Chapter 4

“’Twas merry in the hall,And their beards wagged all.”

Wood relates, amongst other humorous incidents, that

In September, 1592, besides plays, &c., there was a disputation in law and physic, and, amongst many questions, was one,—“Whether the air, or meat, or drink, did most change a man?” and a merry Doctor of that faculty, named Richard Ratcliffe, lately Fellow of Merton College, but now Principal of St. Alban’s Hall, going about to produce thenegative, showed forth a big, large body, a great fat belly, a side waist, all, as he said, so changed bymeatanddrink, desiring to see any other so metamorphosed by theair. But it was concluded (by the Moderator) in the affirmative, thatairhad the greater power of change. One of the questions (the next day) was,—“Whether it be lawful to dissemble in the cause of religion?” written thus, says Gutch, “Non est dissimulandum in causa religionis;” “which being looked upon as a nice question,” continues Wood, “caused much attention from the courtly auditory. One argument, more witty than solid, that was urged by one of the opponents, was, ‘It is lawful to dispute of religion therefore ’tis lawful to dissemble;’ and so going on, said, ‘I myself now do that which is lawful, but I do now dissemble; ergo, it is lawful to dissemble.’ (Id quod nunc ego, de rebus divinis disputans, ego dissimulare; sed quod nunc ego, de rebus divinis disputam, ego dissimulare est licitum; at which her majesty and all the auditory were very merry.)”

In the year 1564, she took up her residence at the lodge of the Provost of King’s College, which stood near the east end of King’s Chapel. We well remember the old pile and the solitary trees that branched beside; and much as we admire the splendid improvements to which they have given place, we could almost find it in our hearts to express regret at the removal of those landmarks of the topographist. The hall was her guard-chamber, the dining-room her presence-chamber, and the gallery and adjoining rooms her private apartments. Her visit lasted five days, during which she was entertained with comedies, tragedies, orations, disputations, and other academical exercises. She personally visited every college, and is said to have been so pleased with the venerable, solemn, and scholastic appearance of Pembroke Hall, that she saluted it with the words—

“O Domus antiqua et religiosa!”

According to the author ofHistorical Anecdotes, &c., was Thomas Cartwright, B. D., Lady Margaret’s Professor and Fellow of Trinity College. He and Thomas Preston (afterwards Master of Trinity Hall,) says Fuller, during Queen Elizabeth’s visit at Cambridge, in 1564, were appointed two of the four disputants in the philosophy-act before her Majesty. “Cartwright had dealt most with the muses; Preston with the graces, adorning his learning with comely carriage, graceful gesture, and pleasing pronunciation. Cartwright disputed like agreat, Preston like agentilescholar, being a handsome man; and the Queen, upon a parity of deserts, always preferred properness of person in conferring her favours. Hereupon, with her looks, words, and deeds she favoured Preston, calling himher scholler, as appears by his epitaph in Trinity Hall chappell.

‘Thomas Prestonæ, Scholarem,‘Quem dixit princeps Elizabetha suum,’ &c.

Insomuch,” continues Fuller, “that for his good disputing, and excellent acting, in the tragedy ofDido, she bestowed on him a pension of 20 lib. a year; whilst Cartwright received neither reward nor commendation, whereof he not only complained to his inward friends in Trinity College, but also, after her Majesty’s neglect of him, began to wade into divers opinions against her ecclesiastical government.” And thus, according to the authority first cited, he becamethe first Dissenter in England, and was deprived, subsequently, as a matter of course, of both his fellowship and professorship.

It was most probably for the entertainment of the Royal Elizabeth, that one Thomas Still, M.A., of Christ’s College, Cambridge, afterwards Bishop of Bath and Wells, composed and produced

A fact no Cantab need blush at,proh pudor, though the plot is none of the sublimest. It was printed as early as 1575, with the following

“A ryght pythy, pleasant, and merie Comedie, entytuled Gammer Gurton’s Needle; played on the stage not long ago in Christe’s College, in Cambridge, made by Mr. S. Master of Arts. Imprynted at London, in Fleete Streeate, beneth the Conduit, at the signe of Sainte John Evangelist, by Thomas Colwell.” Though altogether of a comic cast, it was not deficient in genuine humour, and is a curious sample of the simplicity which prevailed in this country, in the early days of dramatic art. It is in metre, is spun out into five regular acts, and an awful piece it is, as may be seen by the following

