LINEBURG


<< . .

 24
( 27)



. . >>

Press, 2004); Alastair Bellany, ˜Raylyng Rymes and Vaunting Verse: Libellous
Politics in Early Stuart England™, chapter 11 in Peter Lake and Kevin Sharpe
(eds.), Culture and Politics in Early Stuart England (Basingstoke: Macmillan,
1994); Thomas Cogswell, ˜Underground Verse and the Transformation of Early
Stuart Political Culture™, chapter 12 in Susan D. Amussen and Mark A. Kish-
lansky (eds.), Political Culture and Cultural Politics in Early Modern England
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995); Croft, ˜Libels™; Adam Fox,
˜Popular Verses™, Oral and Literate Culture in England, 1500“1700 (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000), and ˜Ballads, Libels and Popular Ridicule in
Jacobean England™, P & P, 145 (1994), pp. 47“83; Martin Ingram, ˜Ridings,
Rough Music and Mocking Rhymes in Early Modern England™, chapter 5 in
Barry Reay (ed.), Popular Culture in 17th-Century England (London: Croom
Helm, 1985), and ˜Libels in Action: Ritual, Subversion and the English Lit-
erary Underground, 1603“42™, chapter 4 in Tim Harris (ed.), The Politics of
the Excluded, c. 1500“1850 (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2001). On broadsides, see
Watt, Cheap Print, and ˜Publisher, Pedlar, Pot Poet: The Changing Character
of the Broadside Trade, 1550“1640™, in Robin Myers and Michael Harris (eds.),
Spreading the Word (Winchester: St Paul™s Bibliographies, 1990), pp. 61“81.
85. Quoted from Adam Fox, ˜Ballads, Libels and Popular Culture in Jacobean
England™, P & P, 145 (1994), pp. 47“83 (quotation p. 50).
86. An Answere to Certaine Scandalous Papers, Scattered Abroad Under Colour of
a Catholicke Admonition (1606). A shewell was a paper or cloth hung up to
prevent deer from going in a particular direction (OED).
87. On Cecil and libels, see below, note 95.
88. Folger Shakespeare Library, Loseley MSS, item 80 (L b 598): autograph of Sir
William More, dated 24 September 1579, headed ˜A Chatholyk to his muse™
and endorsed ˜A Raylyng rotten Ryme of a Rank papyste . . .™. I am grateful
to Heather Wolfe for checking this transcript.
89. One Catholic at least is recorded as objecting to in¬‚ammatory Catholic mate-
rial imported from the Continent on the grounds that it was unnecessarily
combative: ˜They be out of the re[a]ch themselves and therfore do not regard
what we endure.™ Sir Thomas Cornwallis to John Hobart, BL MS Tanner 285,
f. 27a, quoted by Jason Scott-Warren in ˜News, Sociability and Book-Buying in
216 Notes to pages 107“10
Early Modern England: The Letters of Sir Thomas Cornwallis™, The Library,
7th ser., 1:4 (2000), pp. 381“402 (quotation p. 392).
90. Reavley Gair, The Children of Paul™s (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1982), pp. 114“15.
91. John Bossy, The English Catholic Community, 1570“1850 (1975; this edition
London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1979), p. 122; Foley IV, p. 492; Alexandra
Walsham, Church Papists (Woodbridge: Boydell for Royal Historical Society,
1993), pp. 90“1.
92. See Sena, ˜William Blundell™; Adam Fox, ˜Rumour, News and Popular Polit-
ical Opinion in Elizabethan and Early Stuart England™, HJ, 40:3 (1997),
pp. 597“620; and Richard Cust, ˜News and Politics in Early 17th-Century
England™, P & P, 112 (1986), pp. 60“90.
93. For Catholic libels, see Jensen, ˜Ballads and Brags™, and Fox, ˜Religious Satire™.
94. An Answere to a Seditious Pamphlet . . . By a Jesuite (1580), f. A3a. For the
distribution of the Challenge, see Simpson, Edmund Campion, pp. 229“32. At
the Commencement in Oxford on 27 June 1581 the benches of the Univer-
sity Church were strewn with copies of Campion™s later publication, Decem
Rationes, and they were also given as gifts to particular individuals (ibid.,
p. 299).
