Chapter XLVII: Section IX (1)

_Sketch of the practice of the_ royal touch _in England_, _or a historical Essay on the memorable_ empiricism of our English sovereigns, _from Edward the Confessor to George the First_.

It is generally agreed that this notable practice, which appears to have been long deemed as a branch of the royal prerogative, began in this kingdom with, or in the person of Edward the Confessor. {299a} Some however seem to think it to have existed in France at an earlier period: if so, Edward, who had long lived in that country, and appeared very partial to it, and fond of French fashions, might take the hint from thence, and introduce it here upon his accession to the throne, which he might easily manage by the help of the monks, with whom he was so great a favourite.

_Clovis_, and _Robert_ of sainted memory, are named among the early French sovereigns who successfully practised the royal touch, and were greatly admired and venerated by their subjects on that account. In the reign _of Philip_ the first, the virtue is supposed to have been somehow lost, but happily revived again with undiminished splendor in that of Lewis the fat, after which it seems to have long and regularly continued. Francis I. {299b} and Henry IV. are represented as eminent practitioners; how it was with the succeeding monarchs, descended from the latter, we are not informed. No particular attention appears to have been paid to it yet by the emperor Napoleon. What he may think proper to do hereafter, no tongue can tell. Whether he possesses this power or not, it is certain that he possesses some other powers in as great a degree, at least, as any of his royal or imperial predecessors.

But this miraculous gift of healing did not, it seems, belong exclusively to the kings of France and England. {300a} The Earls, or princes of the house of Hapsburg also, are reported to have had it in no scanty measure. They cured the strumous, or scrofulous, it is said, by giving them drink, and the stammerers, by kissing them. But the Kings of Hungary seem to have exceeded all; for we are told that they _could_ cure, not only the king’s evil, but all disorders occasioned by poison, the bite of a viper, or any other venomous animal.

“Mr. _Bel_, who tells us this, observes (what is as remarkable as the
account itself) that he cannot find in history, that these Hungarian
kings ever exercised this wonderful power. {300b} More shame for
them, the unfeeling wretches! if they possessed it.

“The case was otherwise with the royal doctors of France and England,
who have not been so shy of exerting this power, or rather, of
practising this quackery. Some French writers (says Carte) ascribe
this gift of healing to the king’s devotion towards the relics of St.
Marculf, in the Church of Corbigny, in Champagne, to which the kings
of France, immediately after their coronation at Rheims, used to go
in solemn procession: and it must be owned there was formerly a great
veneration paid to this saint in England. It was in memory of him
that a room in the palace of Westminster frequently mentioned in the
rolls of parliament, was called the chamber of St. Marculf; being
probably the place where our kings touched for the Evil. It is now
(our historian adds) called the painted chamber: and though the name
of that saint hath been long forgot in this nation, yet the sanative
virtue of our kings still continues.” {301a}

Of the most noted among our sovereigns, as practitioners in this healing art, the following is thought a pretty complete list. Nothing seems to be known in this way of Harold II. or yet of the four succeeding princes; but that Henry II. practised very successfully is said to be attested by Petrus Blesensis, who had been his chaplain. {301b} It seems highly probable that Henry III. likewise was often applied to, and successfully practised in the same way, as John of Geddesden, a physician, who is said to live about that time, advises a scorfulous patient, after his remedies had proved ineffectual, to apply to the king for a cure: for which he has been much blamed, and seemingly not without reason, as, in case he deemed the royal touch a certain care or remedy, he ought to have sent the patient to the king at first, without troubling him with operation and medicine. {302a}

Henry’s great son, Edward I, also appears to have been no mean master of this same art; and so, probably, might be his son, Edward II, though otherwise no great conjuror; but as to his son, Edward III, few, if any, seem to have gone beyond him in this sanative employment. _Bradwardine_, who attended him in his wars, and whose counsel is said to have contributed to his success, gives a pompous advertisement, in his book _De Causa Dei_, of the wonderful cures wrought by that prince. _F. le Brun_, however, pays no regard to this. He looks upon it as a crafty stratagem, and says, he does not doubt but that Edward’s pretensions to the crown of France excited his zeal to touch those who were diseased; which is not unlikely; princes often, when nothing but politics lie at the bottom, chusing to make religion to swim on the top. {302b} Edward’s grandson, Richard II, cannot be supposed to drop or lay aside a practice for which his grandfather and immediate predecessor on the throne had been so celebrated. Nor is it at all likely that his successors, of the rival house of Lancaster, should discontinue this practice, as that might have been construed to imply a consciousness of inferiority to the princes of the other house, or something like a defect in their own title to the crown.

Least of all is it to be supposed that this practice should be dropt or neglected afterwards, on the restoration of the York line, in the person of _Edward IV_, who would naturally take care to exercise every prerogative or power supposed to have belonged to his ancestors, and which had any way contributed to their popularity, consequence, or celebrity. This monarch, though of a far less religious or devout cast than his immediate predecessor Henry VI. might not on that account be the less qualified to work these miracles, any more than _Charles II._ afterwards; who, though by his clerical subjects denominated _most religious_, was yet certainly, in fact, one of the _most irreligious_ and profligate wretches that ever wore a crown: nevertheless he unquestionably practiced the _royal touch_, as extensively, effectually, and successfully as any one whatever in the whole list of our crowned, or kingly practitioners. And why not?—as the extraordinary gift, supernatural virtue, or miraculous power, belonged entirely, it seems, to his regal quality or dignity; {303} and had nothing at all, apparently, to do with his personal or moral character.

