HISTORY OF LYNN, PART II. (continued 2)

A formal deed, attesting the truth of this ridiculous story, was drawn up and subscribed by bishop Peregrine, the successor of Hubert, A.D. 1013. [283] William of Malmsbury also, the most sensible of our old historians, appears to have given it full credit. In short, it seems very certain that it was long, in common with abundance of other similar tales, universally believed; which shews how well established the authority of the priesthood, and the popular reverence for that order, must then have been in this country, and here at Lynn, as well as in other places.

Next to the priests and monks, the magicians and fortunetellers appear to have then possessed the largest share of the public confidence and veneration; and very probably with equal worthiness. Strange tales have been related by historians of the ascendancy which these sorts of people long had over the infatuated inhabitants, and even over those of the highest orders among them. These things give but an unfavourable idea of our national character in those times. It would but ill become us, however, to think very contemptuously of those foibles in our poor ancestors, while we ourselves with all our boasted advantages and wisdom, have not yet entirely left off consulting fortunetellers and conjurers: to say nothing of the multitude of other impostors, of different sorts, that are daily countenanced and caressed among us.

Section VII.

Of the Heptarchy and its history—remarks on Egbert, Alfred, and their most renowned successors—character of Canute, and of Edward the Confessor: the latter the first of our monarchs that touched for the Evil—remarks on that circumstance, and on the prevalence of that complaint in the parts about Lynn.

During a good part of the period from the Saxon invasion to the conquest, England was divided into seven petty states, or kingdoms, usually denominated, the Heptarchy, [285] the history of which is exceedingly uninteresting; being, as Granger observes, a series of violence, wars, and massacres, among petty tyrants, most of whom were a disgrace to the human species.—Under the famous Egbert those states were consolidated, and formed into one kingdom, under the name of England, which it has borne ever since. The kings who have ruled it, from Egbert to the Norman conqueror, were, for the most part, like their predecessors in the days of the Heptarchy, very disreputable and worthless characters. There were however, some exceptions, among which Alfred was far the most conspicuous, and outshone the rest, as the sun does all the other luminaries.

Among the most renowned and respectable of the other English sovereigns of that period, beside Egbert, already mentioned, were Edward the elder, Athelstan, Edgar the peaceable, Edmund ironside, Canute the great, and Harold the second. Of Edgar we are told, that he styled himself King of Great Britain, as Edred, it seems, had done before him; but that title was afterward discontinued, and not used by any succeeding monarch, till the reign of James the first. The most potent among these crowned heads was Canute, being the sovereign of Denmark and Norway as well as of England. That he possessed great talents is allowed on all hands; and though he was cruel here at first, he gradually became mild, devout, and popular. Though an usurper and a foreigner, he was, perhaps, next to Alfred, the wisest of our ancient kings, if not also the most virtuous and enlightened, especially towards the close of his reign: of which his memorable adventure, or experiment with the tide, and with the miserable sycophants of his court, on the seashore, seems a pretty strong indication. That he was also superstitious, and an admirer of relics, must not be denied: but it was likewise the case with all the most eminent of the princes of those days, the great Alfred himself not excepted. There is a remarkable air of honest simplicity in the reason given by Canute for undertaking a voyage, or journey to Rome, which he did a few years before he died:—“I had been told (said he) that the apostle Peter had received great authority from the Lord, and carried the keys of heaven: therefore I thought it absolutely necessary to secure his favour by a pilgrimage to Rome.”—How many of our modern visionaries and devotees would appear more respectable than Canute, were they as honestly to avow their motives, or give the reason of their proceedings?

In adverting to the princes, or sovereigns of this period, to whom the town of Lynn was in subjection, Edward, called the Confessor, must not be left unnoticed: not so much for any shining qualities, or great respectability of character which he possessed, for there he appears to have been very deficient, as for certain incidents or events which distinguished his reign, independent of any personal worth or merit of his own. With the monks and ecclesiastics he was certainly a great favourite, but what made him so redounded not at all to his honour, but may be said to be a disgrace, rather than any credit to his memory.

The most important and laudable occurrence of his reign was the reformation of the law of the land. Before his time different parts of the kingdom were governed by different laws: Wessex, by the West Saxon; Mercia, by the Mercian; and Northumberland, by the Danish laws. In his reign they were reduced into one body, by the name of the laws of Edward the confessor, which then became common to all England. This together with the abolition of that odious tax called Danegelt, seem to have been his best and most commendable deeds, though probably to be ascribed to his counsellors, such as Goodwin, Leofric, and Siward, rather than to himself. It is said, however, that he was humane, temperate, and charitable, and gave much alms: and, moreover, that he had visions and revelations, the gift of prophecy, and even that of working miracles, his extensive fame for which continued long, and procured him, about two hundred years after his death, from pope Alexander III. the high honour of canonization, under the name of Saint Edward the Confessor, an appellation that must have been very oddly and unaccountably applied.

But of all his memorable achievements, or traits of character, his touching for the Evil, or Scrofula, and pretending to the gift or power of miraculously healing that complaint, are the most remarkable. As this pretended gift or power is supposed to have originated with him, [288a] and to have descended from him to all his legitimate successors on the English throne, a sketch of the history of the practice, from first to last, it is presumed, would not prove unacceptable or unentertaining to the reader. And as the disorder, for whose cure this practice was introduced, is said to be nowhere more common, or prevalent, than at and about Lynn, [288b] which is supposed to have been also the case for many generations, it may naturally and safely be concluded that frequent applications to the throne for a cure would be made, time after time, from these parts, while every body believed that the sovereign’s touch would infallibly remove the malady. Myriads and myriads, labouring under scrofulous complaints, have certainly applied to the throne for relief during the long interval between the time of the Confessor, when the said practice commenced, and the accession of George I. when it was finally laid aside. Even in the single reign of that most religious prince (as he has been called) Charles II. the number, it is said, amounted to above ninety thousand; and it is morally certain that not a few of that multitude, and of the rest, who resorted, before and since, to our different sovereigns, for relief in the same case, were Norfolk and Lynn patients. The insertion therefore, in this volume, of the proposed Sketch of this notable affair, or practice of the royal touch, cannot, it is presumed, be deemed any material deviation from propriety:—so it shall appear in the last section of this chapter, at the conclusion of this second part of the work.

