spondent, is, I have since perceived, not a novel circumstance, and cannot validate the claims of a journal to judicial weight, nor manifest a judicious perusal on the part of its critic. It has been objected by the Spectator, the Saturday Review, and other journals, that I have used unbecoming epithets to Henry VIII. I regret, for the credit of humanity, that the life of an English monarch should not deserve a more courteous delineation. When one writes with all the incidents of a drama before his mental view, he may, at a certain point, give utterance to an indignant expression that may not be justified by the special incident; but whether this be so in the case of King Henry or not, the reader can judge who will refer to the chapters in the first volume headed "The Fall of Anna Boleyn," pp. 385-418; and "The Queen's Death-Warrant Signed," p. 456: Henry's demeanour on the day of Anna's judicial murder; and, to crown all, his marriage with Jane Seymour whilst the blood of her predecessor was still warm on the block. I refer the reader also to Henry's instructions to Lord Hertford, in his campaign against Scotland, in April, 1544, for another proof of his " merciful disposition." The despatch in question is printed in the present volume, chap. xiii. p. 264. Sir Walter Raleigh, who possessed the friendship of Queen Elizabeth, writing in the reign of James I., described Henry VIII. as "the incarnation of human wickedness." Hallam, Mackintosh, and Macaulay, have used strong epithets in relation to Henry's actions as a monarch and Miss Strickland, also, in her "Queens of England," designates Henry a " regal ruffian," in alluding as a man. to his conduct towards Anna Boleyn, and the learned lady has also the truthful temerity to style the "Defender of the Faith," as the "English Bluebeard." To the standard work—"The Archbishops of Canterbury”of the late eminent Dean of Chichester, I make many references-mostly, I am compelled to am compelled to say, of dissidence-but I fully agree with Dean Hook in what follows:-" If any one,' he writes, "were in duty bound to expose the character of Henry VIII., an investigation of his conduct in the divorce case of Anne of Cleves would prove him to be devoid of the common feelings of a gentleman, a Christian-a man. Perhaps there is not in historical literature a viler document than that in which he assigned his reasons for seeking a divorce. He cared not what he did or said, if only he could carry his object." Have the panegyrists of Henry ever seen this document ? Yet there are letters of King Henry's extant equally infamous, but irrespective of matters of public interest like the one so justly denounced by Dean Hook. Another distinguished Protestant writer calls Henry VIII. a "monster;" and, knowing all we do now know of this evil being, to set him down under a natural designation would be an insult to humanity. A A❝ruffian" may have something human or redeeming in him; but the cruel, relentless, heartless, blasphemous, despotic voluptuary nothing. Superficial judgments are, it is to be feared, too frequently delivered in the process of book-reviewing, and the work of years" laboriously and with great endeavour set down in honesty"-adjudicated upon, after a "skim" of a couple of hours, by the "ready pen" of some stray littérateur, whose production, when once handed to his patron, lies amongst the "over matter," without hope of a remorseful retouch, rendered desirable by intervening perusal, but flung into the newspaper on the first contingency. Many authors can bear testimony to the truth of this statement. In several "criticisms" may be found the rather inequitable fact of my being censured for opinions and epithets expressed and used by authorities noted at the bottoms of the respective pages in which they occur. But then I can derive comfort from the amusing essay of Sterne on similar critics, even if I should have reason to realize the sadly playful apophthegm (as to one of his characters) of the greatest English translator I have ever known of the German poets-"For critic-like he never read a book.” I know that it is not within human power to obtain unanimous assent from the perennial diversity of creeds and politics. Even my sincere effort to narrate events on all sides with thorough impartiality has not met with approval from many Catholics and Anglicans, as well as several sections of Dissent, yet no influence has once swayed me from the "noiseless tenour" of my way. I have suppressed no document useful to the cause of truth, far less misrepresented data. If, on my own part, I have fallen into errors of opinion or inference, I humbly regret it; but as to the facts set down, they need no defence, as they are invincible. An honourable historian will be as loyal to veracity as the chivalrous Crusader of old to the sacred object of his devotion. Finally, it seems to me that with much aptness the words of the Roman poet-who, although in the aggregate, a sad magister morum, has transmitted to us many maxims whose observance would befit any Christian gentlemanmight be applied to describe the ideal of one who sets down the result of his researches with fearless fidelity, having regard solely to the eternal principles of Truth :— "Justum et tenacem propositi virum Mente quatit solida; neque Auster, Again I must express my sincere and respectful acknowledgments to those clergy of the Anglican Church who, in the course of my literary inquiries, have afforded me opportunities of consulting MSS., documents, rare black-letter books, diaries, &c., in their possession. I cheerfully assign to those who have in any way assisted me their full share of merit. To the officials of the literary department of the British Museum I would be more diffuse in my thanks, as they one and all deserve, did not long experience prove that courtesy, kindly attention, and delicate consideration seem to be such unavoidable attributes of the gentlemen who officiate in that important department of an unrivalled institution as to render an elaborate expression of individual gratitude superfluous. In conclusion, I beg respectfully to inform the readers of the "Historical Portraits of the Tudor Dynasty," that an index shall be attached to the last volume of the work. S. H. BURKE. LONDON, July, 1880. |