The History of Lynn, Vol. 1 [of 2]

by William Richards

CHAP. I.

Of Lynn while Britain formed a part of the Roman Empire.

Section I.

The present town, or borough of Lynn, of no great antiquity—its site not the same with that of the original town—the probable site of the latter, and era of its origin.

What is now called Lynn, Lynn Regis, or the Borough of King’s Lynn, is generally considered as a place of no very high antiquity. It arose probably during the Heptarchy, out of the ruins of the old town, though not built on the same spot, and must soon have become a place of no small consideration in the kingdom of the East Angles, as may very reasonably be concluded, from the convenience of its situation for trade and commerce. We hear not much of it, however till after the conquest, when it presently appears as a place of growing importance, under the direction and management of its new French masters, the enterprising companions and agents of the successful Norman adventurer, the Bonaparte of the eleventh century.

But though no traces can be discovered of the existence of a town on the eastern side of the river, prior to the time of the Heptarchy, it is more than probable, that there was a town on the opposite, or western side, long anterior to that period. That town has not yet entirely disappeared. It may still be recognized in the little village called Old Lynn; a name which plainly indicates, that the original town must have stood there. It is well known that the town on the eastern side was formerly called New Lynn, or rather New Len, and that the other was then distinguished from it by the name of Old Len. No good reason can be assigned for this, but that the latter was the original town, known by the name of Len long before the other had any existence. The attempt made by Spelman, Parkin, and others to elude this conclusion is weak and frivolous. It does not appear that there ever has been any period, since the eastern, or modern town existed, when the inhabitants did not apply the name of Old Len, or Old Lynn to the other. There can therefore be no manner of doubt, but that it is to this same old Lynn we are to look for the site of the ancient and original town. It is probable, indeed, that that town might extend much nigher to the spot now occupied by the present town, than what the village of Old Lynn now does, as the bed of the river was formerly very narrow, compared with what it is at present; and the waters are allowed to have made considerable encroachments on the western shore. When, and by whom the original town was founded, as well as, what may be the true etymology, or real meaning of its name, are points that are involved in no small obscurity, and cannot, therefore, be very easily and clearly settled, or ascertained. It seems, however, highly probable, if not certain, as shall be shewn by and by, that it took its name from its marshy situation, and was founded by the Romans, at the time when they undertook to drain the fen-country, and rescue Marshland, by strong embankments, from the power and ravages of the ocean. It may also pretty safely be concluded, that this must have taken place within the first century of the christian era, and probably in the reign of Nero, if not in that of Claudius. [215] The foundation of Lynn may therefore be considered as coeval with the first introduction of Christianity into this island; which was nearly if not quite 1750 years ago: and though this fixes the origin of Lynn at a pretty remote period, and much beyond what has hitherto been supposed, yet it seems to be supported by no small degree of probability.

Section II.

A short digression relating to the first Introduction of Christianity into Britain—Bardism.

Having, at the close of the preceding section, suggested an opinion that the origin of Lynn was coeval with the first Introduction of Christianity into this country, it will not, it is presumed, be any way improper, or unacceptable to the reader to offer here a few observations toward ascertaining the time when the last mentioned event took place, especially as all our English writers and antiquaries have left the matter very much in the dark.

Gildas, a writer of the sixth century, and the most ancient of all our British historians, states that “the Gospel began to be published here about the time of the memorable revolt and overthrow of the Britons under Boadicea,” which happened in the year 60 or 61, and was followed by a long interval of peace, which could not fail of proving favourable to the introduction of the new religion and the general success of its publishers. Speaking of the said revolt, together with its disastrous termination and consequences, Gildas adds, “In the mean time, Christ, the true Sun, afforded his rays, that is, the knowledge of his precepts, to this Island, benumbed with extreme cold, having been at a great distance from the sun; not the sun in the firmament, but the eternal sun in heaven.”

This account, given by Gildas, is remarkably corroborated by the Triads of the Isle of Britain, which are ancient British documents of undoubted credit, though but little known. [217a] From them we learn that the famous Caradoc, or Caractacus, having been overthrown in the war, and afterwards basely betrayed and delivered up to the Romans, by Aregwedd Voeddig (the Cartismandua of Roman authors) was, together with his father Brân, (or Brennus) and whole family, carried captive to Rome, about the year 52, where they were detained seven years, or more. At that time Rome enjoyed the preaching of the gospel, and Brân with others of the family became converts to the christian religion. After the expiration of their captivity, they returned home, and were the means of introducing the knowledge of Christ among their countrymen: on which account, Brân is called, one of the three holy sovereigns, and his family, one of the three holy lineages of Britain. The Triads also have preserved the names of three of the primitive christians who accompanied Brân on his return to this country, and who were probably the very first christian ministers that ever set foot on this island: one was an Israelite of the name of Ilid; of the other two, one was called Cyndav, and the other Arwystli Hên, or Arwystli the aged. [217b] This account is very curious, and, in all probability, authentic. [217c]

When Brân returned to his native country, it has been understood that some of his family stayed behind and settled at Rome. Of them Claudia, mentioned, along with Pudens and Linus, in the second Epistle to Timothy, is supposed to be one, and the very same with Claudia the wife Pudens, mentioned by the poet Martial, who lived in those times, and who celebrates her, in his Epigrams, as a Briton of extraordinary beauty, wit, and virtue. To this it has indeed been objected, that Martial, living in the reign of Trajan, cannot be supposed to speak of Paul’s Claudia, who flourished in the reigns of Claudius and Nero. But it might be urged in reply, that though he lived in Trajan’s reign, he lived also, and resided at Rome, in the reign of Vespasian, if not in that of Nero; and the Epigrams in which he mentions Claudia might be written in his younger years, when she was in the prime and bloom of life. Some have made her to be the daughter of Caractacus, which seems not at all unlikely. Pomponia Græcina, the wife of Aulus Plautius, Claudius’ Lieutenant, and the first Roman Governor here, has also been, thought a Briton and a christian, and one of the earliest British Christians. Tacitus speaks of her as an illustrious lady, but accused for having embraced a strange and foreign superstition; [218] and though he says she was acquitted, as to any thing immoral, yet he represents her as leading ever after a gloomy and melancholy kind of life: all which will strictly coincide with the idea of her being a christian. Tacitus could conceive or express himself no otherwise of a person dissenting from his own pagan tenets, or of a religion disallowed by the Roman law, which was with him the standard of truth, rectitude, and orthodoxy. The above accusation and trial of Pomponia Græcina took place, it seems, while Nero and Calphurnus Piso were Consuls, and after Paul had come to Rome the first time, and therefore she may not unreasonably be supposed one of his converts.

Other authorities render it highly probable, that some of those captives had embraced Christianity during their residence at Rome; but the Triads, above-mentioned, may be said to settle the point, and reduce the matter to a certainty. They were documents formed on purpose to preserve and perpetuate the memory of remarkable and interesting events; of which sort may justly be considered, the conversion of Brân and family, and their introducing Christianity into this island. There is every reason to conclude, that the religion of the first British Christians was venerably simple, pure, and perfect, like what appears in the New Testament, and very widely different from that of the men of the present generation. But this subject we will now drop, and resume the thread of the narrative. [219]

Section III.

The ancient history of Lynn continued—the town supposed to have been founded by a colony of foreigners, introduced by the Romans—etymology of its name—mistakes of Camden, Spelman, &c. pointed out.

The great project formed by the Romans of embanking, draining, and improving these fens and marshes, is said to have been executed by a foreign colony, [220] brought over and settled here for that purpose, but, without doubt, powerfully assisted by the natives. This colony is presumed to have been of Batavian or Belgic origin; for where could the Romans have found a people so fit for their purpose as among the inhabitants of a country that so much resembles this, and who must have been, while at home, habituated to the work in which they were here to be employed? The vicinity of those countries to this, and their then subjection to the Romans, may be considered as further corroborating this opinion. From the exposed situation of Marshland, and its lying next to the inhabited part of the country, it may very reasonably be supposed, that these colonists would begin their work there, and even on its eastern side, about where Lynn now stands: and as they would immediately want habitations, it is very natural to conclude, that the town of Old Len, or Lynn, was built for, or by them, and that they were the very people that gave it its name. These conclusions appear remarkably countenanced and supported by that very name itself; for LEN, in the Celtic (or Belgio-celtic) dialect, or language, is said to signify a Fen, Morass, or Marsh. [221] LEN, therefore, as they applied, or used the word here, might mean a town by a morass, the town in the marsh, or the chief town and mother town of Marshland and the Fens. This seems to be, by far, the most tenable and satisfactory explanation of the name of this ancient town, that has ever yet been offered or suggested.

