INTRODUCTION.

Although the prevailing taste for Bibliography has already drawn forth copious accounts of the various editions of theMirror 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 produceoriginal 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, entitledA 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 confessedlyLydgate’sFall 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 tohaue 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, theMirror for Magistrateswas 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 theMirror 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, ofTheboke 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,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 theMirrour, 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 Magistrateswas, 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 minorornament, 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 didnot 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]

II. In the next division of inquiry as to the 'primary inventor’ of theMirror for Magistrates, the discussion arises from the unfoundedapplication of that term by Warton to that eminent geniusThomas Sackville, afterwards created Lord Buckhurst and Earl of Dorset, and which has been repeated, without examination, by subsequent writers.

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 ofFerrers, who exerted himself in completing the original plan, be left unnoticed; but still the general formation rests principally, if not entirely, withBaldwin. 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 aSECOND 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 “theInduction,” which served to envelop all the other contributors with the shade of secondary characters.

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) theLord Vaulxvndertooke 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 yeDuke 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 inthe method of this their Mirror,I purpose only to followthe 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 theMuses Library, 1738, says of Sackville: “It appears to me, by a preface of Mr. Niccols, that theOriginal Planof the Mirror for Magistrates, was principally owing to him.”—Collins, in theEnglish Peerage, having transcribed the passage given above in brackets, is referred to by Lord Orford, in theRoyal 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 ournative poetry, says: “More writers than one were concerned in the execution of this piece: but itsPRIMARY 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 anInduction, and one Legend, which is the life of Henry Stafford duke of Buckingham. Relinquishing therefore the design abruptly, and hastily adapting the close of hisInductionto 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, themeaning of Niccols, (whose corrupt text ofthe Inductionhe 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 theMirrour for Magistratestransferred 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]

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

A Memorial of suche Princes, as since the tyme of King Richarde the seconde, haue been vnfortunate in the Realme of England. Londini Inædibus Johannis Waylandi. Cum priuilegio per Septennium.Folio.

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.

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]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 SirThomas 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 ofThe 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.

A Myrroure for Magistrates. Wherein may be seen by example of other, with howe greuous plages vices are punished: and howe frayle and vnstable worldly prosperitie is founde, even of those whom Fortune seemeth most highly to fauour. Fœlix quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum. Anno 1559. Londini, In ædibus Thomæ Marshe.92 leaves.

This title is in an architectural metal border, composed offour pieces. After the Epistle inscribed by the editorWilliam 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 byBaldwin. A slight authority for this appropriation is found in the Epistle before thecontinuation 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 theEditor, 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, andSkelton; 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 ofSackville,Dolman, andSegar; concluding that theEditorhad 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 ofChurchyard, whose communication ofShore’s Wifewas 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, declarethe tragedy of Thomas Mowbray, duke of Northfolk.” And to this life, in edition 1571, “T. Ch.” is added, the signature of SirT. Chaloner. Again, at p. 77,Ferrersis staid by one who briefly said: “To the end,Baldwin, that you may know whatto 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 toBaldwin. 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.

A Myrrovr for Magistrates—Anno 1563. Imprinted at London in Fletestrete nere to Saynct Dunstans Churche by Thomas Marshe.178 leaves.

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, byBaldwin, in whose handsFerrersis described, as placing allhe 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:

TheInduction.

The tapets torne, and eueryblomedowne blowen.

The other:

Mayster SackuillesInduction.

The tapets torne, and euerytreedowne 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.

A Myrrovr for Magistrates.—Newly corrected and augmented. Anno 1571. Fœlix, &c. Imprinted at London by Thomas Marshe dwellynge in Fleetstreete, neare vnto S. Dunstanes Churche.[26]174 leaves.

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

The first parte of the Mirour for Magistrates, containing the falles of the first infortunate Princes of this lande: From the comming of Brute to the incarnation of our sauiour and redemer Iesu Christe. Ad Romanos. 13. 2. Quisquis se opponit potestati, Dei ordinationi resistit. Imprinted at London by Thomas Marshe. Anno 1574. Cum Priuilegio.Eights, Sig. K ii. Fol. 74. Introduction 6 leaves.

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 ofJohn Higgins.[28]

Their names follow, viz:

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

And keepe, maintaine and celebrate his praise:VVich graunted, all they vanisht quite their wayes.Viuit post funera virtus.Finis que Iohn Higgins.

And keepe, maintaine and celebrate his praise:VVich graunted, all they vanisht quite their wayes.