Gammer Gurton having lost her needle, a great hunt is made in search of it, and her boy is directed to blow theembers of an expiring fire, in order to light a candle to help the search. The witch of a cat has, in the meantime, got into the chimney, with her two fiery eyes. The boy cries, “it is the devil of a fire!” for when he puffs, it is out,—and when he does not, it is in. “Stir it!” bawls Gammer Gurton. The boy does her bidding, and thecat(thefireas he imagines) flies forthwith amongst a pile of wood. “The house will be burnt, all hands to work!” roars the boy, and the cat is discovered by a priest (more cunning than the rest.) This ends theepisode, with which themain plotand catastrophe vie. Gammer Gurton, it seems, had, the day before, been mending her man Hodge’s breeches. Now Hodge, in some game of merriment, was to be punished, for some default, with three slaps on the breech, to be administered by the brawny hand of one of his fellow-bumpkins. To that end, his head is laid in Gammer Gurton’s lap; the first slap is given, Hodge bellows out with pain, and, oh! joyful announcement, on searching for the cause of his affliction, the needle is discovered, buried up to the eye in poor Hodge’s posterior portion. The needle is then extracted with becoming demonstrations, and the curtain falls.

Amongst other interesting matters associated with the memory of Queen Elizabeth (beside that of her having given Cambridge that admirable body of statutes upon which all laws for their governance still continue to be framed,) are the following memoranda, extracted by Dyer from Baker’s MSS. in the public library of the University:—

“The 26th daye of Julie, 1578, the Queene’s Majestie came in her progresse intended to Norfolk, to Audley End, at the town of Waldren, accompanied by the Lorde Treasurer, High Chancellor of the University of Cambridge. The Vice Chancellor and Masters of Colleges thoughte meete and convenient for the dischardge of dutie, that the said Vice-Chancellor and Hedds of Coll. should shewe themselves of the Courte, and welcome her Grace into these quarters.” About the end of his oration, the orator (Mr. Bridgewater of King’s College) makes mention, that “Mr. Doctor Howland, then vice-chancellor,maketh his three ordinarie curtesies, and then kneeling at her Majesty’s feete, presenting unto her—

Of Robert Stephens’s first printing, folio, bound in redd velvett, and lymmed with gold; the arms of England sett upon eche syde of the booke very faire; and on the thirde leafe of the booke, being faire and cleane paper, was also sett and painted in colours the arms of the Universitie, with these writings following: Regiæ Majestati deditissimæ Academiæ Cantabrigiensis Insignia (viz. quatuor Leones cum Bibl. &c.) Also, with the booke, the Vice-Chancellor presented a pair of gloves, perfumed and garnished, with embroiderie and goldsmithe’s wourke, pr. 60s.and these verses:—

“Una quod es semper, quod semper es optima, Princeps,Quam bene conveniunt hæc duo verba tibi?Quod pia, quod prudens, quod casta, innuba virgoSemper es, hoc etiam semper es una modo.“Et populum quod ames, populo quod amata vicissimSemper es, hic constans semper et una manes,O utinam; quoniam sic semper es una, liceretUna te nobis semper, Eliza, frui?”

Since Cambridge has the merit of producing thefirst English play, it is but justice here to add, that

