James the First and His Court Came to Oxford
And was entertained in the Hall of Christ Church, “with the Latin comedy of Vertumnus, written by Dr. Matthew Gwinne, of St. John’s College, Oxford, and performed by the students of that house, without borrowing a single actor; and it was upon this occasion that the humming of his Majesty took place, referred to in my Preface. In 1621, when James and his court happened to be at Woodstock, the scholars of Christ Church enacted Barton Holyday’s comedy of Τεχνογαμια, or the Marriage of the Arts: but his Majesty relished it so little, as to offer several times to withdraw, and was only prevented by some of his courtiers representing that his doing so would be a cruel disappointment. This incident gave rise to the well-known epigram—
“At Christ-Church marriage, done before the king,
Lest that those mates should want an offering,
The king himself did offer—what, I pray?
He offered twice or thrice to go away.”
OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE SEEMED RIVALS
At this period. Wood states, in his Annals, that when King James was entertained at Oxford, in 1605, divers Cambridge scholars went thither out of novelty, to see and hear; and some that pretended to be wits made copies of verses on that solemnity, of which, he says, I have met with one that runs—
To Oxonforde the king is gone,
With all his mighty peers,
That hath in grace maintained us,
These four or five long years.
Such a king he hath been,
As the like was never seen:
Knights did ride by his side,
Evermore to be his guide:
A thousand knights, and forty thousand knights,
Knights of forty pounds a year.
which some attribute to one Lake. This example, he adds, was followed by the Oxonians, when James visited Cambridge in 1614, and “many idle songs” were made by them upon the proceedings at Cambridge, the most celebrated of which is the one entitled, “A Grave Poem, as it was presented in Latin by Divines and others, before his Majesty at Cambridge, by way of Enterlude, stiled ‘Liber novus de adventu Regis ad Cantabrigiam,’ faithfully done into English, with some liberal advantage, made rather to be sung than red, to the tune of ‘Bonny Nell,’” which poem, says Wood, may be seen in the works of the witty Bishop Corbet (by whom it was written,) “printed in 1647.” But in so saying our annalist not only lies under a mistake, but Mr. Gutch, his editor, has not detected it. The poem is not in the edition of 1647, but in that of 1672, which is the third, corrected and enlarged, and “printed by J. C. for William Crooke, at the Green Dragoon, without Temple Bar;” as all may see who will consult the said editions, both extant in the library of the British Museum. The poem is comprised in twenty-six stanzas, as follows:—
It is not yet a fortnight, since
Lutetia entertained our Prince,
And wasted both a studied toy,
As long as was the siege of Troy:
And spent herself for full five days
In speeches, exercise, and plays.
To trim the town, great care before
Was tane by th’ Lord Vice-Chancellor,
Both morn and eve he cleared the way,
The streets he gravell’d thrice a day;
One stripe of March-dust for to see,
No Provost would give more than he.
Their colledges were new be-painted,
Their founders eke were new be-sainted;
Nothing escaped, nor post, nor door,
Nor gete, nor rail, nor b——d, nor wh——:
You could not know (oh, strange mishap!)
Whether you saw the town or map.
But the pure house of Emanuel,
Would not be like proud Jesebel,
Nor show herself before the king
An hypocrite, or painted thing:
But that the ways might all prove fair,
Conceiv’d a tedious mile of prayer.
Upon the look’d-for seventh of March,
Out went the townsmen all in starch,
Both band and bead into the field,
Where one a speech could hardly wield;
For needs he would begin his stile,
The king being from him half a mile.
They gave the king a piece of plate,
Which they hop’d never came too late;
And cry’d, Oh! look not in, great king,
For there is in it just nothing:
And so preferred with time and gate,
A speech as empty as their plate.
Now, as the king came near the town,
Each one ran crying up and down,
Alas, poor Oxford, thou’rt undone,
For now the king’s past Trompington,
And rides upon his brave grey Dapple,
Seeing the top of King’s-Colledge chappel.
