SIR DAVID LVNDSAY AND THE SCOTTlSH REFORMATION Thesis far the Degree of M. A. MlCHlGAN SKATE COLLEGE William R. Barclay 19é8 f", a r7: . L 1 t ‘ t r J | 't'x 4 ’ '\' ." l‘.‘ t , i W 4.. ,7; L' )V’l 9‘ 1 I '1“ '5. wt 1," 'v ”I t ‘ x I , .' i t‘ I . ; , t 3 J t 1' (it . 3w. , . A. 1 . L' 1 x l 3“. I i , }' . '\ . ,‘ L, 'i. t '1 I \ t r‘ 1 k L _J J V t 4 N W 9 T 1 This is to certify that the thesis entitled Sir David Lyndsay and the Scottish Reformation presented by W1111am.R. Barclay has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Mmflegree ith W’ 1; '55.. a Major professor 11/27/48 t. i? ‘37 Date t b 4. “ ‘x V . ‘y ,5 . . H.795 a, ’J rv , ’U T—TP ’i‘i‘ I 7 [ ‘3 f ' ’ "_ ' w ' ‘ ' - """ l ‘ hi?) i } (i ’ ft , t» ‘ 1 u f .. f {\‘H k ’F M . 1 1 , ' ‘4', 7‘ . - 'F. x ’i t 1 In a t ‘ f . . / - t .1 I . i it 1 ‘i‘ f 7. E -’ t j 2 ‘ 4 w‘ t x e - < 1/ a , g a I : ‘i Y I ls. l 1 H ’ r \ ,1“ ‘ t‘ i I ‘Li ’,-i " i 4 t 1 I L ‘ i r } ‘ . . 'P I; d “ f “’4 1 F 31 ’ ‘. I . v, r ‘ ,- ‘l , ‘ 1 t , . ‘ I I ,’ K K i ’ D SIR DAVID LYNDSAY AND THE SCOTTISH REFORMATION by William R. Barclay m A THESIS Submitted to the Graduate School of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of English 1948 I. II. III. IV. CONTENTS Lyndsay's Career in Relation to His Times Lyndsay on Scottish Social and Political Problems Lyndsay on Religion and the Church An Eyaluation 127 PREFACE There has been a considerable interest shown in recent years, particularly in Great Britain, in the works of Sir David Lyndsay. Most of the published results of this interest have been concerned with specialized problems, ranging from scholarly articles on details to William Murison's book on Lyndsay's position as a satirist of the old church. This study is designed to give a more general evaluation of Lyndsay's works and to show how he fit into the times in which he lived. I believe that I entered this study without any particular axe to grind, but perhaps my frequently expressed unwillingness to accept the interpretation that Lyndsay's primary purpose was to kick away the props which supported the Scottish establish- ment of the Roman Kirk is an indication to the contrary. The quotations used in this study are from the E.E.T.S. edition of Lyndsay's works. Only one emendation has been made in any of the material quoted: The punctuation in the passage from the Complaynt g: Schir David Lindesay, l. 92, has been altered so that "pa, Da Lyn" is the entire quotation from young King James V. The E.E.T.S. edition also includes "Vpon the lute" in quotes, which hardly seems in keeping with the baby-talk of the preceeding phrase. The passage reads satisfactorily if 'vpon the lute" runs into the follow- ing line. Since the availability of Lyndsay's works was a necessity throughout the period of preparation of this paper, I used the older E.E.T.S. volume rather than Douglas Hamer's excellent but less readily accessible four volume edition for the Scottish text society. I have taken advantage of Hamer's edition fre- quently, however, as is indicated by citations to his work throughout the paper. It has been both a pleasure and a major part of my educa— tion to prepare this study under the supervision of Professor Arnold Williams. His advice and his encouragement are major ingredients in this paper. LYNDSAY'S CAREER IN RELATION TO HIS TIMES To say that Sir David Lyndsay lived during a period of religious and political turmoil would hardly tie his career to a definite time in Scottish history. But it can at least be maintained that events during Lyndsay's lifetime —- from about 1490 to 1555 -- intensified the political conflict and confusion characterizing all of Scots history before the un— ion. Inseparably and simultaneously, religious develOpments of the period determined the course of the controversy which finally resulted in the overthrow in Scotland of Roman Cath- olic doctrine and institutions. Early in Lyndsay's life his king, James IV, married Margaret Tudor, daughter of Henry VII -— a match significant as a major step towards the eventual union between the two British kingdoms. But the promise of peace suggested by this political marriage was not to be realized. Both Scottish monarchs with whom Lyndsay was closely associated were inp volved in disasterous defeats by English forces: James IV himself was killed at Flodden in 1513; James V‘s forces were defeated at the battle of Solway Moss in 1542, and he died a month later. Both kings were succeeded by regencies for 3 their infant heirs: James V W38 1688 than a year and a half old when his father lost his life at Flodden; his daughter Mary was born only a week before his own death. The struggle for power during the minorities of both of these rulers made stable government impossible in Scotland at a time when the Tudors were consolidating and strengthening the traditional enemy to the south. Political control during these regencies was determined by shifting combinations of power-seeking no- bility, and civil law was dependent upon the whims of local barons and outlaws. At the same time, the battle lines were beginning to form for the coming religious struggles. Lyndsay was a small boy in 1494 when the thirty "Lollards of Kyle” were prosecuted for heresy.1 Patrick Hamilton, the first major martyr in Scotland's long and hard fought changeover to Presbyterisnism, went to the stake in 1528, about the time Lyndsay was writing the first of his surviving works, the Dreme.2 Hamilton's heresy involved doctrine, and resulted in his execution;3 1 After a considerable Opportunity for the Lollards to as- sume an aggressive defence, James IV dismissed the proceedings against them. His action came despite their strong Wyclifite stand (at least as Knox describes their doctrines) on such is- sues as transubstantiation, indulgences and excommunication, veneration of saints, use of images, etc. Of. John.Knox, pp. 7-120 3 0.1L Trevelyan, England L1; the Age 9; Eycliffe, pp. 353.54. 3 Knox I pp. 14—16 and.John M. Ross Ecottish History and Literature 22 the périod g; the Reforma on, p. . Lyndsay's own versified attack on the church in the Dagmg was confined largely to the spiritual, intellectual, and moral poverty of the clergy, and he lived to strike other and more telling blows under the protection of James V. The religious ferment increased during Lyndsay's lifetime, and reached a cli— max five years after his death when the Confession of Faith was ratified by the parliament and Scotland officially became protestant. There is ample evidence in Lyndsay's works that he was a careful and conscientious observer of the sweeping panorama of change which he witnessed from the vantage point of the royal court. He was no dispassionate recorder of these events which transformed Scotland's shaky independence at the beginning of the sixteenth century into partial union.with England in.the early seventeenth. Nor was it with disinterest that he wit— nessed the change in Scottish religion from a decadent Roman Catholicism to a vigorous Calvinsitic protestantism. It is the attempt of this examination of Lyndsay and his writings to establish his position in these upheavals. To what extent was Lyndsay merely a reporter, and to what extent was he a moving force? Where did he favor reform, in a strict, literal sense; where did he advocate complete overthrow of ex- isting institutions? How much was be concerned with doctrine in contrast to matters primarily pertaining to church organi- zation? To answer all such questions with finality is beyond the scOpe of this paper; it is hOped, however, that such answers as are presented will help establish a comprehensible view of Lyndsay's stand on the important issues of his own time. To do this we shall look primarily to the texts of Lyndsay's writings. Parallel works will be cited only to show his relationship to the idea world which was his heritage. Calling attention to all the similar treatments of Lyndsay's subject matter would result in a notable project;_this study can only hint at the widespread literary reflection of the problems which he tackled. Assumptions about Lyndsay's influence in bringing about the Reformation in Scotland have been made by various of the older critics. Such assumptions, unfortunately, are rarely backed by any information more significant than details about Lyndsay's pOpularity some generations after the reformation was accomplished. Until other evidence can be uncovered, students of Lyndsay and his times will of necessity content themselves with generalizations regarding his importance in bringing about reform. This paper will be confined to more tangible matters. The details of Lyndsay's life are pertinent to this study chiefly for two reasons: first, to show what relation- ship exists between his dual careers as court poet and as lyon herald and diplomat, and second, to indicate biographical facts which throw light on his relative immunity while others of the same mind but of lesser political importance fled Scotland by the hundreds.4 Conjectures on these factors by various critics have been.based on a very few facts and a good bit of deduction, not always too astute. Perhaps the most revealing biographical comment on Lynd— say before he became a court figure has been made by Tyler in his Scottish Worthies, where he wrote, "The truth is, of the youth of Lyndsay nothing is known."5 0f the inferences and guesses which have been made, the most significant is the dating of his birth. Chalmer's approximation, 1490, has been frequently adOpted, but Hamer offers interesting evidence for an earlier date. He pr0poses that Lyndsay was born on or be— fore 19 October, 1486, on the assumption that he was at least twenty-one when he received a grant of land on that date in 1507.6 Chalmer's inference that Lyndsay had been in residence at St. Andrews for approximately three years in 1508, based on the entry of a "Da. Lindesay" in the records of St. Salvator's 4 A clear—cut example of the freedom which Lyndsay enjoyed can be found in the issue of scripture translations in English. In theS Satyre of the Threi Estaitis, Lyndsay leaves no doubt about his advocacy of the Bible in the vernacular. On the basis of a letter from Sir Thomas Eure to Thomas, Lord Cromwell (cited in some detail in Chapter II, below) it appears likely that this material was included in the 1540 version of the Satrye. In a letter to Lord Cromwell dated 29 March, 1539, Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, tells of gentlemen and clerks who had fled for their lives across the border for "redying of Scrip— ture in Inglishe." (Quoted by David Laing, editor, in Knox, p. 66h.) 5 Quoted by William Murison, sn- David L ndsa , p. 2. 6DouglasH Hamer, The Works of Sir David Lindsay of the Mount, IV, p Hamer naa'aar IIer rairawea the 1396 fr athIOn. College in that year, conflicts with the Exchequer Rolls for 1508.7 It hardly seems likely that the St. Andrews student and equerry to the king's oldest son were the same person.8 The 1508 statement in the Exchequer Rolls regarding Lyndsay is the earliest concrete piece of biographical evi— , dence available. Unfortunately, there is a gap in the royal records shortly thereafter, which precludes the possibility of further information from that source until 1511. In that year an entry refers to Lyndsay's part as an actor in a play given before the king and queen at Holyrood. Sir David's kinsman, RObert Lindesay of Pitscottie, and George Buchanan both refer to Lyndsay's part in an incident at Linlithgow in 1513 where a ghost-like figure warned James IV against his impending English campaign. The incident suggests that Lyndsay was already a man of some influence in court circles, although there is no reason to believe that his immediate family was either prominent or of high rank.9 7 Aeneas J.G. Mackay, "David Lindsay," Dictionary gf_flap tional Biography, XXXIII, p. 288b. 8 The scholarly process of examination of local and aca- demic records has uncovered a good deal of interesting infor- mation, but it has also led into an occasional blind alley. In tracing details regarding Henryson, about whom biOgraphi- cal data is even more sparse than in thecase of Lyndsay, Laing found references to thirty men of that name contempor- ary with the poet and living in the same area. (Cf. H. Har— The Lyndsays, too, were a prolific family, and even the early court records would be questionable if it were not for sup— porting evidence. By the time of this apparition at Linlithgow, Lyndsay had become usher and one of three tutuors to the king's second son, later James v.10 There is no better source regarding Lyndsay's activities as usher than his own works. In the epistil to James V which precedes the EggggJ Lyndsay reminds his king, Quhen thow wes soung, I bure the in myne arme, Full tenderlie, tyll thow begouth to gang, [walk], And in thy bed oft happit the full warme. (11. 8.10) Lyndsay tells how he sang and danced for the young prince, sometimes acting in plays and disguising himself in various manners (11. 11-18). As James grew older, Lyndsay took care of many of his personal needs, including keeping his purse (11. 19-25). He told him stories from classical history and mythology, as well as relating British prOphecies and tales of loyal lovers; (11. 29—48). In a somewhat later work, the Comolaynt (c. 1529), Lyndsay repeats some of this account of his relationship with young James, and adds a few more descrip- tive details of his duties as attendant.11 In this work 9 Mackay, p. 290a. For a more detailed discussion of this incident, Cf. below, pp. 10 The older son, for whom Lyndsay had been equerry, died in infancy. 11 Lyndsay calls attention in the Comolaynt to his own ten— dency to repeat: And, ay, quhen thow came frome the souls, Than I behuffit to play the fule: As I at lenth, in to my dreme, My sindry seruyce did expreme. (11. 97—100) he again calls to James' attention how he had ...enterit to thy Maiestie The day of thy Natyuitie. (11. 15-16) He describes in detail his playing with his young master: Quhow, as ane Chapman beris his pak, I bure thy grace Vpon my bak, And, sumtymes, strydlingis on my nek, Dansand with mony bend and bek. (11. 87-90) James is reminded that "Pa, Da Lyn (Play, David Lyndsay)," (Vpon the lute) (l. 92) were his first words, and that "Da Lyn" entertained him almost without rest (1. 