LENUOY.

[Pg 122]

LENUOY.

LENUOY.

LENUOY.

LENUOY.

LENUOY.

LENUOY.

LENUOYE.

LENUOY.

LENUOY.