Note on the e-text: this
Renascence Editions text was transcribed by Judy Boss, Omaha, NE,
September, 1998,
from Wilson's Arte of Rhetorique
1560. Ed. G. H. Mair. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1909.
Content unique to this presentation is copyright
© 1998 The University of Oregon. For nonprofit and educational uses
only. Send comments
and corrections to the Publisher, rbear at uoregon.edu.
In the "Introduction" by G.
H. Mair, I have made the following emendations
to the text:
p. vi, final line, I have emended "so" to "[to]";
p. xi, line 12, I have emended "Art" to "[Arte]";
p. xii, line 20, I have emended "Master.2'" to "Master.'2";
p. xv, line 9, I have emended "Rhetorike" to "[Rhetorique]"
Inconsistencies in placing terminal quotation marks before or after
punctuation in the text
of the "Introduction" remain as found.
In "A Prologue to the Reader," folio A.v., I have changed "wordly" to
"[worldly]"
In the first book of The Arte of Rhetorique, I have made
the following emendations:
p. 7, line 8, I have emended "confirmation" to "[C]onfirmation"
p. 7, line 9, I have emended "confutation" to "[C]onfutation"
p. 7, marginalia, n. 1, l. 5, I have emended "partes," to "partes[.]"
p. 9, marginalia, n. 4, l. 5, I have emended "speake" to "speake[.]"
p. 13, marginalia, n. 5, l. 3, I have emended "worthie," to "worthie[.]"
p. 78, line 39, I have emended "But" to "[b]ut"
In the second book of The Arte of Rhetorique, I have made
the following emendations:
p. 102, running head, I have emended "Rhetorique" to "Rhetorique."
p. 120, line 32, I have emended "Amplification ?" to "Amplification[?]"
p. 138, line 5, I have emended "bebauiour." to "be[h]auiour."
In the third book of The Arte of Rhetorique, I have made
the following emendations:
p. 162, line 17, I have emended "gentleman" to "gentlemen"
p. 188, line 18, I have emended "than" to "tha[t]"
p. 197, line 19, I have emended "young" to "young[-]"
p. 217, line 23, I have emended "liuely" to "liuely)"
p. 221, line 22, I have emended "man." to "man[]"
Throughout (with the exception of a few headings where font changes
would have to
change), words hyphenated at line ends and continued to the next line
have had the
parts joined as a single, unhyphenated word on the first line where a
portion of
the word appears; the hyphen appears in the source code.
In Wilson's text, I have omitted catchwords, have transcribed long "s"
as
modern "s", have included folio designations and running heads
and page numbers within the source code, although I have omitted
signature
designations and bolding and italicizing of the running heads.
Presently omitted from this
text are pp. 223-232: "A Table to finde out
such matter as is contained in this Booke." and pp. 233-236:
"Notes"
This edition copyright © 1998
The University of Oregon. For nonprofit
and educational uses only. Send comments and corrections to the Publisher
Tudor & Stuart
Library
Wilson's
Arte of Rhetorique 1560
Henry Frowde, M.A.
Publisher to the University of Oxford
London, Edinburgh, New York
Toronto and Melbourne
Wilson's
Arte of Rhetorique
1560
Edited by
G. H. MAIR
[colophon omitted]
At the Clarendon Press
MCMIX
Oxford
Printed at the Clarendon Press
By Horace Hart, M.A.
Printer to the University
Introduction.
IN 1560 there was imprinted
at London by John Kingston, 'and
now newlie sette forthe againe, with a prologue to the reader,' 'The
Arte of Rhetorique, for the use of all such as are studious of
eloquence, set forthe in Englishe, by Thomas Wilson.' This is not
the first edition. As is implied in the title the book had been
already issued; it had been published in 1553, beautifully printed in
black letter by Richard Grafton, the king's printer. For reasons
which will appear hereafter, the last year of Mary's reign had been
a stirring time for the author, and little leisure was left him for
literary tasks. But with the accession of Elizabeth security and
prosperity returned to him, and he set about preparing a new edition
of his successful textbook. Much was altered and much added; he
prefaced it by a new prologue of much personal interest. Towards
the end of the year the corrected and completed book was issued
from the press. It was reprinted in 1562, 1563, and 1567, and
indeed frequently down to about the year of the Great Armada, when
apparently, whether owing to the advent of newer textbooks or to
the changing taste of a more fastidious and sophisticated period we
cannot know, it fell out of demand and public esteem and gradually
ceased to be reprinted. The Arte of Rhetorique, then, was
in its day
a work of great popularity; it passed through numerous editions and
was eagerly read by two generations of seekers after eloquence and
literary skill, and then slipped gently back into the night, gathering
the dust of unused bookshelves. But a day arrives when the obsolete
becomes again alive and interesting. A modern finds little to
choose between the book that has been superseded and its successor;
he loves them both for their strangeness and for the picture which
they suggest to him of forgotten habits of thought. Antiquity gilds
dullness; stupidity becomes amiable in dead men. It is not, however,
the undiscriminating zeal of the antiquary or the mere delight
in quaintness for quaintness' sake that has
suggested the reprinting
of this book. It is in its way a landmark in the history of the
English Renaissance, and many passages in it are important and
indeed indispensable to the historian of English literature. This has
long been known; the book was styled by Warton 'The first
system of criticism in our language'; but so far to all but a few it
has been accessible only in extracts and these not representative.
There is so much that is of interest in the mass that is forgotten, so
much that explains and interprets many aspects of Elizabethan art,
as to make this reprint of some service perhaps to those who are
studying the period. The book appeared in an age of busy and
eager experiment when many conflicting fashions were struggling for
the mastery both in prose and in verse. Its author was no pedagogue
remote from the live issues of the time. He was a courtier and
a statesman as well as a writer and a scholar; on many of the
problems which emerged from the turmoil of literary effort he had
strong opinions, and the mark of them is left on his work. The
student of Tudor literature may find it worth his while to hear what
an alert and cultured contemporary has [to] say on these matters.
Thomas Wilson, the author
(dignified by many as Sir Thomas
Wilson, though he was never knighted) was born about the year
1525. He was a Lincolnshire man, the son of another Thomas
Wilson of Strubby in that county and Anne Cumberworth his wife.
He himself disclaims any pride in his native shire, and when
Lincoln folk are mentioned in his books it is generally for their
stupidity. He had all the Elizabethan's impatience of rusticity and
dullness, all the contempt which London and the court felt for the
country. 'It is better,' he says, 'to be borne in London then in
Lincolne. For that the aire is better, the people more ciuill, and the
wealth much greater and the men for the most part more wise'.1
Yet he owed much to the neighbours of his early home. One of
them, William Cecil, Lord Burghley, did much to promote Wilson
to the honourable state employment of his later years. There are
others who deserve no less mention -- Katherine Willoughby,
1
P. 13 inf.
Duchess of
Suffolk, with whom
his friendship was firm and lifelong
and about whom we shall hear presently; and Sir Edward Dymock,
who helped him both at the University and later, and at whose
house The Arte of Rhetorique was written during a holiday
visit.
Thomas Wilson was educated
first at Eton; in 1541 he became
a scholar of King's College, Cambridge. The time and the circumstances
were fortunate. During his residence there Sir John
Cheke was chosen provost, and Wilson was thus thrown into contact
with what was at once the most progressive and the most national
side of English Humanism. Through Cheke and Sir Thomas Smith
(himself a member of King's and afterwards his predecessor in the
Secretaryship of State) he gained the friendship of Roger Ascham;
through them, too, he became intimate with Walter Haddon,
another member of the coterie and the most distinguished Latinist of
his time. With him Wilson collaborated in his earliest book.
Before he left Cambridge he had become one of a school of men
who, by their scholarship and the individuality of their opinions, did
much to mould the course of the Renaissance in England on its
pedagogic side, and who had no inconsiderable influence on the
development of English prose. From them he learned the lesson of
simplicity and his horror of exaggerated Latinism. He fought side
by side with them in the crusade against inkhorn terms, and he bore
the brunt of the battle. For whereas Ascham confined himself to
the practice of teaching and the composition of dialogues which
contain precepts in style only by the way; whereas Haddon distilled
from his pen poetical effusions in the learned tongues and Cheke's
influence was exerted through personal contact only, Wilson set
himself in his textbooks on Logic and Rhetoric to provide sure
guidance for the aspiring student who was anxious to acquire what
the new learning had to give him. Through him the teaching of
Cheke and Ascham found its way to a wider circle of disciples than
either of these could command.
At Cambridge, Wilson formed
an attachment which remained
throughout his life his most precious recollection. We have seen
that in Lincolnshire he enjoyed the friendship and patronage of
Katherine Willoughby, Duchess of Suffolk. At
the University he
became the tutor of her two sons. Henry and Charles Brandon,
both counted Dukes of Suffolk because in their death one survived
the other by a few hours, made by the brilliancy and high promise of
their talents and the bitter tragedy of their early death a remarkable
impression on their contemporaries. The elder for a time was
a fellow-pupil with King Edward under Sir John Cheke; but both
during the larger part of their education were under Wilson's care.
It is easy to see how deep was his regard for them; he returns
to their praise again and again, and there is nothing of the conventional
eulogy which is the due of patronage in his tone. When
they died, of the sweating sickness, in 1551, he published along
with Walter Haddon a volume of memorial verses and two letters
by way of biography.1 In The Arte of Rhetorique
the examples 'Of
Commending a noble Personage', and 'Of Comfort',2 are both
tributes to their memory. He begins his commendation after the
manner of rhetoricians in vague phrases and high-sounding generali
ties. Gorgias, Heliogabalus, and Phaphorinus the
philosopher 'extolling
the feuer quartain', all have their place, but when he reaches the
matter in hand he forgets the precepts of the ancients and the
mannerisms of the schools. Of his own special pupil, the Duke
Charles, 'for the Greeke, the Latine and the Italian, I know he
could do more than would be thought true by my report. I leaue
to speake of his skill in pleasant instrumentes, neither will I utter
his aptnesse in Musicke, and his toward nature, to all exercises of the
bodie . . . if his brother were set aside there was not one that went
beyond him. A child that by his owne inclination, so much yeelded
to his ruler, that few by chastment haue done the like; pleasant of
speech, prompt of wit, stirring by nature, hault without hate, kind
without craft, liberall of heart, gentle in behauiour, forward in all
1 'Vita et obitus duorum fratrum Suffolciensium,
Henrici et Caroli Brandoni,
duabus epistolis [Gault. Haddoni et Tho. Wilsoni] explicata; adduntur
epitaphia
et acroamata in eosdem Graece et Latine conscripta, cum
Cantabrigiensium tum
Oxoniensium iugi commendatione et industria,' etc. Edente Tho. Wilsono.