This merit is claimed for them by the Oxford historians, and allowed by the historians of the stage, though they have not agreed of the exact period. We are informed, in Leland’s Collectanea, that “the stage did vary three times in the acting of one tragedy.” In other words, there were three scenes employed; but these, it is said by Chalmers, in his History of Oxford University, were the invention of Inigo Jones; and the exhibition, it appears, took place in the Hall of Christ Church, in 1636, (the year Wood places the invention in,) for the entertainmentof the unfortunate Charles the First and his Queen, when, says our annalist, a comedy was performed for their amusement, entitled, “The Passions Calmed, or the Settling of the Floating,” written by Strode, the Public Orator, and moveable scenery introduced with suitable variations; and though there is pretty conclusive evidence that this was not the first timemoveable scenes, &c. had been introduced, it is evident they had not come into general use, from the fact that, after the departure of the King and hissuite, the dresses and scenery were sent to Hampton Court, at the express desire of the Queen, but with a wish, suggested by the Chancellor of Oxford, the ill-fated Archbishop Laud,that they might not come into the hands of the common players, which was accordingly promised. Leland thinks, however, thatmoveable sceneswere better managed, before this, at Cambridge; and I know not, he says, whether the invention may not be carried back to the year 1583, when the celebrated Polish prince, Alesco, was at Oxford, and for whose entertainment, says Wood (who gives an interesting account of all the particulars of that famous Oxford gaudy,) the tragedy of Dido was acted in the Hall of Christ Church, decorated with scenes illustrative of the play, and the exhibition of “the tempest, wherein it rained small comfits, rose-water, and new artificial snow, was very strange to the beholders.” But other authorities place the invention in 1605, when

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 thehummingof 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 hiscourtiers 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.”

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 onlyliesundera 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. forWilliam Crooke, at theGreen 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, sinceLutetia entertained our Prince,And wasted both a studied toy,As long as was the siege ofTroy:And spent herself for full five daysInspeeches,exercise, andplays.To trim the town, great care beforeWas tane by th’ LordVice-Chancellor,Both morn and eve he cleared the way,The streets he gravell’d thrice a day;One stripe ofMarch-dustfor to see,NoProvostwould 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 thetownormap.But the pure house ofEmanuel,Would not be like proudJesebel,Nor show herself before the kingAn hypocrite, orpaintedthing:But that the ways might all prove fair,Conceiv’d a tedious mile of prayer.Upon the look’d-for seventh ofMarch,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, poorOxford, thou’rt undone,For now the king’s pastTrompington,And rides upon his brave grey Dapple,Seeing the top ofKing’s-Colledgechappel.Next rode his lordship on a nag,Whose coat was blue, whose ruff was shag,And then began his reverenceTo 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,WithEn 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,OfChristendom, and eke ofKent,TheTrinity; 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, fairCarolus,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 admiredAs 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 ActorsUpon the stage; for I am sure thatThere 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 GraceA wondrous witty ambling pace:But we were chiefly spoyl’d by thatWhich was six hours ofGod 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 aHen.He knew he was to use their mightTo help to keep the door at night,And well bestow’d he though his Hen,That they might ToleboothOxfordmen.He thought it did become a lordTo 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,SirEdward Ratcliffbore 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 thenAll treasons againstPriscian.Here no man spoke aught to the point,But all they said was out of joint;Just like the Chappel ominous,In th’ Colledge calledGod 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 fromCambridgekept 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 fromTrinitie,They make a scramble for degree;Masters of all sorts and all ages,Keepers, subsizers, lackayes, pages,Who all did throng to come abroad,Withpray make menow,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’dHodiissime: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 spoylJoseph BernesiusThe sale ofRex Platonicus.

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 thenegative, 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

EntitledIgnoramus, 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 asuperiorplace 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, toshow him up, in the pedantic, crafty, pragmatical character ofIgnoramus; 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 thatdialect, in which almost the best amongst them were accustomed to write and even to discourse; a jargon, says Wilson, in hisMemorabilia 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 whichhe has admirably availed himself in the formation of the character ofIgnoramus, 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 ofGeorge Villiers, who afterwards became Duke of Buckingham, and supplantedSomersetin 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, entitledTrapulario, 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 amistake. Dyer in hisPrivileges of Cambridge(citing vol. ii. fol. 149 of Hare’s MSS.) givesthe 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,

in all commissions of the peace or otherwise, where public shew of degrees is to be made.”

Who had half a score of the softer sex to lisp “Papa,” not one of whom his lady was conjuror enough “to get off,” was one day accosted in Piccadilly by an old Oxfordchum, with, “I hope I see your Lordship well.” “Pretty well, for a man who is daily smothered inpetticoats, and has ten daughters and a wife to carve for,” was the reply.