Camden derives the name of Lynn from the British word Llyn, which signifies a lake; but circumstances do not at all support that idea. There was anciently at Lynn no very large collection of waters: its very river was inconsiderable, consisting only of the water of the Little Ouse, and the Wissey, together with that of the Nar, or Setch river, formerly called Len, and sometimes Sundringham Ea. [222a] The very harbour also, for many ages, was remarkably narrow. As to the waters below, in the roads, “It is very unlikely that the Britons should call them Llyn, (i.e. Lake,) a name which they never appear to have given to similar collections of water: but if we were to admit, that they actually gave that name to these waters, still it would seem exceedingly improbable, that this place should derive its name from thence, any more than Rising, or other towns that are situated near to the like estuaries, or arms of the sea.” Spelman’s conjectures on this point are weaker and more untenable still. He would have the name to be derived from the Saxon Læn, or Lean, signifying, as he says, a farm, or tenure in fee; but which sense, according to Hicks, is unusual: nor is it likely, as Gough has observed, that this tenure should be more particularized here than elsewhere. [222b] Equally futile is what he further advances, “that Len is Saxon for church-land; whence Ter Llen, in Welsh, is church-land:” which is most strangely confounding those two languages, as if the one had sprung from the other. Nor is it strictly true, that Ter llen in welsh means church-land, or even that there is such a welsh word in being. Tir llan might, indeed, have such a meaning, but it does not seem to be ever used in that sense. Llen or Llëen, in that language, means literature, and not church; and as an adjective, it means literary, scholastic, or clerical; whence gwyr llen, or llëen, signifies the clergy, as gwyr lleyg, or lleygion does the laity. But all this can make nothing for Spelman’s point, and it must, of course, fall to the ground.—That Lynn ever went by the name Maidenburg, from saint Margaret the virgin, seems to be another of the idle whimsies of dreaming antiquarians. Of all such dreamers none perhaps ever exceeded Parkin, the continuator of Blomefield the Norfolk historian: whenever he is at a loss for the etymology of the name of any town or village, he generally refers to the British, and pretends to explain it accordingly. Never is he more ready or flippant than when speaking of the signification of British words; of which, at the same time, he knew nothing at all.

Section IV.

Lynn the mother-town of the Fens—further account of its supposed founders and original inhabitants—remarkable works executed by them—great improvers of the country—the account continued to the extinction of the Roman power.

Lynn, as has been already suggested, was, in all probability, the very first town built by the above mentioned colonists, and so the mother town of that extensive country, which they were the means of recovering, improving, and securing from the annoyance of the salt and stagnant waters. Being their original dwelling place, it may naturally be supposed, that it would continue afterward to be their principal habitation or settlement, although in the progress of their work, and as they advanced further on, other dwellings and villages would of course be constructed and inhabited. Considering these people as originally from Belgium or Batavia, than which nothing is more likely, it may from thence be inferred, that the intercourse between Lynn and the Low Countries must have been of very early origin. Some connection or traffick between these colonists and their mother country may fairly be supposed to have commenced from their very first settlement here: so that the trade and intercourse between Lynn and the Netherlands may be concluded to be now of above seventeen hundred years standing.

Those industrious colonists seem not to have, in the least, disappointed the hopes or expectations of their employers. They appear to have carried on and executed the work with great diligence, skill, and success. It is probable, as before hinted, that they began on the eastern side of Marshland, (that being nighest the habitable or inhabited part of the country, and where also their first town or settlement would naturally be erected) and from thence extended their labours to Wisbeach, and so on to the Marshes of Holland, in Lincolnshire, and other parts of the country which they were to recover and improve. The Banks which they constructed in their progress were large, high, and firm, and such as effectually secured the country from the incursion and depredation of the sea. They are still known, in most places, and even on the eastern side of the Ouse and in the vicinity of Lynn, by the name of the Roman Banks. Nor does it appear that they were less judicious or successful in their attempts to drain and improve the parts which they had so well and effectually rescued from the Ocean’s destructive power; for by accounts handed down from ancient writers, it would seem that the country within their banks, at least a great part of it, was soon brought to an admirable state of cultivation, improvement, and fertility, like another paradise, and remained so for many ages. [225]

Even roads, of considerable length and width, appear to have been made by the same people in this new recovered and marshy country, constructed of gravel of no small depth and breadth, and formed in a most masterly manner: of which that leading from Denver to Peterborough, or rather, perhaps, to Castor, or Caister in Northamptonshire, is a most remarkable, and very striking instance. This road, according to Dugdale (as has been already observed in the Introduction) was composed of gravel, three feet deep, and sixty wide: at present, it is said to be covered with a moorish soil, from three to five feet thick. The constructing of such a road, and carrying it for so many miles, through a country almost totally destitute of gravel, stone, or any other materials proper for road-making, which must therefore have been procured from a vast distance, and with immense labour and difficulty, must have been a very extraordinary and stupendous achievement. In comparison with which, how puny are the efforts and performances of our modern adventurers, or commissioners of roads, in this flat country! A proof of this we have in the great Turnpike Road that leads from St. German’s to Wisbeach, where attempts have been making now for some years to cover it with gravel, but hitherto with no very great effect. At any rate, it must appear, that those ancient Colonists, introduced by the Romans, for the purpose of recovering and improving this great fen-country, were eminently qualified for the work in which they were employed, and ought to be still held in grateful remembrance by the good people of England, especially those of Marshland and the Fens, and esteemed among their very best benefactors.—The merit of those works and improvements, however, should not be all ascribed to them: the Romans, who introduced, employed, and maintained them, and who projected the undertaking, should be allowed some share of it. Nor are the natives, or Britons, who laboriously, powerfully, and effectually assisted in carrying on those works and improvements, to be entirely overlooked or forgotten on this occasion. The latter are said to have borne so large a share in those laborious undertakings, as to occasion very serious complaints and remonstrances from some of their countrymen to, and against the Romans, as having cruelly exhausted their strength, by the excessive hardships and fatigues they had been obliged to undergo in that service. Nor is this at all incredible; for the Romans are known to have been often very unfeeling, severe, and cruel task-masters to the nations they had subdued. If the country was improved it was always at the expense of the sweat and treasure, and not unfrequently of the groans and lives of its inhabitants.

The improvements begun in and about the fens, as well as in other parts of the country, were probably in some measure attended to during the whole continuance of the Roman power in this island. On the decline of that power, and especially after the departure of the Roman legions, there is reason to believe that they were neglected and relinquished. The grievous and calamitous scenes which then ensued, would leave no room or opportunity for such pursuits as could be attended to only in the happy seasons of internal tranquillity.

Although we have considered the original inhabitants of Lynn, Marshland, and the Fens, as consisting for the most part of colonists from the continent, we are probably not warranted to conclude, that they were in fact, a Roman Colony, or invested with the rights and immunities of Roman citizens. It may, however, be very reasonably supposed, that they were favoured with some particular privileges, to which, indeed, they appear to have been very justly entitled. But whatever they might be, it is not likely that they enjoyed them for any great length of time after the dissolution of the Roman government here: the country then soon fell a prey to foreign and merciless invaders, and everything was involved in universal confusion and ruin.

CHAP. II.

On the immediate consequences of the abdication of the country by the Romans, and the probable fate of Lynn.

Section I.

Character of the Anglo-Saxons, with general observations on the invasion and conquest of this country by them, and their barbarous treatment of the inhabitants.

The Saxons, who soon succeeded the Romans in the possession of this country, were never very remarkable for forming and encouraging projects of improvement, or for cultivating the arts of peace. They were, indeed a very different sort of people from the others, and possessed all their bad qualities without any of their good ones. They had long been distinguished as a fierce and lawless race, a nation of pirates, and freebooters, like the modern Algierines, whose chief delight consisted in predatory expeditions, and all manner of acts of violence and brutality, which passed with them for national virtue, patriotism, and military glory.

Long before they had effected any settlement in Britain, they used to make frequent descents upon the coast, particularly that of Norfolk, Suffolk, and Essex. To guard against which, the Romans not only kept a fleet cruising in these seas, but also built a chain of forts in the most convenient places, which they had well garrisoned. These forts were nine in number, and extended from Brancaster to Yarmouth, and thence down a considerable way along the coast; and (as was before observed) the troops here stationed, a good part of which consisted of cavalry, were under the command of an officer called, The Count of the Saxon shore. This provision, or precaution, however, proved, too often, but a very imperfect security against the sudden inroads of those ancient and daring marauders. [229]

Of all the nations of the north, the Saxons appear to have been the most barbarous and most sanguinary. The Francs, who conquered Gaul, were a civilised people compared with them. Of the use of letters they were totally ignorant. All knowledge that had not some affinity with piracy, or tendency to improve their system of rapine and devastation, was by them held in the utmost contempt and abhorrence. Gildas, who was born but a few years after their arrival in this country, describes them as a most fierce and detestable people, “a nation odious both to God and man.” [231] They were invited here to assist the inhabitants in opposing the incursions of the Picts and Scots; but they soon turned their arms against their infatuated employers, and converted the war into a system of extermination.