95). Lyndsay's position at the time of the composition of the earlier of these poems was considerably different from that of the period he describes. The 252mg, or most of it, probably was written while Lyndsay was at his family home, the Mount, in Fife. The Earl of Angus, last of James' re-* gents and his virtual captor, had separated the king from his older companion, although Lyndsay continued to receive a royal pension.12 By the time of the Complaynt, Lyndsay was again a member of the royal circle, and he remained in close connection with the court until shortly before his death. James may have played a significant part in making the Satyre 2£_the Threi Estaitis Lyndsay's most important work. It is known that he and his queen attended the first per- formance of this lengthy morality. T.F. Henderson, in the Cambridgp History 9: English Literature, speculates that the 13 Cf. Complaynt, 11. 269-72: For weill I knew his graces mynd Was euer to me trew and kynd, And contrar thare Intentioun, Gert pay me, weill, my pentioun, actual encouragement of the king in the writing of this work was probable.15 Several other of Lyndsay's poems indicate the close re- lationship of the poet with the court. The Testament Egg 'Comolaynt 2: Our Souerane Lordis Paoyngo (c. 1530) purports to relate the unfortunate fall and death—bed advice of the king's parrot. The royal bird, which had been entrusted to Lyndsay -- James' "simpyll seruetoure" (l. 85), left a 119- line epistil to the king which is one of the clearest pre— sentations of Lyndsay's conception of a monarch. The poem also devotes forty-three seven-line stanzas to the bird's advice to courtiers, based in part on morals drawn from Scottish history. Courtiers and their foibles are also treated in the Complaint g£_£Q§_Kingis 52;; Hound Callit Bagsche. An even closer relationship with the king is alggested by 129 Angwe: 19 Xg_Kingis Flytipg (roughly: scolding). In this brief (seventy-line) poem, Lyndsay answers a work ad— dressed to him by James which has not survived. Lyndsay calls James the "Prince of Poetry" (1. 21) and the flower of "flo- wand Rethorik" (1. 70), but his praise of James' poetic skill seems humorous rather than flattering. We do not know what 13 "Sir David Lyndsay," Cambridge Historygg_snglisb Lit- erature, III, p. 139. Henderson points out that at about this time Buchanan was influenced by James to satirize the Francis- cans. 10 James wrote in his original "flyting," but apparently he had made a good-natured attack on Lyndsay's age as being too great to allow him much success with the ladies. Lyndsay's Answer, for the most part, is in such a light hearted spirit, but the seriousness of his advising the king to mend his mor- als is obvious. Only one poem survives which shows clearly Lyndsay's position as official court poet. The Deploratioun g: Egg. Deith gf'Quene Magdalene (1538) offers conventional tribute to the bride of James, who died shortly after her arrival in Scotland. Two other of Lyndsay's minor works reinforce this picture of his close relationship with his king: Ap£_gppr plication,ig Contemptioun 2£,§yde Taillis, written as an at— tack on excesses in women's clothing, is directly addressed to James. ‘Ihg_lusting betuix Iames Watsoun,‘§gg'£hppg_§§£, 2922, a double barrelled satire on the custom of tournaments and the medical profession, describes the battle which the poet says the king and queen witnessed. Little else of blagraphical interest can be gleaned from Lyndsay's works. But at the same time as he was estab- lishing his reputation for literary satire, Lyndsay was a man of affairs involved in several foreign embassies for the crown. Sometime around 1550 he began acting as "lyon king of arms," a function more or less that of chief herald of the realm. He used the title when abroad, but Hamer offers sub- stantial evidence that he was not officially made lyon king 11 until 1542, at the same time as his elevation to the knight- ' hood.14 In 1531, Lyndsay made his first recorded trip out— side of Scotland when he accompanied Sir John Campbell and David Panter, the king's secretary, on an embassy to the court of Emperor Charles V. This mission succeeded in obtaining a renewal of the hundred—year old alliance between Scotland and the Netherlands.15 In the Answer, Lyndsay prephesies a French Hatch for the king,16 and in 1533 he set out for France with the Duke of Albany and others to make the arrangements for such a marriage. The French king was reluctant to give up his daughter Magda— lene, who was never well, possibly as an effect of tuberculo- sis. James finally persuaded him, and the wedding took place 14 IV, 288-89. Chalmers believed that Lyndsay was knighted and made lyon king in 1530, a tradition followed by John Nichol in his “A Short Sketch of Scottish Poetry...,“ included in the E.E.T.S. edition of Lyndsay's Works (p. xxxvii), and by Ross, p. 389. Mackay, following Laing, maintained that the double honor took place “not later than 1529" (p. 29Gb). 15 From this trip comes Lyndsay's only surviving letter, dated Antwerp, 23 August, 1531. Lyndsay's signature, his only available autograph, is the reason for the spelling of his name used in this paper. For a reproduction of his autograph, cf. Murison, frontispiece. Murison's first chapter and Mackay's account in the Q§§,provide the basis for biographical material. 16 With seriousness tempered with humor, Lyndsay warns, Bot t be war with lawbouring of our lance! Sum sayis thare cummis ane bukler urth of france, Quhilk wyll indure our dintis, thocht they be dour. (11. 8 -69) 12 in Notre Dame on 1 January, 1537; but Magdalene died shortly after her arrival in Scotland. Since a legitimate heir was a political necessity, James wasted little time in remarrying. So far as is known, Lynd— say had no direct part in the negotiations leading to this second marriage, but he was on hand at St. Andrews in June of 1538 with a ceremonial welcome for James' new bride, Mary of Lorraine. Lyndsay's next offical mission came after the death of his king and friend. In the capacity of lyon king of arms, he returned various orders and decorations which James had been awarded by Eur0pean rulers. Scotland‘s favor had been widely sought during James' lifetime, and his companion who survived him undertook a considerable tour when he returned awards to three royal courts. James died on 14 December, 1542,17 and by early spring of 1544 Lyndsay had taken back decorations to the Emperor Charles, Francis I of France, and Henry VIII. Lyndsay's activities as an ambassador did not cease with Janes' death. In 1548, he visited the court of Christian III to take part in arrangements for free tradebetween Scotland and Denmark. This mission also attempted, unsuccessfully, to secure Danish assistance in protecting Scottish coastal ship- ping against English raids. 17 This is Murison's date (p. 12). Mackay places James' death two days later (p. 293a). More significant for our purposes than the actual date is the fact that David Lyndsay was present at the time of James' death. 13 Although his visit to the court of Denmark is Lyndsay's last recorded foreign journey, he continued to carry out the duties of lyon king. Shortly before his death he may have presided over a meeting of heralds.18 Presumably, he had retired to the Mount some time earlier, and he may have writ- ten the Monarche (c. 1554) at his family home. Laing was the first editor of Lyndsay to place the date of his death in 1555; Chalmers and others advocated dates as much as three years later, which would have given Lyndsay a much better Opportunp ity to see the approach of the changes he had helped shape.19 We know very little about Lyndsay's personal life. He was married in approximately 1522 to a Janet Douglas, appar- ently no immediate connection of the powerful family. Court resords refer to her only as seamstress to the queen. Other information about his private affairs or his personality and habits is hard to come by. An interesting, though not neces- sarily significant passage in the Complaynt gives a partial view of Lyndsay in the process of gathering material to ex- pose in his satires. At the time the poet was describing, James was under the control of Angus, who had little interest in the king's welfare. According to Lyndsay, the Angus party ¥__ 18 Nichol, p. xxxix. 19 Of. Ross, p. 412. Murison (p. 15) cites an entry in the Register of the Privy Seal which indicates that Lyndsay died. shortly bEfore 18—April, 1555. This record also indicates that Sir David was succeeded as lyon king by his younger brother, Alexander. Mackay does not agree on the matter of Lyndsay's successor; (p. 295a). 14 discontinued James' education (1. 132) and introduced him to immorality (11. 237-52). Although banished from the king's presence, Lyndsay was still interested in his affairs: Quhen I durst nother peip nor luke, it wald I hyde me in ane nuke, 0 see those vncouth vaniteis, Quhow thay, lyke ony beisy beis, Did occupy thare goldin houris, With help of thare new gouernouris.20 (11. 275—80) The view of Lyndsay observing the misdeeds of the court from dark corners, of course, is not a typical one. But it is obvious that he kept himself well informed on matters per- taining to Scotland's welfare. The Papypgo and the Tragedie '9: the Cardinall (c. 1547) indicate that Lyndsay kept careful watch on the activities and intrigues of those in high places, orienting his observations to his sound knowledge of Scottish I political and ecclesiastical history. For a time (1543-46), Lyndsay utilized his knowledge and experience in governmental affairs as a member of parliament for his home district.21 From his writings and the meager biographical material we have, there emerges a picture of Lyndsay as the capable, witty, (frank, and fairly well educated courtier who was trusted and 20 We should not gather that Lyndsay's only purpose in ad- vising the young king was to instil some sort of Puritan mor- ality. In the Pa v 0, he lists "Halkyng, hountyng, armes, and leifull amour'i §%. 274) as the pr0per recreation of princes, and includes music 1. 278-77, 283—84) and the chivalric arts (11. 285—88) as necessary subjects in the training of a king. He repeats much the same advice in the Satyge (11. 1841—50), including "mirth and lawful mirrines" among the "honest pas- times for ane King.“ _ 21 Nicol, p. xxxviii. admired by his king. One incident recorded by Henry Charteris in his 1588 edition of Lyndsay's works illustrates some of these characteristics: It cummis to my memorie ane prettie trik, quhilk sumtyme I haue hard reportit of him. The Kingis grace, Iames the Fyft, beand on ane certane tyme accumpanyit with ane greit nowmer of his Nobillis, & ane greit me e of BischOppis, Abbottis and prelatis standing about, he quiklie & pretitilie inuentit ane prettie trik to teine yame. He cummis to the King, and efter greit dewgard & salutap tionis, he makis him as thocht he war to requyre sum wechtie thing of the Kingis grace. The King per— sauand, demandis quhat he wald haue? he answeris: “Schir, I haue seruit sour grace lang, & lukis to be rewardit as vtheris ar. And now 3our maister Tail eour at the plesure of God is departit; quhafafoir I wald desyre of your grace, to bestow this 1ytil benefits upon me, as ane part of reward of my lang seruice, to mak me 3our maister tail eour." The King beleuand in dede his tailg eour to be e- partit, sayis to him: "Quhairto wald thow be my tail3eour? thow can nouther schaip nor sew?" he answeris: "Schir, that makis na mater: forge haue geuin Bischiprikis and benefices to mony standing heir about 30w: and 3it can they nouther teiche, nor preiche. And quhy may I not than as weill by our tailBeour, thocht I can nouther schaip nor sew; seing teiching and preiching is no les requisite to thair vocatioun, than schaiping & sewing is to ane ta113 eouris." The King incontinent persauit his consait, and leuch merilie thairat: bgg the BischOppis at sic bourding leuch neuer ane quhit.‘ One further phase of Lyndsay's life, his relations with the leaders of the Scottish Reformation, adds a little light and considerable argument to his sketchy biography. Knox first mentions Lyndsay in his History astleing significant in the elevation of the Earl of Arran as "governor" after the death 33 P. 4., (The entire preface is repeated in the E.E.T.S. edition of Lyndsay.) 16 23 Arran's policies wereggenerally inclined to of James V. the pro—English party: but more important to Knox (and pos- sibly alSo to Lyndsay), Arran was the alternative to a re— gency under Cardinal Beaton.24 In describing the beginning of his preaching in Scot- land, Knox makes a more detailed reference to Lyndsay. Writing in the third person, Knox says that he had resisted the urge to preach "whare God had nott called him." Sir David comes into the account as being to some extent connected with presenting the reformer with the necessary call. Knox describes the incident, which took place in 1547, in his own words: ...thei CFMaister Henry Balnaves and Johne Rowght, preachearQ] prively amanges thame selfis advising, having with thame in counsall Schir David Lyndesay of the Mount{ thei conclgged, that thei wold geve a charge to the as d Johnne... Much has been made of this mention of Lyndsay as an evidence of his protestant inclinations. Actually, the account related does little 0‘ a concrete nature except reinforce the picture of Lyndsay as a man whose judgment was valued and whose ad- vice was sought. Had Knox not recorded the event, some spec- ulative critic of Presbyterian bias might well have established such a situation by deduction. Balnaves was something of a poet, and Lyndsay might have been better acquainted with him as an author than as a reformer. Lyndsay's attitude towards 23 P. 106 34 Beaton claimed to have a testament signed by the late king which bequeathed to him the custody of Mary, the royal infant. Of. John Burton Hill, The History of Scotland, p. 189: This was the Beaton whose asshsination in 1548 brought forth Lyndsay's satirical Tragedie. 17 the degeneracy of the clergy was no doubt well known: the Satyre had been performed at least once, and his early works presumably had circulated in manuscript. Knox, like most re- formers, was vigorous in his attacks on the short-comings of the established church, and it might well be that Lyndsay favored his public preaching on grounds not primarily doc- trinal. But this one connection, recorded only by Knox him— self, has been interpreted as Lyndsay's stamp of approval on the unsuccessfulafirotestant revolt which centered around Knox' public sermons. Nichol's comment is fairly typical of this school of interpretation: "Lyndesay, who had aways been a Protestant, and now avowed it onenly, espoused the cause of the insurgents.”26 Apparently basing their inferences largely on this sol- itary mention of Lyndsay's part in Knox' rise to leadership of the religious revolters, various nineteenth century com— mentators on Lyndsay say that the poet was present with the protestant group beseiged at St. Andrew's Castle. The Rev. Mr. Ross, who would have liked as well as any other to connect Lyndsay directly with Knox, has helped dismiss this Opinion by pointing out that at the time of the siege, Lyndsay was sitting in parliament as commissioner for the burgh of Cupar. But Ross, too, bows to the general interpretation and says 35 p. 186. 