Page images


The three first books of Camden's Annals of Queen Elizabeth, extending from the beginning of her reign to the end of the year 1589, were published by order of James I. in 1615. The rest he completed soon after, and lodged a copy of it in the hands of his friend Petrus Puteanus ; – to be preserved, but not published till after his death. He died in November 1623; and the fourth book (printed, if I understand the story right, from Puteanus's copy) appeared in 1627. It appears however that a better copy was in existence; that after the three first books were published, and the fourth copied, Camden had revised and corrected the whole; that a fair copy of the three first (described as “the first part of Mr. Camden's Elizabetha enlarged for the next impression ") passed through the representatives of Sir Robert Cotton into the hands of Dr. Thomas Smith; and a corrected copy of the fourth, through what channel we are not informed, into the hands of Dr. Rawlinson '; and that both of these were ultimately entrusted to Thomas Hearne, and used in his edition of the entire work, published in 1717.

In Hearne's edition the differences between Dr. Rawlinson's MS. and the printed copies are pointed out in foot-notes, but no further particulars are given. A considerable number however of the additions and more material alterations are found in the blank pages of a copy of the fourth book of Camden's

· Both these copies are in the Bodleian Library. The first (Smith MS. No. 2.) is a printed copy of the original folio, with the alterations and additions inserted in Camden's own hand. The second (8vo. Rawlinson, 707.) has the following note on the blank leaf at the beginning:

:-“This book belongs to my honoured and learned friend Thos. Rawlinson, Esq. Tho. Hearne, Aug. 25th, 1716.” It is a copy of the Elzevir edition, Lugd. Batav. MDCXXXIX, containing many alterations and additions inserted between the lines or leaves, in manuscript. They are very clearly written in a small, firm, regular hand; whose, I could not learn.

Annales, which is now in the Cottonian Library (Faustina F. viii. ix.); and are in the hand-writing of Francis Bacon. I suppose that Camden had lent the MS. to Bacon to read and criticise; that Bacon had returned it with these passages suggested for insertion; and that they had been inserted accordingly, either by Camden himself or by some one to whom the MS. was entrusted, in the copy which came into possession of Dr. Rawlinson. At any rate the manner in which they are entered in the Cottonian MS. sufficiently proves that they are of Bacon's own composition, and therefore have a right to a place in this collection. And though many of them have but little independent value, I have thought it better to include them all; the rather because the insertion of two or three immaterial words is enough to show that Bacon had read the passage, and his inserting no more may be taken as a kind of evidence that he had no material correction to suggest. A note on the cover in Camden's hand states that he began to read the MS. over again on the 18th of May, 1620: but at what time Bacon read it I know no means of ascertaining.

Any one who had access to the Cotton MS. might have made the alterations in his own copy.






In the opening of the fourth book of his Annales (Hearne's edition, p. 593.) Camden describes an attempt made by some of the Scotch nobles, at the instigation of Spain, to seize the person of the King, under pretence of delivering him from the custody of Chancellor Maitland and the English faction. He tells us that the King received intelligence one day when he was hunting, that Bothwell was at hand on one side with troops of borderers, and Huntley approaching on the other with a strong army from the North: upon which, nil perterrefactus, sed animo et consilio plane regio, (no way dismayed, but with spirit and judgment truly king-like,) he proclaimed them traitors, mustered his faithful subjects, and so frustrated the enterprise; Bothwell taking at once to flight, and Huntley being presently reduced to submission.

The words nil perterrefactus &c. (Faust. F. viii. fo. 2.) are in Bacon's hand.


In his account of the trial of the Earl of Arundel (p. 595.) Camden had stated that the Justices assessors ( justiciarü assessores), being asked by the prisoner whether an indictment were lawful which contained errors in the description both of places and times, declared that those things were not to be regarded, so the fact were proved (ista minime attendenda esse, modo factum probetur). For these words Bacon substitutes



(Faust. F. viii. fo. 4.) ista regulariter non attendenda esse, nisi criminis ipsius naturam varient: that the rule was, that such points should not be regarded unless the nature of the crime itself were affected by them.


