Famous Imposters 34

Famous Imposters 34

There is little evidence of Elizabeth’s inner nature in these early

days; but we have every right to think that she was of a peaceable,

kindly and affectionate nature. Lady Bryan her first nurse or governess

(after Lady Boleyn, Anne’s mother) thought highly of her. Catherine

Ashley, who had charge of her next, loved her and was her devoted

servant, friend and confidant till her death.

 

Thomas Parry her life-long friend was devoted to her, and when the

circumstances of their respective lives and the happenings of the time

kept them apart, she restored him at the first opportunity and made his

fortune her special care.

 

There is little base here on which to build an inverted pyramid; our

only safety is in taking things as they seem to be and using common

sense.

 

 

(_b_) _Changes_

 

Let us now take the years beginning with 1544. From this time on, more

is known of the personality of Elizabeth; in fact there is little

unknown, that is, of matters of fact, and to this only we must devote

ourselves. Whatever may have been Elizabeth’s motives we can only infer

them. She was a secretive person and took few into her confidence,

unless it was of vital necessity--and then only in matters required by

the circumstance. The earliest knowledge we have of this second period

of her history is in her letter to Queen Catherine (Parr) written from

St. James’ Palace on 31 July, 1544.

 

In the year which had elapsed since her last recorded letter

Elizabeth’s literary style had entirely changed. The meagre grudging

style has become elegant and even florid with the ornate grace and

imagery afforded by the study of the Latin and French tongues.

Altogether there is not merely a more accomplished diction but there

is behind it a truer feeling and larger sympathy. It is more in accord

with the letter accompanying the gift to the Queen, of her translation

of the _Mirror of the Sinful Soul_ which she had dedicated to her.

 

Historians have given various rescripts of certain earlier letters of

the Princess Elizabeth, but none of them seem in harmony of thought

with this, whereas it is quite in accord with her later writings.

Metabolism is an accepted doctrine of physiology; but its scope is

not--as yet at all events--extended to the intellect, and we must take

things as we find them within the limits of human knowledge.

 

It will perhaps be as well to reserve the consideration of any other

point, except the change in actual identity, till the complete analogy

of all natural processes is an established fact.

 

 

(_c_) _Her personality_

 

We have no letters of Princess Elizabeth before 1543 which are not open

to grave doubt as to date, but there is one letter to which allusion

must almost of necessity be made. It is a letter from Roger Ascham,

tutor to the Princess Elizabeth, to Mrs. Ashley. No date is given

by Mr. Mumby, but he states in his text that it was written “during

Grindal’s term of office” as tutor to the Princess. Mumby quotes from

the _Elizabeth_ of Miss Strickland, who in turn quotes from Whittaker’s

_Richmondshire_. Now Grindal’s term of office lasted from 1546

(probably the end of that year) till it was cut short by his death from

the Plague in 1548, so that he could not have known his royal pupil

_before_ 1544. The text of the letter leads a careful reader to infer

that it was written _after_ that date. The important part of the letter

is as follows:

 

“... the thanks you have deserved from that noble imp by your

labour and wisdom now flourishing in all goodly godliness.... I

wish her Grace (Elizabeth) to come to that end in perfectness

and likelihood of her wit and painlessness in her study, true

trade of her teaching, which your diligent overseeing doth most

constantly promise.... I wish all increase of virtue and honour

to that my good lady, whose wit, good Mrs. Ashley, I beeseech

you somewhat favour. Blunt edges be dull and dure much pain to

little profit; the free edge is soon turned if it be not handled

thereafter. If you pour much drink at once into a goblet, the

most part will dash out and run over; if ye pour it softly you

may fill it even to the top, and so her Grace, I doubt not, by

little and little may be increased in learning, that at length

greater cannot be required.”

 

If this letter means anything at all--which in the case of such a man

as Roger Ascham is not to be doubted--it means that Mrs. Ashley, then

her governess, was cautioned not to press the little girl overmuch

in her lessons. It is an acknowledgment of the teacher’s zeal as well

as affection, and in the flowery and involved style of the period and

the man, illustrates the theory by pointing out the error of trying to

fill a small vessel from a larger one by pouring too fast. She is not

a backward child, he says in effect, but go slowly with her education,

you cannot give full learning all at once.