London. in ed. Rich. Graftoni. 2
pp. 14, 66 inf.
things, greedie
of learning, and
Loth to take the foil in any assemblie.'
The second example, 'Of Comfort,' is addressed to their mother.
'When God lately visited this relme with the sweating disease and
received the two worthie gentlemen, Henrie, Duke of Suffolk and his
brother Lord Charles: I, seeing my Ladies Grace their mother taking
their death most greeuously, could not otherwise for the dutie whiche I
then did, and euer shall owe unto her, but comfort her in that her
heauiness, the whiche undoubtedly at that time much weakened her
bodie.' There is no mistaking the sincerity of his friendship. It is
pleasant to read his gratitude for her patronage who was 'by birthe
noble and witte great, of nature gentle and mercifull to the poore, and
to the Godlie and especially to the learned an earnest good patronesse,
and most helping ladie aboue all other'.
In the same year, 1551, which
saw his first appearance as an author
in the two epistles, Wilson published his first famous book, 'The Rule
of Reason, conteyning the Arte of Logike, sette forthe in Englishe
by Thomas Wilson.' In his dedication to King Edward he explains
the reasons which led to its writing and publication. Hitherto
students of logic have been obliged to have recourse to the ancient
tongues; his object is to provide a textbook 'in the vulgar tongue'.
'I take not upon me so cunningly and perfectlie to haue written of
the said arte, as though none could dooe it better; But because no
Englishman untill now, hath gone through with this enterprise, I haue
thought meet to declare that it may be dooen.' The book is based
on Aristotle and makes no pretence at originality. 'I doe herein
take vpon me no more,' he says, 'but to be as a poore meane
manne, or a simple persone, whose charge were to bee a Lodesman,
to conueigh some noble Princes, into a straunge lande.' The composition
of the book was apparently suggested by Richard Grafton,
the King's printer, who had already helped the author at Cambridge.1
1 'The Printer hereof your Maiesties seruaunt,
prouoked me first hereunto,
vnto whom I haue euer founde myselfe greately beholdyng, not only at my
being in Cambridge, but also at all tymes else when I most needed
helpe.' Rule
of Reason, Ep. Ded., ed. 1567.
Richard Grafton was the leading publisher of his time
and issued the First
Book of Common Prayer, Hall's Chronicles, and many other
notable works.
Despite his
fears that 'this
fruit being of a straunge kind (soche as
no Englishe ground hath before this tyme, and in this sorte by any
tillage brought forthe) maie perhaps in the firste tastyng, proue somewhat
rough and harsh in the mouthe, because of the straungenesse',
the book had a considerable vogue. It was republished with corrections
and additions in 1567,1 and frequently reprinted later. Immediately
after, encouraged by its success to continue his plan of
making the sciences accessible to the unlearned, Wilson published The
Arte of Rhetorique. It was dedicated to John
Dudley, Earl of
Warwick and Master of Horse, to whom he tells us its inception was
due. 'For whereas it pleased you, emong other talke of learning,
earnestlie to wishe, that ye might one daie see the preceptes of Rhetorike
sette forthe by me in Englishe, as I had erste
dooen the
rules of Logike: a hauyng in my countree this laste sommer, a
quiete
tyme of vacacion with Sir Edwarde Dymoke knighte: I trauailed so
muche as my leasure might serve thereunto.' The book was
published in 1553,2 and with its appearance his career as an
author
ceased for the time being, and he fell under the ban of religious
persecution. 'Hard shift," says Fuller,3 'he made to conceal
himself
in the reign of Queen Mary.' Eventually he was forced to quit the
country and fly over seas.
His subsequent career must be
told in less detail. Its importance
belongs to political and diplomatic rather than to literary history;
it is written in his dispatches at the Record Office, in State papers
and the like, and could not be adequately treated within the limits
which a preface imposes. In 1555 the fall of Northumberland
drove him abroad, and he travelled to Italy. In the same year we
find him with Sir John Cheke in Padua. Two years later he proceeded
1 The 1567 edition is interesting as containing a
passage cited from 'An
enterlude, made by Nicholas Udall'. This is Ralph Roister Doister,
the date of
which is fixed by the allusion.
2 The statement of one bibliographer (see D.
N. B.) that it was published at
the same time as The Rule of Reason, is undoubtedly
wrong. No such edition
exists; and the passage from the Dedication above quoted implies some
time
between the dates of writing.
3 Fuller's Worthies, ed.
1840, vol. ii., p. 277.
ceeded to
Rome, and in December,
1557, he became implicated in
an intrigue at the Papal Court against Cardinal Pole. In January
he was summoned by Philip and Mary to return to England and
appear before the Privy Council. There can be no doubt what was
the fate they had in store for him; Wilson apparently recognized
the meaning of the summons; he paid no heed and was arrested in
Rome by the Inquisition on a charge of heresy. His position was
one of the greatest danger, and only the fortunate accident of an
insurrection in the city prevented his death; apparently he had been
already put to the torture. The incident is described in a passage
of gravity and dignity in 'The Prologue to the Reader', which he
added to The [Arte] of Rhetorique in 1560.1
'Twoo yeres past, at my
beyng in Italie, I was charged in Roome toune, to my greate
daunger and vtter vndoyng (if God's goodnesse had not been the
greater) to haue written this booke of Rhetorike and the Logike
also, for the whiche I was compted an heretike, notwithstanding the
absolution granted vnto all the realme, by Pope Julie the thirde, for
all former offences or practises, deuised againste the holie mother
Churche, as they call it . . . God be my Iudge, I had then as little
feare (although death was present and the tormente at hande, whereof
I felte some smarte) as euer I had in all my life before. For,
when I sawe those who did seeke my death to be so maliciously
sette, to make soche poore shiftes, for my readier despatche and to
burden me with these back reckeninges: I tooke soche courage, and
was so bolde, that the Iudges did moche maruaile at my stoutnesse.'
The account is too long to quote in full; but it shows that the spirit
of Ridley and Latimer fired other men not less ardently though
martyrdom was only for a few. 'In the ende,' he says, 'by God's
grace I was wonderfully deliuered, through plaine force of the
worthie Romaines (an enterprise heretofore in that sorte neuer
attempted) being then without hope of life, and moche lesse of
libertie.' In 1559, before his return to England he was made an
LL.D. of Ferrara, an honour which he afterwards received from his
own university and from Oxford.
1
See infra.
From 1560 to the end of his
life, Wilson was employed in State
business. He was appointed Advocate of the Court of Arches and
Master of Requests; he enjoyed the patronage, like so many other
men of letters, of the Earl of Leicester, and he was employed with
increasing frequency on diplomatic missions. Amongst his other
posts he held that of Master of St. Catherine's Hospital in the Tower
of London; his conduct there seems to have aroused much controversy.
'Under Queen Elizabeth,' says Fuller,1 'he was made
master of the hospital of St. Catherine's nigh the Tower of London,
upon the same token that he took down the choir, which my author
saith (allow him a little hyperbole) was as great as the choir of
St. Paul's. I am loath to believe it done out of covetousness to gain
from the materials thereof, but would rather conceive it so run to
ruin that it was past repairing.' Fuller's 'author' was Stowe in
whose Survey of London the charge against Wilson is made.
Whatever
the motive which drew him into the task of house-breaking, he
was checked in his destructive career, and the ancient privileges of
the Hospital were apparently confirmed on the presentation of 'an
ernest address from the inhabitants to Secretary Cecyl, complaining
unto him against the said Master.'2 It is unlikely that
Stowe is
right in alleging his action to have been for the sake of personal
gain. Fuller's conjecture is the more charitable. The trial for
treason of the Duke of Norfolk in 15713 and the detention
and
examination of the prisoners (under torture) absorbed his attention
as a Tower official and he dates his letters 'from prison in the
Bloody tower'. In the following year he was sent along with Sir
Ralph Sadler 'to expostulate by way of accusation' with Mary,
Queen of Scots. Two years later he was ambassador to the Netherlands,
and in 1576 conducted the negotiations for the projected
marriage of Elizabeth with Anjou. On November 12, 1579, he
was sworn Secretary of State in place of Sir Thomas Smith.
1 Fuller, ibid.
2 Stowe, Survey of London,
vol. 1, p. 205.
3 State Trials, vol. 1., pp.
957, 1017. Trial of the Duke of Norfolk. Wilson
gave evidence at the trial.
Meanwhile, even under the
pressure of State business (and Elizabethan
officials were hardworked men) his pen was not idle. As early
as 1556 he and Cheke had formed the project of a translation of
Demosthenes into the English tongue. In 1570 there was published,
being dedicated on June 10 of that year to William Cecil, 'Three
Orations of Demosthenes, chiefe orator of the Grecians in fauour of
the Olynthians . . . with those his foure Orations against King Philip
of Macedonie; most nedeful to be redde in these daungerous dayes
of all them that loue their countries libertie and desire to take warning
for their better auayle.' Wilson is responsible for the whole of
this translation, which is said to attain a high level of scholarship.