_Richard_ III. also, after he ascended the throne, may be supposed to possess as much of this supernatural and sanative virtue (whatever may be said of the other virtues) as any one of his predecessors or successors; and as it was evidently his interest to omit no popular observance, and to avail himself of whatever had a tendency to excite or gain the admiration of the people, and reconcile them to his government, we may be sure he would not fail to follow, with spirit, the practice in question; and so, by a copious display of its sanative virtue, compensate, in some sort, or degree, for the absence of virtues of another description. There is therefore abundant reason for setting him down among our royal miracle-workers.

None of all these princes appear to have made a greater figure, or to have proceeded with more parade, solemnity, and success, in this royal business or occupation, than Henry VII.—This politic prince, whatever right he might have to the crown, had probably as good a right as any one to try his hand at this notable and wonder working operation, the effect or fame of which he knew full well how to manage profitably and turn to the best account. He accordingly set about it in good earnest; and in order, as may be supposed, to give the process the most striking, sacred, and solemn appearance, and increase its effect, he had a new form, or office, composed and introduced for the purpose. {304} The project answered; and his success in this practice is said to have been very considerable. This prince would also sometimes take upon him to _convert heretics_; and he would even give them money to facilitate their conversion; {306} which was certainly no illadapted device, or unpromising expedient; and it is the more remarkable, as his majesty was himself so great a lover of money, and appears to have been so exceedingly close-fisted on other occasions. We may therefore be very sure that the conversion of heretics was of the highest importance in Henry’s estimation, and what lay very near to his royal heart. This monarch also, with his queen and eldest son, visited the town of Lynn, where he very probably exercised the _royal touch_, as scrofulous patients may be supposed to have been then, as they are now, very numerous here, all of whom, as well as the rest of the inhabitants, would not fail to give full credit to his majesty’s ability to remove the malady and restore the patients to perfect health; and, of course, would be anxious to apply to him, which he would not be likely to discourage. As to _heretics_, there might be then none of them here for him to try his royal hand at their conversion.

His son and high spirited successor, _Henry VIII_, would doubtless be careful to continue the practice of all the rites and ceremonies appertaining to the royal function, which had been handed down to him from his father: and there is every reason to believe that the operation in question would not be forgotten or omitted, were it only to be even with his neighbour and rival, _Francis I_, who certainly performed it, and would not be likely to be suffered or allowed to go beyond him on such an occasion. Henry therefore may be safely set down among our said royal practitioners, and even among the most able and powerful of them all. But the _King’s Evil_ was not the only Evil in whose cure or removal he was particularly concerned: He was no less concerned in the cure or removal of the _Pope’s Evil_, another dreadful malady, which had long and grievously afflicted most of the good people of this country, and which was generally deemed incurable, till he took it in hand. All the world know how powerfully and effectually _his royal touch operated_ on that occasion.—It seems he had also the reputation of being endowed with extraordinary gifts for the cure or prevention of the _cramp_; and we find that he distinguished himself by the consecration of _cramp rings_, which Stephen Gardiner says were much esteemed every where, and often sought for. {308} So very eminent was Henry among our royal doctors, and miracle mongers.

_Edward VI_, Henry’s amiable son and successor, is not known to have been at all an adept at this princely practice, or even to have been in the least partial to it. He probably thought so very lightly of it as entirely to omit and discard it, as he is also said to have done with respect to the _consecration of cramp rings_, by which his royal father so much distinguished himself. It is likely that Edward, young as he was, had imbibed some sectarian notions which might unfit him for the performance of these sublime operations. Even the royal and episcopal work of _burning heretics_, so much approved of and delighted in by his predecessors, and afterwards by his immediate successor, and so much called for and applauded by ecclesiastics, was to him an object of utter aversion; and if he once suffered it to be done, it was involuntary and against his own better judgement, through the importunate intreaties and urgent expostulations of his bishops, and particularly Cranmer, to whom therefore the guilt and infamy of the deed must properly or chiefly belong. {309} There is reason to believe that no such doings would have sullied or disgraced his reign had he been left to judge and act for himself. It is probable he was left so to judge and act with respect to the _royal touch_; so that we need not be surprised at his declining the practice.