In April 1589, an expedition against Spain was undertaken by Sir John Norris and Sir Francis Drake, with the Queen's permission, but not at the public charge. The Earl of Essex followed soon after, unknown to the Queen, and joined the fleet. In allusion to this circumstance Camden had said (p. 602.) that he committed himself to the sea without the Queen's knowledge, yea to the incurring of her displeasure; for he had no hope to obtain leave of the Queen to go, who was unwilling that any of the prime nobility should hazard themselves in this voyage; (quæ neminem e primariâ nobilitate in hâc expeditione periclitari voluit.)

Instead of this, Bacon suggests (Faust. F. viii. fo. 9.) quæ! nec absentiam aut periculum ejus libenter admissura esset, et expeditionem ipsam potius a privatorum alacritate quam Principis designatione susceptam videri vellet : who would not only have been unwilling to let Essex himself be absent or in danger, but wished besides that the expedition itself should seem to have been undertaken rather by the eagerness of private persons than by appointment of the sovereign.


A little further on (p. 604.), where Camden mentions the blame which was cast on Sir Francis Drake for not supporting the land-forces with his fleet, Bacon adds (Faust. F. viii. fo. 10.) quique militiâ navali bonus, terrestri impar habebatur : that Drake was accounted an able commander for naval warfare, but not equal to warfare by land.


The same year, after describing the confusions in France and the conspiracy against the King which ensued upon the

· The words nec enim a Regina veniam abeundi impetrare speravit, quæ are omitted from the text by Hearne ; who prints nec absentiam . . . vellet, as an independent sentence. The correction is inserted in Rawlinson's copy between the lines, but without any mark to show where it is to come in: the writer not having attended to the line drawn by Bacon under the words for which he meant this sentence to be substituted; though the direction is quite distinct.

murder of Henry Duke of Guise, the great head of the Catholic party, Camden proceeds to say (p. 608.) that hereupon the King was forced to betake himself to the Protestants whom he had persecuted; and the conspirators resorting to a detestable crime murdered him by the hands of James Clement, a monk. (Adeo ut Rex necessario ad Protestantes quos exagitaverat confugeret, et isti ad detestabile scelus conversi illum


Jacobum Clementem monachum parricidio tollerent.) Here Bacon merely inserts in place of et isti (Faust. F. viii. fo. 13.) the words unde duplicatâ invidiâ conjurati ; whereby the conspirators, more enraged than ever, &c.

Hearne suggests in a note that for tollerent we should read sustulerunt. Rightly, no doubt. The introduction of Bacon's words alters the construction, which the transcriber had overlooked. But he is wrong in retaining the words et isti, which are not erased in the corrected volume, but which Bacon has underlined in the manuscript, clearly meaning that they should be struck out and his own words substituted.

VI. A few lines further on (p. 609.) Camden had said that the Duke de Mayenne was proclaimed Lieutenant-General of the Crown of France. Bacon corrects this (Faust. F. viii. fo. 14.) to statûs et coronæ : Lieutenant-General of the State and Crown of France.

VII. In 1591, Hacket, a religious madman, was executed for treason. Having spent his youth in riot and profaneness, and ruined himself by prodigality, Camden tells us (p. 630.) that he suddenly assumed a character of admirable sanctity, spent all his time in hearing sermons and learning the Scriptures, and pretended heavenly revelations and an extraordinary mission. Here Bacon inserts (Faust. F. viii. fo. 32.) the following curious passage : Ante omnia vero, miro et peregrino quodam fervore preces fundebat, in faciem concidens, et veluti extasi correptus et cum Deo quasi expostulans. Attamen unum ex ejus asseclis, cæteris forte perspicaciorem, abalienavit formulâ quâdam orationis quæ illi erat familiaris. Nam cum omnes soleant Dei præsentiam in invocando implorare, ille solus Deum rogare consueverat ut a cætu precantium abesse et se subtrahere vellet; quod

« PreviousContinue »