 

Compare this letter with that of the same writer to John Sturmius,

Rector of the Protestant University of Strasbourg, on the same subject

in 1550:

 

“The Lady Elizabeth has accomplished her sixteenth year; and so

much of solidity of understanding, such courtesy united with

dignity, have never been observed at so early an age. She has

the most ardent love of true religion and of the best kind of

literature. The constitution of her mind is exempt from female

weakness, and she is endued with a masculine power of application.

 

“No apprehension can be quicker than hers, no memory more

retentive. French and Italian she speaks like English; Latin with

fluency, propriety and judgment; she also spoke Greek with me,

frequently, willingly, and understanding well. Nothing can be

more elegant than her handwriting, whether in the Greek or Roman

character. In music she is very skilful but does not greatly

delight. With respect to personal decoration, she greatly prefers

a simple elegance to show and splendour, so despising the outward

adorning of plaiting the hair and of wearing of gold, that in

the whole manner of her life she rather resembles Hippolyta than

Phædra.”

 

That such a scholar as Roger Ascham makes the simile is marked.

Hippolyta was a Queen of the Amazons and Phædra was an almost

preternaturally womanly woman, one with a tragic intensity of passion.

 

The Elizabeth whom we know from 1544 to 1603 certainly had brains

enough to protect her neck. In 1549 Sir Robert Tyrwhitt wrote to the

Protector Somerset, apropos of the strenuous effort being made to gain

from her some admission damaging to herself concerning Thomas Seymour’s

attempts to win her hand:

 

“She hath a very pretty wit and nothing is gotten out of her but by

great policy.”

 

In a letter from Simon Renard Ambassador to the Emperor Charles V dated

London September 23, 1553, there is incidentally a statement regarding

Elizabeth’s character which it is wise to hold in mind when discussing

this particular period of her history. Writing of Elizabeth’s first

attendance at Mass he said: “she, Mary, ... entreated Madame Elizabeth

to speak freely of all that was on her conscience, to which the

Princess replied that she was resolved to declare publicly that in

going to Mass as in all else that she had done, she had only obeyed the

voice of her conscience; and that she had acted freely, without fear,

deceit, or pretence. We have since been told, however, that the said

Lady Elizabeth is very timid, and that while she was speaking with the

Queen she trembled very much.”

 

Compare with this the letter of 16th March, 1554 to the Queen (Mary)

written just as she was told to go to the Tower. In this letter which

is beautifully written and with not a trace of agitation she protests

her innocence of any plot. Her mental attitude was thoroughly borne

out by a calm dignity of demeanour which is more in accord with male

than female nature. In very fact Elizabeth appears all her life since

1544 to have been playing with great thoughtfulness and yet dexterity a

diplomatic game--acting with histrionic subtlety a part which she had

chosen advisedly.

 

A good idea of the personality of Elizabeth during the period beginning

with 1544 may be had from a brief consideration of the risks which a

person taking up such an imposture would run, first at the time of

beginning the venture and then of sustaining the undertaken rôle.

At the outset a boy of ten or eleven would not think of taking it

seriously. At first he would look on it as a “lark” and carry out the

idea with a serious energy only known in play-time. Later thought

would give it a new charm in the shape of danger. This, while adding

to his great zest, would sober him; thence on it would be a game--just

such a game as a boy loves, perpetual struggle to get the best of

someone else. To some natures wit against wit is a better strife than

strength against strength, and if one were well equipped for such a

fray the game would satisfy the ambition of his years. In any case when

once such a game was entered on, the stake would be his own head--a

consideration which must undoubtedly make for strenuous effort--even in

boyhood.

 

The task which would have followed--which did follow if the Bisley

story is true--would have been vastly greater. If the imposture

escaped immediate detection--which is easily conceivable--a new kind

of endeavour would have been necessary; one demanding the utmost care

and perpetual vigilance in addition to the personal qualities necessary

for the carrying out of the scheme. Little help could be given to the

young boy on whom rested the weight of what must have appeared to all

concerned in it a stupendous undertaking. From the nature of the task,

which was one which even the faintest breath of suspicion would have

ruined, the little band, originally involved, could gain no assistance.

Safety was only possible by the maintenance of the most rigid secrecy.

All around them were enemies served by a host of zealous spies. If then

the story be true, those who carried such an enterprising situation

to lasting success, must have been no common persons. Let us suppose

for a moment that the story was true. In such case the Boy of Bisley

who acted the part of the Princess Elizabeth could have had only two