25 P. xxxviii. 18 that "his sympathies were undoubtedly on theirside."87 Another section of this study shall consider in detail Speculations about Lyndsay's sympathies. But it is Lyndsay's career as a poet that gives significance to any interpreta. tion of his stand on religious issues which might be made. Lyndsay, the man of affairs, is an interesting figure, but such attention as has been paid to him stems from his liter- ary, not his political and religious activities. We can find in his writings some of his ideas on poetic theory and prac- tice, and considerable analysis of himself as a poet. We can also establish a general picture of Lyndsay's relationship to the drama, a matter of more direct concern to the overall history of English literature than any interpretations in- volving his biography or his didactic subject matter. Lyndsay's frequent allusions to classical, medieval and contemporary authors suggest a considerable familiarity with the literary and scholarly heritage of his times. While there is no convincing evidence that Lyndsay ever attended any of the Scottish universities, we can reasanably assume that he had a sound foundation in Latin. An edict of James IV in 1496 commanded compulsory education for certain groups of Scottish society, which would have included young Lyndsay. According to the requirements of this edict, the poet would have been trained in “Latina. Art and Jure-”33 Mackay maintains that Lyndsay may have attended school at Holdington, as did John Knox, John Major, and Gavin Douglas, and possibly William 37 P. 408. 38 Herbert Maxwell, Edinburjh: 5 Historical Study, pp. 81—82. 19 Dunbar and George Buchanan.29 But wherever Lyndsay was ed— ucated, he was well grounded in humanistic studies. He did not establish a wide-spread reputation as a humanist as did Buchanan and Major, but rather followed a different tradition of the informal man of learning who took his place in public life. Lyndsay's allusions to references based on his learning are extensive, but they do not fit into any organized pattern. We have already seen how he told the young king stories which would have been part of the background of any well-educated Eur0pean of the early sixteenth century. Among the figures from history, the Bible, literature and mythology whom he used as illustrations for the prince were Hector, Arthur, Julius Caesar, Alexander, Pompey, Jason, Hedia, Hercules, Samp- son, Troilus, Thomas of Ercildoune, Bede and iierlin.30 Know- ledge of a different sort is reflected in the Monarchs, where Lyndsay shows his familiarity with the scriptures as their interpretation as well as with the historical tradition of th near—Eastern monarchies.31 An indication that Lyndsay's a1- lusions, though widespread, were not necessarily repetitions of standard critical interpretions is also found in the Monarohe. 39 P. 289b. 30 Dreme, 11. 32—46. 31 Diodorus, Josephus, and Orosius are cited by Lyndsay as his chief sources. On one occasion, he uses Erasmus as an au- thority (l. 1252). 20 His citation of Hesiod as the "perfyte poet souerane" of Greece (e. 229) is hardly in keeping with usual critical evaluations. Writing about more nearly contemporary authors in the Panyngo, Lyndsay offers conventional blanket tribute to the English masters: Off Poetis now in tyll our vulgare toung; For quhy the bell of Rethorick bene roung Be Chawceir, Goweir, and Lidgate laureate. Quho dar presume thir Poetis tyll Impung, 1 Quhose sweit sentence throuch Albione bene song?~2 (11. 10—14) He shows an even greater lack of discrimination in his citations of Scottish makers. Henryson is mentioned once (1. 19) along with five other poets in the same line, Dunbar, ...quhilk language had at large, As maye be sene in tyll his golden targe, (11. 18-17) fares a little better; but such lesser figures as Kennedy and Sir James Inglis are given treatment approximately equal to that concerning the greater poet. Only Gavin Douglas, of all the British poets whose names have remained alive, is given detailed praise. About this somewhat older contemporary Lynd- say writes: And, as Phebus dois Synthia presell, So Gawane Douglas, ByschOpe of Dunkele, Had, quhen he was in to this land on lyue, Abufe vulgare Poetis prerogatyue, Boith in pratick and speculatioun. I saye no more; gude redaris may discryue 32 It is interesting to note that Lyndsay makes no indica— tion of familiarity with the works of contemporary southern poets such as Hawes, Shelton, or Wyatt. 21 His worthy workis, in nowmer mo than fyue, And, speciallye, the trew translatioun Off Uirgill, quhilk bene consolatioun To cunnyng men, to knaw his gret Ingyne, Als weill in Naturall Science as Deuyne. (11. 26-36) Lyndsay comments frequently on his own poetic style and ability, but it is difficult to separate conventional self- disparagement from the possible attempt at objective analysis. The lines in the "Epistil to the Redar" at the beginning of the Monarchs, Go hence, pure poor Buke, quhilk I have done indyte In rurall ryme, in maner of dispyte, (11. 100-101) offer a late example of a common medieval device.33 Similar sentiment and phrasing is found elsewhere in Lyndsay's Works. 33 The author of the Wallace refers to his own abilities in much the same manner, describing himself as a "burel [ig— norant man" and his work as a “rurall dytt." H.S. Bennett descri es in some detail this convention as it appeared in fifteenth century verse: Other writers use the prologue to excuse themselves or to put in a claim for the indulgence of their readers or their patron. Lydgate luxuriates in these introduc- tory grovellings, which at times.he couples with entreaties for money. Walton apologizes for his "Insuffishaunce of cunnyng and of wit, De— faut of langage and of eloquence." ...Hawes... in the Pastime g: Pleasure ... apologizes to his "Ryght myghty prynce and redoubted souerayne" Henry VII because his work is "Opprest with rudenes without rhetoryke or colour crafty." (Chaucer and the Fifteenth Century, p0. 126—27.) 22 In the concluding stanza of the Monarchs we find, All gentyll Redaris hertyle I Implore For tyll excuse my rurall rude Indyte. (11. 6334-35) The prologue to the Papxngo develons the same theme: Quharefor, because myne mater bene so rude Off sentence, and of Rethorike denude, To rurall folke myne dyting bene directit, Far flemit frome the sycht of men of gude; For cunnyng men, I knaw, wyll soune conclude It dowe no thyng bot for to be deiectit: And, quhen I heir myne mater bene detractit, Than sall I sweir, I maid it bot in mowis, .To landwart lassis quhilks kepith kye & owis. (11. 64—72) Humorous intent seems more obvious and would be more in place here than in the Monarche. The conclusion to the Papvnso (ll. 1179a92) supports the interpretation that at least in this work Lyndsay did not intend to have his abasement taken seriously.34 A different phase of Lyndsay's eXpression of his own lim— itations can also be found in the Monarche. In the prologue to this poem, Lyndsay says that he had never slept on Parnas- sus nor drunk from the “melifluus, famous, fresche fontane" of Helicon (11. 226-32). But the Scottish poet seems to use this convention with a somewhat different purpose from that of the fifteenth century "courtly poets" who "one and all ... repeat with wearisome unanimity that they never slept on Parnassus nor drank of the Muse's well."35 Lyndsay is not so much 34 The meter and content of this conclusion is suggestive of Shelton's Colin Clout (c. 1522), 11. 53-58. For other examples of Lyndsay's criticism of his own lack of poetic ability, of. Answer, 11. 15-16, 64-66, and Ane Suplication, l. 170. 35 Bennett, p. 128. Chaucer has the Franklin use; aghase of this convention in the prologue to his tale: "I Sleep Nevere on the Mount of Pernaso" (1. 13). Lyndsay's invocation of the "heavenly muse" offers an early parallel to Milton‘s usage, al- though the Scottish poet gives no hint of referring to Urania. complaining‘as invoking a different insairation for this primarily religious work. After an aside that "Raueand Rhamnusia, goddes of dispyte" (l. 23?) might be appropriate, he calls on the "heuinlye muse" of Solomon, David, and Sampson (11. 248-50). For that purpose, he writes, ...insteid of the Mont Pernaso, Swyftlie I sall go seik my Souerane: To hont Caluare the strancht waye mon I go, (11. 272-74) to find his inspiration in the "frensche fontane" of Christ's blood. ther examples of Lyndsay's use of conventional forms and ideas are easy to find. Perhaps the most important of these is his handling of the vision allegory in the Dreme and the Monarche. In the earlier poem, Lyndsay's eXperiences’ were revealed in a dream, comparable to that described in the prologue of Pier§_Plowmap_except that Lyndsay's season was winter. In the Monarche, no actual dream is mentioned, but the dialogue with EXperience takes place on the more con- ventional "Kaye mornyns" (1. 126). The allegory of both these poems is the simple and direct allegory of the first passus of Piers: a personified guide interprets what the narrator sees and answers his questions. The complexities of which the form was capable are not approached by Lyndsayf36 35 The dream-vision allegory receives a mucn more typical develOpment in Scotland in such works as "The Ennis Qu‘ir" and Dunbar's "The golden Tgrge". 24 A more traditional though less elaborate use of a con- ventional device appears in the Opening of the Trasedie. The poet was sitting alone in his "Oratorie." He took a book of Boccaccio (Ihone Bochas) "tyll occupye the tyme" and found in it stories of many princes, conquerours, and kings Who "tar fulfulie deposit frome thare ryngis" (11. 1-7). The device supilies Lyndsay with a convenient bridge to his story of the evil life and appr0priate fate of David, Cardinal Beaton. At the same time, this simple and handy mechanism links Lyndsay with a well established tradition in medieval nar- rative. Chaucer used the same method of getting into his story in The B223 9: the Duchess (11. 44—61). In Scotland, Henryson offers the best example of use of the convention in lhg,Testament pf gresseid. AS in the Tragedie, the narrator in Henryson's poem is seated in his "oratur" late at night (11. 39—40), when he used the conventional inspiration of a book as the basis of his poem.37 Lyndsay's skill in adapting conventional usage to fill his purposes raises him above the level of the servile followers of established forms. One such modification of tradition in the Satyre gives an example of Lyndsay's tech- nique. The three vices scheme to hoodwink King Humanity by disguising themselves as virtues. Deceit becomes Discretion, 37 He took the book "to cut the winter nicht and mak it schort.“ The book, of course, was Troilus and Criseyds, "Trittin be worthie Chaucer glorious." (11. 41-42) D.) (II Flattery assumes a "clipit croun" as Devotion, and Falsehood changes his name to Sapientia in an elaborate christenins ceremony (11. 778-808). This chance of names in the morality plays is fairly common, but Lyndsay transforms the scene into one of the humorous hignsoots of the drama. When the dismiised vices meet the kins, Falsehood cannot remember his new name. Here is Lyndsay's method of handling this introduction followinq the Christening: When the kins asks his name Falsehood (Falset) replies, tarie! sir, they call me—~—quhat call thay me? Rex vaanitas: Can ye nocht tell quhat is Sour name? Falset: I kend it quhen I cam fra hame. R. H. Quhat gars e can nocht schaw it now? F: Marie! they ca 1 me tn‘n drink, I trow! R. H.: Thin drink! quhat kynde of name is that? Dissait: Seoiens, thou seruis to beir ane plat. he think thow schawis the not weill—wittit. F3 Sypeins, sir, sypeins: marie! now 3e hit it. (11. 849—57) The christening scene itself is even more indicative of Lyndsay's practice of deve10ping conventions to his own use. Of the many plays in Which the vices Change their names, only in Respublica is there a christening ceremony. And where the Satyre devotes thirty lines to this scene, Resoublica uses 1 only one."8 To call attention to all of Lyndsay's uses of medieval literary shortcuts and ornamentations would be a lengthy and not particularly rewarding task. One idea which he utilized, however, warrants a brief examination because of its continued pooularity in the Renaissance. Men had known for some time 38 Of. Edwin s. Miller, "The Christening in The Three Estates," Egg, LX (1945), pp. 48-44. ID 0) that the world had seen its best days; the makers of classical civilizations had risen as high as the sin-ridden descendents 0‘ Adam were capable. In Lyndsay, we see the idea most definitely advanced in the Konarcne, where the four historical civilizations are represented by successively less valuable metals. The Assyrian world was a golden one, followed by the silver ass of the Persian monarchy. Greece was repre- sented by COpper; home was symbolized by iron (11. 4234-30). Now in his own day the iron base has become mixed with clay: the great empires are melted away, and the world is full of f "dolour and dispyte" (ll. 4231-34).SU "I se nocht ellis bot troubyll infinyte," Experience relates to Courtier, Quharefore, my Sonne, I mak it to the Tend, This warld, I Wait, is drawand to sue end. (11. 4235.37) A simpler and less obviously conventional reference to days which were better occurs variously in Lyndsay's works where he points up the misfortunes of his own time by use of examples of more prosperous and peaceful periods in the past. But even such modifications of the theory of degeneracy fit into a traditional pattern. The same theme is found much earlier in ' r“ r u , such works as the poem "On the Death of Lenard Ill, and was #39 This version of the belief in decline is based on the account of Nebuchadnezzafs dream in Daniel, 2, 31-43., A , longer version, with more attention to the parts of the booy mentioned in the Biblical prophecy, can be found earlier in the Iionarche, 11. 372?-73. l-h also includes, 11. 