No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
The discovery by Mr. Arundell Esdaile of the fragmentary morality Love Fayned and Unfayned has contributed to the history of English drama a document of peculiar interest. The play can, I believe, lay claim to unique significance as reflecting a phase of religious controversy otherwise unrepresented in the drama. Although the fragmentary character of the material renders analysis difficult, the 243 extant lines contain evidence on the basis of which the play may be characterized as an allegorical defense of the sect of Anabaptists. It seems further to reflect, in one aspect, the influence of a group with which the Anabaptists had certain affinities,—the Family of Love.
1 Published by the Malone Society, Collections, i, i (1909), pp. 16-25.
2 A collection of discourses “de tempore et de Sanctis”; the copy in which the play is preserved belongs to the edition of 1492 (Strassburg). It is in the possession of the British Museum (editor's foreword, p. 16).
3 Typical examples of such alterations are the substitution in the first line of fire, which rhymes with desire in v. 2, for flame, which has been written and struck out; and the substitution of celestiall, in v. 124, for heavenl (sic), which has also been written and crossed out. It is impossible to determine from the condition of the ms. whether we have to do with a composition originally incomplete, or a fragmentary text; the volume has been rebound, and has lost its original end-papers and fly-leaves (editor's foreword, p. 16).
4 I make use of the convenient terminology of Mr. R. L. Ramsay, ed. Skelton, Magnyfycence, EETS, Ext. Ser., vol. xcviii, Introd., p. cxlviii.
5 This speech and others of Love Unfayned are very much in the vein of the text-besprinkled utterances of some of the characters in Lusty Juventus; cf. the speeches of Good Counsel (Hazlitt-Dodsley, Old Plays, 1874, vol. ii, pp. 49-50 and 93) and the speech of Knowledge (ibid., p. 55). An even closer parallel is offered by the discourses of Charytie in King Darius (Brandl, Quellen des weltlichen Dramas in England vor Shakespeare, Strassburg, 1898, pp. 363-366).
6 The situation which represents the Vice as chagrined by the failure of another character to keep an appointment with him occurs also in Lusty Juventus and King Darius. The opening lines of Falshode's first speech are in fact a fairly close parallel to the following speech of Iniquitie, in King Darius:—
It seems not unlikely that the author of Love Fayned and unfayned was acquainted with these two plays; he is at least proved to have been familiar with the comic conventions of the Morality stage.
7 Stage direction “cantant.”
8 “Falshode” certainly stands for the Church of Rome (cf. v. 217), and “Love Fayned” is a fitting title for the Church that had, from a dissenting point of view, only pretended reform.
9 A bibliography for the history of Anabaptism on the Continent will be found in the Cambridge Modern History, vol. ii; see also Karl Kautsky, Communism in Central Europe before the Reformation, translated by J. L. and E. J. Milliken, London, 1892, ch. v. For the history of the English Anabaptists, the standard work of reference is Mr. Champlin Burrage's The Early English Dissenters in the Light of Recent Research, Cambridge, 1912. In this work, tht Anabaptists are discussed with special reference to their religious dogma; the matters of their social theory and standards of living, points with which the present article is specially concerned, are not touched upon. An article by Mr. Richard Heath, The Anabaptists and their English Descendants, Contemporary Review, vol. lix, pp. 389-407, contains valuable references, but disregards chronology in its arrangement of data.
10 John Foxe records that in 1535 ten Dutchmen “counted for Anabaptists” were burned in London and other English cities (Acts and Monuments, London, 1684, vol. ii, p. 270, col. 1; the Registers of London cited as authority). Mr. A. F. Pollard, citing Acts of the P. C. 1552-54, pp. 131-138, states that in these years “there was a sect newly sprung up in Kent,” and that ecclesiastical authorities regarded Knox as “a great confounder of these Anabaptists” (Pol. Hist. of Eng., N. Y., 1910, vol. vi, p. 68). Strype records that in 1550 Archbishop Parker served on a commission “empowered to correct and punish” the Anabaptists (Life and Acts of Matthew Parker, Oxford, 1821, vol. i, p. 54); and the Articles of the Convocation of 1552 condemn the Anabaptist theory of property (Liturgies of King Edward VI, Parker Soc., vol. xiv, pp. 536, 548). All recent historians agree that at this time the popular signification of the term “Anabaptist” was extremely vague, a circumstance which renders much of the testimonial evidence on the subject somewhat elusive.