“The earliest collection of Christmas carols supposed to have been published,” says Hone, in his Every-Day Book, “is only known from the last leaf of a volume, printed by Wynkyn Worde, in the year 1521. This precious scrap was picked up by Tom Hearne; Dr. Rawlinson purchased it at his decease in a volume of tracts, and bequeathed it to the Bodleian Library. There are two carols upon it: one, ‘a caroll of huntynge,’ is reprinted in the last edition of Juliana Berner’s ‘Boke of St. Alban’s;’ the other, ‘a caroll bringing in the boar’s head,’ is in Mr. Dibdin’s edition of “Ames,” with a copy of it as it is now sung in Queen’s College, Oxford, every Christmas Day. Dr. Bliss of Oxford also printed on a sheet, for private distribution, a few copies of this, and Anthony Wood’s version of it, with notices concerning the custom, from the handwriting of Wood and Dr. Rawlinson, in the Bodleian Library. Ritson, in his ill-tempered ‘Observations on Warton’s History of English Poetry,’ (1782, 4to., p. 37,) has a Christmas carol upon bringing up the boar’s head, from an ancient MS. in his possession, wholly different from Dr. Bliss’s. The ‘Bibliographical Miscellanies’ (Oxford, 1814, 4to.) contains seven carols from a collection in one volume, in the possession of Dr. Cotton, of Christ-Church College, Oxford, ‘imprynted at London, in the Poultry, by Richard Kele, dwelling at the longe shop vnder Saynt Myldrede’s Chyrche,’” probably between 1546 and 1552. “I had an opportunity of perusing this exceedingly curious volume(Mr. Hone,) which is supposed to be unique, and has since passed into the hands of Mr. Freeling.” “According to Aubrey’s MS., in the Coll. Ashmol. Mus., Oxford,” says a writer in the Morning Herald of the 25th of Dec., 1833, “before the last Civil Wars, in gentlemen’s houses, at Christmas, the first dish that was brought to the table wasa boar’s head, with a lemon in his mouth. At Qeeun’s College, Oxford,” adds this writer, “they still retain this custom; the bearer of it brings it into the hall, singing, to an old tune, an old Latin rhyme, “Caput apri defero,” &c. “The carol, according to Hearne, Ames, Warton, and Ritson,” says Dr. Dibdin, in his edition of the second, is as follows:—

Caput apri differoReddens laudes domino.The bore’s heed in hande bring I,With garlands gay and rosemary,I praye you all synge merely,Qui estis in convivio.The bores heed I understandeIs the thefte servyce in this lande,Take where ever it be fande,Servite cum cantico.Be gladde lordes bothe more and lasse,For this hath ordeyned our stewarde,To chere you all this Christmasse,The bores heed with mustarde.

“This carol (says Warton,) with many alterations, is yet retained at Queen’s College, Oxford,” though “other ancient carols occur with Latin burthens or Latin intermixtures.” But, “Being anxious to obtain a correct copy of this ballad,” says Dr. Dibdin, in hisAmes, “as I had myself heard it sung in the Hall of Queen’s College, I wrote to the Rev. Mr. Dickinson, Tutor of the College, to favour me with an account of it: his answer, which may gratify the curious, is here subjoined.

“‘Queen’s College, June 7th, 1811.

“‘Dear Sir,—I have much pleasure in transmitting youa copy of the oldBoar’s Head Song, as it has been sung in our College-hall, every Christmas Day, within my remembrance. There are some barbarisms in it, which seem to betoken its antiquity. It is sung to the common chaunt of the prose version of the Psalms in cathedrals; at least, whenever I have attended the service at Magdalen or New College Chapels, I have heard the Boar’s Head strain continually occurring in the Psalms.

“‘The boar’s head in hand bring I,Bedeck’d with bays and rosemary;And I pray you, my masters, be merry,Quot estis in convivio.Caput apri deferoReddens laudes Domino.“‘The boar’s head, as I understand,Is the rarest dish in all this land,Which thus bedeck’d with a gay garland,Let us servire Cantico.Caput apri deferoReddens laudes Domino.“‘Our steward hath provided thisIn honour of the King of Bliss;Which on this day to be served is,In Regimensi Atrio.Caput apri deferoReddens laudes Domino.’”