3774-83, a summary of Daniel's dream of the ram and the he goat found in Daniel, 8. ”7 comaonly develOped in medieval sermons.49 In Lyndsay also we find the paradox of the man firmly indoctrinated with this belief that the further decline of the world was inevitable-— the man who at the sane time worked with all his abilities towards the creation of a better life for his fellow country- men. We cannot say muCh here about Lyndsay's language. In the first place, it is difficult to establish what Lyndsay's language was: much of his work has survived in the form of texts printed some years after his death. Were it not for this complication and the added factor that his writines are well off the beaten path of standard English, Lyndsay would offer a linmiist‘s paradise. Survivals of old forms so hand in hand with early instances of new ones, and his inconsistencies are in the best tradition of his aae.41 It is sisnificant, however, that Lyndsay was a firm believer in the use of the vernacular in religion and law as well as in literature.43 In the Satyre (11. 3059-78) and in the honarche (ll. 575‘3 -77), Lyndsay ridicules tre practice of lawyers of confusine the cmmons by their jumble of Latin terminoloey. In the latter 43 For an example of reflection on the better day of the s past e found in the sermon, cf. G. R. Ovet, Literature and P11"; it Ln I.Pd.1-p-V.Ql Fn~1(-,Y LAQ". pp. 3-752. 841 3. Gregory Srith 's Introduction to his Soggemins of M1 Scots (pp. xi-lxv) remains the best account of the lanculie oi “the period, but various of his conclusions are not pertinent to Lyndsay. 42 One prose treatise in the vernacular survives in Which Lyndsay undoubtedly had a hand as lyon king. This wort, :33 Pezis ter of Arms of the Scottisq Veb‘l__L and zentrv, was completed- in IE 4:, —but remained unpublished until 1821. K 3 (I) work, he warns that judges Who do not have "conscience clene" ,at misery on the day of doom: *2 Shall be meted hr I That day sall oas be Peremotoris, Without cawteill or Dilstoris; No Duplycandum, nor Tryolicandum, rot sohortlve has to Sentenciandum, Tithout ContineuationigL Cr ony Aooellationis. That sentence sall nocht be retrait, Nor with no man of Law debatit.43 (ll. 5770—77) Religious affairs which are incomorehensible to the common oeoole because of their Latin form are also subject to Lyrisey's satire. In the description of th. second oriest in Kitteis Confessioun, he writes: And mekle Latyne he did mummill, . I had na thing but hummill bummill. (11. 43—44) Lyndsay devotes twenty-one seven-line stanzas in the Konarcng to "Ane Exclamatioun to the Redar, Twycheryna the Eryttyng of Vulgare and Maternall Lansvage." This digression is his most detailed presentation of his theories on use of the vernacular. Lyndsay tells the reader that he would have the unlearned know the cause of the "most miserabvll trauell and torment" (l. 543) of the inhabitants of the world.44 There are many books by "cunnvnq clerkis" in Latin wh‘Ch contain the orooer instruction, but Our vnlernit knawis lyttill of thare W-rkis, more than tnay do the rauyns of the Euhis. (11. 545.43) ...) ‘ \ 43 The italics are not in the original text. 44 Lyndsay's statement here of his intention to inform the uneducated by his poem disagrees with lines 23-41, Wherein he says that the volume is directed primarily to men in high office in Church and government. {\J (D "Quhy suld of god the maruellous heuinly werk 9e hid frome thame?" he asks (1. 555-56). To suooly the need of common men who have "no Leid except thare toung maternall" (l. 557 , Lyndsay addresses his "Ryme" to "Colgearis, Cairtaris, & to Cukis, --to Iok and Thome" (11. 549-50). The poet cites various historical examoles to show that the vernacular has as honorable and ancient a history as the use of Latin. When the father in heaven save the law to hoses, it was not in Greek or Latin (11. 555—58). Rather, Be wrait the Law, in Tablis hard of Stone, In thare awin vulgsre language of Hebrew, That all the abirnis of Israeli, euery one, hycht know the law, and so the sam ensew. (11. 5~9_5g) ('1 Nor did Aristotle nor Plato write their "hie Philosonhie naturall" in Dutch, Danisn, or Italian (11. 558—68). They used their "most ornate touns maternall" of which the "fame and name doith ryns peroetuall" (ll. 589-70). Virgil, "the Prince of Poetrie," and Cicero, "the flour of Oratrie," did not write in Chaldean, Greek, Arabic, nor Hebrew, Bot in the Homane touns,-—as may be sene,—-- Quhilk wes thair proper lansuase, as I wene. (11. 571-7% rWhen the Romans actually held,world dominion, Lyndsay writes, then Latin was the aoorooriate tongue (ll. 578-79). In the beginning, Adam knew but one lanvuase, but through "Goddis Maledictioun" there are now seventy-two, he continues. Lyndsay thinks it great pleasure for intelligent men to learn the old languages (11. 594-95). He admires those who by diligent labor in their youth master Latin, Greek, and Hebrew (11. 596—97), and laments that he is "nocht of that sorte" (l. 588). But since so many are unlearned, he desires that 30 ...all bukis necessare For our faith wer in tyll our touns vulgare. (11.559-73) Such was Christ's intention, he says, when He sent His disciples throughout the world to give al‘ men a chance to know His teachings in their own tonaues (11. 801-7). Therefore, Lyndsay things it a mockery that "Hunnis & Systeris" use Latin in their services, Nocht v‘derstandyns quhat that syns nor say, Bot lyke one stirlyns or ane Peninsay. (11. 611-12) On the same grounds he criticizes children and high—born ladies who pray in Latin--“to thame ane vncouth leid" (11. 615-18). Surely it would be as "olesand to thare spirit" to say "God have mercy on me" as to mumble "hiserere Mei, Deus" (ll. END-21} On this issue of scriptural translation and vernacular religious Observances Lyndsay offers a variety of arguments.45 Did not Saint Jerome translate the "Law of God" out of Hebrew and Greek into his own native tongue (11. 6 2—24)? Had Jerome lived in Gaelic-sneaking Argyle, he would have written in "Yrische toung" (11. 827-28).45 Saint Paul also favored the use 45’The matter also gets considerable attention in the Satyr.. When Verity attempts to see Kins Humanity; Flattery shouts, Quhat buik is that, harlot, into thy hand? Out! wallowayl this is the new Testament, In Englisoh touns, and nrintit in England! Herisie! herisie, fire! fire! incontinent. (11. 1144—47) Cf. also 11. 1091-92, 3438—39. 46 As the language of the lowland Scots was "Inglis," so the tongue spoken by the Celtic oooulation was Irish or Erse. Of. the last two stanzas of Dunbar's gangs 9: the Seven ggadly Sins, where the Scottish highlanders are "Erschemen" and their language is "ErsChe." Burns refers to "Lallan tonsue, or Erse" in his Address 39 the Deil (1. 113), indicating the lowland and highland languages. 31 of language which the peoole could understand, Lyndsav points out how he said, ...thare bene more edificatioun In fyue wordis that folk doith vnderstand Nor to pronounce of wordis ten thousand In strange lansage, sine wait not quhat it menis. (11.631-SQ Lyndsay devotes one stanza to arguing in favor of preaching in English (11. 636-42). He also wants the devotionals translated so that the peoole can understand their prayers and creeds (11. 648-48). Regarding use of the vernacular in laW, Lyndsay is somewhat briefer but quite as Specific. He writes: I wald sum Prince of gret Discretioun In vulgare language planelye gart translait The neidfull lawis of this Resioun: Than wald thare nocht be half so gret debait Among ws peple of the law estait. (11. 650-54) If every man knew and respected the law, "the Iugis Wald get lytill thyng ado" (1. sea); Thare wald nocht be sic brawlyns at the bar, Nor men of law loup to sic royall rent. (11. 65P-6O) Lyndsay still leaves a place for the classical languages in learned studies (11. 671-75). Poets, too, may "schaw thare glorious Ingyne" in Greek or Latin if they please (11. 676-77). There he draws the line. In a summary typical of Lyndsay in that he echoes earlier phrasings as well as ideas, he writes, Bot lat ws haif the bukis necessare To commoun weill and our Saluatioun Justlye translatit in Our toung Vulgure. (11. 678-80) The bulk of Lyndsay's modern reputation depends on his Satyre 2£_the Threi Estaitis. Professor Brooke refers to this work as a 32‘ coarse, yet strikingly original eXposition of papal corruption...which stands quite apart from the line of English stage progress by reason of its uncouth irregularity of form, and still more by its restriction to the Scots dialect gnd the social and political milieu of Edinburgh.4 Brooke believes, however, that the Satyre is of greater than purely Scottish interest: Yet its imposing bulk and weight of thought, its boldness in meeting empirically the involved problems of histrionic presentation, and the neatness with which it offers commentary and contrast to such Works as "magnificence," " Respublica," The Three Laws," and "King Johan," make it an important document in the history of even the southern British drama.4 A brief examination of the status of the drama in sixteenth century Scotland might help clarify Lyndsay's position as the author of one of the chief British moralities. Miss Mill in her Mediaeval Plays ig_Scotland, maintains that the differences between Scottish and English drama during the Middle Ages are of "degree rather than of kind."49 She protests that too much stress has been placed on the Satyre as a work of "dramatic isolation,"60 and offers several reasons why this text should have survived while others have been lost. 47 C. F. Tucker Brooke, The Tudor 23ama, p. 88. 48 gpgg;, pp. 88-89. 49 P. 101 50 lElQe 33 Chief among these reasons are Lyndsay's position at court; the "command performance" nature of the first presentation and the fact that the king used the Satyre (as Eure wrote) to eXpose "noughtines in Religion;" the effect of the drama on the Catholic clergy and their desire for revenge on Lyndsay;51 the subsequent "canonization of Lyndsay's Works by the protestant leaders;" and, finally, the hostile attitude of Scottish Puritanism, which hit earlier and harder than in England and made the future of any dramatic texts tenuous.52 The employment of the Satyre by the early Scottish reformers as a means of prOpaganda53 suggests why this work should survive their general ban on dramatic productions. That there were other works of a similar nature we know from many sources. John Knox, in his history of the Scottish reformation, mentions a "Friar Kyllair" who "sett furth the Historye of Christie Passioun in forms of a play."54 We have a variety of documentary evidence to show that Lyndsay had had previous eXperience in dramatic activity before he wrote the Satire. One of the early records of Lyndsay at the Scottish 51 Cf. Charteris, pp.5*-9*. 53 Mill, pp. 101-103. 53 Ibid., p. 88. 54 Works, I, 62. Knox' editor, David Laing, dates this play, which has not been preserved, 0. 1535-36. The friar, according to Knox, was later burned as a heretic (probably less than a year before the first performance of the Satyre). 34 court tells of his being provided.with a blue and yellow "taffeta play coat" costing three pounds, four shillings Scots, for "the play playt in the King and Quenis presence in the Abbay" during OctOber of 1511.55 Lyndsay's next recorded dramatic ventures came in connection with cere- monies commemorating the two marriages of James V, which took place in quick succession in 1537 and 1538. Lyndsay was with his king at the time of James' marriage to Magdalene, daughter of the king of France, in Notre Dame de Paris on 1 January, 1537.56 He witnessed there the singing, dancing and tournaments in honor of the royal couple which he described in TE; Deoloratioun 2£_thg_2§ith g: Qgene Magdalene (11. 85-91), written after her death only six months later. The royal party landed at Leith on May 19, and all Scotland prepared to honor the queen's coronation. Lyndsay described, in detail, the preparations wnich were made at Edinburgh, quite likely under his direction. Like "euerilk Ciete, Castell, Tours, and Town" (1. 96), the capital made "greit preparatiuis" (1.99), with ...the peple labouring for thare lyuis To mak triumphs with trump and clarioun. (11. 101-102) 55 Quoted by Mill, p. 59. 56 Mackay, pa 291b. That some form of dramatic spectacle was planned is also indicated by Lyndsay's poem: Thow [death] saw makand rycht costlie scaffalding, Depayntit weill with Gold and asure fyne, Reddie preparit for the Vpsetting, With Fontanis flowing water cleir and wyne; Disegysit folkis, lyke Creaturis deuyne, On ilk scaffold, to play ane syndrie storie! Bot all in greiting turnit thow that glorie! (11. 106-12) Madgalene's death, less than fifty days after her arrival in Scotland, halted the preparation for her coronation, but it also sent James' emissariesin search of a new wife for the king. In June of the next year this second queen, nary of Lorraine (also known as Mary of Guise) arrived at St. Andrews, and this time Lyndsay had an Opportunity to carry out his dramatic plans. Pitscottie describes the "trieumphant frais"57 which his kinsman had prepared. A cloud came out of the heavens and Opened before the queen. From it stepped an angel who presented Mary with the keys of Scotland, along with a con- siderable speech of advice written by David Lyndsay. The text of this ceremony has been lost; likewise, there is no record of what happened at a similar welcome in Edinburgh, where Lyndsay was "in all likelihood" master of ceremonies.58 We have seen that Lyndsay was frequently disparaging of histpwn works, and examined briefly the convention of Which his self-abasement is an example. Commentators in general accept Lyndsay's derogatory comments about his ability as 57 I, 378- 79. "Frais"C farce carries the meaning of triumphal celebration. . hi 1 p. 26. 58 Mill, p. 82. 03 O) competent, even if unintentional criticism. R.L. hackie, in the introduction to his anthology of Scottish poetry, dis- misses Lyndsay, along with Andrew of fiyntoun, by saying that their verse, "though invaluable to the student of Scottish History, is almost negligible as poetry."5'3 Even Lyndsay's greatest admirers offer little more than token objection to such criticism of his meters and diction. In addition to commenting on the artistic mediocrity of most of his writing, many critics -- particularly during the nineteenth century revival of interest in Lyndsay -- have felt called upon to deplore his frequent lapses into vulgar- ity. Occasionally, half-hearted justification for his "crude- ness" or "lack of taste" is made on the grounds that he was no worse than his times. “It was a coarse age," Ross writes; "Scotch humour was particularly coarse; and if the ladies of the Court did not blush at what they heard, we can only wonder and be silent." But even Ross is not completely forgiving; he continues, "Let him bear his measure of blame!"60 Lyndsay is, of course, obscene by later standards. For that matter, he is obscene by comparison with Chaucer or Boccaccio. But criticizing him on this point by the standards of different times and different places seems about as significant as com- plaining that his language happens to be Middle Scots. 