Their countrymen on the continent long retained the original character of their nation. During many ages they continued preeminent for their bloodthirsty disposition and savage manners. Charlemagne subdued them, after a thirty years war, and forced them to become converts to his Christianity, and submit to baptism; but their ferocity he did not subdue, nor had their conversion any effect towards humanizing them. They were, however, called Christians: which was like calling evil, good, or Satan, an angel of light. These Saxon Christians, in the twelfth century, quarrelled with the Venedi, a neighbouring nation, because they objected against embracing their Christianity, and refused to renounce their own paganism, which they seemed to prefer, for its cheapness. The former they found to be an institution attended with an expence which they could but ill support. Bishoprics were to be erected, with large revenues, Monasteries to be endowed, and an annual tribute, under the name of tithes, to be paid by the whole country. Against this the Venedi remonstrated, to Bernard Duke of Saxony, the christian champion. They protested that they were very poor, and unable to bear any heavy burden, such as providing for the maintenance of priests, and especially for the dignity and parade of mitred prelates; that they were fully determined to suffer any extremity, even to abandon their country and state, rather than submit to so tyrannical an oppression. This firm opposition of theirs to the will of the christian potentate, or rather the Saxon tyrant, involved them in a long and bloody war, the final issue of which was, their utter extirpation, by Henry Duke of Saxony, surnamed the Lion, the great champion of the church on that occasion. The cruelty with which he disgraced his victory, was horrible. Few revolutions in history were attended with such circumstances of barbarity, or proved so destructive to the ancient inhabitants. [232] Even Charlemagne, after he had subdued the Saxons, by a long and bloody war, did not attempt to destroy their whole race, but only transplanted a part, and the remainder he endeavoured to reconcile to his empire by the establishment of his Christianity. But the Saxons, by far more cruel than the Francs, were of all conquerors the most destructive, extending the utmost rigour of the sword against those who dared to contend with them for liberty or empire.

“In the same ferocious manner, (says the historian) their ancestors some centuries before had behaved in Britain, where they either massacred or expelled the greatest part of the natives, who had invited them over to their assistance. None of the other nations that overran the Roman Empire behaved with such cruelty to the conquered inhabitants, or were inflamed with such rancour and animosity, as to attempt to convert those provinces into deserts. The Goths, the Burgandians, the Lombards, instead of massacring the Romans in cold blood, and endeavouring to extirpate their whole race, enacted very just laws in favour of those people, in consequence of which the Romans and those fierce barbarous, their conquerors, were considered in the same light as fellow citizens. Theodorick king of Italy, a Gothic prince, upon sending an army into Gaul, makes use of these words to his general, which deserve to be inscribed on pillars of brass, “Let other kings delight in the plunder and devastation of the towns they have subdued; we are desirous to conquer in such a manner, that our new subjects shall lament their having fallen too late under our government.” [233]

How much happier had it been for the Britons to have been invaded by Theodorick than by the Saxons!

From the above account of the character of the ancient Saxons, one may be enabled to form a pretty just, but shocking idea of the miseries in which they involved the wretched inhabitants of this country, and those of Lynn and its vicinity among the rest. The exterminating war which they here waged, and the horrid devastation which attended their successful progress, have been recorded by Gildas, who himself lived at that eventful period, and must have been an eye-witness to no small portion of the direful events which he describes. Nothing can exceed the tragical description he gives of the diabolical and destructive operations of those brutal invaders. He represents the whole country, and especially the western parts, near to which he chiefly resided, as entirely laid waste with fire and sword, and the inhabitants massacred wherever they could be found. Of the wretched remnant, some fled to foreign countries, others retired to the mountains, or hid themselves in deserts and fastnesses, where, however, they could not long remain:—drawn forth by the pressing calls of hunger and famine, multitudes were forced to surrender to the merciless foe, begging that their lives might be spared, on the abject and miserable condition of submitting to perpetual slavery. Even of these not a few appear to have been instantly consigned to destruction. [234a] Others, however, were spared; and from them, in all probability, sprung the Servi, or slaves, with which the country abounded for many ages after. [234b] Some of the wretched inhabitants were so fortunate as to make their escape to their countrymen, either in Wales, or in Devon and Cornwall, or else in Cumberland and the northern parts, where they made a noble stand, and long maintained their liberty and independence.

Section II.

Of the Angles, from whom England, and the English language derive their names—they seize on the parts about Lynn, and the whole province of the ancient Iceni, which receives the denomination of East Anglia, and forms one of the kingdoms of the Heptarchy—revival of Lynn in the mean time—with remarks on the adjacent country.

Those Saxon conquerors of our island consisted of different clans, or tribes, one of which went by the name of Angles; and though they are not generally supposed to have composed the principal or most numerous part of the invaders, yet it so happened, that the whole of the conquered country and also the language of its new inhabitants took their names from them. They took possession of the ancient country, or province of the Iceni, and there founded the kingdom of East Anglia, or of East Angles, comprehending the present counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge, and Huntingdon, which made some figure among its sister kingdoms in the time of the Heptarchy. The kingdom of Mercia and that of Northumberland also, it seems, were inhabited by the same people.

Of Lynn, during that dark and disastrous period, no account has been preserved. It was probably destroyed by those merciless invaders, during their long and bloody contest with the ill fated natives, along with many other towns, all over the country, which certainly met the same fate. [236] At what time it revived, or rose again into existence, is no where recorded. But from the convenience and advantage of its situation it may be supposed to have done so pretty soon after the government of the East-Angles had assumed a settled form, and acquired a competent or tolerable share of stability. That it existed under the East-Anglian kings, seems a very natural and credible supposition; but whether it stood then on the western side only, or on both sides of the river, cannot now be ascertained. Under the Saxon princes that succeeded the dissolution of the Heptarchy, it is well known to have extended to the eastern shore of the river; and it is then, most probably, that we are to date the origin of the present town or borough of Lynn. In the time of Edward, called the confessor, we find it a place of trade and considerable note; a plain proof that it must have been in being, and growing into consequence a good while before that period. It belonged then to Ailmar, bishop of Elmham, and his brother Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury, when blind superstition and ecclesiastical servility may naturally be supposed to have been among the principal or most distinguished characteristics of its inhabitants. It continued afterward under episcopal domination and ghostly discipline till the memorable reign of Henry VIII. who thought proper to take into his own hands that power or supremacy which was before vested in the bishops. In consequence of which, it has ever since been called King’s Lynn, instead of Bishop’s Lynn, which was its former appellation: an appellation, by the bye, which will serve further to corroborate the idea, that it was formerly the deleterious abode of priest-ridden credulity and ecclesiastical thraldom. Indeed it may be said to have been long distinguished for illiberality, intolerance, and a persecuting spirit: and it must appear somewhat remarkable, that the very first person taken up and burnt, in England, under that diabolical law, De hæretico comburendo, was a Lynn man, as was also the last, or one of the very last that underwent persecution for nonconformity under the infamous conventicle Act: The former was one of the preachers belonging to St. Margaret’s Church, in the reign of Henry IV. and the latter a licenced dissenting minister in that of William III. Of each of them a more particular account shall be given in its proper place.

Not only Lynn, but most, if not all, of the adjacent towns and villages appear to have been in being long before the conquest. They are noticed in the celebrated old record, called Domesday, as places then in existence, and seemingly of long standing and remote origin. They had, in all probability, been erected and inhabited many ages before that period, though it seems not likely that many of their present names, or those given them in the Domesday book, are to be traced to a British origin, as Parkin and others pretend. [238a]

That Lynn had become a place of considerable trade in the Saxon times, or before the Norman invasion, is evident from unquestionable existing documents. It had then a toll-booth, and enjoyed certain duties and customs, payable on the arrival of any goods or merchandise, of which the bishop was in full possession of a moiety. This episcopal privilege is supposed to have been as early as the conversion of the East Angles, and establishment of Christianity among them. The town continued daily to flourish and acquire increasing importance; and at an early period after the conquest, one of the writers of that time calls it, “a noble city,” on account of its trading and commercial magnificence. [238b] This was at a period when Hull did not exist, and when Liverpool, if it did exist, was but a very obscure and insignificant place.

Section III.

Of the Saltworks formerly at and about Lynn—paucity of appropriate materials—apology.

The vicinity of Lynn in the Saxon times, and long after, appears to have been remarkable for its numerous Saltworks. [239a] At Gaywood alone, in the Confessor’s time, there were no less than thirty Salt pans, or pits. [239b] The Salt springs of Droitwich, Nantwich, Northwich, &c. were then, it seems, not so much attended to as to afford a supply to the distant parts of the kingdom. The people of these parts were therefore obliged to manufacture their own salt. To what extent the work was carried on, or what quantity was generally, or annually produced, cannot now be ascertained. Nor are we informed of the particular mode, or process adopted and pursued in carrying on this ancient manufactory. It was, probably, pretty simple and not very unlike that used in latter times in the salt-works of South-town, by Yarmouth, and at other places. By the great number of Salt-works then at Lynn, or in its neighbourhood, it seems probable, that a considerable part of the adjacent country, and the interior districts, were supplied from thence with that necessary article: which might easily, even at that early period, be conveyed thither, by means of the inland navigation, which always gave to Lynn the vast advantage of a free and easy intercourse with all those places, however distant, that are situated near the banks, or in the neighbourhood of its numerous rivers. The Salt manufactured here was made, it seems, from the sea water which the tides brought up to the town, and which must have been, of course, much less salt, and less fit for the purpose than the water found below in the roads, or at sea: it appears therefore rather odd, that those salt-works should be placed so far up the country, or so distant from the sea: and yet so it was; every village and hamlet, almost, had then its Salt-work, or the moiety of one. [240] Here it may be proper to observe, that, at the periods of which we have been speaking, salt was not an article of revenue, and must therefore have been a pretty cheap commodity compared to what it is now, when the duty laid upon it by government is said to be above ten times its prime, or original cost.