As is made clear on the title page the work was intended to have
a political significance. Philip of Macedon for the Englishman
meant Philip of Spain, and the lesson was enforced by a comparison
of Athens and England in the preface. It is possible that the
Government through Cecil commissioned Wilson to do the work;
if so, he is the earliest of the long line of English authors who have
used their pens in the service of politics. To be set side by side
with Milton, Dryden, and Swift, to name only a few, is to be in
no bad company. In his last publication he turned to the field
of Economics. In 1572 he dedicated to Leicester 'a discourse on
Usurye, by waye of Dialogue and Oracions'. The dialogue takes
place between 'a rich worldly merchaunt, the godlie zealous Preacher,
the Temporall and ciuil Lawyer', who in turn make the orations. As
might be supposed the rich and worldly merchant is confuted and
the godly and zealous preacher triumphs. Usury is condemned, as
it had been by Aristotle and the Canonists, on moral grounds. In
doing so the author is expressing the opinion held by his own generation;
an Act of Parliament utterly forbidding the practice was passed
the year before his treatise was published; at the end of the century
Shakespeare in The Merchant of Venice takes the same
standpoint.
There is no wonder that the book was popular and much relished by
the Church. In a prefatory letter to the author which appeared in
the edition of 15841 the Bishop of Salisbury eulogizes the
work.
1
Quoted in the Gentleman's Magazine, 1835, p. 471.
'If I were a
usurer never so
greedily bent to spoil and rapine, us
sunt foineratores, yet would I think myself most unhappy if such
persuasion could not move me.' The usurer did not prove so tractable
as the good bishop imagined, and modern ears remain altogether
deaf to his appeal. These, with a Latin treatise which
perhaps was a translation of part of the preface to Demosthenes, are
all his published works. Antony Wood refers to 'other things
which I have not yet seen'.1 They have not come to the light
since his time.
Wilson became Secretary of
State, as we have seen, in 1579; he
did not live above two years to enjoy the office. While he held it,
he obtained a reputation for great ability and deep policy. Despite
his long connexion with the Leicester party, he seems to have done
his best to dissuade Elizabeth from identifying herself with it at the
expense of Sussex. 'His peculiar knack,' we are told, 'was a politic
and artificial nourishing of hopes.'2 'While he enjoyed the
office of
Secretary,' says Antony Wood, 'He became famous for three things
(1) For quick dispatch and industry, (2) for constant diligence, and
(3) for a large and strong memory.'3 His friendship and
influence
were much sought after,4 and had he lived, he might have
been
a guide and patron to the new generation of poets and writers. As
it was, he died while still in office in 1581, and his funeral was celebrated
on June 17 in St. Catherine's Church, East Smithfield. His
portrait may be seen in the National Portrait Gallery.
His career presents him as a
man closely in touch with the three
greatest forces in the England of his time -- the Renaissance, the
Reformation, and the revival of the State under the Tudors. The
last he served faithfully in many quarters. Whether we are to
believe or not the statement of a seventeenth-century biographer5
1 Antony Wood, Fasti Oxonienses, ed.
1721, p. 98.
2 Lloyd, Statesmen and Favourites
of England since the Reformation, 1665. Quoted
in Gentleman's Magazine, loc. cit.
3 Antony Wood, loc. cit.
4 Gabriel Harvey counts him as 'my
honourable fauourer'; he was one of the
numerous friends from whom Harvey hoped advancement.
5 Lloyd in Gentleman's Magazine,
ibid.
that his
parents designed him
for a life of letters and his own inclination
drove him into business, there can be no doubt as to his
capacity. Says Fuller, speaking of his secretaryship, 'It argues his
ability for the place because he was put into it; seeing in those
active times, under so judicious a queen, weakness might despair
to be employed in such an office.'1 There is no reason to
quarrel
with this terse and just verdict. There is no mistaking his zeal for
the Reformation. It shines through everything he wrote, and the
reader of the Logike and the [Rhetorique]
will have no cause to wonder
at the papal persecution of his works. No opportunity is lost of
driving a nail into the coffin of English catholicism. Examples will
be found on many pages of this book. The pre-Reformation period
is 'the doting world when stockes were saintes and dumme walls
spake'. He approves the marriage of priests and monks. 'And
I thinke the Bishops officers would have procured this matter long
agoe, if they had not found greater gaines by Priestes Lemmans then
they were like to haue by priestes wiues.' The Rule of Reason
is one
long Protestant tract in which the doctrines of Geneva are enforced
by the apparatus of mediaeval logic. But though he loved Latimer
as 'the father of all preachers' he was not blind to abuses in his
own Church. 'Doe ye not see, how euery one catcheth and pulleth
from the Church, what thei can? I feare me one day, they wil
pluck doune Church and all. Call you this the Gospell, when men
seeke onely to prouide for their bellies, and care not a groate
whether their soules go to Hell? A patrone of a benefice, will have
a poore ymgrame soule, to beare the name of a Parson, for twentie
marke or ten pound: and the patron himselfe, wil take up for his
snapshare, as good as a hundred marke. Thus God is robbed,
learning decaied, England dishonoured, and honestie not regarded.'2
His part in the English
Renaissance and the importance in it of The Arte of Rhetorique
must now be treated at more
length.
1
Fuller, ibid. 2 P. 36.
II
The Renaissance did not come
to pass in a night. The forms of
teaching and schemes of knowledge which we associate with the
Middle Ages subsisted for long side by side with the new learning.
It is the mediaeval division of arts and sciences which we find in
Wilson's work. When he says in his preface to the Arte of Logike,
that 'divers learned menne, of other countries, have heretofore, for
furtheraunce of knowledge, not suffered any of the sciences liberals,
to be hidden in the Greke or Latine tongue, but haue with most
earnest trauaile, made every of them familiare to their Vulgar
people', the liberal sciences he is thinking of are no other than the
famous seven of mediaeval pedagogy. Later on in the book, he
runs them into a rude kind of rime for the benefit of the learner.
Grammer
doeth teach to utter wordes:
To speake both apt and plaine.
Logike by Arte, settes forthe the truthe,
And doeth tell what is vaine.
Rhetorike at large paintes well the cause,
And makes that seem right gaie
Which Logike spake but at a word
And taught us by the waie.
Musike with tunes, delites the eare:
And makes us thinke it heauen.
Arithmetike by nomres can make
Reckenynges to be euen.
Geometrie thynges thicke and broade,
Measures by line and square:
Astronomie by starres doeth tell;
Of foule and eke of faire.
All that the new zeal for
learning worked for in the first instance,
and all that Wilson pretended to do, was to make these accessible
in the vernacular. Along with this went the breaking up of the
older cyclopaedic system and the beginning of separate textbooks
for each subject.
This is, however, only half
the truth of the matter. Though
the historian must needs deny the cleavage
once imagined between
the old and the new, the theory of a kind of tropical dawn, a sudden
passage from light to darkness, he must admit that the change of
outlook and purpose of life which we call the Renaissance, though it
was gradual, was none the less complete. It meant a new beginning
for the artist and the author as well as for the theologian, the
adventurer, and the statesman. In the Middle Ages the groundwork
of thought and letters was logic. It extended to every department
of culture. Works of piety and the poetry of love, to take
two of the largest and simplest kinds of writing, were founded on a
logical attitude towards things. In the schools it was supreme; the
trivium was threefold only in name; dialectic overshadowed both
rhetoric and grammar. With the Renaissance, however, a complete
revolution took place. Logic gradually went under, and rhetoric,
reinforced by the reading of authors, took the highest place in the
curriculum. What happened in education happened also in literature.
The reading of the ancients awakened a new delight in the melody
of language: men became intoxicated with the beauty of words.
The practice and study of rhetoric was quickly universal and coloured
all literature. The new drama, with its preference for declamatory
speeches over dialogue; the new prose, with its fantasy and its
exuberance of figure; the new poetry, with its mythological allusiveness
and its sensuousness of imagery, all owe their origin to the fashion
of rhetoric. 'Unless the school and university training in rhetoric
are borne in mind, an important factor in accounting for the wealth
of imagery and expression in the English literature of the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries is overlooked.'1 Tamburlaine
and Lucrece, Arcadia and Euphues,
a host of
sonneteers -- all come to the mind.
It is no mere accident that Wilson's long translation of Erasmus's
epistle to persuade a young gentleman to marriage reminds one of
the first part of Shakespeare's sonnets. The same literary impulse
dictated both. The order of his two treatises and the greater
popularity of the Rhetorique represent a fact in the
development of
literature and thought.
1
Prof. Foster Watson, The English Grammar Schools to 1660.
This is hardly the place in
which to attempt a detailed history of
the study of rhetoric in England,1 but some of the most
prominent
books and writers may be briefly noticed. Of course a large part of
the study of rhetoric was carried on directly from the ancient
writers; notably Cicero whom Ascham praised and held superior to all
others of learning rhetoric, and Quintilian, the idol of the teachers
of
that time. But the use of modern works was more usual. There
were two books in the vulgar tongue before Wilson's: Cox's Arte
or
Crafte of Rhetorique and Sherry's Treatise of the figures
of Grammar and
Rhetoric, profitable for all that be studious of eloquence. They
were both
schoolbooks, pure and simple. Wilson does not seem to have known
them; at any rate, in writing his treatise in English, he professes an
innovation. Later Abraham Fraunce, author of several books for
lawyers, published his Arcadian Rhetoric (1588), designed
to show
the beauties of Sir Philip Sidney's Arcadia, and Richard
Mulcaster
combined Grammar and Rhetoric in one of the most popular
treatises of the day. This combination was one of the most
fortunate features in Tudor Education. Grammar was studied
in the sixteenth century more broadly than it has been, perhaps,
before or since. Both Ascham in his Scholemaster and
Elyot in his Grammar minimize the importance of the
formalities
of grammatical
study. 'Back to Quintilian,' the great ideal for which the
Renaissance educationalists worked, means nothing so much as this,
that grammar could not be studied independently of literature. The
growth of rhetorical teaching went steadily on and for the seventeenth
century we have more information. Brinsley's Ludus Litterarius,
or Grammar schoole (1612), and Hoole's New
discovery of the old
art of teaching schoole (1659), give many interesting
particulars.