95. See Francis Bunny, An Answere to a Popish Libell (1607), where he also calls
Parsons™s Brief Apology a libel (p. 113); Robert Cecil, Lord Salisbury, An Answere
to Certaine Scandalous Papers, Scattered Abroad (1606); and Pauline Croft, ˜The
Reputation of Robert Cecil: Libels, Political Opinion and Popular Awareness
in the Early Seventeenth Century™, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society,
6th ser., 1 (1991), pp. 43“69. Thomas Cogswell describes manuscript verse as
a means of conducting a ˜steady, often violent political debate™ at this period:
˜Underground Verse™, p. 287.
96. Folger Library, X d 338 (though Vallenger only confesses to the rhymed libel).
See H. R. Plomer, ˜Stephen Vallenger™, The Library, n.s. 2 (1901), pp. 108“12.
97. Origens Repentance (1619), f. B1b.
98. For biographical material on Wiburn, see ODNB, and Patrick Collinson, The
Elizabethan Puritan Movement (1st edn 1967: this edn Oxford: Clarendon,
1990), pp. 141“3.
99. I.e. the Easter sepulchre. See Godfrey Anstruther, Vaux of Harrowden
(Newport: R. H. Johns, 1953), p. 84.
100. Thomas Knell, An Answer to a Papisticall Byll (1570: broadside); the other
answer, probably published the same year, is in quarto format, An Answer At
Large, to a Most Hereticall, Trayterous, and Papisticall Byll (STC 15030, 15030.5).
101. The Latin may be translated thus: (1) It is not discovered; (2) It is discovered;
(3) Truth does not seek out corners; (4) He said, I do not dare; (5) Then leave
off; (6) Or appear, liar.
102. Keith Thomas comments that a smattering of Latin would have been quite
widely dispersed in areas where grammar schools were plentiful: ˜The Mean-
ing of Literacy in Early Modern England™, pp. 97“131 in Gerd Baumann (ed.),
The Written Word (Oxford: Clarendon, 1986), p. 101.
Notes to pages 110“13 217
103. The libel ˜Couvre le feu, ye Hugonots™, allegedly written by Catholics after
the Great Fire of 1666, may provide a point of comparison. It exists in two
versions, one of which translates the French and Latin tags and glosses the sole
classical allusion, ˜Stygian Lake™, as ˜Hell™; however, it is not clear whether
this is part of an original text or supplied for the copyists™ audience. J. P.
Kenyon, The Popish Plot (this edn Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1974), p. 13,
believes this libel to be the work of an agent provocateur. Though he does not
give his reasons, the date of its distribution “ 5 November “ and the tenor
of the text itself (which begins by denying Catholics™ involvement in the ¬re
but ends with threats of a Catholic takeover and more anti-Protestant action)
make the hypothesis likely. Copies of the libel can be found in State Tracts,
2 vols. (1689“92), vol. II, p. 43; Somerset Record Of¬ce, Oliver MS DD/PH
205; and the manuscript additions to Beinecke Library, Yale, Osborn pb.121
(which also preserves two answers to it).
104. See above, pp. 103, 109“10.
105. See above, note 73, on the text used. The Enborne parish registers survive only
from 1665 (I am grateful to Berkshire Record Of¬ce for this information).
106. I.e. ˜rush™, alluding to the practice of strewing rooms with rushes (OED).
107. Baken = pig™s carcass (OED).
108. John Strype, Memorials of Thomas Cranmer (1694), appendix, p. 137.
109. ˜Great Hodge Podge™, f. 141a“b. This is discussed and partially transcribed
by Sena, ˜William Blundell™, pp. 59“60, and also transcribed in T. E. Gibson
(ed.), Crosby Records (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1887), pp. 24“6. For the
harassment of Catholics at Sefton, see T. E. Gibson, ˜A Century of Recusancy™,
Transactions of the Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, 3rd ser., vol. VII
(1879), pp. 33“66. William Blundell™s account of how he was apprehended in
November 1592 by John Nutter, parson of Sefton, is reprinted on pp. 40“2.