59 A Book 2: Scottish Verse (Oxford, 1934), p. v. 50 P. 404. Lyndsay came at the end of a line of auth1ors who made the period of fusion between the hiddle Ages aid the Renais- sance the brightest era of Scottisn literature. He suffers in comparison with the greatest of these writers on any basis involving artistic merit. But in consideration of the weight, of ideas involved, Lyndsay has no major rival in Scottish literature before the union. That he chose the subject matter he did proved the good fortune of those wno favored reform in church and state. Rarely does he show the ability of Henry- son, Dunbar, or Douglas, alth01gh when he tried hi s ha11d at less didactic matters, as in Sguire geldrum, he revealed him- self as a skillful, humorous, and original versifier. But Sguire heldrum occupies a position outside the usual scone of Lyndsay's writings. The welfare of Scotland and the sal- vation of the human soul were of too great importance to Lyndsay to allow him many suchgmmx d'esorit as heldrum. Partly in evaluation of Lyndsay and partly in refutation of the common charge that the reformation of itself ended the flowering of Scottish literature, Hector MacPherson offers an interesting analysis of the decline of poetry in the north: The literature of the golden a_ge remained feudslisti c when the nation was preparing to enter the path which ultimately brought it within the sweep of the great industrial epoch with the rise of the middle classes. The poetry of the time had no vital connection with the new ideas which in the end were to destroy both feudalism and Romanism. It is a remarkable fact, Which bears out this line of thought, that the one man of letters of the ore-Reformation period who lives in pOpular memory was Sir David Lyndsay. Why? Because he busied himself not with the fantastical allegories 33 of a dying civilization, but with ideas and feelings which were ushering in the new time. 51 "Feudalism and Romanism," church and state, religion and sec- ular affairs -~ whatever pair of terms might be used, the ideas involved were never two separate issues to Sir David Lyndsay. The honarche may be more "religious" and the Satyre more “political," but the twain were thoroughly blended in Lyndsay's thinking, as they were in the minds of virtually all of his contemporaries. Two examples may help show how Lyndsay recognized no barrier between what later ages are inclined to consider as two distinct factors. In a thirty-line passage in the Egg? arche devoted to complaint regarding the clergy's custom of demanding death—presents, Lyndsay thinks nothing of intro- ducing a digression to show the secular manifestations of the same evil: Than cumis the Landis Lord, perfors, And cleiks tyll hum an herield03 hors. (11. 4733-34) From the other point of view, the fifteen acts of the estates in the Satyre (11. 3793—3943), which were designed mainly to 61 zhg_lntellectual Development 2: Scotland, p. 158. 52 Herield (hereL eld) is one version of the Scottish equi- valent of the southern "heriot." The BBQ definition fits both verbal expressions of the practice: "A feudal service, orig- inally consisting of weapons, horse, and other military equip- ments, restored o 3 lord on the death of his tenant; after— wards a render of the best live beast or dead chattel of a de- ceased tenant due by legal custom to the lord of whom he held..." The larger passage from which this excerpt is‘taken is hi itself a digression from the discussion of the evils of the Roman hierarchy. A closely parallel passage is found in the Satyre, 11. 1971—2000. 39 lessen the miseries of the Scottish commons, include almost as much religious as secular material. Items as diverse to the modern reader as the abolition of nunneries and provision for payment of royal councillors are included in the same article (number 6, 11. 3833-58). But the dichotomy between religious and secular affairs has become so pronounced in the years since David Lyndsay wrote that a breakdown into two separate fields is now convenient for examination. Succeeding sections of this paper will con- sider Lyndsay's satire and suggestion first regarding polit— ical and social issues and second in the more purely religious field. Whatever the advantage of such a separation for pur— poses of smudy, it must be remembered that the division is by no means Lyndsay's. LYNDSAY ON SCOTTISH SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS We have already mentioned briefly the obstacles to prosperity and peace in Scotland entailed by contested regencies which occurred twice during Lyndsay's lifetime. Scotland since the time of Alexander III had frequently had a strong monarch, but never a strong monarchy. The Stuarts, even the strong ones, followed a pattern of dying by violence and leaving the heritage of a divided kingdom. Of the eight Stuarts who ruled before James VI became James I of England, seven were succeeded by regencies. James III, the lone exception, was murdered after his defeat at Sauchbierburn by rebelling nobles under the banner of his own son.1‘ Perhaps the most tragic of this series of violent deaths and civil disorders, from the point of view of the Scottish patriot, followed the death at Flodden of this prince who had participated in the overthrow of his own 1 There is some difference of opinion among historians as to whether James IV actually commanded the troops which defeated his father. There is no disagreement, however, regarding Lyndsay's account: How that the Bonus, with baner braid displayit, Agane the Fader, in battell, come arrayit. Papyngc, 11. 477-78. 41 father. James IV was by many standards a "verray parfit gentil knight," but he practiced knighthood at a time when a new age had already blighted the old flowering. A little less chivalry and a good deputy commander of artillery at Flodden would have made a Northern victory a probability. James left the favorable ground which his troupe had occupied early in the day, seeking a “fair fight' by standards already dead. Had he acted as a commander rather than as a knight fighting--bravely and with skill, to be sure—-as an individual. his son, a year and a half old at the time of Flodden, might have inherited a strong, united kingdom and gone on to rule according to the precepts David Lyndsay had taught him since childhood. But James IV was a knight, not a field marshal. His actions on the afternoon of the ninth of September, 1515, brought about not only his death, but the deaths of a gen- eration of Scottish leaders. Twelve earls, thirteen lords of parliament, and the provost of Edinburgh and his fellow magistrates died with their king.3 In The gestament 9; the Papyngo, Lyndsay has described the conduct of that I'rycht redoutit Roye, That potent prince, gentyll king Iames the feird' (11. 486-487) at Flodden and the resultant misfortune to the nation: Allace! that days had he bene counsalabyll, He had obtenit lauds, glore, and victorie. Quhose pieteous proces bene so lamentabyll, I nyll at lenth it put in memorie. 3 Burton, III, as. 43 I neuer red, in Tragidie nor storie, At one Iornaye so many nobyllis slane, For the defence and lufe of thare Souerane. (11. 514-580) This was the Sectland in which David Lyndsay, not yet Sir David, was personal attendant to the young king. During the early years of young James the queen mother margaret acted as regent. Margaret remarried in 1514, less than a year after the death of James IV and less than five months after she had borne a posthumous son. Her husband was the Earl of Angus, who, like so many other Scottish nobles of the day, had come by his title upon his father's death at Flodden Field. A confused situation became further com- plicated with the arrival in Scotland of the Lord High Admiral of France, who came at the request of the Estates to act as regent. This French-Scots Duke of.Albany was the nephew of James III, who had exiled his brother, the present Albany's father. One of the new regent's first acts was to seize the royal children from Margaret, who had fled with them to Stirling. To go into an account here of the murders, intrigues, abductions and_battles which followed would only emphasize the anarchy and chaos into which the kingdom had degenerated. Of more significance to this study are the reactions of Lyndsay to the miseries to which Scotland was subjected. But we should not look to Lyndsay for an organized and develOped corpus of theory regarding the origin of governmental powers, the function of a monarch, or the position of the nobles, of the kirk, or of the common 43 people. Rather, we find in his writings attacks, for the most part disorganized, on abuses as he saw them and asides concerning his positive ideas on good government. It is appropriate to examine, first, Lyndsay's general position in the tradition of literature of complaint and proceed to the specific flaws and errors of his own times which he pointed out, saving for last the more difficult task of clarifying his positive approach to the problems of govern- ment and society. The British tradition of the writer as a social and moral critic is both long and complex. The stream of didactic literature stems from native roots to which were added the reinforcements of contemporary and older literary ways. The writer of the Beowulf was capable of portraying the misfortunes of tribal society in difficult times and putting forward with vigor the prerequisites of an ideal leader; the writers of colloquies and homilies attempted to guide their readers and auditors in their earthly lives. Works which to a later day seem primarily religious, such as the schematic analyses of the seven deadly sins, are often fertile sources for social and political complaint. After the gradual assimilation of the invasion of continental ideas, English literature presents complaint and instruction in three languages. A bibliography of such literature reveals a tremendous accomplishment in both bulk and breadth. Even the romance frequently contains observations on con- temporary problems and moralizes on shortcomings and frailty. 44 Many of these didactic literary documents offer parallels with the developments attempted by Lyndsay in his accounts of his own times; at the same time, many reveal different approaches, different techniques, and different conclusions. Chaucer's Parson's ggle,.with its sequence of sins and their corresponding remedial virtues, represents a sort of catalogue common in medieval moralistic literature but only hinted at in Lyndsay. Gower in the Mirour dg_l'0mme care- fully classifies vices and virtues in some 17,500 Anglo- French octosyllabic lines and devotes nearly 9000 lines to a criticism of society, neatly arranged by estates and sub- orders. While the vices he points out are the same as Lyndsay saw, he is more concerned with the flaws of the common man than the Scottish poet and far more involved in the pattern into which he fits his moralizing. There is also much in Lyndsey which is similar to the basic tenents of Pisa; Plowman. As did this medieval monument, Lyndsay saw the law courts as a maze where the poor man could not obtain Justice; like Piers, he cautioned those in power to love and respect the commonalty. But Lyndsay, for the most part, emphasizes evil in high places, showing less concern than £$g§g_Plowman for the moral regeneration of the individual and the virtue of labor. Lyndsay is, perhaps, more specific than most of the major writers who contributed to the medieval literature of complaint. He does not ignore sin in the abstract nor virtue for its own sake, but he gives generalities less 45 weight and less force than the immediate problems which tore Scotland in the early sixteenth century. He never breaks with the great tradition of the writer as a teacher, but at the same time he shows more kinship with the action of John Knox than with the allegory of John Gower. Lyndsay was a contemporary of the Luther of the Ninetygfizg_ggeses, the Erasmus of the Praise 2; Eglly, the Barclay of the §hip g: Egglg, and the More of Utopia. The surrounding world of these men presented much which they denounced as evil with the primary purpose of effecting reform. Lyndsay was more concerned than most of them about the special problems of‘ his own country. His solutions may not be as clearly organized nor his suggestions as definitely presented as with some of his contemporaries, but the problems to him were as vital and pressing and his feeling of duty to expose weaknesses and evils Just as intense. There can be no doubt that Lyndsay saw advancing the welfare of Scotland as his first duty as a poet. It cannot be said that he forgot universal application of the principles in which he believed or that he was entirely nationalistic, but it is essential to notice that what he saw from his own door was his first concern. Even before the time of Lyndsay's earliest surviving work he appears on the Scottish scene in an incident from which, in one of its varying interpretations, emerges a definite picture of his stand regarding one of Scotlandfls most difficult problems, relations with England. King 46 James IV, prior to his invasion of English territory, was in the church at Linlithgow, accompanied by various lords and nobles, including David Lyndsay. It was here that the king received a warning from a spector-like old man that his venture could not succeed. The incident became one of the most celebrated of Scottish ghost stories, and various factors involved point to the possibility that Lyndsay played a more important role in the event than that of bystander. According to the account of Robert Lindesay of Pitscottie, a man of fifty years came into the church, dressed in a blue robe and with hair reaching to his shoulders, and sought the king. He leaned upon the king's prayer desk and addressed him: Sir king, my mother [Mary] has sent me to thee, desiring the not to goe quhair thow art purposed, quhilk if thow doe, thow sall not fair weill in thy Jorney, nor non that is with the. Fardder, - shoe forbad the not to mail nor use the counsell of women, quhilk if thow doe thow wil be confoundit and brought to shame.35 While the king was 'studieing to give him ane answer," the man vanished from the sight of the assembled lords. Pits- cottie goes on: I heard Sir David Lindsay, lyon herald, and Johns Inglis, the marchall, who war at that tyme young men, and speciall servandis to the kingis, thought to have takin this man, that they might have speired farther tydingis at him, bot they could not touch him.4 3 The Historie and Cronicles of Scotland, I, 258-859. 4 Ibid. Pitscottie was probably a few years premature with Lyndsay' 3 titles, "sir" and "lyon herald". 