From _Mary_, his bloody sister and successor a different conduct might be expected: and her conduct certainly was, almost in every thing, very different from his. Superstitious as she was, and bigoted to the last degree, it is not to be supposed that she should shrink from the performance of any rite or ceremony, however absurd, that had been in request with her popish predecessors, or devoutly practiced by them. This of the _royal touch_ could never escape her attention: nay it is expressly said that the office was indeed fairly written out for her use; [that very office probably, which has been above inserted;] so that there can be no question of her touching for the Evil, as devoutly, and as successfully perhaps, as any of the rest. {310a}

As to _Elizabeth_, heretic as she was, her legitimacy questioned, and her title litigated, she _touched_ for the Evil with a success acknowledged even by the papists themselves, who are said to ascribe it to the _sign of the cross_. {310b} A case is mentioned by _Carte_ of a Roman Catholic, who, being put into prison, perhaps for recusancy, and terribly afflicted with the Evil, was, after he had been there a tedious time, at a vast expence to physicians without the least relief, _touched_ by this queen, and perfectly cured: which gave him occasion to say, he was now convinced by undoubted experience, that the pope’s excommunication of her signified nothing, since she still continued blessed with so miraculous a quality. {310c}—It was well for the poor fellow that he was not a _puritan_, or he might have gone long enough without his cure, as her majesty is known to have been inexorably pitiless and spiteful against that class of her subjects.

Of _James_ I, with his strong faith in ghosts and witches, and lofty notions of indefeasible right, royal prerogative and king-craft, it was not to be supposed that he, of all men, would think meanly or lightly of this royal and religious operation. It accordingly appears that he very readily and warmly engaged in it, and actually became a most dexterous and eminent practitioner—to the no small satisfaction and comfort, as we may suppose, of his liege subjects, as well as advancement of his own fame, or at least, the gratification of his vanity, of which it is well known he possessed no common or scanty portion. Nothing could delight him more than the idea that he could work miracles: his courtiers called him _Solomon_; but that idea was calculated to make him think himself as still greater than even Solomon. We are not informed how many patients underwent or felt his royal touch; but there is every reason to suppose and believe that the number must have been very considerable.

His unfortunate son and successor _Charles_ I. was no less distinguished in this same way than his royal father had been. Great numbers are said to have been by him both touched and cured; of whom not a few were little children, which has been urged as a proof that it could not be ascribed to the effect or strength of imagination. Carte observes, that Dr. Heylyn, an eye witness of such cures, says, “I have seen some children brought before the King by the hanging sleeves, some hanging at their mother’s breasts, and others in the arms of their nurses, all cured, without the help of a serviceable imagination.” {312a} Both Heylyn and Carte were full of faith in these miracles. If they were right, the decapitation of Charles must have been a great loss to the nation, and especially to those who were afflicted with the Evil. For twelve years or more, after that event, not one of these miracles appears to have been wrought in this country.

As to _Oliver Cromwell_, it does not appear that he ever tried his hand at this wonder-working operation; conscious, it may be supposed, that it did not belong to his province, or to the protectoral office and dignity, with which he was invested. What he would have done, had he accepted or assumed the regal title, cannot be said or known with absolute certainty: though the probability seems to bear against his even then becoming a practitioner, as it would hardly have met the approbation of his best friends, or accorded with the ideas of his most trusty and powerful coadjutors, or even with his own.

After a total cessation or suspension of this ancient princely practice, during the whole time of the Common wealth and Protectorate, it revived again at the memorable _restoration_; and _Charles II._ took it up vigorously and solemnly, and on a very extensive scale. The Register of the Royal Chapel is said to exhibit a list of 92,107 persons touched by him for the Evil in a certain number of years; {312b} not including, it seems, the whole of his reign; so that double that number, or more for aught we know, may have passed under his hand during the whole course of his government. Yet we find he practised only at some particular seasons of the year; at least after the summer of 1662, when a royal proclamation was issued to inform the public that such would be the case from thenceforth. His majesty had been then a practitioner full two years, during which time there is reason to believe that he had touched some thousands. He began the work almost immediately after his restoration, so that it may be considered among the first acts of his reign. Of the state of the practice in his royal hands, or under his wise management, a pretty accurate idea may be formed from the following extracts—out of some of the principal Public Papers of that era.

The following passage appeared in the weekly Paper called _Mercurius Politicus_, of June 28, 1660—

“Saturday being appointed by his majesty to touch such as are
troubled by the Evil, a great number of poor afflicted creatures were
met together, many brought in chairs and flaskets; and being
appointed by his majesty to repair to the Banqueting House, his
majesty sat in a chair of state, and stroked all that were brought to
him, and then put about each of their necks a white ribbon with an
angel of gold on it. In this manner his majesty stroked above 600;
and such was his princely patience and tenderness to the poor
afflicted creatures, that though it took up a very long time, his
majesty, never weary of well doing, was pleased to make enquiry,
whether there were any more who had not been touched. After prayers
were ended the duke of Buckingham brought a towel, and the earl
Pembroke a bason and ewer; who, after they, had made obeysance to his
majesty, kneeled down, till his majesty had washed.”

This was within a month after his majesty’s arrival.