Section VIII.

State of Lynn in the Confessor’s time—Stigand, Ailmer, and Harold, bore then the chief sway—great power of the latter—sketch of his character—obtains the crown at the confessor’s death—is soon disturbed by two formidable invasions—the one from the Danish, or Norwegian shores, under Halfagar, whom he vanquishes and slays in battle—the other from France, under his rival or competitor, William of Normandy, in opposing whom he is himself vanquished and slain in the decisive battle of Hastings, which places the conqueror on the throne, without further struggle, through the defection and machinations of the bishops and clergy.

In the time of the Confessor, as he has been already suggested, Lynn was a place of considerable and growing consequence. The town then, and the adjacent country belonged to three of the principal men of the realm. Harold, who afterwards ascended the throne, was then Earl, or Duke of the East Angles, [289] which must have placed Lynn under his jurisdiction. He had besides, great possessions here, being chief proprietor and lord of South Lynn and other places. Great Massingham, Westacre &c. did also belong to him. Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury, likewise bore then no small sway in this town and neighbourhood, as lord of Rising, &c. So also did his brother Ailmer, bishop of Elmham, to which see, even at that early period, the government of the borough of Lynn seems to have been a kind of appendage. These two prelates were Anglo-Saxons, which was the case, it seems, with but three more of the order in the kingdom; [290] the rest being all foreigners, and mostly French, or Normans. These being his countrymen, and in a manner his subjects, we need not wonder at the facility with which the Conqueror obtained the English Crown; especially as the Pope also patronized the undertaking. Though those bishops could not prevent the accession of Harold, owing to his great popularity and power, yet they kept themselves ready to promote the cause and interest of his rival whenever a fair opportunity should offer, and it was not long before they had their wishes completely gratified.

Harold during the latter part of the Confessor’s reign was the most powerful subject in the kingdom. He possessed also great talents and courage, with no small share of ambition, and had acquired vast and unrivalled popularity. It was therefore no great wonder that he should pretty easily make his way to the throne at the very first vacancy. He had had for sometime the chief management of public affairs, and his conduct in the mean while appears to have given general satisfaction. No one in the kingdom was better qualified, or perhaps more deserving than he to wear the crown; and whatever the Norman, or monkish historians may have said to the contrary, it seems pretty certain that he ascended the throne with the general assent and approbation of the people.

His reign however, was soon disturbed, first by a Danish, or Norwegian invasion in the north, beaded by Harfager, or Helfager king of Norway, aided by Harold’s own worthless brother Tosti; and shortly after by a French invasion in the south, under William the bastard, Duke of Normandy. The former Harold opposed with success; the invaders were defeated with great slaughter, and the two chiefs, Harfager and Tosti, fell in the action. Great and rich booty is said to have fallen into the hands of the victors, including a considerable quantity of gold. Here Harold appears to have committed a great error, and to have departed most unwisely and unaccountably from his usual policy, by retaining all the spoil for himself, instead of sharing it with his soldiers, which excited great discontents among them, and proved afterwards, in no small measure, detrimental to his cause.

No sooner had the English monarch triumphed over the first invaders than he learnt that the Duke of Normandy with a great army had made good his landing in Sussex. He immediately commenced his march against that fierce and formidable adversary, with an army greatly reduced by the late bloody, though successful conflict, and rendered discontented by his own impolitic and unwise conduct, already mentioned. Yet notwithstanding those disadvantages, so rapid was his progress from Yorkshire to Sussex, that he actually arrived within sight of his enemies before they had proceeded but a little way from the place of debarkation. It had been better, no doubt, had he taken more time, to refresh and recruit his army, or acted on the defensive, for sometime at least, which could hardly have failed of being very materially to his advantage, as he was then circumstanced. But so impetuous was he, and resolute to bring the contest to a speedy termination, that he absolutely rejected the wholesome counsel given him by one of his brothers, to adopt a different course. To his opponent this must have been perfectly agreeable, and the very thing he wanted, as nothing could have been less his interest than a defensive war on the part of the English, or to find in Harold another Fabius. Both parties accordingly prepared for a speedy and decisive engagement. The two armies are said to have spent the preceding night very differently: the English impiously passed it in riot and revelry; but the Normans, good creatures! were all the time occupied in the duties of religion; for which, to be sure, from the nature of their errand, and the object of their visit, they must have been preeminently qualified! This story, we may presume, was fabricated afterwards by the monks and priests and Norman historians, who were in the interest of the Conqueror, and wished to pay their court to the reigning family. Be that as it might, the battle of Hastings forms a memorable era in the history of this country. Both armies fought with desperate valour, as if determined to conquer or die; but the invaders proved victorious. Harold and his two brothers, with the flower of the English army, fell in that bloody and fatal field; and that single victory may be said to have placed the conqueror on the throne of England, and advanced him to the first rank among the European potentates of that age. In promptness, decision, military and political talents, as well as good fortune, he may be said strongly to resemble the present sovereign of Normandy and the French Empire. But it is to be hoped that the resemblance will not hold, in case the latter should ever attempt to accomplish his long threatened invasion of this kingdom.