47 Pitscottie apparently based his account in large part on conversation with Lyndsay, as did George Buchanan, who relates the incident in his ggggm Scoticarum Historia. Buchanan wrote that he would have dismissed the story as a rumor had he not heard it from Lyndsay, who had a rep- utation for trustworthiness and speaking the truth.5 MMrison, in his chapter on Lyndsay's life, states that the entire affair was contrived by the peace party "to influence the superstitious king" 6and suggests that Lyndsay may have had a part in the well-intentioned fraud. "If Lyndsay had a hand in the device, no wonder the figure disappeared so easily when it came near him."7But neither this apparition nor another in the Edinburgh market place about the same time where a ghostly herald called the devil's roll of knights who were to die in the invasion influenced James or his nobles to avoid the campaign which led to disaster. We know from Lyndsay's later writings that he favored a policy of peaceful relations with England; this incident suggests that he took such a stand even before hindsight illuminated its wisdom. Lyndsay's first work, omitting the possibility of earlier poems which may have been lost, 3 is the Dreme, 5 Murison, p. 4. 6 Ibid., p. 5. 7 Ibid. Hamer does not agree that Lyndsay had any part in EEe "trick,“ if there was one. IV, ix. 8 0:. Henderson, “Sir David Lyndsay," CHEL, III, 131, for a brief discussion of the possibility that early workd of a more belle-lettristic nature may have been lost. Cf. also Hamer, III, 12. 48 usually dated 1528. In many ways this llSS-line poem is the most nearly medieval of all of Lyndsay's work, and some critics have called it his best poetry.9 But it is doubtful if the poem would be distinguished from others of the great body of dream-visions if it were not for the vigor with which he portrays the fate of those whom he sees tormented in hell and the realism of the account of contemporary Scotland with which he concludes the vision. The Dagmglcontainsfmuch that is general, designed as a guide to individual morality; but there is also a considerable quota of the specificnese and directness which are more typical of Lyndsay's later work. While following many of the characteristics of the dream- vision allegory, the 23222 departs from the "may morning" tradition by using a January setting. Perhaps Lyndsay was following Henryson, who began his Testament g; Cresseid by saying, I Ane doolie seesoun to ans cairfull dyte Suld correspond, and be equivalent. (11. 1-2) Certainly the matter of the 22222 is sufficiently "cairfull," and snow and sleet seem more properly ”doolie" than the common setting of flowers and singing birds. What Lyndsay sees in his tour of hell is only slightly more unpleasant than what he sees in Scotland. At the beginning of his underworld Journey, the poet's guide, Dame Remembrance, shows him members of the clergy and others being punished for sins against religion. But soon he sees that hell is 9 or. Ross, pp. 383-384. 49 populated also by the other estates, by those who have sinned against their fellow man. Kings are there for 'cruell Oppressioun“ (l. 246) and l'wrangus conquest" (1.247). UnJust Judges suffer “for thare sentence fals" (l. 259). Cheating merchants, false men of law, and un- loyal laborers are punished for their earthly greed (11. 509-15). Women, from highest to lowest, are also among the damned, Lyke wod Lyonis, cairfullie cryand, In flam of fyre rycht furiouelie fryand. (11. 265-66) This hell-vision demonstrates only a little of Lyndsay's power of invective and satire. Those whom he cites by name are the traditional occupants of literary infernos, and there is no evidence of any allegorical application to the Scotland of his own times. Until the final sec- tions of the poem, where Dame Remembrance shows the narrator his own country, the 22222 has few passages which go beyond generality. As the poem continues, the guide escorts the poet through purgatory, through the planetary system with its occupants from classical mythology, through the 'nynt Spain, and mouare principall' and the 'heuin callit Christallyne,“ and finally into heaven. After a quick view of the glories above("thilk to discryue it passis myne Ingyne"--l. 515), Dame Remembrance shows him the countries of the earth, with a special side trip to the Garden of Eden. What he sees on this Journey fits into typical Medieval-Renaissance patterns regarding astronomy, astrology, mythology, theology, and geography. For almost 50 three-quarters of the 23222.Lyndsay taps such traditional subject hoards of the poet, in a manner presently of little significance except as a source for occasional footnotes to learned studies. But when he views Scotland, Lyndsay puts aside the general and the merely traditional. The causes of Scotland's troubles lay in high places; eXposure of these causes was of more immediate importance than instruction in science or the saving of souls. After the narrator had seen the good and fair nature of Scotland, he asked his guide the question which sets the mood for the remainder of the poem: ...or quhate dois mufe our Misere? . Or quhareof dois procsid our pouertie? (11. 811-12) He had observed Scotland as a country of great resources: an abundance of fish in the seas and the pleasant lakes, wildlife in the fruitful mountains, productive soil for grain in the valleys (11. 817-21). There were rivers and springs and forests (11. 820-26), even mines for gold, silver, and precious stones (ll. 827-28). Scotland lacked, he admitted, spices and wines "or vther strange fructis delycious,‘ but it had resources as valuable and more needful (11. 829-31). Climaxing his catalog of resources the poet mentions the people; there could not be found anywhere I More fairer peple, nor of gretar ingyne, Nor of more strenth gret dedis tyll indure. (11. 834-35) Again he asks, 'Considderand the peple and ground" (I. 859), why the realm should not abound with riches. The fault, 51 Dame Remembrance answers, is neither in the people nor in the land (1. 845). Scotland lacks three things, she tells him: Justice, policy, and peace. These three factors are closely interrelated: It is deficill Ryches tyll incree, Quhare Polycie makith no residence; And Policey may neuer haue entree, Bot quhare that Iustice dois delygence To puneis quhare thare may be found offence. Iustice may nocht haue Dominatioun, Bot quhare Peace makis habitatioun.10 (11. 862-68) When the poet asks why Scotland lacks Justice, his guide places the blame on the highest places: ...I fynd the falt in to the heid; For they in quhome dois 1y our hole releif, I fynd thame rute and grund of all our greif; For,-quhen the heddis ar nocht delygent, The membris man, on neid, be necligent. (11. 878-82) The principal cause of all the trouble of the nation, she -continues, is to be found in princes, whose continuous efforts should be directed towards the execution of Justice (11. 883-89). Before concluding this section of the poem, Lyndsay looses a maJor blow at nobles who attempt to be a law unto themselves: So, I conclude that, throw the necligence Off our infatuate heidis Insolent, Is cause of all this realmes indigence, Quhilkis in Iustice hes nocht bene delygent, Bot to gude counsall inobedient, ' Hauand small Ee vnto the comoun weill, Bot to thare singulare proffect eurilk deill. (11. 904-08) Princes should punish these rebel wolves who oppress_the lO Dame Remembrance here changes her references to the Scottish people from third to first person. poor without pity, Dame Remembrance tells him, so that Scotland might have material wealth and good government (11. 911-15). Lyndsay develOps much the same themes in the con- cluding part of the vision, I'The Complaynt of the Comoun Weill of Scotland.” This technique of repetition is typical of Lyndsay, though by no means unique with him. Here John the Commonweal, in a dialogue with the narrator, reempha- sizes the evils which Dame Remembrance had already discussed. The poet sees that John, whom he later is to develop more fully in the Satyre g§_phg Thrie Estaitis, has fallen from his once honorable status. In their conversation it is revealed that John is fleeing Scotland for his life (11. 939-45). His friends, too, have come upon evil days. Policy had again fled to France (1. 947); his sister, Justice, has almost lost her sight, and can no longer hold the balance evenly (ll. 948-49). Wrong has become captain of arms, and little remedy can by found for cpen treason (11. 950,952). John goes into detail concerning the lawlessness and dis- order which Remembrance had already mentioned: In to the south, allace! I was neir slane; Ouer all the land I culd fynd no releiff: Almoist betuix the Mere and Lowmabane I culde nocht knaw ane leill man be ane theif. (11. 955-56) In the highlands, the isles, Argyle, and the lowlands he experienced the same lack of respect for law. He found that "Ciuele weir misgydis euerilk oist' (l. 992), that. neither the clergy nor the gentry had any respect for the 53 commonweal. The poet, reminding John that "efter the nycht cumis the glaid morrow” (l. 999), asks him when he will return to Scotland. John answers: ...thare sall no Scot haue confortyng Off me, tyll that I see the saw mtre gydit Be wysedome of ane gude auld1 prudent kyng, Quhilk sall delyte hym maist, abone all thyng, To put Iustice tyll exicutioun, And on strang tratouris mak puneisioun. (11. 1002-08) With a warning, 'Wb to the realme that hes ouir soung ane king'I (l. 1011), John departed, and the vision soon ends. Lyndsay completes the Qgege with an 'Exhortatioun Ito the Kyngis Grace,I wherein he again repeats his observ- ations on the state of Scotland. He adds some personal advice, telling the king to ban flatterers from his presence (1. 1071), and warning him about the consequenses of im- morality (vicious 1yfe makis, oft, ane euyll endyng'-- 1. 1107). Finally, he reminds the king that mortality applies as much to him as to men of low estate. “Quhar bene thay gone,” he asks, 'thir Papis & empriouris?‘ (l. 1124) The post does not find it necessary to call special atten- tion to the partial answer to that question which he had given in the hell-vision.13 11 James V, at the time of the composition of the Dreme, was about sixteen. 13 Reminders that death is no respecter of rank are frequent in medieval literature. For example, Cf. Gower, Mirour de l'Omme, ll. 23104-06. Lyndsay utilizes this idea frequently, developing it the most fully in The Deploratioun of the Deith of Qpene Magdalene, 11.176-89. That kings might be punished by eternal damnation was another familiar theme of pulpit and literature. Probably the most noted medieval development of this latter idea is Dante's in Canto XII of the Inferno. 54 Using the 223mg as a framework, we can establish a general picture of Scotland as Lyndsay saw it during the period following the aiumption of power by James V. The poet's next work, Thg_Complaynt 2;.gghi3,David Lindesay; reinforces some of the criticisms made in the 233mg, but ~also adds a more Optimistic note in keeping with James' freeing himself from Angus.15 The poem was written about 1529, after Angus had been expelled, (faine tyll trott over Tweid--1. 372). Ostensibly written as a request for wealth and preferment, the poem asks for a loan ”off gold ane thousand pound, or tway" (l. 462) which Lyndsay promises to repay when the islands climb to the mountains (11. 467-8), or: Quhen kirkmen gairnis no dignitie, . Nor wyffis no Soueranitie. (11. 471-2) He is also willing to make payment, Efter the days of Iugement, Within one moneth, at the leist. (11. 476-7) Actually, however, the bulk of the poem is devoted to discussion of the evils that had taken place during the recently concluded captivity of the king. The post also shows hope that a new era is beginning. He castigates 15 The “erection" of James V to the kingphip took place in 1524, when he was twelve years old. In 1526, he chose his own advisers, Angus being one of them. Two years later James literally escaped from Angus, and the former regent was forced to leave the country. 55 those responsible for the erection of James to the king- ship in 1524, when he was only twelve. These men, he said, ”for dommon weill makand no cair" (l. 129), behaved only "for thare proffeit singulair" (l. 160). He criticizes them for taking the young prince from the schools, where he was learning virtue and science (11. 151-54). It would be as sensible, says Lyndsay, to give a child who had never been to sea the command of a ship during a storm (11. 137-48). Those who controlled the king led him into recklessness and immorality (11. 161-85, 236-52) and were only interested in division of the 'pelf" (11. 198, 254). All the lords strove for superiority, and there was great bloodshed throughout Scotland (11. 551-58). But now that the king is subJect to no man, Justice, prudence, charity, and prosperity have returned to the realm (11. 577-98). Every- thing in the land is in good order except the spirituality (11. 409-11), and Lyndsay offers considerable advice for getting this estate into line (11. 412-48). He concludes the poem, after his humorous request for money and position, with a reminder to James that he is but an instrument of God, ”that ryall Rays." (11. 498-99).14 More than a decade passed from the time of Lyndsay's Optimistic expression in the Complaynt until he again made a maJor attack on social abuses in the Satyre Qf_the Threi 14 This familiar idea received a more famous treatment at the hands of John Knox. Knox records in his history that he told Mary of Scotland, during his conversation with her in 1563, that the sword of Justice is God‘s given to princes only for the purpose of carrying out His will. Works, II, 372. 56 Estaitis. Lyndsay was by no means out of the public scene during this period. Several minor poems survive, more con- cerned with personalities that with maJor issues of state. But in this period Lyndsay was more a man of action than a poet. He represented his monarch in embassies abroad, and at home busied himself with the business pertaining to his court position. The Testament and Complaynt g; Our Soverane Lordis Pa n 0, written about a year after the Complaynt, contains a great deal of advice to the king, the nobles, and the clergy, backed up by examples from Scottish history. The poem, however, contains little further exposure of threats to the well-being of Scotland. In other poems of this period Lyndsay takes sideswipes at human foibles. In The Answer pg ye Kingis Flyting (c. 1556), for example, Lyndsay admonishes James to lead a virtuous life, indicating strongly that he had not been doing so in the past. The ambition of courtiers is portrayed in The Complaint and Confession 9g Bagsche (c. 1556), the "kingis auld hound," but the poem has little of the moral earnestness of such passages as the dialogue with John the Commonweal in the 253mg. Some of the works between the Qgegg and the Satyre show further development of religious satire, but for the most part, like the Complaynt, they show a hopeful attitude towards political and social issues. But when Lyndsay again takes up the attack against wrongdoing in high places, the result is his most vigorous and successful attack on Scotland's problems, Ane Pleasant Satyre gf_the Threi At‘llr‘llllle( 57 Estaitis, in Commendatioun g: Vertew and Vituperatioun aims.