The next is from the _Parliamentary Journal_, of July 9, 1660; a fortnight after the other; and is thus curiously worded—

“The kingdom having for a long time been troubled with the Evil, by
reason of his majesty’s absence, great numbers have flocked for cure.
His sacred majesty on Monday last touched 250 in the
Banqueting-House; among whom, when his majesty was delivering the
gold, one shuffled himself in, out of a hope of profit, which had not
been stroked; but his majesty presently discovered him, saying, this
man has not yet been touched. His majesty hath for the future
appointed every Friday for the cure, at which time 200 and no more
are to be presented to him, who are first to repair to _Mr. Knight_,
the King’s surgeon, living at the Cross Guns, in Russell Street,
Covent Garden, over against the Rose Tavern, for their tickets.—That
none might lose their labour he thought fit to make it known that he
will be at his house every Wednesday and Thursday, from two till six
of the Clock, to attend that service.—And if any _person of quality_
shall send to him he will wait upon them at their lodgings, upon
notice given to him.”

In the same paper of July 30 and August 6, notice was given, that no more would be touched till about Michaelmas: and in the _Mercurius Politicus_, of February 28, 1661, it is said, that _many came twice or thrice for the sake of the gold_.

Another weekly paper, called _Mercurius Publicus_, February 21, 1661, had the following passage—

“We cannot but give notice that certain persons (too many one would
think) who having the _King’s Evill_, and have been _touched_ by his
SACRED MAJESTY, have got the forehead to come twice or thrice,
alleging they were never there before, till divers witnesses proved
the contrary; which hath forced his MAJESTY to give order that
whosoever hereafter comes to be touched, shall first bring to his
MAJESTY’S Chirurgeons a certificate from the _Minister_ and
Church-Wardens (where they live) that they never were touched by his
MAJESTY before: the next healing will begin six weeks hence.”

In the same paper of May 9, 1661, appeared the following notice or advertisement:

“WHITEHALL. We are commanded to give notice, that his MAJESTY finds
the Season already so hot, that it will be neither safe nor fit to
continue his healing such as have the king’s Evil; and therefore that
his MAJESTIES good subjects therein concerned, would at present
forbear to come to court; Friday next (may 10,) and Wednesday (May
15.) being the last days that his MAJESTY intends to heal, till the
heat of the weather be allayed, and his MAJESTY’S further pleasure
known, whereof his good subjects shall have timely notice.”

The same paper of August 15, 1661, contained the passage following:—

“We are commanded to give notice That his _Majesty_ finds the season
such, that it will neither be safe nor fit to continue his Healing
those that have the King’s Evil; and therefore that His _Majesties_
good subjects therein concerned do forbear to come to Court till
All-Saints Day next, till which time His _Majesty_ doth not intend to
Heal.”

In the very same Paper, of July 17, 1662, appeared the following curious courtly advertisement:

“_Hampton Court_.—His Majesty lately set forth a _Proclamation for
the better ordering of those who repair to the Court for cure of the
disease called the King’s Evil_, wherein his Majesty being as ready
and willing to relieve the necessities and diseases of his good
Subjects by his Sacred Touch, which shall come for cure, as any of
his Royal Predecessors, in which, by the Grace and Blessing of God,
he hath in an extraordinary measure had good success, and yet in his
princely wisdom, foreseeing that fit times are necessary to be
appointed for the performing of that great work of Charity, doth
declare his Royal pleasure to be, that from henceforth the usual
times for presenting such persons, shall be from the Feast of
_All-saints_, commonly called _Alhallowtide_, to a week before
_Christmas_, and in the month before Easter, being more convenient
for the temperature of the season, and in respect of any contagion
that may happen in this near access to his Majesties Sacred Person.
His Majesty doth further command that none presume to repair to Court
for cure of the said disease, but within the limits appointed, and
that such persons who come for that purpose, bring certificates under
the hands of the Parson, Vicar, or Minister and Church-Wardens of the
Parishes where they dwell, testifying that they have not at any time
before been touched by the King; further charging all Justices of
Peace, Constables, &c. that they suffer not any to pass but such as
have such Certificates, under pain of his Majestys displeasure: And
that his Majesties Subjects may have the better knowledge of it, his
Majesties will is, that this Proclamation be published and affixed in
some open place in every Market Town of this Realm.” {317a}

To the above Extracts, only one more shall be here added, from another Public Paper, called _The Newes_, of May 18, 1664.—

“His Sacred Majesty having declared it to be his royal will and
purpose to continue the healing of his people for the Evil during the
month of May, and then give over till Michaelmas next, I am commanded
to give Notice thereof, that the people may not come up to the town
in the interim and lose their labour.” {317b}

From these premises it plainly appears that the king really pretended to be endowed with the power or gift of working miracles, and of healing or curing one of the most obstinate and incurable diseases incident to the human frame, even by his _touch_. Most curious and ludicrous it surely must be to see such a man as Charles making such a pretension, and affecting to be hand and glove with Heaven; and no less so to see the whole nation, or at least the whole body of the church folks, or national religionists, (clergy and laity) which constituted the great bulk of the people, giving him full credit for every thing, and deeming the least doubt or hesitation about his miraculous claims as a sure indication of disloyalty, and scarcely short of high treason. Allowing or supposing his majesty to have really possessed this miraculous power, or supernatural healing gift, still it must appear rather a queer case that it should be affected by the _temperature of the seasons_, and actually controlled, overpowered, and crippled, as it were, by the _hot weather_; and that the royal operator, in the meantime, in case he persisted in his benevolent practice, or labour of love, during the dog-days, and for some time before and after, should be exposed to the imminent danger of some alarming _contagion_: at least he and his courtiers seemed evidently to have had such apprehension. In all this, however, his loyal and admiring subjects could discover nothing, either marvellous or suspicious, or yet any way inconsistent. Their sovereign’s miraculous claims found in them the most ready acquiescence. With some, indeed, especially among the poor persecuted nonconformists, the case was otherwise. They disbelieved those royal pretentions. But it only served to strengthen the public prejudice against them; being generally looked upon as an additional and sure proof of their disaffection, or their moral and political depravity.—So much for Charles’s supernatural powers and miraculous deeds.