In attempting to give an account of the state of things at Lynn during the period which we are now contemplating, almost all our light must be borrowed from the general history of the kingdom in the mean while, as the paucity of materials, relating particularly to this town, leaves us, for the most part, no other clew for our guidance. The reader must not therefore be displeased with the method here generally pursued, in exhibiting the state or history of Lynn under its East-Anglian and Anglo-Saxon sovereigns.

CHAP. III.

Of the religious profession of the first Anglian inhabitants of Lynn—their renouncing heathenism, and assuming the christian name—account of their conversion, and character of their Christianity.

Section I.

Heathenism the religion of the first inhabitants of this town after its revival, or restoration, under the East-Anglian government—they, and the rest of the East Angles, together with the other branches of the Heptarchy, become professors of Christianity—account of their conversion.

The inhabitants of Lynn, after it had been rebuilt and repeopled by its Anglian masters, appear to have been blind heathens, and gross idolaters; for when the Angles, or Anglo-Saxons seized upon this country, and founded the East-Anglian kingdom, they were a nation of pagans, worshippers of Thor and Woden, and the rest of the miserable objects of northern, or Scandinavian adoration; and so continued till the seventh century. At that period, one of their princes, named Sigebert, having lived sometime in exile among the Francs, was there converted to Christianity. At his restoration to his kingdom, he brought over with him one Felix, a Burgundian priest, who was employed in recommending to the people the religion of their sovereign, in which he appears not to have been unsuccessful. He was consequently appointed the first bishop of the East Angles, and had his see fixed at Soham, [242] in Cambridgeshire, and afterwards at Domnoc, or Dunwich, in Suffolk. He is said to have taken no small pains in promoting the conversion of the inhabitants; and the parts about Lynn seem to have engaged a considerable share of his attention. In these very parts he is reported to have commenced his labours, which issued in the conversion of the whole country. Tradition gives to Babingley, by Lynn, the honour of being the place where he first landed, and where was erected the very first christian chapel, or place of worship among the East Angles. The second edifice of the same description is said to have been erected at Sharnborn, in the same neighbourhood. At what time the first place of that sort was built at Lynn, cannot now be determined; but it seems very probable that it must have been as early, at least, as the middle part of the seventh century. It cannot, however be said, that the Christianity then introduced was of any great value. The national character was not much, if at all, mended by it; and the people still remained grossly ignorant, profligate, and savage. What they wanted in rational piety and real Christianity, they made up in stupid credulity, blind zeal, and miserable superstition; and it had been well if their descendants had always carefully avoided the imitation of their wretched and pernicious example.

It is somewhat remarkable that Christianity, as it was called, was not received among the East-Angles till it had made considerable progress in most of the other kingdoms of the Heptarchy. In Kent it had been received about the year 526, or soon after, by the ministry of Austin the monk: and even before that time, several years, some of the Kentish people had been brought to think favourably of that religion, by the means of Luidhart, a French bishop, who had accompanied the princess Birtha, daughter of Cherebert, king of Paris, upon her marriage with Ethelbert the Kentish king. The conversion of the East Saxons took place about the beginning of the seventh Century under the ministry of Mellitus, their first bishop: and soon after, that of the Northumbrians, where Paulinus appeared as a very active and successful labourer.

Felix did not begin his labours among the East Angles till about the year 630, when that religion had made some progress in all the other kingdoms, perhaps, except that of Mercia, which seems to have been the last of the seven to adhere to the profession of paganism. The Mercians, however, were afterwards converted, and their country, at one time, formed into an archiepiscopal province, whose seat or metropolis was Litchfield. Thus the different branches of the hierarchy were all, by degrees, nominally christianized. Of the nature, character, and value of that Christianity, a just and proper idea may be formed from the following representations.

Section. II.

Effects of the conversion of the East-Angles, and the other sister-kingdoms—character of their Christianity.

No sooner were the good people of this country converted from paganism than monkery began to be in great request among them. Many monasteries were accordingly founded in all parts of England, which were quickly crowded with inhabitants. A fondness for the monastic life is said to have been here very much increased by an impious doctrine which began to be broached and believed toward the close of the seventh century, “That as soon as any person put on the habit of a monk, all the sins of his former life were forgiven.” This is said to have engaged many princes and great men (who are sometimes as great sinners as their inferiors) to put on the monkish habit, and end their days in monasteries; which, whatever it might be to themselves, was, probably, no mighty loss to their subjects and vassals, or to the world.

Another remarkable feature in the character of the English christians of the seventh and following centuries, was an extravagant veneration for relics; in which the Romish priests drove then a very gainful trade, as few good christians thought themselves safe from the perils or disasters of life, and the machinations of the devil, unless they carried about them the relics of some paint: nor could any church be dedicated without a decent or certain quantity of the same sacred and precious ware. [244]

Stories of dreams, visions, and miracles were also propagated without a blush, by the clergy, and believed without a doubt, by the laity. Extraordinary watchings, fastings, and other arts of tormenting the body in order to save the soul, became frequent and fashionable; and it began to be believed in the seventh century, that a journey to Rome was a most meritorious undertaking, and even, of all others, the most direct road to heaven.—Such was the christianity of the good people of Lynn and the rest of their countrymen in those days.

In the eighth century the humour of making pilgrimages to Rome, and of retiring into monasteries, still increasing, Coinred king of Mercia, as Henry informs us, laid down his sceptre, and took up the pilgrim’s staff, in 709, and travelled to Rome, accompanied by Offa, a young prince of the royal family of the East-Saxons, where they both became monks. Not long after, Ina, the warlike and victorious king of the West Saxons imitated their example, and ended his days in a cloister at Rome, where he founded a house for the entertainment of English pilgrims, and the education of English youth.

Great numbers of nuns also, and other English women, were among those devout pilgrims who then travelled to Rome: but we have the testimony of Winfred, alias Boniface, archbishop of Mentz, who lived at that period, that they were generally debauched before they returned, and even that many of them became common prostitutes in the cities of France and Italy: he therefore exhorts and charges his friend Cuthbert, then archbishop of Canterbury, to put a speedy stop to these scandalous female pilgrimages.

The religious prayers and songs, which constituted the church service, were then all in Latin, and so not understood by the common people, who were therefore directed by the 27th. canon of the first council of Cloveshoos, or Cliff, in Kent, [246] held in 747, to affix any meaning they pleased to the words in their own minds, and to pray in their hearts for any or every thing they wanted, no matter how foreign to the real sense of the public prayers. A curious salvo, says Henry, for the absurd practice of praying in an unknown tongue. The same canon contains also the following short form of prayer, for the dead; “Lord, according to the greatness of thy mercy, grant rest to his soul, and for thy infinite pity, vouchsafe to him the joys of eternal light with thy saints.”

Some of the nobility, or great men of that time, not very fond, it seems, of going themselves through all the fastings and prayers enjoined them by their confessors, would fain be allowed to have the service performed by proxy: and it appears that they actually hired and employed poor people to fast and pray in their stead. It was, certainly, a very notable as well as convenient device, and became, it seems, pretty fashionable, though it is said not to have the good fortune of obtaining the approbation of the said council of Cloveshoos. [247a]

A late historian, [247b] alluding to this period, observes, “that long fasting was then ordered frequently; but as the wealthy might abstain by proxy, a seven years fast might be performed in three days, if the principal could prevail with 840 persons each to take his share. This concise plan of atonement for crimes, (he adds) was condemned solemnly at the council of Cloveshoos; but the decree was disregarded.” The practice therefore seems to have gone on unchecked, notwithstanding the decree of that council. It was not to be expected that so convenient a custom could be very easily abolished. It may be worth while to inquire, whether it had in it, after all, any greater absurdity, than there is in the present practice of the infants at the font, making a confession of their faith by proxy.

Towards the latter part of the above period, a law was enacted, enjoining every priest to learn some handycraft, or manual occupation: which might be very useful; at least, it could do no harm. Another law enjoined, that they should all be capable of repeating the Creed, and the Lord’s prayer: which also might be very right and proper; but it indicates that learning was then at a very low ebb among the English clergy. We learn, however, that in the reign of Ethelred, styled the unready, a mission was sent from hence to Norway, at the request of the king of that country, to convert the Norwegians and Swedes to the christian religion, and that the archbishop of York, and other divines, actually went over on that occasion, and met with great success; though some of them afterwards are said to have suffered martyrdom; which seems rather odd, if the king, as above suggested, was their patron. Whatever their learning might be, their zeal must have been highly commendable and exemplary.

Section III.

Christianity of the ancient inhabitants of Lynn, and of this country, further characterized—whether very materially improved during the reign of Alfred—remarks on that reign—papal instructions to the first missionaries.

Ignorance and superstition, instead of diminishing, appear to have increased in England, during the eighth century. Pilgrimages to Rome became far more frequent, and were attended with worse effects than formerly; the rage of retiring to monasteries became more violent in persons of all ranks, to the ruin of every useful art; the clergy became more knavish and rapacious, and the laity more abject and stupid, than at any former period: of which the trade of relics, then at its height, and which can never be carried on, but between knaves and fools, is a sufficient evidence.