See also Christopher Haigh, Reformation and Resistance in Tudor Lancashire
(London: Cambridge University Press, 1975), pp. 288“9, 329.
110. C.f. Introduction, pp. 11“12.
111. See chapter 4, pp. 114“15.
112. ˜A challenge unto ffox the martirmonger written upon occasion of this mira-
coulouse martirdom of . . . Peter Elcius w[i]th a comforte unto all af¬‚icted
Catholyques™, CSPD 12/157/48, ff. 105a“110b (quotation f. 105a). See chap-
ter 4, pp. 120“1, for further discussion of this poem and the question of
attribution.
113. Thomas Broke Jnr, An Epitaphe Declaring the Life and End of D. Edm[und]
Boner, &c. An Other Epitaphe Made By a Papist, With an Answere. Also a Reply
to a Slau[n]derous Libel (1570). This reprints two earlier items, STC 3817.4
and STC 3817.7. For Bonner™s biography, see ODNB. See above, note 83.
114. A Reply with the Occasion Thereof (c.1579), f. A3a.
115. The History of . . . Powys Fadog, ed. J. Y. W. Lloyd, 6 vols. (London: T. Richards/
Whiting & Co., 1881“7), vol. 3, pp. 144, 152. For White™s polemical ˜carols™,
see John Hungerford Pollen, SJ (ed.), Unpublished Documents Relating to the
English Martyrs, vol. I (London: Catholic Record Society, 1908), pp. 90“9.
218 Notes to pages 114“17
4 . ma rt yr s a nd co nfes s o rs in o ra l cult ure
1. On the interplay between religion and free speech, see Introduction, p. 12,
and David Colclough, Freedom of Speech in Early Stuart England (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2005), chapter 2. Susannah Breitz Monta has com-
mented that ˜the dif¬culties of testifying to inwardness in reliable, understand-
able and persuasive ways are at the heart of the task which martyrologists
undertake™: ˜“Thou Fall™st a Blessed Martyr”: Shakespeare™s Henry VIII and the
Polemics of Conscience™, ELR, 30:2 (2000), pp. 262“83 (quotation p. 263).
2. Sarah Covington, The Trail of Martyrdom (Notre Dame: University of Notre
Dame Press, 2003); Anne Dillon, The Construction of Martyrdom in the English
Catholic Community, 1535“1603 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002); Brad S. Gregory, Sal-
vation at Stake (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999); Susannah
Breitz Monta, Martyrdom and Literature in Early Modern England (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2005). On cross-confessional studies, see Thomas
M. McCoog, SJ, ˜Construing Martyrdom in the English Catholic Community,
1582“1602™, chapter 5 in Ethan Shagan (ed.), Catholics and the ˜Protestant Nation™
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2005). Foucault™s notion of the scaf-
fold as theatre is expounded in Surveiller et Punir (1st edn 1975) (Discipline and
Punish) and usefully inspires chapter 7 in Peter Lake and Michael Questier, The
Antichrist™s Lewd Hat (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002).
3. McCoog, ˜Construing Martyrdom™; Arthur F. Marotti, Religious Ideology and
Cultural Fantasy (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 2005), chapter 3.
McCoog identi¬es something of a time-lag before Elizabethan Catholic martyrs
became signi¬cant propaganda weapons to their own countrymen; it is striking
that much (though not all) of the material discussed below dates from the
seventeenth century.
4. On Protestant martyrdom, see above, note 2; John R. Knott, Discourses of
Martyrdom in English Literature, 1563“1694 (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1993); and the ongoing work of the British Academy John Foxe Project.
5. However, only the ballad on Thewlis™s death is recorded in another contempo-
rary manuscript, Bod MS Eng. poet. e. 121, fols. 31a“36a.
6. Thewlis was martyred at Lancaster, 18 March 1616: Foley VI, p. 181. See also
Arthur Marotti, Manuscript, Print and the English Renaissance Lyric (Ithaca NY:
Cornell University Press, 1995), pp. 4“7; Godfrey Anstruther, The Seminary
Priests (Gateshead: St Edmund™s College, Ware/Ushaw College, Durham, 1968),
vol. I, pp. 354“5. Natascha W¨ rzbach, The Rise of the English Street Ballad
u
1550“1650 (1981: trans. Gayna Walls, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1990), discusses martyr-ballads (pp. 224“5, 230), though seems to assume that
all speakers in them are ¬ctional.