From the disastrous and fatal field of Hastings, Edwin and Morcar, the principal surviving English commanders, with the shattered remains of Harold’s army, retreated in the night to London, where they convened the people, and such of the grandees of the realm as were there to be found, to consult upon the best mode of proceeding, at so critical and desperate a conjuncture. They themselves were for placing Edgar Atheling, the next heir, on the throne, and adopting vigorous measures for the discomfiture and expulsion of the invaders; but their advice was not taken, their reasons were set at nought, and every idea of any further resistance was abandoned; so that William obtained the crown without fighting another battle, or encountering any further difficulty. Nothing could exceed the pusillanimity, or dastardly conduct of the English on that memorable occasion, instead of the present prevailing and flattering idea, that one Englishman can beat two or three Frenchmen, they seemed to believe, on the contrary, that one Frenchman could beat, at least, two or three Englishmen. In short, they appear to have erred as much on the one hand as we do on the other. But it was not the only time when our dear countrymen discovered a diffidence of their own superiority.

The blame of rejecting the counsel of the two chieftains above-mentioned has been imputed to the defection and machinations of the bishops and clergy, who, as has been already suggested, were decidedly in the interest of the Norman, and, of course, inimical to the Anglo-Saxon or English, government, constitution, and succession. The chief reasons for which, were probably the following—1. Many of them, and most of the bishops were foreigners, and William’s countrymen and subjects; so that it was natural for them to favour his enterprize and pretensions.—2. Ecclesiastical power and priestly domination were more likely to be promoted, and the popular, or opposite spirit depressed and crushed under a Norman, than an Anglo-Saxon, or English government.—3. Even under the Confessor, monk-ridden and priest-ridden as he was, the civil power was so formidable, and superior to the ecclesiastical, that the parliament actually procured the deprivation and banishment of Robert, archbishop of Canterbury, as an incendiary and fomenter of disputes between the king and his subjects, and had Stigand appointed in his room: a change therefore, or such a revolution in the constitution and government as William was likely to effect or promote, must have been a desirable object with the whole clerical body.—4. The Pope had openly appeared in favour of the invasion, the success of which he was understood to have much at heart: and so careful had he been to let all see that William was his man, and the church’s favourite and champion, that he first made him a present of a consecrated standard, a golden Agnus Dei, and a ring, in which was pretended to be one of St. Peter’s hairs; (of course a most precious relic;) and then he solemnly excommunicated all that should oppose him. This conduct or example of the pope would alone have been sufficient lo influence and determine the bishops, clergy, and monks, or the whole body of the ecclesiastics, to betray and sacrifice the cause of the people, or of the nation, and promote to the utmost that of the invader. They would have done so without any other reason or inducement; but being further stimulated by those before mentioned, we may safely conclude that their zeal in the disgraceful cause which they had so basely espoused, must have been of no ordinary fervour.

This memorable co-operation of the clergy with the conqueror, so hostile to the liberty and independence of the country, has been pronounced, in a recent publication, to be “the true origin of the alliance between church and state, so much contended for by some of our ecclesiastics; who have renounced the penances of popery, but would fain retain both its pride and its power.” [296] But if it was really its origin here, yet it seems to have begun elsewhere at a much earlier period: for the world does not appear to have existed a very long while before statesmen and priests found it to be their interest to play into each others hands, and enter into partnership, for the better management of their respective concerns; or, in other words, for the sake of keeping the multitude more easily and effectually in subjection.

The papal presents and interference in favour of the Norman expedition, despicable as they appear, must have largely contributed to recruit William’s forces, inspire them with confidence and enthusiasm, and eventually promote and ensure his success. Nor was he himself wanting on his part. Nothing that an intrepid adventurer, and able leader could do to give effect to his undertaking was by him omitted. He even went so far as to make very liberal promises to divide the lands of the English among his followers, in case he proved victorious; which promises he afterwards very punctually and amply performed, so that the English grandees were deprived of their possessions, or if they were permitted to retain any part of them, they held the same under the Normans, who then became every where the great lords and proprietors of the country.

The whole English nation, in the meantime, was so completely subdued and degraded, as to become, like the ancient Gibeonites, mere hewers of wood and drawers of water for their haughty conquerors, whom providence seemed to employ, like the Danes before, as instruments of retaliation and vengeance, for the atrocities formerly committed on the original inhabitants. The English language itself was now in a manner prohibited and proscribed, and the French substituted for it, or introduced in its room, especially in the courts of law, and all legal transactions, which continued to be the case for a long time. [297] French also became now the sole language of gentlemen, or of all who moved in the high and polite circles. None could be admitted into such circles, or allowed the name of gentlemen, without that language, which bore very hard, no doubt, upon many an English buck of those days; hence that well known old proverb, “Jack would be a gentleman, but that he can talk no French.”

The changes which the Norman Conquest produced in this country shall be further noticed in the next part or division of this work, where it will be seen how Lynn in particular, and its vicinity were affected by that memorable and humiliating revolution.

During the period of which we have been treating, Lynn exhibited no appearance of a borough, or corporate town: that state, or order of things belonged to the policy of a subsequent period, and resulted from the revolution effected by the conquest, and the odious feudal system, for their attachment to which the Normans were so very remarkable. Of the population of Lynn before the conquest, a great part probably consisted of slaves of different descriptions, the vassals and property of the bishop and other great men. The artificers, tradesmen, and merchants of Lynn were then all, perhaps, in that condition, and following their respective employments or professions, by the permission, and under the protection or patronage of their lordly superiors and proprietors, and also for their, as well as their own behoof or emolument. It is not very clear or probable that the condition of these people and of the rest of their unfree or enslaved countrymen, did or could, by the conquest, suffer any very material deterioration. But with their superiors, the high and mighty, or great men of the land, their lordly and unfeeling oppressors, the case is known to have been far otherwise: that event, like some modern conquests and revolutions, degraded and humbled them with a vengeance.