His brother and successor, _James_ II. another of our _religious_ monarchs, continued this practice with unabated zeal, solemnity, and devotion. He appears to have made some improvement in the process; particularly by restoring the sign of the cross, which had been unaccountably omitted by his father, and grandfather. It is probable that none of its ancient appendages were by him forgotten, or left unrestored, if he did not also, in his princely wisdom, devise some others, equally suitable and edifying: and had the crown continued in his family, the good subjects of these realms would hardly have failed of having the institution or practice still preserved amongst them, and observed in all things according to the pattern exhibited by him. But his unexpected abdication forced things into another channel, and deprived us of so fair and important a chance. James is supposed to have practised at Whitehall as frequently, in proportion to the length of his reign, as his brother had done. But as his reign, compared with that of Charles, was very short, (though, in some respects, much too long) it is not to be supposed that he, like the other, could boast of his myriads of patients and cures. It appears, however, that he was very assiduous in this business, as well when his occasions called him abroad, as when detained within the precincts of his own court or palace: hence when he went to Oxford in 1687, about the affair of Magdalen-College and other matters, part of his time there is known to have been employed in _touching_; which shews how very partial he was to the practice, and how very ready he was to attend to it on every occasion that might offer. {319} _Dr. Sykes_ in a letter to _Dr. Charlett_, of September 4, 1787, expresses himself thus, “This morning the king _touches_ in Christ Church Quire; hears one Father Hall this morning at the new Popish Chapel there; but whether he will be there in the afternoon, or at University College, I know not.” And _Creech_ in a letter to _Dr. Charlett_, of September 6, the same year, says, “On sunday morning the king _touched_. _Warner_ and _White_ officiating: all that waited on his majesty kneeled at the prayers, beside the Duke of Beaufort, who stood all the time.” {320} All this shews how partial and devoted James was to this practice, as well as how obsequiously the learned Oxonians observed and contemplated this part of their Sovereign’s conduct. Had he not gone beyond this royal _touch_, neither the Magdalenians nor any other Oxonian fraternity had ever resisted his mandates: his popularity, in that case, might have been as unbounded as that of our present sovereign, and his descendants might have reigned here gloriously to this day.

At the Revolution this practice or operation was again suspended. _William_ III. was a Presbyterian, and _Oliver Cromwell_ an Independent: the spirit and principles of these sects seem not to be congenial with, or favourable to the practice; nor does this gift or privilege appear to extend to sectarian or heterodox princes, but only to those of the Romish, or Church of England faith.

At the accession of _Anne_, of course, this sanative virtue and practice again revived, and numbers were _touched_ by the royal hand of that illustrious princess, among whom was the late celebrated _Dr. Samuel Johnson_, then in his childhood. At the death of Anne, the said virtue forsook the British throne: at least none of our succeeding monarchs have yet ventured to revive the practice. The two first princes of the present dynasty had, doubtless, their reasons for refraining from it; but as it is not known what they were, it is impossible to say whether their majesties were governed therein by wise or unwise, proper or improper motives. We know that actions very right in themselves may yet be performed upon very wrong and unjustifiable principles. There is, however, no room to suppose that these two potentates were in any measure influenced in this instance by what their enemies, the Jacobites, would be ready to insinuate: an apprehension of their own title to the Crown being defective. The voice of the Nation (than which, there can be no better title) had placed them on the throne of these realms.

His present majesty has hitherto followed the example of his two immediate predecessors, in not restoring or resuming this dormant or neglected branch of the royal prerogative. If he ever should hereafter, at any time, think proper to restore or resume it, there can be no manner of doubt of his meeting with ample success, as well as abundant employment. In that case it may be presumed that multitudes of patients would soon be flocking in from all quarters, not excepting the County of Norfolk and the parts about Lynn Regis. His resolving to resume the practice would instantly occasion the revival of the national faith in the efficacy of the operation; and so far would such a resumption or experiment be from endangering his majesty’s fair fame and popularity, that it would, in all probability, augment the same, and so render him for the residue of his reign, within the British Isles at least, more popular and more celebrated than ever. But as we are not warranted to expect that his majesty will ever try the experiment, or put to the test the faith of his subjects in the miraculous efficacy of his _touch_, we shall here drop the subject as far as it may concern him.