7. The rhyme suggests a two- or three-syllable pronunciation of ˜Thewlis™, though
the name is sometimes spelt ˜Thules™.
8. BL Add. MS 15,225, fols. 23a“25a. W¨ rzbach, Rise, discusses the ballad (pp. 58
u
(f/n 77), 122, 181).
9. Cf. W¨ rzbach, Rise, p. 58, on how the listener participates in the invocation.
u
Notes to pages 117“19 219
10. BL Add. MS 15,225, fols. 25a“27b. This is only one text to problematise the com-
mon dichotomy proposed in hagiographical texts between ˜exemplary charac-
ter™ and ˜subjective experience™ (e.g. in W¨ rzbach, Rise, p. 181).
u
11. On the use of popular providentialism among Catholics at this date, see Wal-
sham, ˜Miracles and the Counter-Reformation in England™, HJ, 46:4 (2003),
pp. 779“815.
12. See Richard Simpson, Edmund Campion (revised edn London: John Hodges,
1896), p. 459, quoting contemporary stanzas on the topic (which can be found
in Thomas Al¬eld (attr.), A True Reporte of the Death & Martyrdome of M.
Campion Jesuite [1582], f. F2a). Simpson attributes the poem to ˜Poundes™ (i.e.
Thomas Pounde) but without giving his reasons. See also Walsham, ˜Miracles™,
pp. 790“1. One literary commentary on Campion™s death is actually titled
˜Thamesis In Edmundi Campiani nece amnem sistit™ (Beinecke Library, Yale,
MS 45, fols. 72b“74b).
13. The high level of discrepancy between accounts necessitates caution, though.
The ballad claims Thewlis™s quarters were set ˜upon the Castell hye™; Richard
Challoner, quoting a printed account (apparently not surviving, but cf. ARCR I,
no. 1070), says that Thewlis™s four quarters were hung up at Lancaster, Preston,
Wigan and Warrington (Memoirs of Missionary Priests, rev. John Hungerford
Pollen (London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne, 1924), p. 344); and Archivum
Romanum SJ, Ang. 32, f. 22v, refers to Thewlis™s body and that of a companion
as being cut up and thrown into the square together, so that it was impossible to
distinguish one from another (I am grateful to Barbara Ravelhofer for supplying
a translation of the latter document from the original Italian).
14. Byrd™s motet sets texts from Psalm 78 (Vulgate numbering)/79 (King James
Bible numbering). On Byrd™s recusancy, see the biographical entry by Joseph
Kerman in Stanley Sadie (ed.), The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musi-
cians, 2nd edn (London: Grove/Macmillan, 2001), vol. 4, pp. 714“31; and David
Mateer, ˜William Byrd™s Middlesex Recusancy™, Music and Letters, 78 (1997),
pp. 1“14. On the motet™s possible link with Campion™s death, see Grove, p. 718;
John Harley, William Byrd, Gentleman of the Chapel Royal (Aldershot: Ashgate,
this edn 1999), pp. 224, 228“9; and Craig Monson, ˜Byrd, the Catholics and
the Motet: The Hearing Reopened™, in Hearing the Motet, ed. Dolores Pesce
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 348“74 (esp. pp. 354“62), who
gives several analogies for the use of these texts from contemporary Catholic
martyrology.
15. For controversy over Catholic burials in early seventeenth-century Lancashire,
see D. R. Woolf, ˜Little Crosby and the Horizons of Early Modern Historical
Culture™, chapter 5 in Donald R. Kelley and David Harris Sacks (eds.), The
Historical Imagination in Early Modern Britain, Woodrow Wilson Center Series
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 99“100.
16. However, for an account of a crow that died after feasting on a martyr™s ¬‚esh,
see Stonyhurst MS A.IV.7, no. 5, cited in Alexandra Walsham, Providence in
Early Modern England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 242 (note
84).