Section IX.

Sketch of the practice of the royal touch in England, or a historical Essay on the memorable empiricism of our English sovereigns, from Edward the Confessor to George the First.

It is generally agreed that this notable practice, which appears to have been long deemed as a branch of the royal prerogative, began in this kingdom with, or in the person of Edward the Confessor. [299a] Some however seem to think it to have existed in France at an earlier period: if so, Edward, who had long lived in that country, and appeared very partial to it, and fond of French fashions, might take the hint from thence, and introduce it here upon his accession to the throne, which he might easily manage by the help of the monks, with whom he was so great a favourite.

Clovis, and Robert of sainted memory, are named among the early French sovereigns who successfully practised the royal touch, and were greatly admired and venerated by their subjects on that account. In the reign of Philip the first, the virtue is supposed to have been somehow lost, but happily revived again with undiminished splendor in that of Lewis the fat, after which it seems to have long and regularly continued. Francis I. [299b] and Henry IV. are represented as eminent practitioners; how it was with the succeeding monarchs, descended from the latter, we are not informed. No particular attention appears to have been paid to it yet by the emperor Napoleon. What he may think proper to do hereafter, no tongue can tell. Whether he possesses this power or not, it is certain that he possesses some other powers in as great a degree, at least, as any of his royal or imperial predecessors.

But this miraculous gift of healing did not, it seems, belong exclusively to the kings of France and England. [300a] The Earls, or princes of the house of Hapsburg also, are reported to have had it in no scanty measure. They cured the strumous, or scrofulous, it is said, by giving them drink, and the stammerers, by kissing them. But the Kings of Hungary seem to have exceeded all; for we are told that they could cure, not only the king’s evil, but all disorders occasioned by poison, the bite of a viper, or any other venomous animal.

“Mr. Bel, who tells us this, observes (what is as remarkable as the account itself) that he cannot find in history, that these Hungarian kings ever exercised this wonderful power. [300b] More shame for them, the unfeeling wretches! if they possessed it.

“The case was otherwise with the royal doctors of France and England, who have not been so shy of exerting this power, or rather, of practising this quackery. Some French writers (says Carte) ascribe this gift of healing to the king’s devotion towards the relics of St. Marculf, in the Church of Corbigny, in Champagne, to which the kings of France, immediately after their coronation at Rheims, used to go in solemn procession: and it must be owned there was formerly a great veneration paid to this saint in England. It was in memory of him that a room in the palace of Westminster frequently mentioned in the rolls of parliament, was called the chamber of St. Marculf; being probably the place where our kings touched for the Evil. It is now (our historian adds) called the painted chamber: and though the name of that saint hath been long forgot in this nation, yet the sanative virtue of our kings still continues.” [301a]

Of the most noted among our sovereigns, as practitioners in this healing art, the following is thought a pretty complete list. Nothing seems to be known in this way of Harold II. or yet of the four succeeding princes; but that Henry II. practised very successfully is said to be attested by Petrus Blesensis, who had been his chaplain. [301b] It seems highly probable that Henry III. likewise was often applied to, and successfully practised in the same way, as John of Geddesden, a physician, who is said to live about that time, advises a scorfulous patient, after his remedies had proved ineffectual, to apply to the king for a cure: for which he has been much blamed, and seemingly not without reason, as, in case he deemed the royal touch a certain care or remedy, he ought to have sent the patient to the king at first, without troubling him with operation and medicine. [302a]

Henry’s great son, Edward I, also appears to have been no mean master of this same art; and so, probably, might be his son, Edward II, though otherwise no great conjuror; but as to his son, Edward III, few, if any, seem to have gone beyond him in this sanative employment. Bradwardine, who attended him in his wars, and whose counsel is said to have contributed to his success, gives a pompous advertisement, in his book De Causa Dei, of the wonderful cures wrought by that prince. F. le Brun, however, pays no regard to this. He looks upon it as a crafty stratagem, and says, he does not doubt but that Edward’s pretensions to the crown of France excited his zeal to touch those who were diseased; which is not unlikely; princes often, when nothing but politics lie at the bottom, chusing to make religion to swim on the top. [302b] Edward’s grandson, Richard II, cannot be supposed to drop or lay aside a practice for which his grandfather and immediate predecessor on the throne had been so celebrated. Nor is it at all likely that his successors, of the rival house of Lancaster, should discontinue this practice, as that might have been construed to imply a consciousness of inferiority to the princes of the other house, or something like a defect in their own title to the crown.

Least of all is it to be supposed that this practice should be dropt or neglected afterwards, on the restoration of the York line, in the person of Edward IV, who would naturally take care to exercise every prerogative or power supposed to have belonged to his ancestors, and which had any way contributed to their popularity, consequence, or celebrity. This monarch, though of a far less religious or devout cast than his immediate predecessor Henry VI. might not on that account be the less qualified to work these miracles, any more than Charles II. afterwards; who, though by his clerical subjects denominated most religious, was yet certainly, in fact, one of the most irreligious and profligate wretches that ever wore a crown: nevertheless he unquestionably practiced the royal touch, as extensively, effectually, and successfully as any one whatever in the whole list of our crowned, or kingly practitioners. And why not?—as the extraordinary gift, supernatural virtue, or miraculous power, belonged entirely, it seems, to his regal quality or dignity; [303] and had nothing at all, apparently, to do with his personal or moral character.

