[367] Loo! thus his glory grewe great, by my dispite. 1578.
[368] So enuy euer, her hatred doth acquite. 1578.
Sorrowe and false shame,
Whereby her foes do shine in higher fame. 1578.
[370] Running. 1559.
[371] T. Ch. This signature first added in the edition of 1571, and has been uniformly believed to mean Thomas Churchyard. However, it may be more confidently assigned to Master Chaloner, i. e. Sir Thomas Chaloner.—In the British Museum there is a fragment of the original edition of the Mirror for Magistrates, as printed in folio, during the reign of Queen Mary, and suppressed, as already noticed, by the Lord Chancellor. The fragment consists of two leaves, and which, unfortunately, are duplicates, commencing with the interlocutory matter before the legend of Owen Glendower, and ends with the eighteenth stanza of the same legend. It begins “Whan Master Chaloner had ended thys so eloquent a tragedy,” and therefore appears conclusive that the above was written by Thomas Chaloner, and that the legend of Richard the Second, by Ferrers, which now follows, was first written for the edition of 1559.
When the legend of Jane Shore was added in 1563, Baldwin says: “This was so well lyked, that all together exhorted me instantly to procure Maister Churchyarde to vndertake and to penne as manye moe of the remaynder as myght by any meanes be attaynted at his handes:” which compliment proves that the author was a new candidate, and upon the signatures being first added in 1571, we find his name affixed to “Shore’s Wife,” in full, Tho. Churchyarde, to distinguish it from the above abbreviation for Thomas Chaloner.
[372] About the feeste of seynt Bartholmew fell dyscension and discorde atwene the duke of Herforde and the duke of Norfolke, wherefore the duke of Herforde accusyd that other that he had taken iiii M. marke of the kynge’s, of suche money as he shulde therewith haue wagyd certeyne sowdyours at Calays, he lefte vndon, and toke the same money to his owne vse. But another wryter sayeth, that as the sayd ii dukys rode vpon a tyme from the parlyament towarde theyr lodgynges, the duke of Norfolke sayde vnto that other: “Sir, see you not howe varyable the kynge is in his wordis, and how shamefully he puttyth his lordes and kynnes folkys to deth, and other exylyth and holdyth in pryson; wherfore full necessary it is to kepe, and not for to truste moche in his wordis, for with out dowte in tyme to come, he wyll by such lyke meanys bryng vs vnto lyke deth and distruction.” Of which wordys the sayd duke of Herforde accusyd that other vnto the kynge; wherefore eyther wagyd batayle, &c. Fabyan.
[373] For where as maister Hall, whom in thys storye we chiefely folowed, making Mowbray accuser and Boleynbroke appellant, mayster Fabyan reporteth the matter quite contrary, and that by the reporte of good authours, makyng Boleynbroke the accuser, and Mowbray the appellant. Which matter, &c. 1559, 63.