220 Notes to pages 119“25
17. Knaresborough, ˜Foule draughtes™, Hull University Library, DDEV/67/3,
p. 422 (Thewlis); ˜An Ode or Sonnet upon three Catholick Priests put to
Death at Lancaster on the same Day. Viz. the Seventh of August One thou-
sand six hundred forty six™, stanzas 27“8: John Knaresborough, ˜Sufferings of
the Catholicks™, 5 vols., Hull University Library, DDEV/67/1, vol. IV, p. 416
(Reading/Bamber). Challoner knew and used Knaresborough™s work for his
Memoirs of Missionary Priests: see Challoner, ed. Pollen, index under name.
18. This refers to the ballad, references to which are cited in the margin of Knares-
borough™s account.
19. ˜A challenge unto ffox the martirmonger written upon occasion of this mira-
coulouse martirdom of . . . Peter Elcius w[i]th a comforte unto all af¬‚icted
Catholyques™, CSPD, 12/157/48, fols. 105a“110b; portions quoted in Guiney,
p. 186, and Foley, vol. III, pp. 623“6. For Pounde™s biography, see Thomas
M. McCoog™s article in ODNB; for the attribution to Pounde, see Guiney,
pp. 182“5. This poem is also referred to in chapter 3 above, p. 113.
20. I explore Catholics™ stylistic utilitarianism further in the section on religious
prose in the Oxford History of Literary Translation in English, ed. Robert Cum-
mings (forthcoming).
21. Weeping, mourning (OED).
22. See Introduction, pp. 8“10.
23. Transcription taken from the edition in Gerard Kilroy, Edmund Campion
(Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), pp. 199“204; see also the commentary to a ver-
sion of the poem in Ruth Hughey (ed.), The Arundel Harington Manuscript of
Tudor Poetry, 2 vols. (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1960), vol.
I, item 66. For William Byrd™s setting of an adaptation of the poem (seemingly
intended to reach an audience beyond the Catholic community), see Grove,
pp. 718“19; Harley, William Byrd, pp. 78“9. For other elegies on Campion,
see Guiney, section XVI, and W. R. Mor¬ll (ed.), ˜Ballads Relating Chie¬‚y to
the Reign of Queen Elizabeth™, in Ballads from Manuscripts, vol. II (Hertford:
Ballad Society, 1873), pp. 157“91.
24. Brief printed and manuscript accounts of the martyrdom, and sketches of
it, are all possible means of dissemination “ though given the stringencies
of underground Catholic publication in England, printed images would be
unlikely. Simpson, Edmund Campion, describes Campion™s remains as hav-
ing been nailed up on a gate (p. 466) so the ballad may also be alluding to
this.
25. I am grateful to John Harley and John Milsom for help with this section.
26. This is an adaptation of 1 Corinthians 4:9. See my ˜“We Are Made a Spectacle”:
Campion™s Dramas™, in The Reckoned Expense, ed. Thomas M. McCoog, SJ
(Woodbridge: Boydell, 1996), pp. 103“18.
27. ˜Great Hodge Podge™, Lancashire Record Of¬ce, DDBL acc. 6121, f. 145a“b
(quotation f. 145b; square brackets marking off reported speech/song), with
the Latin originals copied into the margin. See also T. B. Trappes-Lomax, ˜The
Birthplace of the Blessed Robert Anderton™, Biographical Studies, 1:3 (1951),
pp. 235“8. The author was a priest, whose alias is given as Malton. Here as
Notes to pages 125“6 221
elsewhere, I am grateful to Margaret Sena for sharing with me her unpublished
work on William Blundell.
28. Bruce R. Smith, The Acoustic World of Early Modern England (Chicago: Univer-
sity of Chicago Press, 1999), pp. 194“5, discusses how singing by condemned
individuals was a common feature of executions.
29. Bod MS.Eng.th.b.1“2. Gerard Kilroy suggests that ˜Jollett™ is a pseudonym of
Sir Thomas Tresham™s: Edmund Campion, pp. 13, 15, 21. The text is quoted from
the Latin/English online edition of the Catholic Bible at www.newadvent.org.