Next rode his lordship on a nag,
Whose coat was blue, whose ruff was shag,
And then began his reverence
To speak most eloquent non-sense:
See how (quoth he) most mighty prince,
For very joy my horse doth wince.
What cryes the town? what we? (said he)
What cryes the University?
What cryes the boyes? what every thing?
Behold, behold, yon comes the king:
And every period he bedecks,
With En et Ecce venit Rex.
Oft have I warn’d (quoth he) our dirt,
That no silk stockings should be hurt;
But we in vain strive to be fine,
Unless your Grace’s sun doth shine;
And with the beams of your bright eye,
You will be pleased our streets to dry.
Now come we to the wonderment,
Of Christendom, and eke of Kent,
The Trinity; which to surpass,
Doth Deck her spokesman by a glass:
Who, clad in gay and silken weeds,
Thus opes his mouth, hark how he speeds.
I wonder what your Grace doth here,
Who had expected been 12 year,
And this your son, fair Carolus,
That is so Jacobissimus;
There’s none, of all your Grace refuses,
You are most welcome to our Muses.
Although we have no bells to jingle,
Yet can we shew a fair quadrangle,
Which, though it ne’er was graced with king,
Yet sure it is a goodly thing:
My warning’s short, no more I’ll say,
Soon you shall see a gallant play.
But nothing was so much admired
As were their plays, so well attired;
Nothing did win more praise of mine,
Than did their Actors most divine:
So did they drink their healths divinely,
So did they skip and dance so finely.
Their plays had sundry grave wise factors,
A perfect diocess of Actors
Upon the stage; for I am sure that
There was both bishop, pastor, curat:
Nor was this labour light or small,
The charge of some was pastoral.
Our plays were certainly much worse,
For they had a brown hobby-horse,
Which did present unto his Grace
A wondrous witty ambling pace:
But we were chiefly spoyl’d by that
Which was six hours of God knows what.
His Lordship then was in a rage,
His Lordship lay upon the stage,
His Lordship cry’d, All would be marr’d:
His Lordship lov’d a-life the guard,
And did invite those mighty men,
To what think you? Even to a Hen.
He knew he was to use their might
To help to keep the door at night,
And well bestow’d he though his Hen,
That they might Tolebooth Oxford men.
He thought it did become a lord
To threaten with that bug-bear word.
Now pass we to the Civil Law,
And eke the doctors of the spaw,
Who all perform’d their parts so well,
Sir Edward Ratcliff bore the bell,
Who was, by the king’s own appointment,
To speak of Spells and Magic Ointment.
The Doctors of the Civil Law,
Urged ne’er a reason worth a straw;
And though they went in silk and satten,
They, Thomson-like clip’d the king’s Latine;
But yet his Grace did pardon then
All treasons against Priscian.
Here no man spoke aught to the point,
But all they said was out of joint;
Just like the Chappel ominous,
In th’ Colledge called God with us,
Which truly doth stand much awry,
Just north and south, yes verily.
Philosophers did well their parts,
Which proved them Masters of the Arts;
Their Moderator was no fool,
He far from Cambridge kept a school:
The country did such store afford,
The Proctors might not speak a word.
But to conclude, the king was pleased,
And of the court the town was eased:
But Oxford though (dear sister hark it)
The king is gone but to New-Market,
And comes again ere it be long,
Then you may sing another song.
The king being gone from Trinitie,
They make a scramble for degree;
Masters of all sorts and all ages,
Keepers, subsizers, lackayes, pages,
Who all did throng to come abroad,
With pray make me now, good my Lord.
They prest his lordship wondrous hard,
His lordship then did want the guard,
So did they throng him for the nonce,
Till he bless them all at once,
And cry’d Hodiissime:
Omnes Magistri estote.
Nor is this all which we do sing,
For of your praise the world must ring:
Reader, unto your tackling look,
For there is coming forth a book,
Will spoyl Joseph Bernesius
The sale of Rex Platonicus.
