and Hodgkins the printers. Dr. Dexter's suggestion is a strong one and we could almost wish it were true. Nevertheless it is not possible to accept it. Of Barrowe's actual connection with Marprelacy not a trace has been discovered. In the minute story of the production of the Tracts, already given, not a detail points to a cell in the Fleet. The form in which the writings have come to us does not hint a prison origin; unless the imperfection of the secondary tract THESES MARTINIANAE be considered a suggestion in that direction; as implying an absent author in limbo, who could not be consulted by the printers in regard to certain incomplete sentences in the text. He We are conscious of a difference between these two men which makes itself known in their respective views and writings. So that while we recognise that both use strong idiomatic speech, having little in common with the dilettante euphuism of the time; though the writings of both men are flavoured with the culture of the schools of learning; yet we must also recognise that the sharp satire and wit of Barrowe, written as though he were unconscious of the literary character of his eager and earnest pages, differs from that quite special type of wit, and especially of irony, which distinguishes Martin Marprelate from all his contemporaries. Martin' is by no means unconscious of the character of his figures and inversions and drolleries. indulges in swordplay before he delivers his fatal thrust. But who could imagine Henry Barrowe writing the rustic dialect in which Martin freakishly delivers a blow, in the guise of an unsophisticated yokel? And it is time to mention an objection to Dr. Dexter's hypothesis which is really fatal. The ecclesiastical standpoint of THE EPISTLE and THE EPITOME is not that of A Briefe Discovery of a false church. In making out 'Martin's' point of view it is necessary on the one hand to note that he differs not only in temper, but also in intellectual conviction, from such men as Travers, Field, Cartwright, Udall, and their fellows. 'Martin' champions their cause; but he is not altogether of their party. In his breadth of sympathy, his theological akin to the author But, on the other temper, his deep humanity, he is more of A Petition directed to her Majesty. hand, the difference between him and Barrowe is almost more marked. 'Martin,' rigidly clinging to the 'tetrarchy' of church officers, even though they owe their position to the consent of the people, cannot possibly be classed in the same school as Barrowe. Barrowe's Church is an emancipated democracy; its constitution is voluntary. The following quotations, from both writers, touching the support of the ministry, are in themselves, probably, sufficient to destroy any claim made on behalf of Barrowe to be Marprelate :— The minister's maintenance by tithe, no Puritan denieth to be unlawful. For Martin, good Master Parson, you must understand doth account no Brownist to be a Puritan, nor yet a sottish Cooperist.1 This is Marprelate's view in reply to Bishop Cooper. The following is from Barrowe's examination before Whitgift in 1587. The questions are put by the Lord Treasurer: Burleigh. Why, thou wouldst have the minister to live of somewhat; whereof should he live? Barrowe. Ex pura eleemosyna. Of clear alms, as Christ in his testament hath ordained and as he and his apostles.2 5. Examination of the Evidence in Favour of assigning the Authorship to Penry or Throkmorton.-(a) THE DIRECTORSHIP OF THE SECRET PRESS.-In regard to the housing of the press, the provision of printers and distributers, there is no doubt that Penry is the principal figure. Indeed, until the retirement of Waldegrave, we know of none else. He it was that negotiated with Mrs. Crane of Aldermary for the use of her house at East Molesey; and later, with Sir Richard Knightley to shelter the press at Fawsley and at Norton-by-Daventry. Through Sir Richard, Penry was able to prevail upon John Hales, in spite of his fears, to 1 HAY ANY WORKE, 25. 2 Examinations of Hen. Barrowe, John Grenewood, and John Penrie, 16. U shelter the press at the White Friars, Coventry. Penry was printer's reader and manager up to this time. It is only at this juncture that Job Throkmorton comes within our purview. After Penry's failure to induce Waldegrave to reconsider his decision no longer to meddle or be a dealer in this course'; after his ineffectual negotiations with Sharpe, the bookbinder, who was able to worke about the press,' not as an efficient compositor, but as he himself in some sorte'; Throkmorton appears on the scene. He commissions Humfrey Newman to find a printer, and the result is the engagement of John Hodgkins. But even then, it is Penry who is ostensibly responsible for the payment of Simms and Thomlyn, Hodgkins' assistants. While the printers were busy at Wolston printing THESES MARTINIANAE and THE JUST CENSURE, Penry arrives early on the scene to supervise the printing, binding, and despatch of these tracts. Throkmorton follows, and apparently with his arrival came the remainder of the 'copy' of the first of them. It was characteristic of his extreme caution that he should whisperingly inquire of Hodgkins if his two men could be depended upon; but the very question would imply that he was one of the principals in the confederacy. (b) PENRY'S AND THROKMORTON'S ACQUAINTANCE WITH THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINALS OF THE SECONDARY TRACTS.