“The following,” adds the Doctor, “is Hearne’s minute account of it: (Hist. Guil. Neubrig. vol. iii. p. 743:) ‘I will beg leave here,’ says the pugnacious Oxford antiquary, ‘to give an exact copy of theChristmas Carolupon the Boar’s Head, (which is an ancient dish, and was brought up by King Henry I. with trumpets, before his son, when his said son was crowned) as I have it in an old fragment, (for I usually preserve even fragments of old books) of the Christmas Carols printed by Wynkyn de Worde, (who as well as Richard Pynson, was servant to William Caxton, who was the first that printed English books, though not the first printer in England, as is commonly said,) printing being exercised at Oxford in 1468, if not sooner, which was several years before he printed anything at Westminster, by which it will be perceived how much the said carolis altered, as it is sung in some places even now, from what it was at first. It is the last thing, it seems, of the book (which I never yet saw entire,) and at the same time I think it proper also to add to the printer’s conclusion, for this reason, at least, that such as write about our first printers, may have some notice of the date of this book, and the exact place where printed, provided they cannot be able to meet with it, as I believe they will find it pretty difficult to do, it being much laid aside, about the time that some of David’s Psalms came to be used in its stead.’”

Is briefly noticed in Pointer’s “Oxoniensis Academia,” as “that of having a boar’s head, or the figure of one in wood, brought up in the hall every year on Christmas Day, ushered in very solemnly with an old song, in memory of a noble exploit (as tradition goes,) by a scholar (a Tabardar) of this college, in killing a wild boar in Shotover Wood.” That is, having wandered into the said wood, which was not far from Oxford, with a copy of Aristotle in his hand (for the Oxonians were of old logicians of the orthodox school in which an Alexander the Great was bred,) and if the latter, as a pupil who sat at the foot of Aristotle, conquereda world, no wonder our Tabardar, as a disciple being attacked by a wild boar, who came at him with extended jaws, intending to make buta mouthful of him, was enabled to conquer so rude a beast, which hedidby thrusting the Aristotle down the boar’s throat, crying, in the concluding words of the 5th stanza of the following song—‘Græcum est.’ The animal of course fell prostrate at his feet, was carried in triumph to the college, and no doubt served up withan ‘old song,’as Mr. Pointer says, in memory of this “noble exploit.” The wittyDr. Buckler, however, is not satisfied with this brief notice of Mr. Pointer’s: but says, in hisnever-to-be-forgottenexposé, or “Complete Vindication,” ofThe All-Souls’ Mallard(of which anon,) “I am apt to fear, that it is a fixed principle in Mr.Pointerto ridicule everyceremonyandsolemn institutionthat comes in his way, however venerable it may be for its antiquity and significance;” and after quoting Mr. Pointer’s words,he adds, with hisunrivalled irony, “now, notwithstanding thisbold hintto the contrary, it seemeth to me to be altogether unaccountable and incredible, that a polite and learned society should be so far depraved, in its taste, and so much in love with ablock-head, as to eat it. But as I have never had the honour of dining at aboar’s head, and there are many gentlemen more nearly concerned and better informed, as well as better qualified, in every respect, to refute thiscalumnythan I am, I shall avoid entering into a thorough discussion of this subject. I know it is given out by Mr. Pointer’s enemies, that he hath been employed by some of theyoung secedersfrom that college, to throw out a Story of theWooden-head, in order to countenance the complaints of those gentlemen aboutshort commons, and the great deficiency ofmutton,beef, &c.; and, indeed, I must say, that nothing could have better answered their purpose, in this respect, than in proving, according to theinsinuation, that the chief dish at one of their highest festivals, was nothing but a log of Woodbedeck’d with bays and rosemary; but surely this cannot be credited, after theuniversityhas been informed by thebest authority, and in the mostpublicManner, that ayoung Nobleman, who lately completed his academical education at that house, was, during his whole residence, not only verywell satisfiedbutextremely delightedwith the college commons.”