Richard III. also, after he ascended the throne, may be supposed to possess as much of this supernatural and sanative virtue (whatever may be said of the other virtues) as any one of his predecessors or successors; and as it was evidently his interest to omit no popular observance, and to avail himself of whatever had a tendency to excite or gain the admiration of the people, and reconcile them to his government, we may be sure he would not fail to follow, with spirit, the practice in question; and so, by a copious display of its sanative virtue, compensate, in some sort, or degree, for the absence of virtues of another description. There is therefore abundant reason for setting him down among our royal miracle-workers.

None of all these princes appear to have made a greater figure, or to have proceeded with more parade, solemnity, and success, in this royal business or occupation, than Henry VII.—This politic prince, whatever right he might have to the crown, had probably as good a right as any one to try his hand at this notable and wonder working operation, the effect or fame of which he knew full well how to manage profitably and turn to the best account. He accordingly set about it in good earnest; and in order, as may be supposed, to give the process the most striking, sacred, and solemn appearance, and increase its effect, he had a new form, or office, composed and introduced for the purpose. [304] The project answered; and his success in this practice is said to have been very considerable. This prince would also sometimes take upon him to convert heretics; and he would even give them money to facilitate their conversion; [306] which was certainly no illadapted device, or unpromising expedient; and it is the more remarkable, as his majesty was himself so great a lover of money, and appears to have been so exceedingly close-fisted on other occasions. We may therefore be very sure that the conversion of heretics was of the highest importance in Henry’s estimation, and what lay very near to his royal heart. This monarch also, with his queen and eldest son, visited the town of Lynn, where he very probably exercised the royal touch, as scrofulous patients may be supposed to have been then, as they are now, very numerous here, all of whom, as well as the rest of the inhabitants, would not fail to give full credit to his majesty’s ability to remove the malady and restore the patients to perfect health; and, of course, would be anxious to apply to him, which he would not be likely to discourage. As to heretics, there might be then none of them here for him to try his royal hand at their conversion.

His son and high spirited successor, Henry VIII, would doubtless be careful to continue the practice of all the rites and ceremonies appertaining to the royal function, which had been handed down to him from his father: and there is every reason to believe that the operation in question would not be forgotten or omitted, were it only to be even with his neighbour and rival, Francis I, who certainly performed it, and would not be likely to be suffered or allowed to go beyond him on such an occasion. Henry therefore may be safely set down among our said royal practitioners, and even among the most able and powerful of them all. But the King’s Evil was not the only Evil in whose cure or removal he was particularly concerned: He was no less concerned in the cure or removal of the Pope’s Evil, another dreadful malady, which had long and grievously afflicted most of the good people of this country, and which was generally deemed incurable, till he took it in hand. All the world know how powerfully and effectually his royal touch operated on that occasion.—It seems he had also the reputation of being endowed with extraordinary gifts for the cure or prevention of the cramp; and we find that he distinguished himself by the consecration of cramp rings, which Stephen Gardiner says were much esteemed every where, and often sought for. [308] So very eminent was Henry among our royal doctors, and miracle mongers.

Edward VI, Henry’s amiable son and successor, is not known to have been at all an adept at this princely practice, or even to have been in the least partial to it. He probably thought so very lightly of it as entirely to omit and discard it, as he is also said to have done with respect to the consecration of cramp rings, by which his royal father so much distinguished himself. It is likely that Edward, young as he was, had imbibed some sectarian notions which might unfit him for the performance of these sublime operations. Even the royal and episcopal work of burning heretics, so much approved of and delighted in by his predecessors, and afterwards by his immediate successor, and so much called for and applauded by ecclesiastics, was to him an object of utter aversion; and if he once suffered it to be done, it was involuntary and against his own better judgement, through the importunate intreaties and urgent expostulations of his bishops, and particularly Cranmer, to whom therefore the guilt and infamy of the deed must properly or chiefly belong. [309] There is reason to believe that no such doings would have sullied or disgraced his reign had he been left to judge and act for himself. It is probable he was left so to judge and act with respect to the royal touch; so that we need not be surprised at his declining the practice.

From Mary, his bloody sister and successor a different conduct might be expected: and her conduct certainly was, almost in every thing, very different from his. Superstitious as she was, and bigoted to the last degree, it is not to be supposed that she should shrink from the performance of any rite or ceremony, however absurd, that had been in request with her popish predecessors, or devoutly practiced by them. This of the royal touch could never escape her attention: nay it is expressly said that the office was indeed fairly written out for her use; [that very office probably, which has been above inserted;] so that there can be no question of her touching for the Evil, as devoutly, and as successfully perhaps, as any of the rest. [310a]

As to Elizabeth, heretic as she was, her legitimacy questioned, and her title litigated, she touched for the Evil with a success acknowledged even by the papists themselves, who are said to ascribe it to the sign of the cross. [310b] A case is mentioned by Carte of a Roman Catholic, who, being put into prison, perhaps for recusancy, and terribly afflicted with the Evil, was, after he had been there a tedious time, at a vast expence to physicians without the least relief, touched by this queen, and perfectly cured: which gave him occasion to say, he was now convinced by undoubted experience, that the pope’s excommunication of her signified nothing, since she still continued blessed with so miraculous a quality. [310c]—It was well for the poor fellow that he was not a puritan, or he might have gone long enough without his cure, as her majesty is known to have been inexorably pitiless and spiteful against that class of her subjects.

Of James I, with his strong faith in ghosts and witches, and lofty notions of indefeasible right, royal prerogative and king-craft, it was not to be supposed that he, of all men, would think meanly or lightly of this royal and religious operation. It accordingly appears that he very readily and warmly engaged in it, and actually became a most dexterous and eminent practitioner—to the no small satisfaction and comfort, as we may suppose, of his liege subjects, as well as advancement of his own fame, or at least, the gratification of his vanity, of which it is well known he possessed no common or scanty portion. Nothing could delight him more than the idea that he could work miracles: his courtiers called him Solomon; but that idea was calculated to make him think himself as still greater than even Solomon. We are not informed how many patients underwent or felt his royal touch; but there is every reason to suppose and believe that the number must have been very considerable.