-Our knowledge of the conduct of the press under the management of Waldegrave is slight; for the reason that he was never arrested after he became Marprelate's printer. Sutcliffe's reference to his 'deposition,' as we have earlier stated, is a blunder. So soon, however, as we get an interior view of the secret printing-house (under the roof of Roger Wigston) we find that both Penry and Throkmorton are able to deal authoritatively with certain defects in the manuscripts. Throkmorton was able to decipher for Simms certain obscurities arising from interlineations. He did p'sently1 read them distinctly and readily unto him.' Penry also, when the printers showed him that towards the end of 2 Manchester Papers, 123 (G). 'Presently' at once. 2 Martin Senior there were some things written wthout sense,' 'strooke owt certayne lines and interlined that wch should be supplyed.'1 3 (c) THE EVIDENCE OF THE HANDWRITING.-Our evidence under this head relates only to the tracts printed by Hodgkins; and of these the partly printed MORE WORK could be left out of the account. Apart from the reference to its contents in THE PROTESTATYON, we only know its name. The testimony in regard to the two Wolston Tracts is conflicting, though it involves only Penry and Throkmorton. Valentine Simms, the compositor, states that THESES MARTINIANAE, THE JUST CENSURE, and MORE WORK were in the handwriting of Throkmorton. He doth thinke that "more worke" was likewise of Mr. Throkmortons penninge for that it was the same hand that "m'tin senior" and "martin Junior" was.' Hodgkins in his deposition declares that the handwriting of the three works is 'the same or very like to the hande where with Penry corrected the print.' Matthew Sutcliffe states that MORE WORK is 'written with I. Throkmortons owne hande and in divers places with his hand it is interlined and corrected.' 4 But in another place he states that the manuscript' which every man may see who doubteth hereof, is half of it written with Iob Throkmortons owne hand.' 5 In the Government Summary of Evidence we read that the two handes vsed in the same doe seeme to be, the one Penryes and the other his mans hand.' 6 Of the testimony of the printers we should be inclined to give the greater weight to the statement of Hodgkins, as the weightier and more intelligent witness. But summing up the whole of the evidence, the greater likelihood is that the manuscripts of the works in question, as handled by the printers, were in the joint hands of Penry and Throkmorton; though this conclusion is contrary to the extreme caution of Throkmorton in leaving 2 Ibid. (R). 1 Manchester Papers, 123 (Z). 3 Harl. MSS. 7042. 5; Arber's Sketch, 126. 5 Ibid. 71 vers.; Sketch, 178. 6 Lansd. MSS. 61. 68; Arber's Sketch, 117. no trace of his own complicity in the enterprise. And the evidence on hand seems to show that the originals were transcribed, whether by the author or by an amanuensis we do not know, before being handed to the printers. On their journey as prisoners to London, 'Hodgkins told Simes (this examinate) that they had an other copy of "more worke for the coop" wch should serve them an other time.'1 (d) THE EVIDENCE OF LANGUAGE AND STYLE.-Speaking broadly, we may say that that which is more conspicuously 'Martinist' in the style of the Tracts is least like Penry's style. Penry is a dexterous writer, as his tracts and letters abundantly show. He has mastered perfectly the English tongue. His writings are not those of an educated foreigner; in style they are idiomatic and thoroughly English. The ingenious theories based upon Penry's supposed imperfect command of English, intended to account for such whimsicalities as fickars,' 'confocation,' and the like, are utterly wide of the mark. The supposition that Penry dictated the text while the printer set phonetically what he heard is too grotesque. A compositor setting up such a work as THE EPISTLE OF THE EPITOME at the dictation of a reader is an impossible supposition. Moreover, if we could seriously discuss the theory that Penry read out the text, it is only necessary to know the Welsh alphabet to understand that an imperfect acquaintance with the English would not have led him to pronounce v as f, but the opposite. The Welsh has no v; the sound is represented by a single f. (The English f is represented in Welsh by f) The common Welsh place-name 'Llanfair' (St. Mary's) is pronounced 'Llanvair'; 'afon' (a river) is pronounced 'avon.' There is, of course, a conventional stage-Welshman, whose blunders include the substitution of ƒ for v. Shakespeare's parson, Sir Hugh Evans, says, 'It is that fery person,' and 'fery goot.' And it is permissible to suppose that Martin imitated the conventional stage-Welshman (just as he imitates the conventional rustic of the comedies); and did so to suggest mockingly to Whitgift that some one 1 Manchester Papers, 123 (last parag.). |