Lysand. I observed it had a "glorious aspect," as bibliographers term it.
Lis. But what has become of Ashmole all this while?
Lysand. I will only further remark of him that, if he had not suffered his mind to wander in quest of the puzzling speculations of alchemy and astrology—which he conceived himself bound to do in consequence, probably, of wearing John Dee's red velvet night cap—he might have mingled a larger portion of common sense and sound practical observations in his writings.
But a truce to worthy old Elias. For see yonder the bibliomaniacal spirit of Archbishop Laud pacing your library! With one hand resting upon a folio,[352] it points, with the other, to your favourite print of the public buildings of the University of Oxford—thereby reminding us of his attachment, while living, to literature and fine books, and of his benefactions to the Bodleian Library. Now it "looks frowningly" upon us; and, turning round, and shewing the yet reeking gash from which the life-blood flowed, it flits away—
Par levibus ventis, volucrique simillima somno!
[352] Archbishop Laud, who has beheaded in the year 1644, had a great fondness for sumptuous decoration in dress, books, and ecclesiastical establishments; which made him suspected of a leaning towards the Roman Catholic religion. His life has been written by Dr. Heylin, in a heavy folio volume of 547 pages; and in which we have a sufficiently prolix account of the political occurrences during Laud's primacy, but rather a sparing, or indeed no, account of his private life and traits of domestic character. In Lloyd's Memoirs of the Sufferers from the year 1637 to 1660 inclusive (1668, fol.) are exhibited the articles of impeachment against the Archbishop; and, amongst them, are the following bibliomaniacal accusations. "Art. 5. Receiving a Bible, with a crucifix embroidered on the cover of it by a lady. Art. 6. A book of popish pictures, two Missals, Pontificals, and Breviaries, which he made use of as a scholar. Art. 7. His (own) admirable Book of Devotion, digested according to the ancient way of canonical hours, &c. Art. 19. The book of Sports, which was published first in King James his reign, before he had any power in the church; and afterward in King Charles his reign, before he had the chief power in the church," &c., pp. 235-237. But if Laud's head was doomed to be severed from his body in consequence of these his bibliomaniacal frailties, what would have been said to the fine copy of one of the Salisbury Primers or Missals, printed by Pynson upon vellum, which once belonged to this archbishop, and is now in the library of St. John's College, Oxford?! Has the reader ever seen the same primate's copy of the Aldine Aristophanes, 1498, in the same place? 'Tis a glorious volume; and I think nearly equals my friend Mr. Heber's copy, once Lord Halifax's, of the same edition. Of Laud's benefactions to the Bodleian Library, the bibliographer will see ample mention made in the Catalogus Librorum Manuscriptorum Angliæ, Hiberniæ, &c., 1697, folio. The following, from Heylin, is worth extracting: "Being come near the block, he (Laud) put off his doublet, &c., and seeing through the chink of the boards that some people were got under the scaffold, about the very place where the block was seated, he called to the officer for some dust to stop them, or to remove the people thence; saying, it was no part of his desire 'that his blood should fall upon the heads of the people.' Never did man put off mortality with a better courage, nor look upon his bloody and malicious enemies with more christian charity." Cyprianus Anglicus; or the Life and Death of Laud; 1668, fol.; p. 536. In the Master's library at St. John's, Oxford, they shew the velvet cap which it is said Laud wore at his execution; and in which the mark of the axe is sufficiently visible. The archbishop was a great benefactor to this college. Mr. H. Ellis, of the Museum, who with myself were "quondam socii" of the same establishment, writes me, that "Among what are called the king's pamphlets in the British Museum, is a fragment of a tract, without title, of fifty-six pages only, imperfect; beginning, 'A briefe examination of a certaine pamphlet lately printed in Scotland, and intituled Ladensium Autocatacrisis,' &c., 'The Cantabarians Self-Conviction.' On the blank leaf prefixed, is the following remark in a hand of the time. 'This Briefe Examen following, was found in the Archbishop's (Laud?) Library, wher the whole impression of these seauen sheets was found, but nether beginning nor ending more then is hearein contained. May 11th, 1644.' This work, (continues Mr. Ellis,) which is a singular and valuable curiosity, is in fact a personal vindication of Archbishop Laud, not only from the slanders of the pamphlet, but from those of the times in general: and from internal evidence could have been written by no one but himself. It is in a style of writing beyond that of the ordinary productions of the day."
Peace, peace, thou once "lofty spirit"—peace to thy sepulchre—always consecrated by the grateful student who has been benefited by thy bounty!
Perhaps Laud should have been noticed a little earlier in this list of bibliomanical heroes; but, having here noticed him, I cannot refrain from observing to you that the notorious Hugh Peters revelled in some of the spoils of the archbishop's library; and that there are, to the best of my recollection, some curious entries on the journals of the House of Commons relating to the same.[353]
[353] I am indebted to the same literary friend who gave me the intelligence which closes the last note, for the ensuing particulars relating to Hugh Peters; which are taken from the journals of the lower house: "Ao. 1643-4. March 8. Ordered, that a study of books, to the value of 100l. out of such books as are sequestered, be forthwith bestowed upon Mr. Peters." Journals of the House of Commons, vol. ii., p. 421. "Ao. 1644. 25 April. Whereas this House was formerly pleased to bestow upon Mr. Peters books to the value of 100l., it is this day ordered that Mr. Recorder, Mr. Whitlock, Mr. Hill, or two of them, do cause to be delivered to Mr. Peters, to the value of 100l., books out of the private and particular study of the Archbishop of Canterbury." Id., vol. iii., p. 469. "Ao. 1644. 26 Junij. Dies publicæ Humiliationis. Mr. Peters made a large and full relation of the state of the western counties, and of the proceedings of my Lord General's army, since its coming thither," &c. "Whereas, formerly, books to the amount of 100l. were bestowed upon Mr. Peters out of the archbishop's private library, and whereas the said study is appraised at above 40l. more than the 100l., it is ordered this day that Mr. Peters shall have the whole study of books freely bestowed upon him." Id. p. 544. "Ao. 1660. May 16. Ordered, That all books and papers, heretofore belonging to the library of the archbishop of Canterbury, and now, or lately, in the hands of Mr. Hugh Peters, be forthwith secured." In Ashmole's life, before the first volume of his Antiq. of Berkshire, it is said in Aug. 1660, "Mr. Ashmole had a commission to examine that infamous buffoon and trumpeter of rebellion, Hugh Peters, concerning the disposal of the pictures, jewels, &c., belonging to the royal family, which were committed chiefly to his care, and sold and dispersed over Europe: which was soon brought to a conclusion by the obstinacy or ignorance of their criminal, who either would not, or was not able to, give the desired satisfaction."
Lis. This is extraordinary enough. But, if I well remember, you mentioned, a short time ago, the name of Braithwait as connected with that of Peacham. Now, as I persume Lorenzo has not tied down his guests to any rigid chronological rules, in their literary chit-chat, so I presume you might revert to Braithwait, without being taxed with any great violation of colloquial order.