During the memorable reign of the celebrated Alfred, the state of religion has been supposed to have improved; but how far we are warranted to admit, or carry that idea, does not seem very clear. Alfred was, doubtless, a most excellent prince, as may fairly and justly be inferred from that notable clause in his Will, “that the English had an undoubted right to be free as their own thoughts,” and particularly from his so greatly magnifying, and acting upon that never to be forgotten precept of Christ, “to do unto others as we would have others do unto us;” not to mention the many other notable and commendable deeds ascribed to him: [249] but that he was instrumental in very materially reforming, or improving the religion of his country, appears rather doubtful, if not improbable. His altering the Ten Commandments, leaving out the second, and adding another, to humour the worshippers of images, make very considerably against the notion of his having much advanced the work of religious reformation. The commandment which he added, was expressed in these words, “Make not thou gods of gold, or of silver,” a precept, as it has been observed, which few of his subjects could afford to transgress. [250]

From Alfred’s days to the conquest, the religion of England experienced no amendment; nor ever after till the Era of the reformation, or the 16th. century, except what took place under the influence of Wickliff, and the Lollards; but they were soon crushed under the heavy and strong hand of priestly and royal persecution: the very first victim, as was before observed, was a Lynn man.

From the above representation of the original christianity of the English nation, and of the Lynn people among the rest, one cannot be very much biassed in its favour. But we shall cease to wonder at its being no better, when we consider whence it proceeded, and under what sort of rules or maxims it was introduced. It was first brought hither and promulgated by Austin, a monk of the convent of St. Andrew’s at Rome, accompanied by forty other Romish monks, all sent by the then Pope, whose name was Gregory, commonly called Gregory the first, and Saint Gregory, who was advanced to the papal chair in 590. Austin and his companions arrived here in 596. Among the instruction which pope Gregory gave Austin for the regulation of his conduct and ministry, the following are not the least remarkable.—

“He was not to destroy the heathen temples of the English, but only to remove the images of their gods, to wash the wails with holy water, to erect altars, and deposit relics in them, and so convert them into christian churches; not only to save the expence of building new ones, but that the people might more easily be prevailed upon to frequent those places of worship, to which they had been accustomed. He directs him further, to accommodate the ceremonies of the christian worship as much as possible to those of the heathen, that the people might not be much startled at the change; and in particular he advises him to allow the christian converts, on certain festivals, to kill and eat a great number of oxen, to the glory of God, as they had done formerly to the honour of the devil.” [252]

These admonitions, (says Dr. Henry) which were but too well observed, introduced the grossest corruption into the christian worship, and shew how much the apostles of the sixth and seventh centuries had departed from the simplicity and sincerity of those of the first.

CHAP. IV.

Miscellaneous observations, on the social distinctions, and the general state of the community among the Anglo-Saxons.

Section I.

State of society at Lynn, and in this country, before the Conquest.

Of the state of Society in this country, as to the different ranks among the inhabitants, the following is thought to be a pretty fair and true representation.—The next rank below that of the royal family was held by the Thanes, which were, it seems, of different degrees, and we are told that the highest order among them went by the name of king’s thanes. [253] These also are said to have been of two different sorts, Eoldermen, and Eorles; the former supposed to be supreme in the administration of justice; the latter comprehended military as well as civil authority, but was not hereditary till the close of the Saxon dynasty. The Ceorles (Churles, or Carles) were next below the thanes. They were free, descended from yeomen, and were chiefly engaged in husbandry. To them the gate of nobility was open, and they might become thanes by five different methods. [254a] Another order, or description of men, in those times, was called Huscarles; (i.e. house-carles:) they were retainers, or domestic dependents of the thanes, and reputed freemen. All the rest of the community, it seems, were slaves, of different descriptions. Of them however, it would sometimes happen, though but very rarely, that some obtained manumission, and they formed a particular class, denominated Freed-men; but we are told that they were few, and little regarded. They could obtain, it seems, no rank in the state; and applying, for the most part, to mechanical employments, seem hardly to have been distinguished from the race which they had quitted.—Slaves were never suffered to carry arms, and the very gift of a weapon conferred freedom. Of the other orders no man went abroad without his spear; and laws were enacted to guard against damages occasioned by the careless bearer. In battle the ceorles who formed the infantry, beside a broad sword, and sometimes a club, bore only a round shield with an offensive pointed weapon in the centre. The cavalry being composed of thanes, huscarles, and the richer ceorles, who could afford to keep horses, was better provided with defensive armour. [254b]

The enslaved part of the inhabitants, and which is said to have constituted by far the most numerous class of the community, went, like the privileged orders, by different names. Of them the chief and most remarkably were the Villani and the Servi. In regard to the former, we are told that Villenage was of two kinds: 1st Pure Villenage, to which some were subject from their birth, from whom uncertain and indeterminate service was due to the lord. The successors of these are our copy-holders; who, though time has dealt favourably with them in other respects, still retain one mark of their original vassalage, or servitude; for as of old the former were not reckoned as members of the commonwealth, but merely as part and parcel of the owner’s substance, no way entitled to the privileges of freemen, so do their successors still continue without any right to vote at elections by virtue of their copy-holds. 2nd Villenage by Tenure, which bound the tenant to perform certain services agreed upon between him and his lord; such as ploughing his ground, reaping his corn, &c.

The lowest, as well as most numerous class of slaves among the Anglo-Saxons were the Servi, who, (as well as all the rest of the unfreemen,) were probably the descendants of the aboriginal inhabitants, who had escaped the general massacre, or whose lives had been spared at the reduction and conquest of the country. These were protected by neither law nor religion, for a very long period; and they consequently suffered the most unfeeling and cruel treatment. Christianity is said to have ameliorated their condition. It certainly ought to have done so; but from such a christianity no material amelioration could well have been expected. Even our own boasted protestantism, how feeble has generally been its influence in such cases! The long and bloody contest between the rival and barbarous houses of York and Lancaster did more, it seems, for the relief and emancipation of those poor English slaves than any thing else; for the contending parties, in order to recruit and reinforce their armies, found it convenient and necessary to liberate great numbers of them: at length they were all manumitted, and Britain now contains no people of that description. It would be well if the same could be said of every other, part of the British dominions. These Servi are often mentioned by Bloomfield and Parkin, and appear to have been very numerous in the parts about Lynn before the conquest, and even long after that period.

Beside the Villani and Servi, we meet with other descriptions of bondmen, whose condition seem to have been less abject; at least, less so than the latter. Of those one sort was called Bordarii, Bordars, or Borderers: they were such as held a cottage, or some small parcel of land, on condition of supplying the lord with poultry, eggs, and other small provisions for his board and entertainment. Such small estates were formerly called Bord-lands, now demesnes.—Coliberti was the name of another description of bondmen among the Anglo-Saxons; and they were, it seems, a middle sort of tenants, between servile and free; they had their patrons, to whom they paid rent, and were manumised as servants used to be, but were not absolutely free. They were such of the Servi as were enfranchised, or liberated in a certain degree, but still paid some duties to the superior lord. They appear to have been held in scarcely any higher estimation than the class to which they had originally belonged.—The Burgaris, Burgenses, or Burgesses, was another order of bondmen among the Anglo-Saxons. They were tradesmen in great towns, and had their patrons, under whose protection they traded, and to whom they paid an acknowledgement; but some of them were in a more servile condition, and altogether under the power of the king, or other lords. [257a] Some of the above descriptions of Anglo-Saxon bondmen, or British slaves, and particularly the Villani, the Servi, and the Bordarii, were very numerous in the parts about Lynn, in the times of which we are now speaking, and long after. [257b] England did then so abound in slaves, and was so much a land of slaves, as to be able to carry on a trade in that commodity with other nations, and especially the Irish, whom English merchants, for a long time, abundantly supplied with that favourite article, out of their home stock, or native produce, with as little shame or remorse as they have in modern times supplied the West Indies and North America with the poor defenceless natives of ill-fated Africa. [257c] And yet the English was then, as well as now, a christian nation, priding herself in the fond idea of the purity and pre-eminence of her goodness, faith, and piety. Alas, for poor christianity! How often hath her venerable name been profaned and postituted on the vilest occasions, and for the basest of purposes!

Section II.

Of the Wittenagemote and other courts, maxims of jurisprudence, institution of tythings, nuptial and funeral rites, sacerdotal, domestic, and other customs, among the Anglo-Saxons.

The Wittenagemote, or assembly of wise men, was the highest court among the Anglo-Saxons, and from which our parliament seems to have originated. Bishops, judges, and thanes composed it, and it does not appear that the lower orders, or bulk of the people were there any how represented. The business of this assembly was prepared and opened by the king.—Another high court, but inferior to the former, was the Shiregemote, in which much business was transacted in the way of a modern assize. The Eolderman, or the Eorle was the president, and the domesmen, or judges, with certain lawmen, as they were called, formed the bench. It was held only twice in the year.—The Hundred Court came next, over which the Hundredary presided. Sales of estates, registering of Wills, manumission of slaves, &c. were here transacted. It was also called Wapontake, from the custom of always attending well armed. It was the repository of deeds and records, was held monthly, and had the jurisdiction of ten tythings.