We learn the way rhetoric was taught; how the pupils kept a book
with the headings of invention under which they entered subjects for
exercise. We learn, too, much regarding the textbooks generally
1 The thing has in some degree been done by
Professor Foster Watson's recent
book, The English Grammar Schools to 1660. Most of the
above was written before
I had an opportunity of reading it, but I have ventured to add one or
two points
from it which had escaped my own reading.
used in
schools, none of which
were in English. The most popular
(it was greatly admired by Gabriel Harvey) appears to have been
that of a Frenchman of the name of Talon who latinized himself as
Talaeus. 'For answering the questions of Rhetorike,' says Brinsley
in one place, 'you may if you please, make them perfect in Talaeus' Rhetorike,
which I take to be most used in
schools.' He was run
hard by English competitors, the chief of whom was Charles Butler,
a member of Magdalen College, who published his Rhetoricæ Libri
Duo
in 1598. In a later edition he quotes by way of preface the eulogy
bestowed upon him by Brinsley, 'Instead of Talaeus you may use
Master Butler's Rhetorike, of Magdalens in
Oxford, being a notable
abridgement of Talaeus; making it most plaine and farre more easie
to bee learned of scholers: and also supplying many things wanting
in Talaeus . . . it is not of much greater price though the worth be
double.' Brinsley commends it further for its treatment of the
figures belonging to poetry, and for its rules as to metre. One
other famous book on Rhetoric deserves notice. This is Thomas
Farnaby's Index Rhetoricus, a small but exceedingly
well-constructed
book. Like Wilson, its author had an adventurous career, for he
began life as a postmaster at Merton College, and after sailing with
Drake and Raleigh to the Main, and serving as a soldier in the Low
Countries, settled down to his profession as an usher in a Devonshire
school. Three years after he had commenced teaching, he was headmaster
of a large school of his own in London, with three hundred
pupils and an educational system which was famous all over Europe.
His Index he dedicated to a senator of Venice; it had a
continental
as well as an English reputation. Of the others, and they are legion,
there is no space here to deal at length and there is little profit and
much tedium in a mere catalogue. Many will be found treated in
Warton's History of Poetry, which is, much more than its
name
implies, a history of all branches of literature, and which is
particularly well informed on this period.
All these textbooks owe their
system and their terminology
to the ancient writers. Wilson is no exception to the rule. His
book is a judicious compilation from Quintilian as far as the first two
books are concerned, while the third owes
almost as much to Cicero.
Yet the charge of plagiarism would be an idle one to prefer. The
Elizabethans had none of our modern squeamishness about literary
copyright, as the whole result of the study into Shakespeare's sources
sadly witnesses. The words of the Player king in Hamlet.
Our thoughts are ours,
their ends none of our own,
sum up the author's point of
view. And in writing on such a subject
as Rhetoric there is a double excuse, for a science must have a
received terminology, and it lies not with every new artist to invent
new names for his colours or the processes that he uses. The terms
and divisions of Quintilian were common property among his
Renaissance imitators, and with this caveat we can turn to The
Arte
of Rhetorique without the danger of unjust censure.
The first book treats of
certain preliminaries, such as what is
an orator, what is rhetoric, with what subjects it deals and what is
its
end. Three things are required of an orator: that he should teach,
that he should delight, and that he should persuade. The lessons of
plainness, order, and directness are duly enforced, without which it
is impossible either to delight or win over. The means by which
Eloquence is attained leads the author to point out that the knowledge
of the art is of no avail without practice, which came before
theory was invented; for 'Rhetorique was first made by wisemen,
and not wisemen by rhetorique'. Besides practice, five general
qualities are necessary for the perfect orator, Invention, Disposition,
Elocution, Memory, and Utterance. The first of these is now
systematically treated; and so a detailed account of the different
causes and the 'places' which confirm them completes the first book.
The bulk of it, and the part which is of most interest to readers,
is made up of the numerous examples which the author gives to
enforce his instruction. Many varied kinds of oration are provided
for the study of the pupil. Some of these are translated, but the bulk
are from the author's own hand. Those on comfort we have already
seen. The translation of Erasmus's epistle persuading a friend
to marriage, and the example of praising King David for killing
Goliath are perhaps the best of the statelier sort. Some of the
judicial speeches, particularly that on p. 92,
to prove by conjectures
the knowledge of a notable and heinous offence, committed by a Souldier,
when he forgets the solemnity of the occasion and begins to tell his
story, are not without a kind of merit, though they show an entire
ignorance of the rules of evidence. As a whole, however, the examples
are of no great worth, as even the writer of an essay in praise
of the book is bound to confess. His precept is unimpeachable,
but plainness and directness, at once the most sought after and
the most elusive of all literary qualities, are not so easily come by
in
practice, and cannot be had save by much striving. Moderns when
they essay to write on the subject generally take their examples from
authors of standing. We may admire Wilson for his courage in
taking the bolder course of original composition, but we cannot help
questioning his discretion.
The second book deals with
Disposition, and in it the author gets
to much closer grips with his subject. His method is to take each
different part of an oration and discuss the various ways in which it
may be treated. He begins with the Entrance, which may be
treated in two ways, either the orator may plainly set forth what
he is going to say and so win straight to the matter on hand or else
he may proceed by insinuation, gaining his hearers' attention by
some tale or by some strange thing, 'that they all may quake at the
onely hearing of the same'. His examples are aptest for pleading at
the bar, but many will serve for the clergy also, of whose preaching
he has a poor opinion; for often, he says 'they beginne as much
from the matter as it is betwixt Dover and Barwicke, whereat some
take pitie and many for wearinesse can scant abide their beginning,
it is so long or they speake anything to the purpose'. Next comes
Narration which should be brief, plain, and probable, and then
Division which should declare the points at issue between the orator
and his adversary. The Confirmation in which he must prove
his point and the Conclusion in which he should sum all up for
the benefit of the hearers complete the scheme. There follows
a discussion of the figure Amplification, that is a storing of
sentences
and examples which shall help to win favour or move affections.
Under this head we get Wilson's treatment of
Mirth and Laughter
and the best means by which these may be used by the rhetorician.
Elocution, Memory, and Utterance are dealt with in the third
and last book. Of these the first consists in an account of the
Figures or Tropes, largely based on Cicero, each furnished with
examples, mainly from the classical writers. The sections on Memory
and Utterance, as they are the last, are also the best part of the
book. In them he is less bound by his models; his hand is freer and
has gained in expertness; the clumsiness of style which tries the
reader's patience in the earlier parts is absent, because his subject
holds him more imperiously than before. They may be commended
to those who wish to see Wilson at his best. It is not great prose,
but it is vigorous, living, and unaffected, and it comes nearer to
fulfilling the precepts of its author than anything else in the Arte
of
Rhetorique.
The formalities of Rhetoric
are no more cheerful reading in
Wilson than in any other author who treats of the subject.
Fortunately the space at his disposal allowed him much opportunity
for wandering a little from the matter at hand and giving his verdict
on
men and things. Many of his friends are mentioned or alluded
to in his pages. A reference to Latimer we have already seen;
Walter Haddon is the best 'Latine man' in England. Sir John
Cheke's arrival at Cambridge from the court to take up the provostship
of King's College gives occasion for one of the best anecdotes in
the book (p. 164). The proverbs of Heywood, 'whose paines
in that behalf are worthy immortal praise,' are mentioned with
eulogy more than once. Ascham is not named, but we learn that
'bowes are not esteemed as they haue beene among vs Englishmen,
but if we were once well beaten by our enemies, we should soone
know the want, and with feeling the smart, lament much our folly',
and it is plain enough where he learned these doctrines. Passing
from his personal references to his opinions and prejudices, the
reader is most struck, perhaps, by the Protestant zeal which we have
already noticed and which shines through every page of the book.
But the statesman is there as well as the reformer. The direction
and reorganization of industry which ended
in the Statute of
Apprentices and the proceedings in check of vagrancy are both
treated of under the head of Justice or True Dealing. 'Thankes
be to God, wee hang them apace, that offend a lawe, and therefore,
wee put it to their choyce, whether they wilbe idle, and so fall
to stealing or no? they knowe their reward, goe to it when they wil.
But if therewithal some good order were taken for the education of
youth, and setting loyterers on worke (as thanks be to God, the
Citie is most godlie bent that way) all would sone be well, without
all doubt.' The inclosure of the Common Lands finds in Wilson
a strong supporter. 'Commons or Equalitie,' he says, 'is when the
people by long time have a ground . . . the whiche some of them will
keepe still for custome sake, and not suffer it to be fenced, and so
turned to pasture, though they might gain ten times the value: but
such stubburnesse in keeping of commons for custome sake, is
not standing with justice, bicause it is holden against all right.' To
comment, however, on the idiosyncrasies and tastes which he
displays to his reader is a work of too great magnitude to be
attempted here; the curious will find material enough on almost
every page.
Besides these the book is
enlivened with many anecdotes. They
serve one of two purposes; either they are meant to enforce a point
or enliven the tedium of his discourse, or else they are given as
samples
of the kind of entertainment an orator should interpose to lighten
the effect of the weightier message he has to tell. Some of them
are of historical or personal interest, such as that of the Spaniard
who
watched the burning of a heretic at Smithfield (p. 138), or that of
the rebel priest in Norfolk, or the story of the Cambridge lecturer
who would not face his audience; others are of the perennial sort
which pass from age to age, and from country to country, which find
no difficulty in achieving a local habitation and a name in all
climates,
and are not abashed or estranged by any kind of company. The
story of the sentry and the abbot, for instance, appears from time
to time even in our own day in newspapers; many others are under
the same category. The author's treatment of his stories is not always
free from carelessness of a disconcerting
kind. He sometimes begins
a tale and fails to finish it. In this way perishes the story of the
archdeacon and the young man, which began with much promise;
the archdeacon had inveighed in the tone of Sir Andrew Aguecheek
against the multitude of heretic and vain preachers: 'You say euen
troth (quoth the yong man) and so went forth: but to tell all, I had
neede to haue time of another world, or at least to haue breath of
another bodie.' Sometimes he begins a tale for edification and
then his baser nature carries him away and the matter becomes one
of scurrility and jest. So the story of the poor hermit, perhaps the
best in the book, abruptly passes from a denunciation of the carnal
living of the Religious to a frank enjoyment of the favourite subject
of Elizabethan humour in which the laughter is all on the side of the
hermit. Wilson is catholic in the extreme as regards his sources.