His unfortunate son and successor Charles I. was no less distinguished in this same way than his royal father had been. Great numbers are said to have been by him both touched and cured; of whom not a few were little children, which has been urged as a proof that it could not be ascribed to the effect or strength of imagination. Carte observes, that Dr. Heylyn, an eye witness of such cures, says, “I have seen some children brought before the King by the hanging sleeves, some hanging at their mother’s breasts, and others in the arms of their nurses, all cured, without the help of a serviceable imagination.” [312a] Both Heylyn and Carte were full of faith in these miracles. If they were right, the decapitation of Charles must have been a great loss to the nation, and especially to those who were afflicted with the Evil. For twelve years or more, after that event, not one of these miracles appears to have been wrought in this country.

As to Oliver Cromwell, it does not appear that he ever tried his hand at this wonder-working operation; conscious, it may be supposed, that it did not belong to his province, or to the protectoral office and dignity, with which he was invested. What he would have done, had he accepted or assumed the regal title, cannot be said or known with absolute certainty: though the probability seems to bear against his even then becoming a practitioner, as it would hardly have met the approbation of his best friends, or accorded with the ideas of his most trusty and powerful coadjutors, or even with his own.

After a total cessation or suspension of this ancient princely practice, during the whole time of the Common wealth and Protectorate, it revived again at the memorable restoration; and Charles II. took it up vigorously and solemnly, and on a very extensive scale. The Register of the Royal Chapel is said to exhibit a list of 92,107 persons touched by him for the Evil in a certain number of years; [312b] not including, it seems, the whole of his reign; so that double that number, or more for aught we know, may have passed under his hand during the whole course of his government. Yet we find he practised only at some particular seasons of the year; at least after the summer of 1662, when a royal proclamation was issued to inform the public that such would be the case from thenceforth. His majesty had been then a practitioner full two years, during which time there is reason to believe that he had touched some thousands. He began the work almost immediately after his restoration, so that it may be considered among the first acts of his reign. Of the state of the practice in his royal hands, or under his wise management, a pretty accurate idea may be formed from the following extracts—out of some of the principal Public Papers of that era.

The following passage appeared in the weekly Paper called Mercurius Politicus, of June 28, 1660—

“Saturday being appointed by his majesty to touch such as are troubled by the Evil, a great number of poor afflicted creatures were met together, many brought in chairs and flaskets; and being appointed by his majesty to repair to the Banqueting House, his majesty sat in a chair of state, and stroked all that were brought to him, and then put about each of their necks a white ribbon with an angel of gold on it. In this manner his majesty stroked above 600; and such was his princely patience and tenderness to the poor afflicted creatures, that though it took up a very long time, his majesty, never weary of well doing, was pleased to make enquiry, whether there were any more who had not been touched. After prayers were ended the duke of Buckingham brought a towel, and the earl Pembroke a bason and ewer; who, after they, had made obeysance to his majesty, kneeled down, till his majesty had washed.”

This was within a month after his majesty’s arrival.

The next is from the Parliamentary Journal, of July 9, 1660; a fortnight after the other; and is thus curiously worded—

“The kingdom having for a long time been troubled with the Evil, by reason of his majesty’s absence, great numbers have flocked for cure. His sacred majesty on Monday last touched 250 in the Banqueting-House; among whom, when his majesty was delivering the gold, one shuffled himself in, out of a hope of profit, which had not been stroked; but his majesty presently discovered him, saying, this man has not yet been touched. His majesty hath for the future appointed every Friday for the cure, at which time 200 and no more are to be presented to him, who are first to repair to Mr. Knight, the King’s surgeon, living at the Cross Guns, in Russell Street, Covent Garden, over against the Rose Tavern, for their tickets.—That none might lose their labour he thought fit to make it known that he will be at his house every Wednesday and Thursday, from two till six of the Clock, to attend that service.—And if any person of quality shall send to him he will wait upon them at their lodgings, upon notice given to him.”

In the same paper of July 30 and August 6, notice was given, that no more would be touched till about Michaelmas: and in the Mercurius Politicus, of February 28, 1661, it is said, that many came twice or thrice for the sake of the gold.

Another weekly paper, called Mercurius Publicus, February 21, 1661, had the following passage—

“We cannot but give notice that certain persons (too many one would think) who having the King’s Evill, and have been touched by his SACRED MAJESTY, have got the forehead to come twice or thrice, alleging they were never there before, till divers witnesses proved the contrary; which hath forced his MAJESTY to give order that whosoever hereafter comes to be touched, shall first bring to his MAJESTY’S Chirurgeons a certificate from the Minister and Church-Wardens (where they live) that they never were touched by his MAJESTY before: the next healing will begin six weeks hence.”

In the same paper of May 9, 1661, appeared the following notice or advertisement:

“WHITEHALL. We are commanded to give notice, that his MAJESTY finds the Season already so hot, that it will be neither safe nor fit to continue his healing such as have the king’s Evil; and therefore that his MAJESTIES good subjects therein concerned, would at present forbear to come to court; Friday next (may 10,) and Wednesday (May 15.) being the last days that his MAJESTY intends to heal, till the heat of the weather be allayed, and his MAJESTY’S further pleasure known, whereof his good subjects shall have timely notice.”