It appears that after the death of queen _Anne_ it was firmly believed by a great part of the nation, that the sanative virtue, or miraculous power which she was allowed to possess, still existed in the person of a certain exiled prince of her family. In proof of which a story was industriously propagated of one _Christopher Lovel_, of Bristol, who being most sadly and grievously afflicted with the Evil, after having recourse to the most eminent of the faculty, and availed himself of the best medical help in vain, went at last to the Continent, in quest of the said prince. Having found his royal highness, and being kindly received, he underwent the operation of the _touch_, got perfectly cured, and returned home safe and sound, in full health and high spirits, after an absence of four months and some few days. Carte, the historian, and many more, gentlemen of the faculty as well as others, visited him, examined the case thoroughly, and pronounced the cure complete. Some of them, of whom one was _Dr. Lane_, an eminent physician, considered it as one of the most extraordinary and wonderful events that had ever happened.—After this, who can doubt the reality of the fact, that such a sanative virtue, gift, or power, was actually possessed by the said prince?—It seems, however, that the miracle did not effect a radical cure: poor Lovel relapsed again, sometime after, and died of the Evil at last. Such, in all probability, were all the other great cures performed by the rest of our royal doctors, although many of them, like this, were attested as _perfect cures_, by very respectable, but too credulous witnesses.

It is somewhat remarkable that _Whiston_, as well as _Carte_, believed in the efficacy of the royal touch: the former derives it from the _prayer_ used at the time, while the latter seems to consider it as a divine or miraculous gift bestowed upon, or inherent to all the rightful heirs to the English throne. Both of them were men of considerable respectability, and very confident, it seems, of the soundness of their respective opinions in this case. Their opinions however appear equally untenable, and may pretty safely be pronounced utterly unfounded. The favourable effects, or apparent benefit which some of those patients might experience after having undergone the operation of the _touch_, must doubtless be ascribed to their own operative faith and strength of imagination, rather than to any supernatural virtue proceeding from that princely performance, or any miraculous gift possessed by the royal practitioners. To the same cause must also be attributed the salutary effects said to have sometimes resulted from the pretended animal magnetism, as well as such empirical charms and nostrums as have acquired an uncommon share of popular fame, or have stood very high in the good opinion of the public. A patient’s favourable opinion of a remedy administered to him, and his very confident expectation of deriving from it very essential benefit, are allowed to have had a happy effect, and to have done great things sometimes in very serious and dangerous cases.

Now we may rest assured that on no other ground but this can we reasonably account for benefits experienced by many who underwent the royal touch; admitting that to have been really the case; for it is too absurd to suppose that those royal personages were actually endowed with power to work miracles, or that the ceremony performed, or yet the gold given to the patients to wear about their necks, had in them any supernatural or healing virtue to render them capable of producing such effects.

It must be rather mortifying to our national vanity and pride, to think that our dear ancestors, for seven hundred years, firmly believed in the miraculous efficacy of the royal touch, in scrofulous complaints. {324} But while we reprobate, or pity their stupid and miserable credulity, in this and other instances, let us not forget that we ourselves are not without our errors and failings, and those no less inexcusable and degrading: witness our general belief in witchcraft, conjuration, prodigies, and newspapers, together with the unshaken faith of multitudes in _Richard Brothers_, _Joanna Southcote_, and many other notorious impostors of different descriptions: and it may be justly questioned, if there ever was a period when the inhabitants of this country have been more inexcusably credulous, more easily and egregiously imposed upon, or more generally and universally duped, than in this very age.—But we will here close this long section; hoping that its contents will not fail to contribute, at least in some measure, to the amusement and satisfaction of the inquisitive and candid reader; especially if he ever wished to learn the history of the royal touch, of which he will find here, perhaps, a more particular and circumstantial account than in any other publication.

* * * * *

_End of Part_ II.

HISTORY OF LYNN. PART III.

HISTORY OF LYNN FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NORMANS IN ENGLAND TO THE REFORMATION.

CHAP. I.

Observations on the Conquest—account of the changes then introduced—their effects on the kingdom at large, and on Lynn and its vicinity in particular.

The conquest of England by the Normans appears to have been no less complete than those which had been before effected by the Romans, the Saxons, and the Danes. The English grandees were generally stript of their possessions, and their lands divided among the conqueror’s chief favourites and great captains, who then became the nobles of the realm, and from whom are descended most of our present great families. This conquest was obtained much easier than any of those that preceded it. A single battle now determined the fate of the whole country, partly, as was before observed, through the defection, intrigues, and influence of the clergy, most of whom were in the interest of the invader, as he was supported by their holy father the Pope, who had distinguished him by such special marks of his favour as, could not fail of attaching them to his cause.