11 Cf. Strype, Life and Acts of John Whitgift, Oxford, 1822, vol. i, pp. 71-73.
12 Strype, Life and Acts of Archbishop Grindal, Oxford, 1821, pp. 180-191. The proclamation is referred to also by Camden, History of the Most Renowned and Victorious Princess Elizabeth, London, 1688, Bk. i, p. 48.
13 Strype, Parker, vol. ii, p. 424. Mr. Pollard (op. cit., p. 366) states that in 1575 Guaras spoke of the presence of Anabaptists in London; and that on July 22 of the same year two Flemish Anabaptists were burnt at Smithfield.
14 “Spenser's Arraignment of the Anabaptists,” Jour. Eng. and Ger. Phil., vol. xii, pp. 434-448.
15 Cf. Burrage, op. cit., vol. i, p. 251. The first English Anabaptist congregation to be settled in England was that led by Thomas Helwys and John Murton, according to Mr. Burrage. Its members had previously belonged to an English Anabaptist group in Holland, but established themselves in London about 1611-1612. Mr. Burrage believes that other congregations may have been organized in various counties prior to 1620.
16 Cf. Burrage, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 251-269, for titles of works appearing between 1611 and 1624.
17 Ed. Halliwell, London, 1845, vol. i, pp. 97-98.
18 Ibid., pp. 264-265.
19 Ibid., pp. 388-389. He had written in 1620 (cf. vol. i, p. 142) that “no Anabaptistical or Pelasgian heresies against God's grace and providence were then stirring” at Cambridge.
20 The question of the later developments of Anabaptism and of its relation to the tenets of the modern Baptists and Quakers, is discussed by Mr. Burrage and Mr. Heath.
21 Cf. Burrage, op. cit., vol. i, pp. 257, 258. An attack upon the Anabaptists through the medium of drama, such as Bale's indictment in Kynge Johan (Manly, Specimens, vol. i, p. 616, vv. 2591-2596), might moreover have called forth a response in kind.
22 Ed. Max Niemeyer, in Neudrucke deutscher Litteraturwerke des XVI. und XVII. Jahrhunderts, No. 77-78 (Flugschriften aus der Reformationszeit, No. viii, Halle, 1888).
23 A possible exception is a vague reference to justification by works, to be considered later.
24 Cf. Restitution, p. 71.
25 Perhaps the earliest recorded charge is a statement in the Heresies Condemned in 1530 (cited by Mr. Heath, op. cit., p. 401) to the effect that the Anabaptists said, “The woorst Türke lyving hath as much right to my goodes as his nede, as my own household or I myselfe.”
26 Later Writings of Bishop Hooper, Parker Society, vol. xxvii, p. 121. For other expressions of Bishop Hooper on this point, see the same volume, pp. 42, 76 (noted also by Mr. Padelford, op. cit.).
27 Rogers, The Catholic Doctrine of the Church of England, an Exposition of the Thirty-Nine Articles: Parker Soc., vol. xlv, p. 352. See also p. 355, and the references to Bale, Mystery of Iniquity (Geneva, 1545), on p. 353.