The same paper of August 15, 1661, contained the passage following:—

“We are commanded to give notice That his Majesty finds the season such, that it will neither be safe nor fit to continue his Healing those that have the King’s Evil; and therefore that His Majesties good subjects therein concerned do forbear to come to Court till All-Saints Day next, till which time His Majesty doth not intend to Heal.”

In the very same Paper, of July 17, 1662, appeared the following curious courtly advertisement:

“Hampton Court.—His Majesty lately set forth a Proclamation for the better ordering of those who repair to the Court for cure of the disease called the King’s Evil, wherein his Majesty being as ready and willing to relieve the necessities and diseases of his good Subjects by his Sacred Touch, which shall come for cure, as any of his Royal Predecessors, in which, by the Grace and Blessing of God, he hath in an extraordinary measure had good success, and yet in his princely wisdom, foreseeing that fit times are necessary to be appointed for the performing of that great work of Charity, doth declare his Royal pleasure to be, that from henceforth the usual times for presenting such persons, shall be from the Feast of All-saints, commonly called Alhallowtide, to a week before Christmas, and in the month before Easter, being more convenient for the temperature of the season, and in respect of any contagion that may happen in this near access to his Majesties Sacred Person. His Majesty doth further command that none presume to repair to Court for cure of the said disease, but within the limits appointed, and that such persons who come for that purpose, bring certificates under the hands of the Parson, Vicar, or Minister and Church-Wardens of the Parishes where they dwell, testifying that they have not at any time before been touched by the King; further charging all Justices of Peace, Constables, &c. that they suffer not any to pass but such as have such Certificates, under pain of his Majestys displeasure: And that his Majesties Subjects may have the better knowledge of it, his Majesties will is, that this Proclamation be published and affixed in some open place in every Market Town of this Realm.” [317a]

To the above Extracts, only one more shall be here added, from another Public Paper, called The Newes, of May 18, 1664.—

“His Sacred Majesty having declared it to be his royal will and purpose to continue the healing of his people for the Evil during the month of May, and then give over till Michaelmas next, I am commanded to give Notice thereof, that the people may not come up to the town in the interim and lose their labour.” [317b]

From these premises it plainly appears that the king really pretended to be endowed with the power or gift of working miracles, and of healing or curing one of the most obstinate and incurable diseases incident to the human frame, even by his touch. Most curious and ludicrous it surely must be to see such a man as Charles making such a pretension, and affecting to be hand and glove with Heaven; and no less so to see the whole nation, or at least the whole body of the church folks, or national religionists, (clergy and laity) which constituted the great bulk of the people, giving him full credit for every thing, and deeming the least doubt or hesitation about his miraculous claims as a sure indication of disloyalty, and scarcely short of high treason. Allowing or supposing his majesty to have really possessed this miraculous power, or supernatural healing gift, still it must appear rather a queer case that it should be affected by the temperature of the seasons, and actually controlled, overpowered, and crippled, as it were, by the hot weather; and that the royal operator, in the meantime, in case he persisted in his benevolent practice, or labour of love, during the dog-days, and for some time before and after, should be exposed to the imminent danger of some alarming contagion: at least he and his courtiers seemed evidently to have had such apprehension. In all this, however, his loyal and admiring subjects could discover nothing, either marvellous or suspicious, or yet any way inconsistent. Their sovereign’s miraculous claims found in them the most ready acquiescence. With some, indeed, especially among the poor persecuted nonconformists, the case was otherwise. They disbelieved those royal pretentions. But it only served to strengthen the public prejudice against them; being generally looked upon as an additional and sure proof of their disaffection, or their moral and political depravity.—So much for Charles’s supernatural powers and miraculous deeds.

His brother and successor, James II. another of our religious monarchs, continued this practice with unabated zeal, solemnity, and devotion. He appears to have made some improvement in the process; particularly by restoring the sign of the cross, which had been unaccountably omitted by his father, and grandfather. It is probable that none of its ancient appendages were by him forgotten, or left unrestored, if he did not also, in his princely wisdom, devise some others, equally suitable and edifying: and had the crown continued in his family, the good subjects of these realms would hardly have failed of having the institution or practice still preserved amongst them, and observed in all things according to the pattern exhibited by him. But his unexpected abdication forced things into another channel, and deprived us of so fair and important a chance. James is supposed to have practised at Whitehall as frequently, in proportion to the length of his reign, as his brother had done. But as his reign, compared with that of Charles, was very short, (though, in some respects, much too long) it is not to be supposed that he, like the other, could boast of his myriads of patients and cures. It appears, however, that he was very assiduous in this business, as well when his occasions called him abroad, as when detained within the precincts of his own court or palace: hence when he went to Oxford in 1687, about the affair of Magdalen-College and other matters, part of his time there is known to have been employed in touching; which shews how very partial he was to the practice, and how very ready he was to attend to it on every occasion that might offer. [319] Dr. Sykes in a letter to Dr. Charlett, of September 4, 1787, expresses himself thus, “This morning the king touches in Christ Church Quire; hears one Father Hall this morning at the new Popish Chapel there; but whether he will be there in the afternoon, or at University College, I know not.” And Creech in a letter to Dr. Charlett, of September 6, the same year, says, “On sunday morning the king touched. Warner and White officiating: all that waited on his majesty kneeled at the prayers, beside the Duke of Beaufort, who stood all the time.” [320] All this shews how partial and devoted James was to this practice, as well as how obsequiously the learned Oxonians observed and contemplated this part of their Sovereign’s conduct. Had he not gone beyond this royal touch, neither the Magdalenians nor any other Oxonian fraternity had ever resisted his mandates: his popularity, in that case, might have been as unbounded as that of our present sovereign, and his descendants might have reigned here gloriously to this day.