William’s army consisted of 60,000 men; not all his own subjects, (for his duchy could not furnish and maintain such a force) but made up chiefly of adventurers, or soldiers of fortune, who had engaged in the expedition, on the promise of forfeited lands, in proportion to the numbers they brought with them. Accordingly, some are said to have afterward bestowed on them no less than 700 manors, others 5, 4, 3, 2, and 100, or less; insomuch that all the land in England, if we except the royal demesnes, the church lands, and those annexed to the cities and boroughs, were in no more than about 700 hands, whose wide possessions were again distributed among their numerous vassals, according to the principles of the feudal system, which was now completely introduced and established in England. {328}

In consequence of this change, it became a fundamental maxim, and necessary principle of our English tenures, that the king is the universal lord and original proprietor of all the lands in his kingdom, and that no man doth or can possess any part of it, but what has, mediately or immediately, been derived from him, to be held upon feudal services. This engrafting of the feudal tenure on almost all the land in the kingdom, is said to have been the most important alteration which our civil and military policy then underwent. {329a} The great lords held their lands of the king, by certain services, as all their vassals held theirs also of them. Thus the king had the whole power of the country closely connected with, and dependent upon himself. This state of things was calculated, no doubt, to secure the kingdom from external danger, and may be considered as laying the foundation of that high military character which England afterwards held among its neighbours.

A vast demesne was now set apart for the king, amounting to 1422 manors, together with many other lands which had never been erected or formed into manors. Besides these he had the profits of all his feudal tenures, his worships, marriages, and reliefs; the benefit of excheats, either upon failure of heirs, or forfeiture; the goods of felons and traitors; the profits of his courts of justice; besides many other casualties, which amounted to an immense revenue; insomuch that the Conqueror, as we are informed, had no less than 1060_l._ 10_s._ a day, the annual amount of which, allowing for the comparative value of moneys &c. was equal to several millions (perhaps twenty or more) of ours. {329b} So large a revenue might probably justify the saying of Fortescue, that originally the King of England was the richest in Europe.

We are told, that William’s military tenants were obliged, on all occasions, to furnish 60,000 knights, completely equipped, and ready to serve forty days at their own expence. Every seaport also, in proportion to its ability, was obliged to find, in time of danger, one or more ships properly furnished with men and arms; which, joined with such other ships as the king hired were generally an overmatch for the invaders. {330} Thus we see how powerful and formidable England became after the conquest, in its means of defence and resistance, under its Norman sovereigns.

Whilst we are noticing the changes now introduced into this country, it may not be improper to observe, that the feudal system was a favourite branch of the Norman policy, and which they appear carefully to have established wherever they could get a firm footing. They did so, not only in Normandy and England, but also in _Sicily_, which they appear to have subdued much about the time of which we are now speaking, and which has groaned under the oppression of that System ever since, even to this day. Of the commencement of that order of things in that island, and its present aspect and bearings, a very recent writer gives the following account, which may serve to cast some light on the state of our country at the period now under consideration.

“Roger the Norman, conqueror of Sicily, and contemporary with our
William the First, on his accession to the throne, divided the lands
of the kingdom into three portions—One third of these was called the
demesnes of the Crown, which are administered by the corporation of
the royal towns where they are situated; each town, according to the
revenue of its demesnial lands, pays to the king a certain income,
besides maintaining the police, roads, &c. &c. and the tribute which
each territory pays is called the royal patrimony.—The next third
part of these lands was distributed by King Roger among his nobles;
some of these were fiefs contained within the territory of the
demesnial towns, while others had a town of their own, of which the
estate or barony formed the territory. Sometimes townships of these
baronial towns have estates belonging to them, which are administered
by their corporations, called giurati.—The remaining third portion
was either distributed among the bishops and mitred abbots, or served
to endow the several Convents, which in an age fertile in
superstition were so generally established.

“This distribution of property has remained thus ever since the
Norman Conquest; and all the noble fiefs, as they are held by a grant
in military tenure, are supposed to belong to the crown, and given to
a family and their descendants, subject to military service. This
Circumstance supposes an absolutely strict entail, which prevents the
sale of fiefs without the king’s sanction; (verbo regio;) it supposes
also the indivisibility of the fief—hence the rights of
promogeniture, which has reduced the younger branches of families to
a most miserable state. Thus the lands of the nobles are entailed in
their families. Those of the church are attached to it, and the
demesne lands are equally so to the corporations, as
above-mentioned.” {331}

Of the orders of Society in Sicily, the same writer says—

“Those princes, dukes, marquisses, and barons, who hold estates which
have a town, or sufficient population, are called parliamentary
barons, and have a right to sit in the assembly of the nobles: all
others are called rustic fiefs, and give no right of this kind to
their landlords, though they be decorated with a title.—The next
order of men are the clergy, who form a distinct assembly or house of
parliament, and consists of archbishops, bishops, archimandrites,
mitred abbots, &c. The principal of these are younger brothers of
the noble families; so that, in fact, the ecclesiastical house of
parliament is tied to the lords.—The next order of men consists of a
second rank of nobles, who hold fiefs without burghs, or towns, and
who, though they have the same splendid titles, have no seat in the
parliament. The next order are the burghers of the different towns;
these apply to agriculture, to the church, and to the medical and
legal professions: then come the artisans and peasants. These are
the peasants of the demesne, and those who are the vassals of the
parliamentary lords.”

After noticing the multiplied miseries under which the bulk of the people is involved by this wretched order of things, which forms an insuperable obstacle in the way of national happiness and prosperity, our author informs us, that, according to the original constitution of Sicily, the three houses of parliaments have the faculty of granting supplies to the Crown; but the majority of the two houses (he says) are sufficient; by which means the house of commons, or demesnial assembly becomes totally nugatory, and the lords and ecclesiastics, after generously granting the supplies, throw the whole burden of them on the commons. Whatever remonstrances are made, the matter is left to the decision of those who have done the evil, and the mischief is thus perpetuated: {333} for it seems they never think of yielding in the least to the remonstrances of the commons, or complaints of the people.