The King James Bible translates the verse as ˜This is the day which the Lord
hath made: we will rejoice and be glad in it™ (Psalm 118, v.24; the same psalm is
numbered 117 in the Douai/Rheims Bible, on which the online edition cited
above is based). The attribution to Byrd is rejected by John Morehen in ˜Is
Byrd™s Haec a Faec?™, Early Music Review, 24 (1996), pp. 8“9; the motet is
transcribed in the ˜Annual Byrd Newsletter™, 2, pp. 6“7, part of Early Music
Review, 21 (1996), and commented on there by John Harley and Richard
Turbet (p. 16). Byrd did, in fact, set the same text in Cantiones Sacrae (1591);
since the execution took place in 1601, Barkworth™s singing might well have
alluded to this. See Monson, ˜Byrd, the Catholics and the Motet™, p. 362,
and, for Byrd™s involvement in this world, see Kerry McCarthy, ˜Byrd, Augus-
tine and Tribue, Domine™, Early Music, 32:4 (2004), pp. 569“76, and note 14
above.
30. Bod MS.Eng.th.b.1“2, vol. 2, pp. 114 (quotation), 116 (motet). Barkworth
became a Benedictine shortly before his death and appeared clothed as such
on the scaffold: see Michael Questier, Conversion, Politics and Religion, 1580“
1625 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 196. On ˜last words™
motets, see Monson, ˜Byrd, the Catholics and the Motet™, pp. 355“8.
31. On Garnet, see Foley IV, pp. 117“18. Bod MS.Eng.th.b.1“2, vol. 2, pp. 132“7.
32. See above, note 14.
33. This is an acclamation used on the feast of the Triumph of the Cross, 14
September (translation quoted from the Lectionary of the Roman Missal, vol.
I (London: Collins, 1981), p. 998); and also the versicle which introduces each
station of the Stations of the Cross, thus evoking Calvary in the context of the
martyr™s progression. (I am grateful to John Morrill for the latter observation.)
On the speci¬c resonances of this text among English Catholics, see Monson,
˜Byrd, the Catholics and the Motet™, pp. 366“70.
34. Though possibly (as commented above, note 29) inspired by Byrd™s setting.
35. On Catholic music-making in private houses, see John Milsom, ˜Sacred Songs
in the Chamber™, chapter 7 in John Morehen (ed.), English Choral Practice
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
36. Gradualia (1610), f. A2a. The original is in Latin; the translation is taken from
Joseph Kerman, The Masses and Motets of William Byrd (London: Faber &
Faber, 1981), p. 54.
37. Kerman, Masses, pp. 248, 288“9. Diane Kelsey McColley also comments of
Byrd™s settings of the Magni¬cat, Te Deum and Benedictus that they may be
intended to express the feelings of a persecuted church: Poetry and Music in
222 Notes to pages 126“8
17th-Century England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), p. 87.
For the political uses of the idea of harmony, see Robin Headlam Wells, Eliza-
bethan Mythologies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 66“7.
Byrd may also have felt it appropriate to use Counter-Reformation features,
especially those inspired by Alfonso Ferrabosco the elder, in his more Catholic
pieces: see David Wulstan, ˜Byrd, Tallis and Ferrabosco™, chapter 5 in English
Choral Practice, ed. Morehen, esp. p. 125.
38. Harley, William Byrd, pp. 227“9, sees Byrd™s Cantiones Sacrae as expressing the
Catholic community™s general discontent.
39. Kerman, Masses, p. 37, comments: ˜Free choice of this kind is something new
in the history of Latin sacred music in Britain . . . To make a personal choice
of a motet text implies an interest in and respect for the actual quality of the
text in itself, an attitude which sooner or later is bound to affect the musical
setting.™
40. See Grove, p. 718; Harley, William Byrd, pp. 224“5. This psalm was used
by both Catholics and Protestants to express the sorrows of disaffection: for
Protestant uses, see Hannibal Hamlin, Psalm Culture and Early Modern English
Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), chapter 7. For
Catholic mockery of a Protestant™s doing so, see John Floyd, The Overthrow of
the Protestants Pulpit-Babels (1612), p. 81. For the use of this psalm elsewhere in
English Catholic discourse, see Monson, ˜Byrd, the Catholics and the Motet™,
p. 353.
41. ˜By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remem-
bered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. For
there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that
wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion. How
shall we sing the LORD™s song in a strange land?™ (Ps.137, v.1“4 in original
order, King James Bible).