For 'moving sport by old tales' he recommends the stories of
King Arthur and the Round Table, 'the which,' in the opinion of his
friend Ascham, 'are nothing else than open manslaughter and bold
bawdrie.' The bulk of his anecdotes, however, deal with the
ancients, and particularly with Diogenes and Cicero. These he took
bodily from a contemporary collection -- The Apophthegmes of
Erasmus
-- translated into English by his friend Nicholas Udall and first
published in the year 1542. Udall designed his work to be for
'the most pleasant and the same most honeste, profitable and
holsome readyng of all maner men, and especially of nobel men',
and to this purpose Wilson borrowed the portions he used in The
Arte of Rhetorique. There can be no doubt as
to the identity
of the source; most of the classical stories can be traced to this
book. Sometimes Wilson fills up his page by taking two together
as they follow one another in Udall's work, as for instance, the two
Cicero stories on p. 156, in the first of which he writes Vibius
Curius, where the original had Iubius Curtius, a fact which indicates
that his method was both hurried and unscrupulous. But these
stories, carelessly chosen and thrown in by haphazard as they are,
point to the future supremacy of the lives of the Greeks and Romans
as moral teachers to the modern world. Plutarch had not yet been
translated and students had to be content with
the casual and
secondhand information they gleaned from Erasmus. With the
coming of Amyot and North began that intelligent and anxious
study of the lives of the ancients from the most beautiful and
dignified account of them that the world possesses, which was to
have such momentous consequences in the next age, and was
destined to lead Europe a far cry from the path of social and
political advance which the sixteenth century trod.
The philologist will find
little to interest him in this book;
unlike Mulcaster, Wilson touches not at all the study of language.
He does preserve a number of old and obsolete words -- 'snapshare,'
'yngrame,' 'haultie,' 'nesh,' are a few -- but his instinct
was to distrust any word not in daily use, and he hated archaism as
much as he did the inkhorn term. The student of style on the other
hand will find him an instructive example of a certain stage in the
development of English prose. The intention is plain enough; he
desired to write as men spoke; to use no words and no constructions
not already familiar to all his readers. Yet he utterly failed to
carry this out in practice. There is a clumsiness and ineffectiveness
of syntax which makes the expression of any abstract idea impossible
or at best halting; it shows itself most prominently in his constant
use of participial nouns, particularly in his definitions. Insinuation
is 'a priuie twining or close creeping in'; a conclusion is 'the
handsomely lapping vp together, and brief heaping of all that which
was said before, stirring the hearers by large vtteraunce, and
plentiful
gathering of good matter, either the one way or the other'. It is
easy enough to see that prose as an instrument of instruction or
a means of expressing ideas is in its infancy here. The later
Elizabethans found that Latinism was a safer road than that which
Wilson and his fellows in their poverty trod, and the ideals of Cheke
had to wait for their acceptance and their success till the days of
Dryden. Yet Wilson was not free from extravagances of a kind
incident to the practice of his art, and these are worth looking into
as a possible clue to the origin of the most popular type of English
prose in the generation which followed him. The historians tell us
that Euphuism is older than Euphues, but they
have failed to notice
that the English study of rhetoric provides a much better indication
of its origin than do the imagined influences of Italy and Spain.
It is very easy to exaggerate the cosmopolitanism of literary effort;
and an English source for this affectation is in the nature of things
more likely than a foreign. Now, the recipe, so to speak, of
Euphuism is to be found in The Arte of Rhetorique. By
this is not
meant that we claim that Wilson's book taught Lyly his secret;
only that it was through the fashionable study of rhetoric in the
literary coteries of the time that this manner of writing was evolved.
Examples of what is meant abound in this book. One or two
characteristics may be noted here. In the first place, one of the
most prominent features of Lyly's style was its adornment with
metaphors drawn from natural history of a legendary kind; this is
recommended by Wilson when he talks of the use of similitudes: --
'Oftentimes brute beasts and thinges which haue no life, minister
great matter in this behalf. Therefore those that delite to prove
thinges by similitudes, must learn to knowe the nature of diuers
beastes, of metailles, of stones, and all such as haue any vertue in
them, and be applied to man's life.' Passages such as the following
occur many times, and they all have the ring of Euphues about
them. 'For if felicitie should stand by length of time, some tree
were more happie than any man, for it liueth longer, and so likewise
brute beastes, as the Stagges, who liueth (as Plinie doth say)
two
hundred years and more.' Here is both the natural history and the
ascription of the fact to the ancients, a favourite method with the
Euphuists. But other characteristics are also to be found in these
pages. The full-mouthed rhetoric of the later writer finds an
anticipatory echo, so to speak, in such a passage as this: -- 'For if
they
that walke much in the sunne, and thinke not of it, are yet for the
most part sunne burnt, it can not but be that they which wittingly
and willingly trauail to counterfect other, must needes take some
colour of them and be like unto them in some one thing or other,
according to the prouerbe, by companying with the wise, a man shal
learn wisdome:' or in a translation such as that which Wilson
gives on p. 186, of Tully's invective
against Verres, a passage which
shows that a large part of the Euphuistic manner was derived from
the imitation of Cicero practised by the teachers and students of
rhetoric in the schools. The connexion of Wilson with the Literature
of the reign of Elizabeth must now (as he would say) be set
forth more at large.
III
We talk too loosely when we
extend the patronage of Elizabeth
forward and backward outside the limits of her actual reign.
Though Wilson served the queen faithfully as an ambassador and
counsellor for twenty most eventful years of peril and stress, he cannot
with any justice be termed an Elizabethan. The word fits best the
high sense of glory and achievement which sprang upon the nation
after the destruction of Spain and lasted till the inexplicable
apparition
of unsought melancholy which saddened the reign of James. Wilson
died while the issue of the fight was still undecided; in truth he
belongs to an elder and graver age. His companions were no
splendid courtiers nor daring and hardy adventurers; still less were
they swashbucklers, exquisites or literary dandies. He was one of a
band of grave and dignified scholars, men preoccupied with morality
and citizenship as well as with the lighter problems of learning and
style. They fought for sound education, for good classical scholarship,
for the purity of written English, and behind all these for the
strength and worth of the native English character which they felt
was menaced by the reckless orgy of assimilation which seized young
England face to face with the allurements which reached it from
abroad. It was not difficult to discern from which quarter the
danger came. Its eminence as the fount and origin of the revived
learning had led English scholars to Italy early in the sixteenth
century, and the path was worn hard with the steady stream of their
feet for over a hundred years after. This could not be without its
influence on the manners of the nation, and indeed the fears of the
prophets of evil did not prove groundless.
There followed in the
train of the men of learning the men of fashion, eager to con and
copy the new manners of a society whose moral teacher was
Machiavelli, whose patterns of splendour were the courts of Florence
and Ferrara. The effect on England was not long in showing itself,
and it lasted for more than two generations. Coryat, writing well
within the seventeenth century, is as enthusiastic as the authors who
began the imitation of Italian metres, in Tottel's Miscellany;
the rod
of censure is wielded as sternly in the satires of Donne and Hall as
it had been by Ascham fifty years before. The danger feared was
a real one no doubt, yet the evil was not unmixed with good, for
insularity will always be a foe to good literature. The Elizabethans
learned much more than their plots from their Italian models.
Improvements in dress, in the comforts of life and in the amenities
of society all came this way, nor were the worst effects dreaded by
the patriots ever planted on our shores. Italian vice stopped short
of real life; poisoning and hired ruffianism flourished in the theatre
merely. All this, however, is later than our author's period. He and
his companions only foresaw the danger ahead; they laboured to
meet it as it came. The brunt of the contest was borne by Ascham;
in the Scholemaster (the passage is too trite to make
quotation
possible) he inveighs against the translation of Italian books and the
corrupt manners in living and the false judgement in doctrine which
they breed. Wilson, perhaps because he knew his Italy better,
perhaps with some memory of the service done him by the citizens
of Rome in his time of peril, is much less outspoken than his fellows.
The Italianate Englishman, instead of being specially singled out for
damnation, finds himself classed with all who have come out of
foreign parts. 'Some farre iourneyed gentleman at their returne
home, like as they loue to goe in forraine apparell, so wil thei
ponder their talke with ouersea language. He that commeth lately
out of Fraunce, will talke Frensh English and neuer blush at the
matter. An other chops in with English Italienated, and applieth
the Italian phrase to our English speaking, the which is, as if an
Oratour that professeth to vtter his mind in plaine Latine, would
needes speake Poetrie, and farre fetched
colours of straunge antiquitie.'
It is plainly only the man of letters who speaks here.
But if he was a laggard in
the matter of the Italianate Englishman,
in the battle of style and language he fought in the van. In
estimating the influence of his book it must be observed that whatever
he and his party achieved of practical result was probably due
to his efforts. The Arte of Rhetorique not only treated
the matter
much more systematically, but it reached a much wider public than
Cheke or Haddon or Ascham commanded. The attack was delivered
at three points. It was directed against undue Latinism,
against archaism, and against affectations borrowed from foreign
tongues. The last need not detain us; his attitude towards it
has already been noticed. But the question of 'inkhorn terms'
requires larger treatment. The word seems to have been first used
about the year 1543, and it speedily became popular as a nickname
for this vice in writing. The leader of this movement against
Latinism was Sir John Cheke, and his attitude need cause no surprise.
