« PreviousContinue »
At a later stage of the trial, Essex argued that if he had meant anything else than his own defence against private persons, he would not have gone forth with so small a force and so slightly armed. To which (Camden had added, p. 856\) Bacon replied, "This was cunningly done of you, who placed all your hope in the citizens' arms, expecting them to arm both yourself and your party and to take arms in your behalf; imitating herein the Duke of Guise, &c. (vafre hoc a te factum, qui in rit'iinn arnn's spent totam defixisti, ut te tuosque iiriluinlit et pro te anna caperent; imitatu s in hoc Gruirium, qui Lutetiam ^-c.) For this Bacon substitutes (in accordance, as before, with the contemporary reports and with the Declaration) "Cui Baconus: at in hoc imitatuH es receni exemplum Q-uisii, qui Lutetiam lion ita pridem cum pauculis ingressus, cives nihilmninus ud anna ita concitavit ut Regem urbe exturbaret." 'Mut in this you imitated the recent example of the Duke of Guise, who, no long time since, though he entered Paris with a small company, yet he roused the citizens to take up arms, in such sort that the King was obliged to fly the city.' The words in italic are inserted in Macon's hand.
In Hearne's edition nihilominus is inserted after Lutetiam; which is wrong. When I examined the volume in the Bodleian Library into which these corrections have Ihwii transcribed, I neglected to observe whether the same mistake occurs there. But as that volume was printed after Camden's death, and the cor1'iii'tioiiH may all have been made from the Cotton MS., wu are to far without evidence that they had received Camden's own sanction. That they were derived from a fair copy in which they had been incorporated under his superintendence, seems to me improbable, considering the nature of the errors into which the transcriber has fallen (see above, pp. 50, 52, 59.); all of which materially injure the sense and construction.