Compensation to the injured party or his family, rather than the annoyance of the criminal, being the principle of the Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence, capital punishments were unfrequent. The chastity of maidens was protected by very severe laws; the ravisher of a nun was fined as an assassin, and the violator of a child incurred the penalty of a severe mutilation. Murder, as well as manslaughter, might be atoned for, at a stated price: every wound had its exact value; robbery was venial, and when committed on a bordering country, (although in peace) was almost deemed laudable. [259]

It was in the institution of Tythings, or neighbourships, that the wisdom of the Anglo-Saxons appeared most conspicuous and admirable. Every ten families were connected together, as fellows in arms and in civil society. Each answered for the others’ good behaviour to the magistrate, and each joined in paying the penalty which any one member might casually incur. A man who was not inrolled in these tythings was avoided by all, as a vagabond and person of bad character; nor could he hope to be admitted to a tything unless his probity was generally acknowledged. To Alfred this excellent institution is said to owe its perfection; and its effects on society must have been very great and salutary. [260]

Of the customs of the ancient inhabitants of Lynn, and of the Anglo-Saxons in general, relating to matrimony, the following appear to have been some of the most remarkable and striking.—Every unmarried woman was supposed to have a guardian, or owner: the virgin belonged to her father, brother, uncle, or nearest male relation; the widow claimed the same protection from her husband’s male relatives; the lover was obliged to buy his mistress, of her guardian, by a gift, the amount of which was settled by a law, that set a higher price on the maid, by one half, than on the relict. If unadvisedly the wooer wedded the lady without the guardian’s consent, her property and goods were still the property of that guardian, and an injury offered to her was to be atoned for to him, and not to the spouse. At the wedding, the guardian delivered up his ward to the husband, a friend of whom had previously avowed himself the guarantee of a proper provision for the bride in case of his death. At the feast which followed, the usual and large presents of gold, silver, arms, cloths, household stuff, &c. made by the invited friends and relations, formed the portion of the bride, who had beside, from custom immemorial, a right to ask of her mate, on the next sun-rising after her nuptials, a gift, to serve her as pin-money. As to what related to divorces, among these people, we meet with no particular account. In the education of their children, they only sought to render them dauntless, and apt for the two most important occupations of their future lives, war and the chase. It was a usual trial of a child’s courage to place him on the sloping roof of a building, and if, without screaming or apparent terror, he held fast, it was deemed a favourable omen, and he was pronounced a brave boy.

The burial ceremony is said to have been much more joyous among them than that of marriage; which seems to imply something very unnatural, as well as barbarous. The house in which the body lay till its burial, was a perpetual scene of feasting, singing, dancing, and every species of riot. This, of course, was very expensive to the family of the deceased; and it was in some places carried so far, that the corpse was forcibly kept unburied by the visiting friends, till they were certain that they had consumed, in games and frantic festivity, all the wealth the deceased had left behind him.—Nothing can well exceed the barbarism and brutishness of such a custom: and yet it seems to have long continued in some parts of this island after the introduction of christianity, and even of protestantism. Nay, some remains of it are known to have existed in some places within the memory of some of the present inhabitants. It is surprising how tenacious mankind often are of their ancient customs, be they ever so vile, unseemly, or heathenish. Heathenish, certainly, or of pagan origin, must this most odious practice have been: but it is not the only English custom that comes under that description. The Waites, that usually go about before christmas, may be considered as of the self-same origin, and belonged, in all likelihood, to a certain pagan, riotous, and lawless feast, celebrated at that time of the year: the precursor and prototype of our principal christian festival. The ushering in of May with the blowing of horns, a custom now almost, if not altogether peculiar to Lynn, seems evidently to be of the same class. It is still most tenaciously kept up in this town, by the boys and children, though nobody pretends to know either its meaning or its origin. But as May-Day is known to have been one of the highest and most notable days of the year among our heathen ancestors, the said custom may very safely be concluded to have originated with them; especially as that day does not appear to have ever been very much thought of by the papists.

A notable custom among the Anglo-Saxon christians of the eighth century, and from which Lynn cannot be supposed exempted, was that of the Clergy usually celebrating Mass, or administering the Sacrament without Shoes and Stockings, and with chalices made of horn: which seems to shew, that they had not then arrived at that sacerdotal pride and pomp, at least in regard to their dress, which became so prevalent among those of their order in latter times, when they thought proper to assume a consequence so far above the other orders of the community.

In private life the Anglo-Saxons are said to have been devout to the extreme of credulity, and hospitable to drunken extravagance. Their manners were rough, but social; their tables were plainly, but plentifully served. Large joints of roasted meat seem to have had the preference; salted victuals also were much in use. At table, the rank of the guests was strictly observed; and, by the laws of Canute, a person sitting above his proper station was to be pelted out of his place with bones, at the discretion of the company, without the privilege of taking offence. The lady, (or, as the Saxons named her, leaf-dien, the bread giver) sat, as now, at the upper end of the table, and distributed the provisions to her guests. The liquors used at genteel tables were wine, ale, and spiced ale, pigment (a composition of wine, spice, and honey,) morat, (honey diluted with mulberry juice) and mead. [263] Such, as may reasonably be concluded, was the state of things with regard to these matters, in the best of the families of Lynn at those times.

Section III.

State of learning, and of the medical profession, among the Anglo-Saxons.

Learning during the time now alluded to was at a very low ebb in this Country. “Among the various discouragements, (says Andrews) which literature was obliged to encounter in this ill-fated period may be reckoned the extreme scarcity of materials for writing.” A strong proof of which (he adds) “is that many of the MSS. of the 10th and 11th centuries are written on parchment, from which older works (perhaps the Decades of Livy) have been erased.” It was for want of parchment to draw the deeds upon, (as he supposes,) that estates, were then frequently conveyed from one family to another by the ceremony of a turf and a stone, delivered before witnesses, without any written agreement. However that was, England even in those dark times, exhibited some rays of intellectual light, and produced some literary characters that would have done honour to more enlightened ages. Bede, in particular, styled the Venerable, who flourished in the 8th century, and has been called, the wise Saxon, is believed to have comprised, in eight folio volumes, the whole body of knowledge that his age afforded. To him may be added Egbert, arch-bishop of York, and his pupil Alcuin, both distinguished in their day for extraordinary literary attainments. Alfred and his learned associates appeared in the 9th century, and were the ornaments of that dark age; but the light which they exhibited was not lasting, and they left no successors that were any way worthy of them. In the 10th (and most part of the 11th) century, scarce any man of literature appeared among the English. Elfric is said to have been by far the most remarkable and eminent. He was styled the grammarian, from his having written a Latin grammar. Two volumes of homilies, in MS. translated by him from the Latin into the Saxon language, are said to be still extant. Very few beside have in any degree contributed to illuminate the gloom of that dismal period. Gerbert, however, who, from a low origin, was advanced to the papal chair in 999, under the name of Silvester II. deserves to be respectfully noticed, as it is to his experience, gained by travel, and a long residence among foreign nations, that our arithmetic is said to owe the use of the Saracen numerals.—But as none of these persons appear to have sprung from Lynn, or its vicinity, no further notice can properly be taken of them in this work; and what has been already said of them and other extraneous matters, was chiefly intended for the purpose of pointing out the probable state of things at Lynn in the meantime, for want of more suitable and appropriate materials.

Physic and Surgery, during those early ages, were in a most wretched state in this country, and, of course, among the inhabitants of Lynn. Old women were then the chief professors of the medical art; and as they mingled charms and spells with their prescriptions, the patient’s fancy sometimes effected, or, at least, assisted in effecting the cure. As Christianity gained ground, the clergy, having much time on their hands, applied themselves to the study of medicine, but made so little progress, that for a long time, Holy Water seems to have been the prescription to which they chiefly trusted. If holy water were still in use, as a popular, fashionable, or favourite medical prescription, instead of the innumerable patent medicines, and other vile quackeries that now disgrace this ill-fated country, it had been better, no doubt, for the health and constitutions of myriads of our unwary and credulous fellow-subjects. There seems, however, but little prospect of an end to this great and growing evil, while quackery continues to be so convenient and gainful to the state, or to contribute so largely, as it now does, to the revenue of the kingdom. But it is not the only public evil, the prospect of whose extinction appears very distant and hopeless.

Section IV.

Expressive and remarkable names of the months—state of the coinage, or currency—general value of different commodities in this country before the conquest—slavery—comparison with the present course of things.

The inhabitants of Lynn and the rest of their countrymen, in the Anglo-Saxon ages, could give more satisfactory reasons, it seems, for the names of their months, than we can for those of ours. December, which with them stood first, was called Midwinter-monath, the midwinter month. January, was denominated Aefter-yula, that is, after Christmas, or rather, after the feast called Yula, a pagan, riotous, lawless festival, observed at that time of the year, and to which our Christmas succeeded, with no small resemblance. February, they called Sol-monath, the sun month, from the returning of the sun at that season. March, they named Rhede, or Reth-monath, the rough, or rugged month. April’s name was Easter-monath, from a favourite Saxon goddess, whose festival was kept at that time, and may be said to be still kept by us, under the idea of the christian passover, which we seem to have dedicated to that same pagan goddess, by our continuing to preserve her precious memory, and celebrating the feast still in her name. May was called Trimilchi, from the cows being then milked three times in the day. June’s name was Seremonath, the dry month, July was called Mœd-monath, the mead month, from the meads being then in their bloom and beauty, or the people being there employed in hay making. August had the name of Weod-monath, the weed month, from the luxuriance, or abundance of weeds at that time. September was named Hærfest-monath, or the harvest month. October bore the name of Winter-fyllith, or winterfall, from winter approaching with the full moon of that month. November, their last month, they called Blot-monath, blood month, from the blood of the cattle then slain and stored for winter provision.