And keepe, maintaine and celebrate his praise:

VVich graunted, all they vanisht quite their wayes.

Viuit post funera virtus.Finis que Iohn Higgins.

Viuit post funera virtus.

Finis que Iohn Higgins.

The last parte of the Mirour for Magistrates, wherein may be seene by examples passed in this Realme, with howe greuous plagues, vices are punished in great Princes and Magistrates, and howe frayle and vnstable worldly prosperitie is founde, where Fortuneseemeth moste highly to fauour. Newly corrected and amended. Fœlix quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum. Imprinted at London by Thomas Marshe. Anno. 1574. Cum Priuilegio.168 leaves.

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 entitledThe Last Parte,” the existence of our preceding article not being then known.

The Contents are the same as edition 1571.

The first parte of the Mirour for Magistrates.—Imprinted at London by Thomas Marshe. Anno 1575. Cum Priuilegio.80 leaves.

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:

The last parte of the Mirour for Magistrates.—Imprinted at London by Thomas Marshe. Anno 1575. Cum Priuilegio.

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.

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

Mentioned by Ritson in theBibliographia 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.

The Last part of the Mirour for Magistrates.—Imprinted at London in Fleetstreete, neere vnto Sainct Dunstanes Church, by Thomas Marsh. 1578. Cum Priuilegio.190 leaves.

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.

The Seconde part of the Mirrour for Magistrates, conteining the falles of the infortunate Princes of this Lande. From the Conquest of Cæsar, vnto the comyng of Duke William the Conquerour. Imprinted by Richard Webster, Anno Domini. 1578.72 leaves.

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 ofThomas 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 theThirdpart.

The Mirour for Magistrates, wherein may be seene, by examples passed in this Realme, with how greeuous plagues vices are punished in great Princes and Magistrates, and how fraile and vnstable worldly prosperity is found, where Fortune seemeth most highly to fauour: Newly imprinted, and with the addition of diuers Tragedies enlarged. At London in Fleetstreete, by Henry Marsh, being the assigne of Thomas Marsh. 1587. Cvm privilegio.283 leaves.

A short preface, grounded upon the prefatory epistle of 1574, is substituted for that, and followed by a metrical address fromThomas Newtonto the reader. Some additional legends byHigginsare 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 byBaldwin. The brief Memorial to the reader is given; and the29 legends already named with the addition of four, viz:

The productions ofBaldwinandHigginsare 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 theSTANDARD EDITION.

A Mirovr for Magistrates: Being a trve chronicle historic of the vntimely falles of such vnfortvnate Princes and men of note, as haue happened since the first entrance of Brute into this Iland, vntill this our latter Age. Newly enlarged with a last part, called A Winter night’s Vision, being an addition of such Tragedies, especially famous, as are exempted in the former Historie, with a Poem annexed, called England’s Eliza. At London Imprinted by Felix Kyngston.1610.The Falles of Vnfortvnate Princes. Being a trve chronicle historic of the vntimely death of such vnfortunate Princes and men of Note, as haue happened since the first entrance of Brvte into this Iland, vntill this our latter Age. Wherevnto is added the famovs life and death of Qveene Elizabeth, with a declaration of all the Warres, Battels and Sea-fights, during her Raigne: wherein at large is described the Battell of 88. with the particular seruice of all such Ships, and men of note in that action. Contre fortune nul ne peut. At London, Imprinted by F. K. for William Aspley, and are to be sold at his shop in Pauls Churchyard at the Signe of the Parrot.1619. also 1621. 448 leaves.

The Falles of Vnfortvnate Princes. Being a trve chronicle historic of the vntimely death of such vnfortunate Princes and men of Note, as haue happened since the first entrance of Brvte into this Iland, vntill this our latter Age. Wherevnto is added the famovs life and death of Qveene Elizabeth, with a declaration of all the Warres, Battels and Sea-fights, during her Raigne: wherein at large is described the Battell of 88. with the particular seruice of all such Ships, and men of note in that action. Contre fortune nul ne peut. At London, Imprinted by F. K. for William Aspley, and are to be sold at his shop in Pauls Churchyard at the Signe of the Parrot.1619. also 1621. 448 leaves.

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, byRichard Niccols. Unfortunately the original spirit and characteris materially affected, if not destroyed, by his choosing to omit all intermediate matter between the legends, whether prose or verse: for theL’envoyofHiggins, and conversations ofBlenerhassetandBaldwinare 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.

Back to Index Next