EXTRAORDINARY DIVINITY ACT,
THE FAMOUS CAMBRIDGE LATIN COMEDY,
His Majesty was, as usual, entertained with speeches, disputations, and dramatic exhibitions. Fuller relates, that the following Or Disputation, was kept at Cambridge before this prince, during this visit, where Dr. John Davenant (afterwards Bishop of Sarum) was respondent, and Dr. Richardson, amongst others, opponent. The question was maintained, in the negative, concerning the excommunicating of kings. Dr. Richardson vigorously pressed the practice of St. Ambrose, who excommunicated the emperor Theodosius,—insomuch, says Fuller, that the king, in a great passion, returned,—“Profecto fuit hoc ab Ambrosio insolentissime factum.” To which Dr. R. rejoined,—“Responsum vere Regium, et Alexandro dignum, hoc non est argumentu dissolvere, sed desecare,”—and so, sitting down, discontinued from any further argument. It was for the entertainment of James during this visit, that Entitled Ignoramus, was first enacted. It originated in a dispute on the question of precedency, in 1611, when the Mayor, whose name was Thomas Smart, had seated himself in a superior place in the Guildhall of the town, in the presence of the Vice-Chancellor of the University, who asserted his right to the same; but the Mayor refused to resign the seat, till the Vice-Chancellor’s attendants forcibly ejected him. The dispute was laid before the Privy Council, who decided in favour of the Vice-Chancellor. But during the progress of the affair, the Recorder of Cambridge, named Brankyn, stoutly defended the Mayor and Corporation against the rights of the University. This it was that induced the author of the play, Geo. Ruggle, Fellow of Clare-Hall, to show him up, in the pedantic, crafty, pragmatical character of Ignoramus; and if lawyer Brankyn, it is said, had not actually set the dispute agoing, he greatly contributed to keep it alive. At this time King James had long been expected to visit Cambridge, who had a strong prejudice against lawyers, and a ruling passion to be thought the patron of literature. The circumstances suggested to Ruggle the propriety of exposing lawyer Brankyn before his Majesty, in the above character, and to render it the more forcible, he resolved to adopt the common-law forms, and the cant and barbarous phraseology of lawyers in the ordinary discourse. It was, therefore, necessary that he should make himself master of that dialect, in which almost the best amongst them were accustomed to write and even to discourse; a jargon, says Wilson, in his Memorabilia Cantabrigiæ, could not but be offensive to a classical car. He, therefore, took more than ordinary pains to acquaint himself with the technical terms of the profession, and to mark the abuse of them, of which he has admirably availed himself in the formation of the character of Ignoramus, who not only transacts business, but “woos in language of the Pleas and Bench.” The comedy was enacted before his Majesty by the members of the University, and he was so much delighted with, on dit, either the wit or absurdity, that he caused it to be played a second time, and once at Newmarket. During one of these representations, says Dr. Peckard, formerly Master of Magdalen College, in his Life of Mr. Farrer, “the King called out aloud, ‘Treason! Treason!’ The gentlemen about him being anxious to know what disturbed his Majesty, he said, ‘That the writer and performers had acted their parts so well, that he should die of laughter.’” It was during the performance of this play, according to Rapin and others, that James was first struck with the personal beauty of George Villiers, who afterwards became Duke of Buckingham, and supplanted Somerset in his favour. Thomas Gibbons, Esq. says, in his Collection, forming part of the Harleian MSS. in the British Museum, (No. 980, art. 173.) that “the comedy of Ignoramus, supposed to be by Mr. Ruggle, is but a translation of the Italian comedy of Baptista Porta, entitled Trapulario, as may be seen by the comedy itself, in Clare-hall Library, with Mr. Ruggle’s notes and alterations thereof.” A literary relique that is said to have now disappeared; but it is to be hoped, for the credit of a learned Society, that it is a mistake. Dyer in his Privileges of Cambridge (citing vol. ii. fol. 149 of Hare’s MSS.) gives the judgment of the Earl Marshal of England, which settled this famous controversy. The original document is extant in the Crown Office, in these words:—“I do set down, &c. that the Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge is to be taken in commission before the Mayor. King James, also, in the third of his raigne, by letters under the privy signett, commandeth the Lord Ellesmere, Chancellor of England,