- The dating of the composition and performances of this work has long been a matter of controversy. George Chalmers, in his 1806 edition of Lyndsay's works, set 1555 as the date of its first performance, a tradition followed by ProfessorNichol, in his "Sketch of Scottish Poetry..." precéZding Lyndsay's works in the E.E.T.S. edition. 15' While there is some evidence to back up Chalmers' conten- tion, more recent scholarship usually is in line with the conclusion of Anna J. Mill, as presented in her Mediaeval §l§1§.lg Scotland and in "Representations of Lyndsay's Satyre 9f the T§39i_EstaitisP Miss Mill finds "traces of four distinct performances," the earliest of which was at Linlithgow on Epiphany, 6 January, 1559/40. 16The difficulty in establishing the date by internal evidence is increased by the fact that the drama was revised and brought up to date for different performances. But there is sufficient evidence to establish that the play was performed in 1540, whether or not an earlier version was presented. A letter from Sir Thomas Eure to his fellow Englishman, Thomas, Lord Cromwell, not only supports this date, but also throws a considerable light on the play and its presentation. Eure apparently did not see the Sat re, but reports on a conver- sation he had with Thomas Bellenden. The king of Scots himself was present, Eure states, along with his queen and 15 P. xlv. 16 '”Representations of Lyndsay's Satyre 9£_the Threi Estaitis," PMLA, XLVII (1932), p. 636. 58 the 'hoole counsaile spirituall and temporall." The matter of the "Enterluyde," Eure writes, ...concluded vpon the declaracon of the noughtines in Religion, the presumpcon of Busshops, the collucon of the spiritual Courtes, called the Concistory Courts in Scotland, and mysusing of preists...17 In addition to his second hand account of the performance, Eure sent his superior a detailed account of the action of the drama. While neither the letter nor the 'nootes" on the plot mention Lyndsay by name nor the Satyre by title, the synOpsis leaves no doubt that this is the work described. The accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland indicate that the crown financed costumes for the January 6 performance-- possibly the only indoor presentation of the Satyre.18 Eure's report differs somewhat from the plot as found in the surviv- ing texts. The eXpanded version which forms the most complete text is based on an outdoor performance given near Edinburgh, probably on 12 August, 1554.19 The text for this later per- formance survives in the printed version of Robert Charteris, published in 1602. Henry Charteris, in the preface to the 1568 edition of Lyndsay's works, provides a brief account of this presenta- tion, although he did not print the drama itself. The queen '17 Original Letters, Third Series, ed. H. Ellis, VIII, 279. Quoted by Mill, “Representations...,'l p. 656. 18 Ibid. or. also Murison, pp. 58-42, and Hamer, II, 2-60 19 Mill, "Representations...,“ pp. 640, 647. 59 regent (Mary was only twelve years old) attended the play, Charteris writes, with “ans greit part of the Nobilitie," and 'ane exceding greit nowmer of pepill.‘ The play lasted l'fra .ix. houris afoir none, till .vi. houris at euin." 2° Happily, the drama provided an intermission. Diligence con- cludes the first part of the Satyre by saying: And, ale, I mak sow exhortatioun, Sen 58 haif heard the first pairt of our play, Go tak ane drink, and mak Collatioun: Ilk man drink his marrow, I 50w pray. Let sum drink Ayle, and sum drink Claret wine: Be great Doctors of Physick I hears say, That michtie drink comforts the dull ingine. And 3e, Ladies, that list to pisch, Lift Vp sour taill plat in ane disch; And, gif that sour mawkine cryis quhisch, Stop in ane wusp of Stray. Let nocht sour bladder burst, I pray 50w; For that war euin aneuch to slay 50w: For git thair is to cum I as 50w, The best pairt of our Play. (11. 1910-25) From the comments of Eure and Charteris, it appears that the Satyre attracted considerable attention, in England as well as in Scotland. There are many factors in the drama which brought forth this interest, and have earned for the Satyre praise as “by far the finest as well as the most elaborate specimen of the early satiric play in English.'33 Professors Grierson and Smith, in‘A Critical Histony 2; British Poetgy, point out that in the Satyre, 30 P. 4*. 21 The advice to the ladies is given the following marginal gloss in the E.E.T.S. edition (p. 447): Let the ladies, too, avail themselves of this intermission. 22 Samuel M. Tucker, Verse Satire in England Before the Renaissance, p. 210. 60' ...though Lindsay makes his bow to morals and religion, his real obJect is political; his real hero is not 525 Humanitas but John the Commonweal, the poor misgoverned peeple of Scotland.35 This viewpoint is more acceptable with a qualification of the statement about Lyndsay's "bow to morals and religion.” Certainly the Satyre is not primarily concerned with doc- trine; even had Lyndsay been the avowed Protestant which Scottish Presbyterian critics have been wont to call him, he would have been wise enough to profit by the example of the burning bodies of heretics and confine his criticism of the church to relatively safe ground. But Lyndsay did not handle morals and religion perfunctorily. Rather, he treated such matters in the Satyre from a social point of view, orienting his portrayal of clerical degeneracy towards the effect it had on the Scottish people. Essentially, then, the Satyre Qf_the Threi Estaitis is a social document, where- in, of course, there is no dichotomy, with religion on the one hand and politics and economics on the other. A detailed analysis of the form of this morality and of the thread of plot which holds it together would be too lengthy for inclusion here.34 I shall avoid the temptation of further study of the Satyge as a dramatic work, and con- sider it only as a store house of Lyndsay's ideas, examining 3" P. 59. 24 Several such analyses exist. Among them are Nichol, pp. xlv-xlviii, Ross, pp. 594-405, and Murison, pp. 44-74. 61 first the abuses which he exposed. There is no better char- acter in the drama to reveal the misery of Scotland's commons than their own representative, John the Commonweal. John does not appear until line 2417 of this 5650-line work, short- ly after the three estates have marched in backwards for their meeting with King Humanity. Correction, who had come to Scot- land to help the king set the country right, is as curious as John about the reason why the estates "gang, all, backwart' (1. 2582). But the answer he receives from Spirituality is not very specific: Soveraine, we haue gaine sa this many a geir. Howbeit so think we go vndecently, , Wee think was gang richt wonder pleasantly. (11. 2584-86) John appears on the scene poorly clothed and lame because of neglect (11. 2457-40). His heart is made dreary by the estates' going backward (11. 2441-42). But small wonder it is, John says, that the estates march in reverse; they are led by evil. Covetousness and Sensuality lead the clergy (11. 2445-46), the lords temporal are led by Public Oppression (11. 2447-49), while the merchants and craftsmen follow Deceit and Falsehood (11. 2251-52). John warns that he will be forced to turn to begging unless the king puts the estates in order (11. 2457-58). The first of John's specific complaints involves the law- lessness of the borders. How can the country defend itself against England, he asks, when ...we can nocht, within our natiue Land, Destroy our awin Scots common trator theifis, Quha to leill laborers daylie dois mischeifis? (11. 2584-86) Were he king, John continues, he would hang every chieftan, including the most noble, who harbored theives within his 62 territory (11. 2587-92). John also obJects to idle men. He quotes the text, "Quho labouris nocht he sall not sit" (l. 2602), in application to beggars, fiddlers, pipers, par- doners, Jugglers, Jesters, gamblers, and their likes who do not contribute to the public good (11. 2605-14).35This ob- Jection applies also to the ...great fat Freiris, Augustenes, Carmleits, and Cordeleirs, And all vthers that in cowls bene cled, Quhilk labours nocht, and bene well fed. (11. 2615-18) Perhaps on no subJect is John more vehement than inJustice. He sees the courts Operating more in behalf of covetousness than for the punishing of vice (11. 2649-57):26 If the trans- gressor against the public weal is a man Of means and position, inJustice is all the more pronounced. In John's own words: Bot he that all the warld hes wrangit,-- Ane cruell tyrane, ane strang transgressour, Ane common, publick, plains Oppressour,-- By buds [bribes] may he Obteine fauours 0f Tresurers and compositours: Thocht he serue greit punitioun, Gets easie compositioun. (11. 2658-64) The consistorial courts, he complains, are a special burden on the poor (11. 2665-68). His friend, Pauper, is in strong agreement, maintaining that the consistory has more need of 35 We should proceed cautiously in drawing from this attack of John's any inferences of Puritanism in Lyndsay. Conventional ObJection to Jugglers, minstrels, and the rest of their clan had already had a long history. Cf. E. K. Chambers, The Medieval Sta*e, I, 58-61,'and Owst, pp. 10-15. 36 Hahn is in keeping with a highly developed medieval tradition in his complaints about the miscarriages of Justice. For an interesting discussion of similar problems, illustrated with numerous literary citations, cf. G. M. Trevelyan, England $3 the Age g£_Wycliffe, pp. 111-17. 65 reformation than hell itself (11. 5055-56). Pauper adds a personal eXperience to show how such courts pervert Justice: iarie: I lent my gossop my mear, to fetch hams coills; And he hir drounit into the querrel hollis. And I ran to the Consistorie, for to pleinse; And thair I happinit amang ane greidie meinse, Thay gaue me, first, ans thing thay call citandum; Within aucht dayis, I gat bot lybellandum; Within ans moneth, I get ad opponendum; In half ans 3eir, I gat interloquendum; And, syne, I gat--how call so it?--ad replicandum; Bot I could never ans word git vnderstand him, And than thay gart me cast out many plackis, And gart me pay for four and twentie actis; Bot, or thay came half gait to concludendum The fiend ans plack was left for to defend him. Thus thay pastponit me twa geir, with thair trains, Syne hodie ad octo, bad me cum againe; And than thir ruiks thay roupit wonder fast For sentence silver: thay cryit, at the last. 0f pronunciandum thay maid me wonder fain§° Bot I gat never my gude gray meir againe. 7 (11.5059-78) Pauper, who is a sample member of the commons of Scotland for whom John is spokesman, had also earlier come in contact with legal procedure, to his misfortune. At one time he had been a prosperous farmer, living with his father, who was more than eighty, his mother, ninety-five, and his wife and "sax or seavin" bairns (11. 1975-75, 1991, 1928, 1998). He 37 Pauper first appears in the play at the beginning of the second part. The drama had not yet recOmmenced, and Diligence (here merely an actor rather than the personified virtue of the morality proper) attempts to remove him from the scene so that the action can be started. Pauper climbs the scaffolding to the king's chair, but in time interests Diligence with L18 problems and remains to be a major character in the play. This same interlude (before the estates convene to continue the drama) contains the earthy and amusin scene where the pardoner divorces a shoemaker and his wife 11. 2122-79). Nichol's description of this procedure (p. xlvii) as a "strange rite" is a masterpiece of euphemism. A somewhat similar scene in Mankind (Adams' edition, 11. 150-141) is bowdlerized by the editor, who says “the language is unprintable." (Joseph Q. Adams, Chief Egg-Shakespearean Drama, p. 507.) (Presumably, the incident involving the mare which Pauper describes here took place before he lost another mare as heriot. The order of the mares in confusing in the drama.) 64 had a mare, who carried salt and coal and foaled yearly, and three "fat and fair" cows (11. 1977-80). But when his parents died in close succession, Pauper was forced to pay heriot and corpse-present to both temporal and spiritual lords: Our gude gray Meir was baittand on the feild; And our Lands laird tuik hir for his hyrsild. The Vickar tuik the best Cow be the head, Incontinent, quhen my father was deid; , And, quhen the Vickar hard tel how that my mother Was dead, fra-hand he tuke to him ane vther. (11. 1985-90) When his wife dies, shortly thereafter, for "verie sorow," Pauper is again oppressed: And, quhen the Vickar hard tell my wyfe was dead, The thrid Cow he cleikit be the head. Thair vmsst clayis, that was of rapploch gray The Vickar gart his Clark bear them away. (11. 1995-96) Pauper was on his way to St. Andrews to spend his last great in an attempt to get Justice, since he had already tried both civil and church court in Edinburgh without restitution (11. 1964-68). Diligence calls him the "daftest fuill“ he has ever scen if he hopes to get legal relief from the actions of churchmen (11. 2008-10). Pauper asks Diligence where he would find the law by which his three cows were taken from him, and is told that custom is the only Justification (11.2011-22). If usage makes corpse-present legal, Pauper-asks (in language nor ordinarily thought quotable), then does the customary behavior of certain members of the clergy with ”Ladies, madinis, and vther mens wyfis“ constitute law? (11. 2024-28) Diligence doesn't answer his question, but warns him that such talk about the clergy will get him hanged (l. 2050). Other characters also contribute to the picture of the 65 miseries of Scotland. Good Counsel protests early in the play that his banishment from Scotland has brought the realm much misfortune (11. 578-84). From this same speaker we learn that the fate of the commons is ever growing worse: Thir pure commouns, daylie, as 5e may as, Declynis doun till extreme povertie; For sum ar hichtit as into thair maill, Thair winning will nocht find them water-kaill. (11. 