246 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 283. 



DRAMATIC ATTACK ON POPE AND CARDINALS. 

 (Vol. xi., p. 12.) 



J. M. B. asks for some information relative to 

 Card. Farnese's statement, that at Edward VI.'s 

 coronation plays were performed in vituperation 

 of the pope and cardinals. He refers to a note at 

 p. 113. of my Memoirs of the Council of I'rent. 

 At the time I had no knowledge of any historical 

 fact bearing upon the subject ; but very lately I 

 have found one, which appe.ars to me to favour 

 the cardinal's assertion with high probability. It 

 occurs in the volume issued by the Parker So- 

 ciety, containing the Correspondence of Archbishop 

 Parker. In pp. 20-29. will be found a series of 

 letters between Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, 

 and Dr. Matthew Parker, at the time Vice-Chan- 

 cellor of the University of Cambridge. The date 

 therefore, which is the early part of 1545, as well 

 as the other circumstances, sufficiently prove that 

 the occurrence, which will appear, is not the same 

 a's is asserted to have taken place at the coronation 

 of Edward VI. ; for it plainly belongs to the reign 

 of Henry VIII. It appears, by Gardiner's initi- 

 ative letter of the correspondence referred to, 

 that at Christ's College, Cambridge, the youths 

 belonging to the college had played a tragedy 

 called Pammachius, which he characterised as 

 very pestiferous, and concerning which he calls 

 for an account from the Vice-Chancellor. This 

 was given ; and it appears that the tragedy con- 

 tained passages vituperative enough of Rome, al- 

 thougli some of the lines were omitted on that 

 account. It certainly does appear a fair inference, 

 that if in the reign of Henry, who was tenacious 

 enough of what remained to him of his papal 

 faith, such an offence could be committed, it 

 ■would be no strange thing if it should be sub- 

 stantially repeated by his son. It would perhaps 

 be some drawback to the probability that any 

 apparent indiscretion should occur at the coro- 

 nation of a young prince, which took place the 

 next day to the funeral of his fiither. Still, from 

 the peculiarities of the age, such things might 

 happen. A good deal depends upon the real cha- 

 racter of the tragedy. 



It appears, particularly from Bayle, and more 

 minutely as to bibliography from Brunet, that the 

 tragedy of Pammachius was a production of the 

 fertile pen of Thomas Naogeorgus (he is best 

 known by his latinised name), and was published 

 at Viteberg, 1538, in 8vo. Another edition fol- 

 lowed the next year at Augsburg. The work is 

 so scarce that, unless it has been obtained very 

 lately, it has not found a place in the British 

 Museum,* the Bodleian Library, or the Advocates' 



[* It will be found in the new MS. Catalogue of the 

 British Museum, under the author's German name, 

 KiRCHMEYER, Thomas.] 



in Edinburgh. All that is known without in- 

 spection of the book is to be inferred from its 

 being dedicated to Archbishop Cranmer, and from 

 the first four lines of the Prologue which appear 

 in Bayle, where we are told that Pammachius was 

 a Roman bishop, who became weary (tcediian cepit) 

 of evangelic doctrine. It may readily be supposed 

 by any one acquainted with the less rare effusions 

 of the Bavarian's muse, that on such a subject his 

 words would not always be the honey of language. 



J. M. 



Sutton Coldfield. 



" OLD DOMINION." 

 (Vol. X., p. 235.) 



The popular story, that Virginia acknowledged 

 Charles II. before his restoration in England, is, 

 I believe, without foundation. Nor did she invite 

 him to rule over her. Clarendon says (Oxford, 

 1826, vl. 610. b. xiii.), "the king was almost in- 

 vited," &c. Equally erroneous is the rest of the 

 narrative, that Berkeley was brought from his 

 retirement and, " by a kind of obliging violence, 

 made governor on condition of his proclaiming 

 Charles," and that " the king, in compliment to 

 that colony, wore at his coronation a robe of the 

 silk that was sent from thence." I send some ex- 

 tracts from my MS. notes concerning the early 

 history of this country. They may, perhaps, help 

 your correspondents to get at the truth. 



1649, January 30. King beheaded. 



1649, October. Assembly met at Jamestown. 

 Act passed expressing veneration for king's me- 

 mory, declaring It treasonable to dispute his son's 

 right to the crown, or to maintain that the govern- 

 ment derived from the crown was extinct. 



1650, Act of parliament (Long), after de- 

 claring that Virginians had traitorously usurped 

 a power of government, declared them to be there- 

 fore notorious robbers and traitors. Sir George 

 Ayscue sent * with large army and fleet to subdue 

 them. 



1651, September 26. Council of State; Brad- 

 shaw being president, appointed Captain Robert 

 Dennis, Mr. Richard Bennett, Mr. Thos. Steg f 

 (Stagg), and Captain William Clairborne (the 

 three last-mentioned being planters), commis- 

 sioners for the reducement of Virginia. They 

 sailed in the " Guinea " frigate. 



1652, March. Dennis arrived at Jamestown, 

 demanded surrender ; Berkeley (Governor by au- 

 thority of Assembly and Council, also, it is said, 

 acting under warrant of Charles II., dated June, 

 1650, at Breda) hired some Dutch smugglers 



* Not by Cromwell, as generally said. 



t I should be obliged for information as to this Thomas 

 (Steg) Stagg. Was he the same Thomas, whose daughter 

 Mary was married to Robert Willys of Cambridgeshire ? 

 Or was he a brother of that Mary ? 