At the Revolution this practice or operation was again suspended. William III. was a Presbyterian, and Oliver Cromwell an Independent: the spirit and principles of these sects seem not to be congenial with, or favourable to the practice; nor does this gift or privilege appear to extend to sectarian or heterodox princes, but only to those of the Romish, or Church of England faith.

At the accession of Anne, of course, this sanative virtue and practice again revived, and numbers were touched by the royal hand of that illustrious princess, among whom was the late celebrated Dr. Samuel Johnson, then in his childhood. At the death of Anne, the said virtue forsook the British throne: at least none of our succeeding monarchs have yet ventured to revive the practice. The two first princes of the present dynasty had, doubtless, their reasons for refraining from it; but as it is not known what they were, it is impossible to say whether their majesties were governed therein by wise or unwise, proper or improper motives. We know that actions very right in themselves may yet be performed upon very wrong and unjustifiable principles. There is, however, no room to suppose that these two potentates were in any measure influenced in this instance by what their enemies, the Jacobites, would be ready to insinuate: an apprehension of their own title to the Crown being defective. The voice of the Nation (than which, there can be no better title) had placed them on the throne of these realms.

His present majesty has hitherto followed the example of his two immediate predecessors, in not restoring or resuming this dormant or neglected branch of the royal prerogative. If he ever should hereafter, at any time, think proper to restore or resume it, there can be no manner of doubt of his meeting with ample success, as well as abundant employment. In that case it may be presumed that multitudes of patients would soon be flocking in from all quarters, not excepting the County of Norfolk and the parts about Lynn Regis. His resolving to resume the practice would instantly occasion the revival of the national faith in the efficacy of the operation; and so far would such a resumption or experiment be from endangering his majesty’s fair fame and popularity, that it would, in all probability, augment the same, and so render him for the residue of his reign, within the British Isles at least, more popular and more celebrated than ever. But as we are not warranted to expect that his majesty will ever try the experiment, or put to the test the faith of his subjects in the miraculous efficacy of his touch, we shall here drop the subject as far as it may concern him.

It appears that after the death of queen Anne it was firmly believed by a great part of the nation, that the sanative virtue, or miraculous power which she was allowed to possess, still existed in the person of a certain exiled prince of her family. In proof of which a story was industriously propagated of one Christopher Lovel, of Bristol, who being most sadly and grievously afflicted with the Evil, after having recourse to the most eminent of the faculty, and availed himself of the best medical help in vain, went at last to the Continent, in quest of the said prince. Having found his royal highness, and being kindly received, he underwent the operation of the touch, got perfectly cured, and returned home safe and sound, in full health and high spirits, after an absence of four months and some few days. Carte, the historian, and many more, gentlemen of the faculty as well as others, visited him, examined the case thoroughly, and pronounced the cure complete. Some of them, of whom one was Dr. Lane, an eminent physician, considered it as one of the most extraordinary and wonderful events that had ever happened.—After this, who can doubt the reality of the fact, that such a sanative virtue, gift, or power, was actually possessed by the said prince?—It seems, however, that the miracle did not effect a radical cure: poor Lovel relapsed again, sometime after, and died of the Evil at last. Such, in all probability, were all the other great cures performed by the rest of our royal doctors, although many of them, like this, were attested as perfect cures, by very respectable, but too credulous witnesses.

It is somewhat remarkable that Whiston, as well as Carte, believed in the efficacy of the royal touch: the former derives it from the prayer used at the time, while the latter seems to consider it as a divine or miraculous gift bestowed upon, or inherent to all the rightful heirs to the English throne. Both of them were men of considerable respectability, and very confident, it seems, of the soundness of their respective opinions in this case. Their opinions however appear equally untenable, and may pretty safely be pronounced utterly unfounded. The favourable effects, or apparent benefit which some of those patients might experience after having undergone the operation of the touch, must doubtless be ascribed to their own operative faith and strength of imagination, rather than to any supernatural virtue proceeding from that princely performance, or any miraculous gift possessed by the royal practitioners. To the same cause must also be attributed the salutary effects said to have sometimes resulted from the pretended animal magnetism, as well as such empirical charms and nostrums as have acquired an uncommon share of popular fame, or have stood very high in the good opinion of the public. A patient’s favourable opinion of a remedy administered to him, and his very confident expectation of deriving from it very essential benefit, are allowed to have had a happy effect, and to have done great things sometimes in very serious and dangerous cases.

Now we may rest assured that on no other ground but this can we reasonably account for benefits experienced by many who underwent the royal touch; admitting that to have been really the case; for it is too absurd to suppose that those royal personages were actually endowed with power to work miracles, or that the ceremony performed, or yet the gold given to the patients to wear about their necks, had in them any supernatural or healing virtue to render them capable of producing such effects.

It must be rather mortifying to our national vanity and pride, to think that our dear ancestors, for seven hundred years, firmly believed in the miraculous efficacy of the royal touch, in scrofulous complaints. [324] But while we reprobate, or pity their stupid and miserable credulity, in this and other instances, let us not forget that we ourselves are not without our errors and failings, and those no less inexcusable and degrading: witness our general belief in witchcraft, conjuration, prodigies, and newspapers, together with the unshaken faith of multitudes in Richard Brothers, Joanna Southcote, and many other notorious impostors of different descriptions: and it may be justly questioned, if there ever was a period when the inhabitants of this country have been more inexcusably credulous, more easily and egregiously imposed upon, or more generally and universally duped, than in this very age.—But we will here close this long section; hoping that its contents will not fail to contribute, at least in some measure, to the amusement and satisfaction of the inquisitive and candid reader; especially if he ever wished to learn the history of the royal touch, of which he will find here, perhaps, a more particular and circumstantial account than in any other publication.

End of Part II.