28 Bullinger, Decades, Parker Soc., vol. ix, p. 18.
29 Histoire des Anabaptistes, Contenant leur Doctrine, les Diverses Opinions qui les divisent en plusieurs sectes, les troubles qu'ils ont causéz & enfin tout ce qui s'est passé de plus considérable à leur égard depuis l'an 1521, jusques à présent. The work gives the history of Anabaptism on the Continent from 1521 to about 1640 (the last date mentioned in the book). Editions were issued in 1695 (Paris) and 1699, 1700, 1702 (Amsterdam). The references given in this study are from a copy of the edition of 1700, “À Amsterdam, chez Jaques Desbordes, devant le Comptoir de Cologne, MDCC,” owned by the Library of the University of Pennsylvania. The passage cited above is found on p. 6.
30 One may refer also to a tract entitled A Warning for England, Harleian Misc., vol. v, p. 259. Mr. Padelford's paper, referred to above, deals almost wholly with this point.
31 Strype, Whitgift, vol. i, p. 73. This passage, and others from the Life of Whitgift, are referred to also by Mr. Padelford, op. cit.
32 Bist, des Anab., p. 251.
33 It is interesting in this connection to note the attitude of Strype, who might have been Whitgift as far as ecclesiastical antipathies were concerned. He entertains just such suspicions of the Puritan reformers: “and perhaps … they had their eye upon the revenues of the Church” (Whitgift, vol. i, p. 57).
34 Keller, Ein Apostel der Wiedertäufer, p. 65; cited by Mr. Heath, Contemp. Rev., vol. lix, p. 396. The work of Keller has not been accessible for me.
35 Hist. des Anab., p. 250.
36 Mock-Majesty, or the Siege of Munster, London, printed for J. S. and L. C. 1644; reprinted in the Harleian Miscellany, vol. v, pp. 455-478.
37 Harl. Misc., vol. v, p. 471. The use of the word “policy” in the passage quoted is especially interesting, as the term is used by the adversaries of Anabaptism in the play. Love Fayned advises Falshode (v. 135):—
We must worke by pollicyes for to converte his mynde.
38 Strype, Whitgift, vol. i, p. 71. This accusation is of course at variance with the direct testimony elsewhere adduced as to the simple way of life of the Anabaptists.
39 Italics mine.
40 Hist. des Anab., p. 250. The passage has reference to the practices of Anabaptists in Moravia, but the methods of the parent sect on the Continent would naturally be communicated to the groups in England. The title of the first edition of the Hist. des Anab. (Paris, 1695) indeed contains the phrase “tant en Allemagne & Hollande, qu'Angleterre.”
41 It is true that this characteristic fits equally well the “Psalm-singing Puritan,” but this circumstance hardly warrants the consideration of a possible Puritan source for the play. A Puritan of the less genial type who was sympathetic with the stage, would be an anomaly.
42 Strype, Whitgift, vol. i, p. 73. The Bishop adds, “They talk gloriously,” a phrase applying well enough to the Evangelical fervour of Love Unfayned's address to Feloship (vv. 25-60).
43 Bullinger, Decades, Parker Soc., vol. ix, pp. 57-58.
44 It is true that Falshode calls Love Fayned “deare brother,” but he uses the term in an obviously mocking spirit. Love Fayned likewise speaks scornfully of “love vnfayned, that brother.”
45 With certain groups of Puritans, also, the usual mode of address was “sister” and “brother” (cf. Trevelyan, England Under the Stuarts, Oxford, 1904, p. 65).
46 Strype, Whitgift, vol. i, p. 72; cf. also Life and Acts of John Aylmer, Oxford, 1821, p. 17. Rogers states that “the Anabaptists condemn all superiority among men, saying, that every man should be equal for calling” (Parker Soc., vol. xlv, p. 330).
47 Strype, Whitgift, vol. i, p. 72.
48 Cf. Restitution, ch. ix.
49 Catholic Doctrine, Parker Soc., vol. xlv, p. 53; he refers to Bale, Mystery of Iniquity, p. 53. Bale perhaps has the Anabaptists in mind also in the attack upon certain “hypocrites” who believe in “will-works,” found in God's Promises (ed. Hazlitt-Dodsley, Old Plays, 1874, vol. i, p. 322). Cf. also Padelford, op. cit., pp. 445-446.