42. ˜How shall we sing the LORD™s song in a strange land? If I forget thee, O
Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee,
let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above
my chief joy. Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom in the day of
Jerusalem . . .™ (Ps.137, v.4“7a, King James Bible).
43. Masses, pp. 26, 39“44.
44. On performativity as a way of inculcating ideal behaviour, see Bridget Nichols,
Liturgical Hermeneutics (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1996), chapter 8.
45. ˜An epitaph, upon the death of three most blessed marters™, Epitaphs (1604),
fols. A4“B2a.
46. The Catholicism of the Hoghton family has been intensively studied in connec-
tion with the theory that Shakespeare spent part of his early life at Hoghton
Hall: see E. A. J. Honigmann, Shakespeare: The ˜Lost Years™ (1985: 2nd edn
Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998), chapter 2.
47. Transcription taken from 3rd edn (Manchester: John Heywood, 1882), pp. 32“
43. Harland describes it as having been taken from the ¬rst printed copy by
Peter Whittle (not found) and also cites variants taken from a mid-eighteenth-
century copy owned by the antiquarian J. W. Bone. Another version, described
Notes to pages 128“31 223
as taken from ˜framed . . . manuscript verses™, is given in G. C. Miller, Hoghton
Tower in History and Romance (1948: rev. edn Preston: Guardian Press, 1954),
attributed (without giving source) to Roger Anderson, butler to Thomas
Hoghton (pp. 29“32); another version still is given in Joseph Gillow, The
Haydock Papers (London: Burns & Oates, 1888), pp. 10“15.
48. ˜Mr Whittle appears to have made free with several of the stanzas™ (Harland,
Ancient Ballads, pp. 32“3). As we have it, the text may bear some signs of
elite composition (the ¬rst verse, for instance, begins ˜Apollo, with his radiant
beams . . .™); but cf. W¨ rzbach, Rise, p. 210, about uses of well-known literary
u
material in popular ballads.
49. A study of the oral traditions surrounding late-seventeenth-century highway-
men has found that many tales survived till the early twentieth century, pre-
serving a level of detail both remarkably high and historically veri¬able as
accurate: Alan Macfarlane and Sarah Harrison, The Justice and the Mare™s Ale
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), pp. 168“72.
50. On Hoghton™s care for his servants, see Robert Bearman, ˜“Was William Shake-
speare William Shakeshafte?” Revisited™, Shakespeare Quarterly, 53:1 (2002),
pp. 83“94.
51. The Study of Folk Music in the Modern World (Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 1988), p. 14.
52. I.e. the monarch™s orb, or (¬guratively) worldliness.
53. ˜Verses concerning lovers divided by religion™: Somerset Record Of¬ce,
DD WO/56/9/10, dated by the cataloguer to the late sixteenth century. I am
grateful to Somerset Record Of¬ce for permission to quote this manuscript. Cf.
the ballad where a Catholic husband travels overseas, discussed in my Catholi-
cism, Controversy, and the English Literary Imagination 1558“1660 (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 163“4.
54. Probably to be read ˜whither™.
55. See Juliet Fleming, Graf¬ti and the Writing Arts of Early Modern England
(London: Reaktion, 2001).
56. Sharon Lambert, Monks, Martyrs and Mayors [Lancaster, n.p., 1991], page
headed ˜Aldcliffe Hall™.
57. See G. A. Gotch, The Buildings . . . by Sir Thomas Tresham (Northampton: Tay-
lor, 1883), and, among recent commentators, Peter Davidson, ˜The Inscribed
House™, in Michael Bath, Pedro F. Campi and Daniel S. Russell (eds.), ˜Emblem
Studies in Honour of Peter M. Daly™, Saecula Spiritalia, 41 (2002), pp. 41“62,
as well as his article, ˜Recusant Catholic Spaces in Early Modern England™,
pp. 19“51 in Ronald Corthell, Frances E. Dolan, Christopher Highley and
Arthur F. Marotti (eds.), Catholic Culture in Early Modern England (Notre

<< . .

 24
( 27)



. . >>

Copyright Design by: Sunlight webdesign