The Anglo-Saxons are said to have made use of coins as early as the reign of Ethelbright, or Ethelbert, who governed Kent from 561 to 616; as the fines ordered in his laws are all estimated by shillings, which was even then a denomination of money. The money-pound of the Anglo-Saxons, is thought to have been the same with the Tower-pound long in use at the mint, and to have weighed less than the Troy-pound by ¾ of a Troy-ounce. Its value was about 2l. 16s. 3d. of modern money. [268a] The Mark, like the Pound an imaginary coin, weighed eight ounces, or two thirds of the Pound. The merchant reckoned 12 ounces to the mark. Its value was 1l. 17s. 9d. The Mancus, a real coin, was valued at the 8th. of a mark, or 4s. and 8d. The Shilling, a real coin, was worth about eleven pence farthing of our money. The Anglo-Saxon penny, (pening, or sceata,) was a silver coin, and weighed near three-pence of our money. This little piece would do more in those times for its owner, than some shillings would do now. Halflings and Feorthlings, were the half, and the fourth, or quarter of the Anglo-Saxon penny, and were of silver. To these may be added a small brass coin called Styca. Beside these coins, it was usual with the Anglo-Saxons to complete the sum destined for any particular purpose, by adding what they called live money, such as oxen, sheep, horses, or slaves; [268b] which last species of traffick was carried to an almost incredible height of brutality.

The value or price of cattle, land, and other commodities, in the times of which we are now speaking, amounted to but a very small portion of what they now fetch.

“By the laws of Athelstan, (says Dr. Mavor) a sheep was valued at a shilling, or fifteen-pence of our money: an ox was computed at six times the value of a sheep, and a cow at four. A horse was valued at thirty shillings of our money, and a mare at twenty-four. Between the years 900 and 1000, a hide of land was purchased for about one hundred and eighteen shillings, which was little more than a shilling per acre. [269] On the whole, (he adds) when we combine the alteration in the weight of the pound, and the modern value of the precious metals from their greater plenty, we may conceive every sum of money mentioned by historians, during the Anglo-Saxon, and even the Norman times, as if it were multiplied more than a hundred-fold above a sum of the same denomination at present.”

Section V.

Probability that Lynn was formerly concerned in the exportation of slaves—comparison between the ancient and modern English slave-dealers—slaves and horses the chief exports of this country in those days—corn not then exported, though it had been formerly—imports—commerce—miscellaneous hints and observations.

Considering how very fruitful in slaves England appears to have been under the Anglo-Saxons, and how commonly they bought and sold their slaves, (and even their own kindred,) and that they were actually a principal article of their exports to other countries, [270] it is more than probable that Lynn and other Norfolk ports were then deeply concerned in that traffic.—Slaves are known to have then abounded in the parts about this town; and no other commodity, or produce of the country, was more marketable, or saleable, both at home and abroad; we may therefore be sure that the merchants and opulent people of Lynn were not inattentive to so fashionable and profitable a branch of commerce. Some indeed, even then, disapproved of it, and a bishop, of the name of Wolfstan, is said to have firmly set his face against it at Bristol, and to have made the people somewhat ashamed of their proceedings; but it does not appear that they relinquished it, for Bristol continued to be the chief English mart for slaves, long after his time. His conduct, however, was highly laudable, memorable, and exemplary; but where among our modern prelates, can we find one that has virtue or fortitude enough to imitate the noble example of Wolfstan!

How vile and mercenary must the character of those ancient English dealers in human flesh appear, when we contemplate them as selling their own countrymen and neighbours, and even their kindred! It reminds us of what has often been said of the modern commercial, or mercantile character: that a merchant would sell his own father, if he could do it safely and gainfully.—Between our ancient and modern English slave dealers, there is some dissimilarity, though they both acted from the same principle, and the conduct of each appears thoroughly unjustifiable and atrocious.—The latter dealt only in strangers, at a great distance, and of another colour; but the former trafficked, as was before observed, in their own countrymen, and near neighbours, brought up among them, and, occasionally, even in their own near relations. Of the two, therefore, the conduct of the ancients appears, at first sight, as far the most unnatural and stocking; but that will cease to be the case, upon further consideration, and when times and circumstances are duly attended to. Those ancients lived in rude and barbarous ages, when the natural rights of man were not understood, and when darkness visible was every where predominant; which must, in some measure, extenuate their misdeeds. But our modern slave-dealers have carried on their operations in the open day, and in the very face of the sun—they have adhered to this most barbarous and savage traffick in the most enlightened age of the world—they have persisted in it, in spite of the frequent and solemn remonstrances of the most virtuous and enlightened of their countrymen, and in defiance of the clearest demonstrations of the flagiciousness of their conduct. They have, therefore, no cloak for their sin, no excuse or palliating plea for their atrocities. To them belongs the pre-eminence of turpitude and infamy, and they may be said to stand at the head of those monsters who have been a disgrace to christianity, to humanity, and to their country.

Slaves and horses appear to have been the principal, if not the only articles exported from this country during the Anglo-Saxon ages. Corn constituted then no article of our exports, though it had done so formerly, in a considerable degree, while Britain formed a part of the Roman Empire. Agriculture must therefore have miserably declined here since the arrival of the Saxons, and the country had no reason to congratulate itself on its change of masters. After the introduction of Christianity the monks are said to have been, by much the best husbandmen, and also the best, if not the only gardeners in the country. They were certainly the most enlightened class of the community, and the little knowledge and learning which the country then possessed were chiefly, if not entirely, confined within the solemn precincts of the monasteries.

Of our imports in those days, books, relics, pictures, and images of saints, clerical vestments, and church ornaments, are said to have been the chief articles; which gives but a very miserable idea of the state of the country, and its commerce, in the mean time.—They were however, not the only articles, for it appears that wines also were imported from France and Spain, cloths from Germany and Flanders, furs, deer-skins, (and probably, bear-skins,) ropes, whale oil, &c. from Scandinavian and even a portion of all the different commodities then known in any part of Europe is supposed to have been at that period imported to this country. Yet the balance of trade is said to have been much in our favour—that is, we got much more by the sale of our Slaves and horses, in which our exports consisted, than what we lost or laid out in the purchase of all the various articles which we imported, many of which, at the same time, must have been pretty expensive. This seems to imply, that those Slaves and horses, with which foreign markets were supplied from hence, must have been very numerous, as well as very beneficial and lucrative to our English merchants.

During some part of this period the shipping of England seems to have been pretty numerous; but what portion of it belonged to the port of Lynn does not appear. The royal navy too, was at times on a respectable footing, particularly in the reigns of Alfred and Canute, as well as in those of Edgar, surnamed the peaceable, and Ethelred: the latter is said to have possessed near 800 sail of men of war, [274] but they were all what would now be called small vessels. The military force of the kingdom consisted generally of about 50,000, though on extraordinary occasions it considerably exceeded that number.

For a long time, markets were usually kept on Sundays, in or near some church, but that being found somewhat inconvenient, as interfering with the religious service of the day, they were afterwards changed to Saturdays. The fairs of those times were also generally kept within the precincts of some great churches, or monasteries, on some notable day, generally the anniversary of the patron saint, and it was customary to oblige every comer to the fair, at the gate, before he entered, to swear that he would neither lie, steal, nor cheat: which might be very useful, if the people had then a proper sense of the sacredness of oaths, otherwise it would be of but little avail, as it is to be feared it would also be in the present day, when, from the multiplicity or commonness of oaths, a disposition to trifle with, or make light of them is notoriously prevalent. For holding these fairs, bishops and abbots obtained charters from the crown, with a view to increase their own revenues by the tolls which such charters would authorise them to levy on such occasions. Thus every thing contributed to the aggrandizement of the church. Before the end of this period, the clergy had possession of more than a third part of all the land in the kingdom, with the tithes of all the rest.

Much attention was then bestowed on the decoration of churches and religious houses. Organs and bells were introduced toward the latter part of this period. The famous Saint Dunstan gave a fine organ, in the reign of Edgar, to the abbey of Glastonbury. Bells became very common about the 10th century, and were hung in the towers of churches, which were then all of wood: only the altars were, it seems, built of stone. The first set of bells in this kingdom, that we hear of, was at Croyland, in Lincolnshire, in the reign of Athelstan, a gift of the abbot Turketul to that celebrated monastery. [275] There had, however, been single bells in England long before that period, and even as early as the 7th century, as is attested by Bede. In the time of M. Paris, bells were not allowed to ring at funerals, as inspiring too gay and unsuitable ideas. Clocks also began to be introduced here toward the close of this period. About the same time, the English began to be expert and noted manufacturers of woollen cloth; the value of a sheep’s fleece, of course, was then well understood, and rated at two fifths of the animal’s whole price. Silk, though now beginning to be imported, was not woven here until some centuries afterwards: linen, in the mean time, was extremely scarce. It is very remarkable, but seemingly an unquestionable fact, that highly finished works in gold and silver, were the production even of our darkest ages. The monks, in those times, were the best artists, and the famous St. Dunstan inferior to none of them. Yet the means of supplying life with necessaries, appear to have been but imperfectly known and cultivated. The pagans of Sussex, in the 7th. century, though starving for want of food, knew not how to catch any fish, except eels, until bishop Wilfred, who came thither in 678, instructed them in the use of nets. He took 300 at a draught; and by thus supplying their bodily wants, rendered their minds tractable to his doctrines, and easily succeeded in their conversion. [276]—Our modern missionaries to the south sea isles, and other foreign parts, would do well to imitate his example, and not confine their attention or labours solely to religious instruction. A goodly pattern of the same kind has also been very lately set before them among the North American Indians by the Quaker missionaries. But it is to be feared that they and their employers are too wise in their own eyes to profit by such examples.