50 For the history of the Familist movement, see the monograph of Mr. A. C. Thomas, The Family of Love, or Familists, Haverford College Studies, No. 12 (1893), and Burrage, op. cit., vol. I, ch. viii.
51 Cf. the article by Miss C. Fell Smith in the Dictionary of National Biography; a list is there given of the works of Nicholas, with the English titles of such as were translated.
52 Nicholas is often referred to as “H. N.,” the signature which he appended to most of his writings.
53 Op. cit., p. 33.
54 Ibid., p. 33.
55 Ibid., pp. 16-17.
56 Annals of the Reformation, London, 1725, vol. ii, p. 375. Baker's Chronicle has no record of Familists in England until “the 23d year of Elizabeth,” and states that in this year several of H. N.'s books were “by Proclamation commanded to be burnt” (Chronicle of the Kings of England, London, 1769, p. 367).
57 Strype, Annals, vol. ii, pp. 375-377.
58 History of Elizabeth, p. 48.
59 Commons Journals, vol. i, pp. 128-130; cited by Miss Smith.
60 Fuller, Church History of Britain, London, 1868, vol. iii, p. 239.
61 Strype, Annals, vol. ii, p. 600.
62 Ibid., vol. i, p. 378.
63 Ibid., vol. i, p. 378. The date of the first edition of the Annals is 1709-08, so that the last Familist known to Strype would have been an old man in 1688.
64 Strype affirms that Anabaptists sheltered themselves under the name of the Familists (Annals, vol. ii, p. 379), and in the petition referred to above, the Familists showed resentment at having been classed in popular opinion with the Anabaptists.
65 Strype, Annals, vol. ii, p. 377.
66 Rogers, Catholic Doctrine, Parker Soc., vol. xlv, p. 355.
67 Ibid., p. 354.
68 Strype, Annals, vol. ii, p. 589.
69 Cath. Doct., Parker Soc., vol. xlv, p. 187.
70 Strype, Annals, vol. ii, p. 598.
71 Ibid., p. 421.
72 It may be well to note the difference between the significance of the name Familiaritie in this play, and the use of the same term by the editor of Lyndesay's Three Estates (EETS, vol. xxxvii) to render Hameliness of the original. Hameliness, a kind of boisterous wanton, is a character diametrically opposite to the pious homilist Familiaritie.
That the name Familiaritie has reference to one of the lesser “Families” of the period—the Family of the Mount, the Family of the Essentialists, etc.—is wholly improbable. The peculiarities of these minor sects (cf. Strype, Annals, vol. i, pp. 379-380) are not reflected in Love Fayned and Unfayned.
73 A copy is owned by the Bodleian Library; Miss Smith (loc. cit.) gives the catalogue number as ms. Bodl. M257. Creizenach, Geschichte des neueren Dramas, Halle, 1903, vol. iii, pp. 527-528, has a brief note on the content of the play. He refers to Nicholas, however, as a “Wiedertäufer.”
74 Strype, Annals, vol. ii, p. 375.
75 Burrage, op. cit., vol. i, p. 266.
76 Ibid., pp. 265-266.
77 Cf. vv. 75-76, the opening lines of Falshode's first speech:—God save ye, my masters, god save ye this blessed day Why stare ye at me thus I wene ye be come to see a play.
78 Unless the phrase is an obsolete by-word, “sainct quintan's” must be a correctional institution or almshouse. The name does not, however, appear in Stow's Survey of London, Camden's Britannia, or Harrison's Description of England, although all these works mention numerous charitable and correctional institutions. Dugdale does not list it among the monastic hostels. It may be one of the numerous unnamed almshouses recorded by Baker in the Chronicle among the “pious works” which he enumerates for each successive reign. The tradition of charitable treatment of vagrants is associated with St. Quintin, Bishop of Arvergne and Rovergne; cf. Surius, De Probatis Sanctorum Vitis, Cologne, 1618, vol. iv, pp. 316-317.