In the Oxford Sausage is the following

I sing not of Rome or Grecian mad games.The Pythian, Olympic, and such like hard names;Your patience awhile, with submission, I beg,I strive but to honour the feast of Coll. Reg.Derry down, down, down, derry down.No Thracian brawls at our rites e’er prevail,We temper our mirth with plain sober mildAle;The tricks of Old Circe deter us from Wine:Though we honour a boar, we won’t make ourselves Swine.Derry down, &c.Great Milo was famous for slaying his Ox,Yet he proved but an assin cleaving of blocks:But we had a hero for all things was fit,Our Motto displays both his Valour and Wit.Derry down, &c.Stout Hercules labour’d, and look’d mighty big,When he slew the half-starved Erymanthian Pig;But we can relate such a stratagem taken,That the stoutest of Boars could notsave his own Bacon.Derry down, &c.So dreadful his bristle-back’d foe did appear,You’d have sworn he had got the wrongPig by the ear,But instead of avoiding the mouth of the beast,He ramm’d in a volume, and cried—Græcum est.Derry down, &c.In this gallant action such fortitude shown is,As proves him no coward, nor tender Adonis;No Armour but Logic; by which we may find,That Logic’s the bulwark of body and mind.Derry down, &c.Ye Squires that fear neither hills nor rough rocks,And think you’re full wise when you out-wit a Fox;Enrich your poor brains, and expose them no more,Learn Greek, and seek glory from hunting the Boar.Derry down, &c.

Is another custom that eitherwas, oris, annually celebrated at Queen’s College, Oxford, notpro bono publico, it seems, but pro bonocook-o!and has a reference, probably, to the exploit in which Milo “proved but an ass,” as observed in the second line of the third verse of the foregoing song.On dit, every Christmas, New Year’s, or some other day, at that season of the year,a block of woodis placed at the hall-door, where thecookstands with hiscleaver, which he delivers to each member of the College, as he passes out of the Hall, who endeavours, atonestroke, to sever the block of wood; failing to do which, he throws down half-a-crown, in which sum he ismulct. This is done by every one in succession, should they, as is invariably the case, prove themselves asses in “cleaving of blocks.”But should any one out-Milo Milo, he would be entitled to all the half-crowns previously forfeited: otherwise the wholegoes to the cook.

Lord Byron has said, that a man is unfortunate whose name will admit of beingpunned upon. The lament might apply to all peculiarities of person and habit. Dr. Joseph Jowett, the late regius professor of civil law at Cambridge, though a learned man, an able lecturer, one that generously fostered talent in rising young men, and adilettantemusician of a refined and accurate taste, was remarkable for some singularities, as smallness of stature, and for gardening upon a small scale. This gave the late Bishop Mansel or Porson (for it has been attributed to both, and both were capable of perpetrating it) an occasion to throw off

Exiguum hunc hortum Jowettulus isteExiguus, vallo et muriit exiguo:Exiguo hoc horto forsan Jowettulus isteExiguus mentem prodidit exiguum.

AlittlegardenlittleJowett had,And fenced it with alittlepalisade:Because this garden made alittletalk,He changed it to alittlegravel walk:And if you’ld know the taste oflittleJowett,Thislittlegarden doth alittleshow it.

Who had the honour to edit hisAdversaria, can both, it is said, bear witness to the fact, that Porson was unlike many pedants who make a display of their brilliant parts to surprise rather than enlighten; he was liberal in the extreme, and truly amiable in communicating his knowledgeto young men of talent and industry, and would tell them all they wanted to know in a plain and direct manner, without any attempt to display his superiority. All, however, agree that the time for profiting by Porson’s learning wasinter bibendum, for then, as Chaucer says of the Sompnour—

“When he well dronkin had with wine,Then would he speak ne word but Latine.”

More than one distinguished judge of his merits

And he never appeared so sore, says one who knew him well, as when aWakefieldor aHermannoffered to set him right, or hold their tapers to light him on his way. Their doing so gave him occasion to compare them tofour-footed animals, guided only by instinct; and in future, he said, he “would take care they should not reach what he wrote with their paws, though they stood on their hind legs.” I may here very appropriately repeat the fact, that

As he has shown in his preface to the second edition of his Hecuba. The German critic, Hermann, however, whom he makes to say, in his notes on the Medea, “We Germans understand quantity better than the English,” accuses him of being more dictatorial than explanatory in his metrical decisions. Upon this the professor fired the following epigram at the German:—

Back to Index Next