In Sicily the feudal system exists without its original energies; and it may be said to exist in its very worst state, so as to spend all its force in oppressing beyond measure the middle and lower orders of the community, or great body of the nation, without contributing to the real benefit of any. The consequence is that the people, for the most part, groan hopelessly under their burdens, and seem perfectly indifferent about the issue of the present contest with France. Yet some people seem to wonder at their supineness, and their not rising as one man in defence of their king and country. They might probably have done so, had their rulers been wise, and left them what would have been worth contending for, or defending. When rulers cease to feel for the people, it is not unnatural or unusual for the people also to cease to feel for them. This, perhaps, will apply to many of the recent changes among the European powers.

Beside the feudal system, our Norman conqueror introduced into this country divers other innovations—One of which was the separation of the Spiritual courts from the Civil; which was effected (says Blackstone) in order to ingratiate the new king with the popish clergy, who for sometime before had been endeavouring all over Europe to exempt themselves from the secular power; and whose demands the conqueror, like a politic prince, thought it prudent to comply with, by reason that their reputed sanctity had a great influence over the minds of the people; and because all the little learning of the times was engrossed into their hands, which made them necessary men, and by all means to be gained over to his interests. And this was the more easily effected, because the episcopal sees being then in the breast of the king, he had taken care to fill them with Italian and Norman prelates. This innovation produced very grievous consequences; so that by degrees the rights and privileges of the English clergy were delivered up into the hands of the Pope, who taxed them at his pleasure, and in process of time drained the kingdom of immense treasures: for besides all his other dues, arising from annates, first fruits, peter-pence, &c. he extorted large sums of money from the clergy for their preferments in the church. He advanced foreigners to the richest bishopricks, who never resided in their dioceses, nor so much as set foot upon English ground, but sent for all their profits to a foreign country; nay so covetous was his Holiness, that before livings became void, he sold them provisionally among his Italians, insomuch that neither the king nor his clergy had any thing to dispose of, but every thing was bargained before hand at Rome. {334}

Another grievous innovation, introduced at the same period, consisted in the depopulation of whole countries for the purposes of the king’s royal diversion; and subjecting both them and all the ancient forests of the kingdom to the unreasonable severities of forest laws imported from the continent, whereby the slaughter of a beast was made almost as penal as the death of a man. In the Saxon times, though no man was allowed to kill or chase the king’s deer, yet he might start any game, pursue, or kill it, upon his own estate. But the rigour of these new constitutions vested the sole property of all the game in England in the king alone; and no man was entitled to disturb any fowl of the air, or beast of the field, of such kinds as were specially reserved for the royal amusement of the sovereign, without express licence from the king, by a grant of a chase, or free warren: and those franchises were granted as much with a view to preserve the breed of animals as to indulge the subject. From a similar principle to which, though the forest laws are now mitigated, and by degrees grown entirely obsolete, yet from this root has sprung a bastard slip, known by the name of the _game law_, now arrived to and wantoning in its highest vigour: both founded upon the same unreasonable notions of permanent property in wild creatures; and both productive of the same tyranny to the commons; but with this difference, that the forest laws established only one mighty hunter throughout the land, the game laws have raised a little Nimrod in every manor. {335}

Another innovation produced by the conquest was, “narrowing the remedial influence of the country-courts, the great seats of Saxon justice, and extending the original jurisdiction of the king’s justiciaries to all kinds of causes arising in all parts of the kingdom. To this end the _Aula-regis_, with all its multifarious authority, was erected; and a capital justiciary appointed, with powers so large and boundless, that he became at length a tyrant to the people, and formidable to the crown itself. The constitution of this court, and the judges themselves who presided there, were fetched from Normandy: and the consequence naturally was, the ordaining that all proceedings in the king’s courts should be carried on _in the Norman_ [_or French_] _instead of the English language_:—a provision the more necessary, because none of his Norman justiciaries understood English; but as evident a badge of slavery as ever was imposed upon a conquered people.” And yet the nation was obliged to submit to it and bear it, for ages. The former plainness and simplicity now gave way to the abstruseness, chicanery, and subtilty, which have ever since so unhappily characterized our legal proceedings. {338a}

Another of the hateful innovations of the same memorable period was, the introduction of the _trial by combat_, for the decision of all civil and criminal questions of fact in the last resort. This was the immemorial practice of all the northern nations, but first reduced to regular and stated forms among the Burgundi, about the close of the fifth century: and from them it passed to other nations, particularly the Franks and the Normans; which last had the honour to establish it here, though clearly an unchristian, as well as most uncertain method of trial. But it was a sufficient recommendation of it to the conqueror and his warlike countrymen, that it was the usage of their native duchy of Normandy. {338b} This vile remain of ancient barbarism, and foul disgrace of the legal polity of our ancestors, has long ceased to exist in our island.