Section VI.

Population of Lynn, and the country in general, before the conquest—condition of the bulk of the inhabitants in the mean time—sufferings of the inhabitants of Lynn and the adjacent country from the Danes—intrepid and ferocious character of that people—instruments of vengeance on the Anglo-Saxons—their disposition and character not much changed by their conversion to christianity—remarkable instances of imposition, superstition, and credulity.

Of the population of Lynn, at any time during that long period, from the establishment of the Saxons to that of the Normans, no estimate can now be formed; but it is pretty certain that the major part of its inhabitants, as well as those of the adjacent country, and of all the rest of England, were Slaves, during the whole of that time, and long after. Those unfortunate people, for the most part at least, appear to have been the descendants of the original inhabitants, who were reduced to that condition, at the subjugation, of conquest of the country, and whose lives had been then spared, on condition of their becoming the property, or goods and chattels of the conquerors. So did the Saxons treat those of the natives whose lives they condescended to spare; all the rest they butchered without mercy, except such of them as were fortunate enough to escape to the unsubdued parts of the island. Of these cruel and horrid deeds, they never appear to have repented, even after they assumed the name of christians, for the bondage still continued; but, in time, a severe retaliation took place, and the Saxons, in their turn, were treated much after the same manner as they had formerly treated the Britons. Long peace had destroyed their martial spirit: from a very warlike people, they became gradually a most dastardly race, and so fell an easy prey to the ferocious Danes. The difference at that time between these two nations in point of military prowess, is said to be so great that the Saxons, alias the English, frequently fled before inferior numbers of the Danes, and could hardly be prevailed upon to meet them in the field of battle on any terms. “Oh the misery and worldly shame in which England is involved through the wrath of God! (said an English bishop in the reign of Ethelred the unready) How often doth two or three troops of Danes drive the whole English army before them from sea to sea, to our eternal infamy, if we were capable of feeling shame! But, alas! so abject are we become, that we worship those who trample upon us, and load us with indignities.” Such was then the abject submission of the English to the insolence of the Danes, “that when an Englishman met a Dane on a bridge, or in a narrow path, where he could not avoid him, he was obliged to stand still, with his head uncovered, and in a bowing posture, till he was out of sight.” Nay, we are assured that English submission and Danish insolence and brutality were sometimes carried still further, and even to degrees that are almost incredible, as well as too indelicate to relate. [278] These Danes, who now became the instruments of retaliation and vengeance upon the Anglo-Saxons, were remarkable for their extraordinary military skill and intrepidity; and they were as unfeeling and ferocious as the latter appear to have been at the time when they invaded and conquered this country: they were therefore probably the fitter for the execution of the work in which they were employed. Much has been said of the cruelties committed by the Danes in this country: they were certainly very enormous and shocking; but there is no reason to conclude that they exceeded, or, perhaps, even equalled those which the Saxons had before exercised upon the former inhabitants. Of all the perpetrators of Danish enormities, in this island, Guthrum seems to be the foremost, or most conspicuous, in the pages of our ancient historians. Of him one of them speaks thus—“The cruel Guthrum arrived in England A.D. 878, at the head of an army of Pagan Danes, no less cruel than himself; who, like inhuman savages, destroyed all before them with fire and sword, involving cities, towns, and villages, with their inhabitants, in devouring flames; and cutting those in pieces with their battle-axes who attempted to escape from their burning houses. The tears, cries, and lamentations of men, women, and children, made no impressions upon their unrelenting hearts; even the most tempting bribes, and the humblest offers of becoming their slaves, had no effect. All the towns through which they passed exhibited the most deplorable scenes of misery and desolation; as, venerable old men lying with their throats cut before their own doors; the streets covered with the bodies of young men and children, without heads, legs, or arms; and of matrons and virgins, who had been first publicly dishonoured, and then put to death.” [279] This is very shocking, and looks like providential retaliation. The annals of history exhibit many instances of the same kind. The Danish warriors were always prodigal of life, and not only did not fear, but even courted a violent death. A natural death they dreaded, as a most ignoble and disgraceful end, and which they always appeared very anxious to avoid. No wonder that they became the terror of every nation against which they happened to wage war. No greater evil could well befall any people than to have them for their enemies and invaders.

To no part of this island did the Danes prove a greater, or more terrible scourge than to the province of the East Angles, which became one of their principal settlements, and where they committed the most shocking barbarities. Hence we may very safely conclude that the sufferings which the inhabitants of Lynn experienced from them must have been exceedingly grievous and deplorable. But as those sufferings have not been recorded they cannot now be described or particularized.

The Danes, as well as the Anglo-Saxons, when they invaded this country were pagans. Both of them afterward took up the profession of christianity; but it was only its profession, or bare name that they did take up. Their former ferocity still remained. They continued grossly ignorant, superstitious, and heathenish, and exhibited scarcely a spark of the real spirit of the religion of Christ, except perhaps in the latter part of the reign of Alfred. Their ghostly, or religious instructors were miserable and blind guides, or knavish and artful impostors, who taught them that the most meritorious actions consisted in erecting and endowing monasteries, performing pilgrimages, and reverencing the priesthood. From such pretended or pseudo-christianity, what good effect could be expected? Grapes cannot be gathered of thorns, or figs of thistles.—When Earl Alwine, who was the greatest and richest man in England, in the reign of Edgar the peaceable, consulted St. Oswald, bishop of York, what he should do to obtain the pardon of his sins, the sainted prelate made him the following eloquent harangue: “I beseech your excellency to believe that those holy men who have retired from the world, and spend their days in poverty and prayer, are the greatest favourites of heaven, and the greatest blessings to the world. It is by their merits that the divine judgements are averted and changed; that plagues and famines are removed; that healthful seasons and plentiful harvests are procured; that states and kingdoms are governed; that prisons are opened, captives delivered, shipwrecks prevented, the weak strengthened, and the sick healed: that I may say all in one word, it is by their merits that this world, so full of wickedness, is preserved from immediate ruin and destruction. I intreat you therefore, my dear son, if you have any place in your estate fit for that purpose, that you immediately build a monastery, and fill it with holy monks, whose prayers will supply all your defects, and expiate all your crimes.” The Apostles, no doubt, would have answered such an inquiry very differently. The building of Ramsey abbey, however, as Dr. Henry observes, was the consequence of this fine speech. [282] Such acts were represented by the monks as contributing greatly to the future repose of those who did them, and of their friends; whence it was usual for all those who had any sense of religion, or concern, for their salvation, to bequeath some part of their estates to their own souls, as they called those bequests which they made to a church or a monastery.

To promote and establish an unbounded veneration for the priesthood, miraculous tales were industriously propagated, and as readily believed; for the credulity of the people perfectly suited the knavery of the priests. The following talc, or rather miracle, is related by William of Malmsbury, in the very words, as he says, of one of the persons on whom it was wrought:

“I Ethelbert, a sinner, will give a true relation of what happened to me on the day before Christmas, A.D. 1012, in a certain village, where there was a church dedicated to St Magnus the martyr, that all men may know the danger of disobeying the commands of a priest. Fifteen young women and eighteen young men, of which I was one, were dancing and singing in the church-yard, when one Robert, a priest, was performing mass in the church; who sent us a civil message, intreating us to desist from our diversion, because we disturbed his devotion by our noise. But we impiously disregarded his request; upon which the holy man, inflamed with anger, prayed to God and St. Magnus, that we might continue dancing and singing a whole year, without intermission. His prayers were heard. A young man, the son of a priest, named John, took his sister, (who was singing with us) by the hand, and her arm dropped from her body without one drop of blood following. But notwithstanding this disaster she continued to dance and sing with us a whole year. During all that time we felt no inconvenience from rain, cold, heat, hunger, thirst, or weariness; and neither our shoes, nor our clothes wore out. Whenever it began to rain, a magnificent house was erected over us, by the power of the Almighty. By our continual dancing we wore the earth so much, that by degrees we sunk into it up to the knees, and at length up to the middle. When the year was ended, bishop Hubert came to the place, dissolved the invisible ties by which our hands had been so long united, absolved us, and reconciled us to St. Magnus. The priest’s daughter, who had lost her arm, and other two of the young women, died away immediately; but all the rest fell into a profound sleep, in which they continued three days and three nights; after which they arose and went up and down the world, publishing this true and glorious miracle, and carrying the evidence of its truth along with them, in the continual shaking of their limbs.”

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.

HISTORY OF LYNN. PART III.

History of Lynn from the establishment of the Normans in England to the Reformation.