That the leading scholar of his day should be the chief opponent
of the triumph of the classics as a source of English vocabulary is
no more inexplicable a paradox than that which is presented by
the literary history of a century and a half later when Bentley
championed the cause of modern literature in the battle of the
books. Both fought against men of far less scholarship than themselves,
and Cheke, at any rate, knew and loved his own literature
and had its welfare deeply at heart. In the introductory letter to
Thomas Hoby, which he wrote as preface to the latter's translation of
Castiglione's Courtier, he gives a plain statement of his
case. 'I am
of this opinion that our own tung shold be written cleane and pure,
vnmixt and vnmangeled with borowing of other tunges, wherein
if we take not heed by tijm, ever borowing and neuer payeng,
she shal be fain to kep her house as bankrupt. For then doth our
tung naturallie and praisable vtter her meaning, when she boroweth
no counterfeitness of other tunges to attire herself withall, but
vseth plainlie her owne, with such shift, as nature, craft, experiens
and folowing of other excellent doth lead her vnto, and if she want
by any tijm (as being imperfight she must) yet
let her borow with
suche bashfulness, that it mai appear, that if either the mould of our
own tung could serve us to fascion a woord of our own, or if the old
denisoned words could content and ease this neede, we wold not
boldly venture of vnknown wordes.'
Wilson entered on the
campaign with vigour. 'I know them
that thinke Rhetorique standeth wholie vpon darke wordes, and
hee that can catch an inkhorne terme by the taile, him they coumpt
to be a fine Englisheman, and a good Rhetorician.' He inveighs
against the unlearned or foolish fantasticall, 'soch fellowes as haue
seen learned men in their daies,' who so Latin their tongue that the
simple think they speake by some revelation, and he gives as an
example his famous letter 'deuised by a Lincolnshire man, for
a voyde benefice'. -- 'Such a letter that William Sommer himselfe,
could not make a better for that purpose.' In his translation
of Demosthenes ten years later, he returns to the subject. 'I had
rather follow his veyne (he is speaking of Demosthenes) the which
was to speake simply and plainly to the common people's vnderstanding,
than to overflouryshe with superfluous speach, although
I might thereby be counted equall with the best that euer wrate
Englysh.' His model in writing was such a style as Latimer's, that
is to say, the pure speech of the common people. He was too wise
not to see that the avoidance of classicisms might be pushed to
extremes. 'Now whereas wordes be receiued as well from Greeke
as Latine, to set forth our meaning in the English tongue, either for
lack of store, or els because we would enrich the language; it
is well doen to use them, and no man therein can be charged
for any affectation, when all other are agreed to followe the same
waie. There is no man agreeued when he heareth (Letters Patents)
and yet patent is Latine, and signifieth open to all men.' There
can be no doubt as to the sanity and justice of his attitude and
doubtless many good Saxon words were saved in the crusade which
would otherwise have been lost, for their nature makes them
difficult to recover if once they fall out of use. But there were not
wanting strong opponents to Wilson and Cheke. George Pettie,
one of a number of writers who made their
bread out of the detested
style of composition, boldly championed the cause of Latinism
and ornament. 'It is not unknown to all men,' he says, 'how
many words we have fetcht from hence within these few yeeres,
whiche if they should all be counted inkpot tearmes, I know not how
we shall speake anie thing without blacking our mouthes with inke.'
There is reason in the criticism; Cheke and his followers did go too
far, while safety, in this case as in most, lay in the mean. Yet their
efforts were not without fruit, for the worst excesses never took a
strong grip of English prose; that it was saved is not so much due
to their precepts as critics as to their work as translators.
The shafts which Wilson
directs against archaism are no less keen
though their effect was less. He puts his arguments into the mouth
of an ancient philosopher.
'Phauorinus the
Philosopher (as Gellius telleth the tale) did hit
a yong man ouer the Thumbes very handsomely, for vsing ouer
old, and ouer straunge wordes. Sirha (quoth he) when our olde
great auncesters and Graundsires were aliue, they spake plainly in
their mothers tongue, and vsed olde language, such as was spoken
then at the building of Roome. But you talke me such a Latine, as
though you spake with them euen now, that were two or three
thousand yeres agoe, and onely because you would haue no man to
vnderstand what you say. Now, were it not better for thee
a thousande fold, (thou foolish fellowe) in seeking to haue thy
desire, to holde thy peace, and speake nothing at all? For then
by that meanes, fewe should knowe what were thy meaning. But
thou saiest, the olde antiquitie doth like thee best, because it is
good, sober, and modest. Ah, liue man, as they did before thee,
and speake thy mind as men doe at this day.'
Now, the return to Chaucer is by
far the most striking feature of the
revival of English letters. We are accustomed to hear from the
historians of the introduction and imitation of Italian metres by the
authors of Tottel's Miscellany, but in reality their
indebtedness to
the older English poets is far more obvious and much better worth
noting. It is not merely the direct references to Chaucer nor the
acknowledged quotations from his work. The whole spirit of the
verse both of Surrey and Wyatt is caught from him. The opening
lines of the first poem in the volume,
written by Surrey, are pure
Chaucer: --
The sonne hath
twise brought furth his tender grene,
And clad the earth in lustie loueliness.
In the second we get the 'soote
season' and all the Chaucerian
language of spring. Wyatt is no less firm in his allegiance. There
is no mistaking the source of the rhythm of such a passage as
this: --
He knoweth, how
grete Atride that made Troy freat,
And Hanniball, to Rome so troubelous:
Whom Homer honored, Achilles that great,
And Thaffricane Scipion the famous:
And many other, by much nurture glorious:
Whose fame and honor did bring them aboue:
I did let fall in base dishonest loue.
The minor authors who
contributed to the collection fell also under
the spell.
Full faire and
white she is and White by name:
There is no need to multiply
instances. As Wilson scornfully says,
'The fine courtier wil talke nothing but Chaucer,' and the fine
courtier was to be the saving of English verse. Wilson and his
companions, in attacking Latinisms and language borrowed from the
older poets, were attacking the two most precious sources of the
Elizabethan poets' vocabulary. All the sonorousness, dignity, and
beauty of Spenser and the dramatists would have been lost had they
succeeded in their object, and English poetry would have been
starved into the warped and ugly forms of Sternhold and Tusser.
We cannot, then, regret that their efforts failed, as they did. For
all their learning and high morality, they were not fit teachers;
their moral preoccupations made it impossible that they should be
so. Their ideal reappeared and was fulfilled late in the seventeenth
century when fantasy and imagery had worn themselves out and the
greater richness of the language made simplicity possible and
adequate for poetic speech.
There remains a matter of
special interest. From time to time
there have been critics who suggested that traces of the reading of The
Arte of Rhetorique might be found in
Shakespeare. Nathan
Drake, a student of Shakespeare whose wide knowledge of minor
Elizabethan literature should have saved him from the neglect into
which he has fallen, suggested that the character of Dogberry might
be derived from Wilson. 'An other good fellowe of the countrey
being an Officer and Maior of a toune, and desirous to speake like
a fine learned man, hauing just occasion to rebuke a runnegate
fellowe, said after this wise in a great heate. Thou yngrame an
vacation knaue, if I take thee anymore within the circumcision of
my dampnation: I will so corrupt thee, that all other vacation knaues
shall take illsample by thee.' There is sufficient similarity to
warrant
the suggestion, but much more certain evidence of Shakespeare's
reading of Wilson is to be found; it lies, as might be expected, in Love's
Labour's Lost. There can be no doubt from
this play that
Shakespeare had read some Rhetoric, that he found it tedious and
dull and fit matter only for ridicule and laughter. It is the formal
rhetoric which he satirizes; its schemes and its technical terms.
'I will look again on the intellect of the letter,' says Holofernes,
'for the nomination of the party writing to the person written
unto.' The word here is Wilson's Intellection, which is 'a trope,
when we gather or iudge the whole by the part, or part by the whole'.
But Holofernes was not the only student of The Arte of Rhetorique
in
the company gathered in Navarre. Don Armado culled some of
the splendour of his speech from this source. His letter to Jaquenetta
is modelled on one of Wilson's examples. He is writing of King
Cophetua: --
'He it was
that might rightly say Veni, vidi, vici; which to
annothanize in the vulgar, -- O base and obscure vulgar! -- videlicet,
He came, saw, and overcame: he came, one; saw, two; overcame,
three. Who came? the king: why did he come? to see: why did
he see? to overcome: to whom came he? to the beggar: what
saw he? the beggar: who overcame he? the beggar. The
conclusion is victory: on whose side? the king's. The captive is
enriched: on whose side? the beggar's. The catastrophe is a nuptial:
on whose side? the king's: no, on both in
one, or one in both.
I am the king; for so stands the comparison: thou the beggar: for
so witnesseth thy lowliness.'
All this follows the
questions appended to the Example of commending
King David given below p. 21. It is quite possible that
other evidence of Shakespeare's acquaintance with Wilson's work
might yet be found; a certain knowledge of it can be proved beyond
doubt.1
That sort of criticism which
consists in the resurrection of dead
reputation, or in the re-erection of broken monuments, is not apt to be
the most sound. It is not pretended here that The Arte of
Rhetorique
is a great book. But that it has an historical interest apart from, and
independent of, its real merits has perhaps been shown in these pages.
No treatise on Rhetoric can ever be anything more than a kind of
tool-box with whose contents the novice may try his hand, and in
a case of this sort there is neither best nor worst. If he has talent
and imagination he will use his tools well, however poor they be; if
not, he will be a botcher at the best, even if they are good. The
words of Theseus may be applied with greater truth in this matter than
in that of which he used them: 'The best of this kind are but
shadows; and the worst are no worse if imagination mend them.'
I have to acknowledge the
help and suggestions of Professor
Raleigh, and of Professor Grierson of Aberdeen University, and the
courtesy of Mr. R. B. McKerrow, who kindly lent me his copy of the
very rare edition of 1560.
1 The reference to Timon on p. 55 has been thought
to have suggested Timon
of Athens. It is possible that the panegyric of order on p. 157
may have suggested
the speech of Ulysses in Troilus and Cressida, Act. I.
Sc. iii. There is little
similarity between the two, save in idea, but the passage in
Shakespeare looks as
though it were based on a particular reminiscence of his reading.
Professor
Raleigh has pointed out (Shakespeare, E. M. L.) the
similarity of some of Wilson's
speeches to those of Falstaff.
GEORGE HERBERT
MAIR.
Oxford, December,
1908.
NOTE
This book is a reprint of the
edition of 1585, which is stated on
its title-page to be taken from that of 1567. As it contains many
errors (for the most part typographical and due to carelessness) it
has been collated with the edition of 1567, and with that of 1560
(which is the editio princeps). The latter has so far been
regarded as
non-existent; none of the great libraries contain a copy. I am
indebted to Mr. R. B. McKerrow for the loan of one in his possession.
The first edition (that of 1553) is quite incomplete, and was revised
and added to (see Prologue to the Reader).
THE
Art of Rhetorique,
for the vse of
all such as are studious
of Eloquence, set forth
in English, by Tho-
mas Wilson.
1553.
¶ And now newly set forth a-
gaine, with a Prologue
to the Reader.
1567.
¶ Imprinted at London, by
George Robinson.
1585.
¶ TO
THE RIGHT HO-
nourable Lorde Iohn Dudley,
Lorde Lisle, Erle of Warwicke, and
Maister of the Horse to the Kinges
Maiestie: your assured to
commaund, Tho-
mas Wilson.
Hen Pirrhus King of the Epirotes made
battaile against the Romaines, and could
neither by force of armes, nor yet by any policie winne
certaine strong Holdes: He vsed commonly to send one
Cineas (a noble Orator, and sometimes Scholer to Demosthenes)
to persuade with the Captaines and people
that were in them, that they should yeeld vp the
saide Hold or Townes without fight or resistaunce.
And so it came to passe, that through the pithie eloquence
of this noble Orator, diuers strong Castelles
and Fortresses were peaceably giuen vp into the
handes of Pirrhus, which he should haue found
very hard and tedious to winne by the sworde. And
this thing was not Pirrhus himselfe ashamed in his
common talke, to the praise of the
said Orator openly
to confesse: alledging that Cineas through the eloquence
of his tongue, wanne moe Cities vnto him,
then euer himself should els haue beene able by force
to subdue. Good was that Orator that could doe so
much: & wise was that King which would vse such
a meane. For if the worthinesse of Eloquence maie
mooue vs, what worthier thing can there bee, then
with a word to winne Cities and whole Countries?
If profite maie perswade, what greater gaine can we
haue, then without bloudshed achiue to a Conquest?
If pleasure maie prouoke vs, what greater delite
doe wee knowe, then to see a whole multitude, with
the onely talke of man, rauished and drawne which
way he liketh best to haue them? Boldly then may I
aduenture, and without feare step forth to offer that
vnto your Lordship, which for the dignitie is so excellent,
and for the vse so necessarie: that no man
ought to be without it, which either shall beare rule
ouer many, or must haue to doe with matters of a
Realme. Considering therefore your Lordships high
estate and worthie calling, I knowe nothing more
fitting with your Honor, then to the gift of good
reason and vnderstanding, wherewith we see you
notablie endued, to ioyne the perfection of Eloquent
vtteraunce. And because that aswell by your Lordshippes
most tender imbracing of all such as be
learned, as also by your right studious exercise: you
do euidently declare, not onely what estimation you
haue, of all learning and excellent qualities in generall,
but also what a speciall desire and affection, you
beare to Eloquence: I therefore, commend to your
Lordshippes tuition and patronage, this treatise of
Rhetorique, to the ende that ye may get some furtheraunce
by the same, & I also be discharged of my
faithfull promise, this last yere made vnto you. For,
whereas it pleased you among other talke of learning,
earnestly to wish, that ye might one day see
the preceptes of Rhetorique, set forth by me in English,
as I had erst done the rules of Logicke: hauing
in my countrey this last Sommer, a quiet time of vacation,
with the right worshipfull Sir Edward Dimmoke
Knight: I trauailed so much, as my leasure
might serue thereunto, not onely to declare my good
heart, to the satisfying of your request in that behalfe,
but also through that your motion, to helpe
the towardnesse of some other, not so well furnished
as your Lordship is.
For, as touching your
selfe, by the time that perfect
experience, of manifolde and weightie matters
of the Commonweale, shall haue
encreased the Eloquence,
which alreadie doth naturally flowe in you:
I doubt nothing, but you will so farre be better then
this my Booke, that I shall not onely blush to
chalenge you for a Scholer, in the Art of Rhetorique,
by me rudely set forth: but also be driuen to set this
simple treatise, to your Lordship to Schoole, that it
may learne Rhetorique of your daylie talke, finding you
such an Oratour in your speech, as great Clarkes do
declare what an Oratour should bee. In the meane
season, I shall right
humbly beseech your good Lordship,
so to be a patrone and defendour of these
my labours, to you dedicated: as I shall
be a continual petitioner vnto almightie
God, for your preseruation,
and long
continuance
A
Prologue to the
Reader.
REAT may
their boldnesse bee thought, that seeke
without feare to sett foorth their knowledge: & suffer
their doinges to be sene, they care not of whom. For, not
onely thereby doe they bring men to thinke, that they stand
much in their owne conceipt, but also they seeme to assure
themselues, that all men will like whatsoeuer they write.
Wherein they commit two great faults: the one is, that they
are proud: the other is, that they are fond. For, what
greater pride can there be, then for any man to thinke himselfe
to be wiser, then all men liuing? Or what greater folly
can be immagined, then for one to thinke, that all men will
like, whatsoeuer he writeth? Such are they for the most
part by all likelihood, that doe set forth Bookes. Wherein
they doe both betray them selues, and also giue great occasion
to the world, to talke largely of them. But al those that doe
write, are not such as I say, nor meane not as I thinke, as the
which are wise and learned men, writing onely vnder the
correction of others, to edifie their neighbour, and not seeking
in any wise their own glorie. Neither all that bee Readers
will talke their pleasures, but rather stay their iudgements,
and weye things with reason. Some perhappes may like the
writer, if his doinges bee good, but the most part vndoubtedly
must of force bee offended, as the which are corrupt of iudgement,
because they are nought. Then such as seeke the
greatest praise for writing of Bookes, should do best in my
simple minde to write foolish toyes, for then the most part
would best esteeme them. And herein perhappes may I get
some aduauntage, that in my yong yeares, haue bene bold to
set forth my simple fantasies. For, in follie, I dare compare
with the proudest, and in pride I dare match with him that is
most foolish: not doubting to finde such fellowes, that not
onely will seeke to be egall vnto me, and perhappes excell me,
but also such as will therein right well esteeme me.
Cicero in his second
Booke de Oratore, bringeth in one Lucilius,
a pleasaunt and merie conceipted man, who saith, that
he would not haue such thinges as he wrote to bee read,
either of those that were excellently learned, or of them that
were altogether ignoraunt. For, that the one would thinke
more of his doinges, and haue a farther meaning with him,
than euer the aucthour selfe thought: the other taking the
booke in his hand, would vnderstand nothing at all, being as
meete to reade Aucthours, as an Asse to play on the Organnes.
This man in thus saying, had some reason. But I being
somewhat acquainted with the world, haue found out an other
sort of men, whom of all others, I would bee loth should reade
any of my doinges: especially such things as either touched
Christ, or any good doctrine. And those are such malicious
folke, that loue to finde faults in other mens matters, and
seuen yeares together wil keepe them in store, to the vtter
vndoing of their Christian brother: not minding to reade for
their better learning, but seeking to depraue whatsoeuer they
finde, and watching their time, will take best aduauntage to
vndoe their neighbour. Such men I say of all others, would I
be loth to haue the sight, of any myne earnest doinges, if
I could tell how to forbid them, or how to hinder them of
their purpose.
Two yeares past at my beeing
in Italie, I was charged in Roome Towne, to my great
daunger and vtter vndoing (if
Gods goodnesse had not bin the greater) to haue written this
Booke of Rhetorique, & the Logicke
also, for the which I was
coumpted an Hereticke, notwithstanding the absolution,
graunted to al the Realme, by Pope Iulie the third, for al former
offences or practises, deuised against the holie mother
Church, as they call it. A straunge matter, that thinges done
in England seuen yeres before, and the same vniuersally forgiuen,
should afterwards be layd to a mans charge in Roome.
But what cannot malice doe? Or what will not the wilfull
deuise, to satisfie their mindes, for vndoing of others? God
be my Iudge, I had then as little feare (although death was
present, and the torment at hand, wherof I felt some smart)
as euer I had in all my life before. For, when I saw those that
did seeke my death, to bee so maliciously set, to make such
poore shifts for my readier dispatch, and to burden me with
those backe reckeninges: I tooke such
courage, and was so
bolde, that the Iudges then did much maruaile at my stoutnesse,
and thinking to bring doune my great heart, told me plainly,
that I was in farther perill, then wherof I was aware, and
sought therupon to take aduauntage of my words, and to
bring me in daunger by all meanes possible. And after long
debating with me, they willed me at any hand to submit
my selfe to the holy Father, and the deuout Colledge of
Cardinalles. For otherwise there was no remedie. With
that beeing fully purposed, not to yeeld to any submission,
as one that little trusted their colourable deceipt: I was as
ware as I could bee, not to vtter any thing for mine owne
harme, for feare I shoulde come in their daunger. For
then either should I haue dyed, or els haue denyed both openly
and shamefully, the knowne trueth of Christ and his Gospell.
In the ende by Gods grace, I was wonderfully deliuered, through
plain force of the worthie Romaines (an enterprise heretofore
in that sort neuer attempted) being then without hope of life,
and much lesse of libertie. And now that I am come home,
this booke is shewed me, and I desired to looke vpon it,
to amend it where I thought meet. Amend it, quoth I?
Nay, let the booke first amende it selfe, and make mee
amendes. For surely I haue no cause to acknowledge it
for my booke, because I haue so smarted for it. For where I
haue beene euill handled, I haue much a doe to shewe my self
friendly. If the Sonne were the occasion of the Fathers
imprisonment, would not the Father bee offended with
him thinke you? Or at the least, would he not take heede how
hereafter he had to doe with him? If others neuer get more
by bookes then I haue done: it were better be a Carter, then
a Scholer, for [worldly] profite. A burnt child feareth the
fire, and a beaten dogge escheweth the whippe. Now therefore,
I will none of this booke from henceforth, I will none of
him I say: take him that list, and weare him that will. And
by that time they haue paid for him so dearely as I haue done,
they will bee as wearie of him as I haue beene. Who that
toucheth Pitch shall be filed with it, and he that goeth in the
Sunne shall bee Sunne burnt, although he thinke not of it.
So they that wil reade this or such like bookes, shall in the
ende be as the bookes are. What goodnesse is in this treatise,
I cannot without vainglorie
report, neither will I meddle with
it, either hot or colde. As it was, so it is, and so bee it still
hereafter for mee: so that I heare no more of it, and that it
be not yet once again cast in my dish. But this I say to
others, as I am assured they will laugh that will reade it: So
if the world should turne (as God forbid) they were most like
to weepe, that in all pointes would followe it. I would bee
loth that any man should hurt himselfe for my doinges. And
therefore to auoyde the worst for all parts, the best were neuer
once to looke on it: for then I am assured no man shal take
harme by it. But I thinke some shal reade it, before whom
I doe wash my handes, if any harme should come to them
hereafter, & let them not say but that they are warned.
I neuer heard a man yet troubled for ignoraunce in Religion.
And yet me thinkes it is as great an heresie not to know God,
as to erre in the knowledge of God. But some perhaps may
say vnto me: Sir, you are much to be blamed that are so fearfull,
and doe cast such perrilles before hande, to discourage
men from well doing. I aunswere: My minde is not to
discourage any man, but only to shewe how I haue beene tried
for this bookes sake, tanquam per ignem. For in deede the
Prison was on fire when I came out of it, and where as
I feared fire most (as who is he that doth not feare it?) I was
deliuered by fire and sworde together. And yet now thus
fearfull am I, that hauing beene thus swinged, and restrained
of libertie: I would first rather hassard my life presently hereafter
to dye vpon a Turke: then to abide againe without hope
of libertie, such painfull imprisonment for euer. So that
I haue now got courage with suffering damage, and my selfe
as you see, very willing from henceforth to dye: being then
brought only but in feare of death. They that loue sorrowe
vpon sorrowe: God send it them. I for my part had rather
bee without sence of griefe, then for euer to liue in griefe.
And I thinke the troubles before death being long suffered,
and without hope continued are worse a great deale, then
present death it selfe can bee: Especially to him that maketh
litle accompt of this life, and is wel armed with a constant
mind to Godward. Thus I haue talked of my self more then
I needed, some will say, and yet not more (may I well say)
then I haue needed in deede. For I was without all helpe,
and without all hope, not onely of
libertie, but also of life,
and therefore what thing needed I not? Or with what wordes
sufficiently could I set forth my neede? God be praised,
and thankes be giuen to him onely, that not onely deliuered
me out of the Lyons mouth, but also hath brought England
my deare Countrey, out of great thraldome and forraine
bondage.
And God saue the Queenes
Maiestie, the Realme, and
the scattered flocke of Christ, and graunt, O mercifull
God, an vniuersall quietnesse of minde, perfect
greement in doctrine, and amendment of our
liues, that we may be all one Sheepefolde, and
haue one Pastour Iesus, to whom with
the Father, the Sonne, and the
holy Ghost, bee all honour
and glorie worlde without
ende. Amen.
This seuenth of
December.
1560.
E L O
Q V E N C E F I R S T
giuen by God, and after lost
by man, and last repayred
by God againe.
An (in whom is
powred the breath of life) was made at
the first being an euerliuing creature, vnto the likenesse
of God, endued with reason, and appointed Lorde ouer all
other thinges liuing. But after the fall of our first Father,
sinne so crept in that our knowledge was much darkned,
and by corruption of this our flesh, mans reason and entendement
were both ouerwhelmed. At what time God being
sore greeued with the follie of one man, pitied of his mere
goodnesse the whole state and posteritie of Mankind. And
therefore (whereas through the wicked suggestion of our
ghostly enemie, the ioyfull fruition of Gods glorie was
altogether lost:) it pleased our heauenly Father to repaire
mankind of his free mercie, and to graunt an euerliuing
enheritaunce, vnto all such as would by constaunt faith seeke
earnestly hereafter. Long it was ere that man knewe himselfe,
being destitute of Gods grace, so that all thinges waxed
sauage, the earth vntilled, societie neglected, Gods will not
knowne, man against man, one against an other, and all
against order. Some liued by spoyle: some like brute beastes
grased vpon the ground: some went naked: some roomed
like Woodoses: none did any thing by reason, but most
did what they could by manhood. None almost considered
the euerliuing GOD, but all liued most commonly after their
owne lust. By death they thought that all thinges ended:
by life they looked for none other liuing. None remembred
the true obseruation of Wedlocke: none tendered the education
of their children: Lawes were not regarded: true
dealing was not once vsed. For vertue, vice bare place:
for right and equitie, might vsed authoritie. And therefore,
whereas man through reason might haue vsed order: man
through folie fell into errour. And thus for lacke of skill,
and for want of grace euill so preuailed, that the deuil was
most esteemed, and God either almost vnknowne among them
all, or els nothing feared among so many. Therefore, euen
now when man was thus past all hope of amendement,
God
still tendering his owne workmanshippe, stirring vp his faithfull
and elect, to perswade with reason all men to societie.
And gaue his appointed Ministers knowledge both to see the
natures of men, and also graunted them the gift of vtteraunce,
that they might with ease win folke at their will, and frame
them by reason to all good order. And therefore, whereas
men liued brutishly in open feeldes, hauing neither house
to shroude them in, nor attire to clothe their backes, nor yet
any regard to seeke their best auaile: these appointed of
GOD called them together by vtteraunce of speech, and
perswaded with them what was good, what was bad, & what
was gainful for mankind. And although at first the rude
could hardly learne, and either for the straungenesse of the
thing, would not gladly receiue the offer, or els for lack
of knowledge, could not perceiue the goodnesse: yet being
somewhat drawne, and delited with the pleasantnesse of reason,
and the sweetnesse of vtteraunce: after a certaine space they
became through Nurture and good aduisement, of wilde,
sober: of cruell, gentle: of fooles, wise: and of beastes, men:
such force hath the tongue, and such is the power of Eloquence
and reason, that most men are forced euen to yeeld in that
which most standeth against their will. And therefore the
Poets doe feine, that Hercules beeing a man of great wisedome,
had all men lincked together by the eares in a chaine,
to drawe them and leade them euen as he lusted. For his
witte was so great, his tongue so eloquent, and his experience
such, that no one man was able to withstande his reason, but
euery one was rather driuen to doe that which he would, and
to will that which he did: agreeing to his aduise both in word
and worke in all that euer they were able. Neither can I see
that men could haue beene brought by any other meanes,
to liue together in fellowship of life, to maintaine Cities, to
deale truely, and willingly obeye one an other, if men at the
first had not by art and eloquence, perswaded that which they
full oft found out by reason. For what man I pray you,
beeing better able to maintaine himself by valiaunt courage,
then by liuing in base subiection, would not rather looke
to rule like a Lord, then to liue like an vnderling: if by
reason he were not perswaded, that it behoueth euery man
to liue in his owne vocation: and not to seeke any
higher
roume, then wherunto he was at the first appointed? Who
would digge and delue from Morne till Euening? Who
would trauaile and toyle with ye sweat of his browes? Yea,
who would for his Kings pleasure aduenture and hassarde
his life, if witte had not so won men, that they thought
nothing more needfull in this world, nor any thing whereunto
they were more bounden: then here to liue in their duetie, and
to traine their whole life according to their calling. Therefore,
whereas men are in many thinges weake by Nature, and
subiect to much infirmitie: I thinke in this one poinct they
passe all other creatures liuing, that haue the gift of speech
and reason. And among all other, I thinke him most worthie
fame, and amongst all men to bee taken for halfe a GOD:
that therein doth chiefly and aboue all other excell men,
wherein men doe excell beastes. For he that is among the
reasonable of al most reasonable, and among the wittie, of all
most wittie, and among the eloquent, of all most eloquent:
him thinke I among all men, not onely to be taken for a
singuler man, but rather to be coumpted for halfe a God. For,
in seeking the excellencie hereof, the soner he draweth to
perfection, the nyer he commeth to God, who is the
cheefe wisedome, and therfore called God, because he is most
wise, or rather wisedome it self.
Now then, seing that God
giueth his heauenly grace, vnto al
such as call vnto him with stretched handes, and humble heart,
neuer wanting to those, that want not to themselues: I purpose by
his grace and especiall assistence, to set forth such precepts
of eloquence, and to shewe what obseruation the
wise haue vsed, in handeling of their matters:
that the vnlearned by seeing the practise
of others, maie haue some knowledge
themselues, and learne by
their neighbours deuise,
what is necessarie for
them selues in
their owne
case.
Gaulterus
Haddonus D. Iuris
Ciuilis, Et Reginæ Maiestatis, à
Libellis supplicibus.
REtoricem Logice
soror, est affata sororem:
Quem didicit nuper, sermo Britannos erat.
Retorice tacuit, magno perculsæ dolore:
Nam nondum nostro nouerat ore loqui.
Audijt hæc, Logices, Wilsonus forte, magister:
Qui fuerat, nostros addideratque sonos.
Retoricem mutam, verbis solatus amicis:
Seuocat, & rogitat num esse Britanna velit?
Deijciens oculos respondit velle libenter:
Sed se, qua possit, non reperire, via.
Ipse vias (inquit) tradam, legesque loquendi:
Quomodo perfecte verba Britanna loces.
Liberat ille fidem, nostro sermone politur:
Retorice, nostra est vtraque facta soror.
Anglia nobilium si charus sermo sororem.
Est tibi, sermonis charus & author erit.
¶ Thomas
Wilsonus in Anglicam
Rhetoricem suam.
ANglia si doceat,
quod: Græcia docta: quid obstat
Quo minus ex Anglis Anglia, vera sciat.
Non (quia Greca potes, vel calles verba Latina)
Doctus es, aut sapiens: sed quia vera vides.
Aurea secreto tegitur sapientia sensu.
Abdita sensa tenes Anglus? es ergo sciens.
Sed me Rhetoricem nequeat cùm lingua polire:
Cui vacat, hoc vnum quod valet, oro velet.