2567-70) Diligence has been so accustomed to lack of reward that even after King Humanity's promise that Parliament shall recompense him for his efforts, he says, I will get riches throw that rent, Efter the day of Dume; Quhen, in the colpots of Tranent, Butter will grow on brume. (11. 1807-10) But there is frequent warning that wrong and Oppression shall not go unpunished. Even before the estates meet to reform Scotland, Verity admonishes princes who tolerate mistreatment of their people: Wa, than, and duill be to sow Princes, all, Sufferand the pure anes for till be Opprest! In everlasting burnand fyre 5e sall With Lucifer richt dulfullie be drest. Thairfoir, in tyme for till eschaip that nest, Feir God, do law and Iustice equally Till everie man; as that na puir Opprest Vp to the hevtn on 50w ans vengence cry. (11. 1055-42) We shall turn again to the Satyre for consideration of Lyndsay's positive political and social philosOphy, but before leaving this work there is one character than cannot be over- looked in an examination of complaint. This character is _Folly, who in spite of his long history receives a development from Lyndsay which is in many ways unique. Looking for ancestors and relatives of Lyndsay's Folly could become a 66 sort of game at which Folly himself would be highly amused; the backward extent of such a search would be limited only by the breadth of the gap over which the searcher could still see similarities. Almost at random we can find examples of this character in British literature and folk customs. There are definite hints of Folly in various folk plays and festival rites cited by Miss Mill in her Mediaeval Play; ig'Scotland,38 though nothing as highly developed as the"Joyous Societies" Of France ever appeared in the British Isles.39 By the middle of the fifteenth century the doctrine of fools and folly had been regularized in Lydgate's Q_I_‘_d_;_'_e_ _o_f; £2115, Folly as a specific character had appeared in England well before this, if we are to accept 1425 as the approximate date of Th; Castle 53:;Perseverancev?’O Folly in this early morality has but a small role, but is developed clearly enough to appear as being completely devoted to evil. Mere nearly contemporary with Lyndsay's Sat re, Folly appears in Skelton's Magpificence and Heywood's Dialog gf_flip_apg_§plly. In both of these works we see a sinister and cynical character, showing little of the good humor and none of the good intentions of Lyndsay's creation. Sebastian Brant's Narrenschiff (l494),5l along with Alexander Barclay's free English translation, the 28 Ppe 16-18e 39 Barbara Swain, Fools and F011 During the Middle es and the Renaissance, p. 158. Cf. a so Miss Swain's chapter , 1r"Th-e JOyous Societies,“ pp. 75-90. The "Feast of Fools" forms another organized medieval custom. Cf. Chambers, I, 195-95 in particular. 50 Adams, p. 265n. 31 Miss Swain offers the interestin s ecul ship idea may have a common ancestor wit goderxfitfioolnidtglyatfltglaets. 67 ghyp g; 2211; (1509), also continues the viewpoint of close association of folly with sin. The first maJor departure from this tradition, and the creation of a Folly towards whom Lyndsay's shows the greatest relationship, was made by Erasmus in The Praise 2; Egily_(l5ll). It may be true, as Hudson says of her, that Erasmus' Folly is not "consistently or clearly imagined.'53 But she emerges clearly enough to be easily distinguished from the evil figure of the moralities. She has the virtue which she herself as- cribes to fools: Ashe can speak the truth frankly without fear.55 Such a character who can satirize the flaws of humanity and still keep a full measure of sympathy is also found in Lyndsay's Folly. By examining Folly's part at the close of the Satyre, it can be seen why Miss Swain calls him the only character of his type in the English moralities I'which accused human weakness yet Jested light-heartedly at it.'54 Folly enters the action of the Satyre with considerable blueter(l. 4272), unable to remember his own name (11. 4277-79).55 53 Hoyt Hopewell Hudson, "The Folly of Erasmus: An Essay," in The Praise 2; Folly, ed. Hudson, p. xxv. 55 Hudson's translation, pp. 49-50. 54 P. 165. 55 His forgetfulness is reminiscent of Erasmus' Folly, who says, ”I see you are expecting a peroration, but you are Just too foolish if you suppose that after I have poured out a hodgepodge of words like this I can recall anything that I have said." (p. 125). There is some indication, by the way, that Lyndsay was familiar with at least part of Erasmus' writings. Cf. Monarchs, 11. 6246-52. 68 He presents a sharp contrast with the serious business the estates have Just concluded when he offers his complaint to the king: he had Just been attacked by a sow in a dung-heap (11. 4521-28). Folly is much surprised to see the pulpit and learn that bishOps are now expected to preach (11. 4450-51, 4455-45). He decides to deliver a sermon himself, using the text, "Stultorum humerus infinitus" (l. 4466). He is not ashamed to be a fool, he says, fer, ...and hundreth stands heir by, Perventure als great fuillis as I. (11. 4475-74) Furthermore, he has a genealogy showing Earles, Duiks, Kings, and Empriours, With mony guckit Conquerours, Quhilk dois in Folie persevsir, And has done sa this many geir. Quhat vails all thir vaine honours, Nocht being sure to leife twa houris? (11) 4478-81, 4484- 85 One fool hoards money, while another steals it from him (11. 4486-89). some fools behave as if they thought they would never die (11. 4490-92). There are many wealthy fools, he says, and many fools among;the Estates, Judging by their actions in the past (11. 4495-4500). He has brought fools- caps to sell to all varieties. He will sell caps to the merchants (11. 4504-12), to old men who marry young wives (11. 4515-26), to the clerical fools who "sell thair awin saullis to the Devill" (l. 4556). He has special, long-cared caps for princes: For I haue heir--I to the tell,-- Ane nobill cap imperiell, Quhilk is nocht ordanit bot for doings 0f Empreours, of Duiks, and Kings,-- For princelie and imperiall fuillis: 69 'Thay sould haue luggis ale lang as Muillie. The pryde of Princes, withoutin faill, Gare all the warld rin tOp ovir taill. To win them warldlie gloir and gude, Thay curs nocht schedding saiklee blude. (11. 4554-65) Folly's final beetowal Of caps is to those in high places, not only princes but the Pope as well, who are making war throughout Europe for reasons which he does not understand (11. 4568-82). Concerning such struggles he asks, Is this fraternall charitis? 0r furious folie? Quhat say as? Thay leird nocht this at Christie Scuillis: Thairfoir, I think them verie fuillis. I think it folie,--be Gods mother!-- Ilk Crhistian Prince to ding doun vther. Becaus that this hat sould belang them, " Gang thou, and part it evin amang them. (11. 4582-89) Though it is FOlly who ends the action of the Satyrs, we could Obtain a more typical view of the essential seriousness of this work by quoting the prayer of Verity: Get vp!--thow sleipie all too lang, 0 Lord-- And mak sum ressonabill reformatioun 0n them that dois tramp doun thy gracious word, And has ans deidlie indignatioun At them quha make maist trew narratioun. (11. 1160-64) This exhortation also offers a bridge to an examination of Lyndsay's social criticism as found in his last maJor work, the Monarchs. In the second book of this 6558-lins poem we find a virtual repetition of Vsrity's prayer: Gstt vpe! thow slepist all to lang, 0 Lords; ,And mak one haistie reformatioun 0n thame quhilk doith tramp doun yi gratioue words, And hes ans deidly Indignatioun Att thame quhilk makith.trew narratioun 70 Off thy Gospell, schawing the verytie.36 (11. 2701-6) The pessimistic overtones of the excerpt seem more in keeping with the spirit of the Monarchs, which is Lyndsay's dreariest as well as his longest work (and some critics have added, his dullsst). The poem is an elaborate history of the world,'ex- amining evil past and present and drawing frequent morals. In "The Epistil to the dearu (wherein Lyndsay speaks to the book itself), we find that the poem is addressed To faithfull Prudent Pastourie Spirituall, To Nobyll Erlis, and Lordis Temporall. ‘ (11. 57-8) To these men in power “this schort memoriall" is to show “Quhow Mankynd bene to missris maid thrall" (l. 41). He tells the book to bessach them to suppress all laws Inuentit be Msnnis Traditioun, ' Contrar to Christie Institutioun. (11. 44-5) While the poem includes all time and space in its scape, Lyndsay makes clear in the "Epistil" that his purpose is to reveal how God, to punish the breaking of his commandments (11. 46-7), has "Scurgit this pure Realms of Scotland" (1. 49). There are many scriptural commentaries, in prose or verse, Latin or the vernacular, parallel to the burden of Lyndsay's 56 Such close parallels are frequently found between the Sat re and the Monarchs, usually being incorporated in the I'aIIgressions" of fie latter poem. Lyndsay provides the basis for dating the Monarchs in lines 5278-505. 0f the six thousand years which the world is to exist, "Fyue thousand, fyue hundreth, thrs, & fyftys" (l. 5501) have gone by, thereby dating the composition of this part of the work at 1555. There is the possibility that this may be 1554 under the new calendar. 0n the other hand, it may be that use of the older system eXplains why the first printed edition is dated 1552. Cf. Hamer, III, 257. 71 poema37 Mackay suggests as Lyndsay's primary source the ex- position of the prophecies of the Book of Daniel by Melanchthon, published in 1552 and translated into English in 1550.58 This work,according to Mackay, became a popular manual of universal history. For this examination, however, neither the source nor Lyndsay's use of it is as important as the digressions he makes to point out special applications to the situation around him. In form, the Menarche is an extended conversation in which Courtier (Lyndsay) questions EXperiencs in the manner of "the tame interlocutors in a Socratic dialogue.“59 The poem begins with an extended account of the creation and early history of man, then proceeds to a discussion of the five great monarchies 'of past and present. First of these, and the one given the most detailed development, is Aseyria. Persia, Greece, and Rome are passed over more hastily, as if Lyndsay were in a hurry to get to the fifth and last monarchy, the church. The poem concludes with a description of the day of Judgment. There is much in this elaborate psuedo-history which Lyndsay can use as examples Of the evil ways of men in power. There is much also which he can appropriate as springboards for digressions on Scottish social conditions. Two maJor targets for Lyndsay's satire and complaint, which have been 37 Cf. Arnold Williams, IWho Used the Commentaries?" The Common Expositor, pp. 26-59. 58 P. 295b. Knox also used this work, Mackay says. 59 Nichol, p. xlix. The actual title of the work is e Dialog pptuix Experience and ans Courteour, Off the Misera 111 Estait 2f the Warld. 72 treated earlier in this paper only in passing, deserve par- ticular attention--war and women. A special section in the second book of the Monarchs is entitled I'0f Ye Gret Misere and Skaythis that Cvmis of Weiris, and thow King Nynvs Began the First Weris, and Straik the First Battell." Only Courtier speaks in this section; he asks EXperisncs an impassioned fifty- eight-lins question, quite in contrast to his usual meek two- 1ins queries. He begins, FATHER, I pray gov, with my hart, Declair to me, or we depart, Quho first began thir mortall Wsris,-- Quhilk euerilk faithfull hart efferis, And euere polesye doun thrawis,-- Express agane the Lordis lawis; Sen Christa, our kyng omnipotent, Left Peace in tyll his Testament. Quhov doith procsid this creueltie Aganis Justice and Equitie? (11. 1889-98) Wherever war is, there also is great misery, he continues. Cities with many a strong tower are destroyed; virgins and matrons are "deflorit;' richly decorated temples are burnt and their priests killed or put to flight (11. 1899-1907). Families are broken up (11. 1908-10). Schools, both of natural science and of divinity, are 'trampit doun," along with every virtue (11. 1911-15). Laboring men, merchants, and craftsmen are ruined and made homeless (11. 1918-24), while the finest works of man--”Beildingis, Gardyngis, and pleasand parkis"--are utterly destroyed (11. 1927-29). Courtier, still nominally asking a question, gives special attention to the economic results of war: Ryches bene turnit to powertis, Plentis in tyll penuritie. Deith, Hounger, Darth, it is weill kende or: Weir this is the Fatsll ends. . (11. 1931-34) 73 The effects on the legal structure are equally disastrous: Justice is turned into tyranny, and both civil and canon law are overthrown (11. 1955, 1957-58). War begets murder and mischief (1. 1939); it destroys kings and kingdoms (1. 1941). Perhaps as a climax to this catalogue of war's miseries, Courtier concludes: "Weir scheddis mskls saiklee bluds." (l. 1945) Declaring himself unable to say any good of war, he repeats his question, Declare to me, Schir, gyf as can, Quho first thir Miserris began. (11. 1945-46) Experience answers that cruel, prideful, covetous kings are responsible for war, and the first of these was Ninus (11. 1947-49, 1955-54).40 Ninus was not satisfied with his own territories (11. 1007-10), and 'Throuch Pryde, Couatyce, and vanis glors' (l. 2015) began the history Of conquest. Some eight hundred lines and two full-fledged digressions later we learn that Ninus was finally overthrown by his wife (11. 2851-56). All his conquests, Experience reminds Courtier, "was nocht bot gret schedding of blude" (l. 2842). From this story EXperisnce draws the moral, Princis, for wrangus conquessing, Doith mak, oft tymes, ans euyll ending: Thocht he had lang prosperitie, He endit with miseretie. (11. 2847-50) Such is the usual fats, the post writes elsewhere, of men who engage in conquests. Cyrus of Persia, who had a 'bluds schedding thyrste' (1. 5658) was defeated and decapitated. 40 With this answer begins a new section: "...Ane Schorts Discriptiovn of the Fovr MOnarchis..." ' 74 His head was thrown into a vessel of blood by Queen Tomyris, and advised, "Drynk, now, thy fyll' (1. 5657). Alexander, so Often considered a maJor (and virtually Christian) hero in medieval narrative, fares no better. Experience tells ' of his 'creuell conqueesyn' (l. 5655), how he mixed the Ganges with Indians' blood and the Euphrates with the blood of Persians (11. 5666-68). It is 'rycht abhominabyll," he tells Courtier, to read how he shed guiltlsss blood (11. 5670-71). But the fate of Alexander was the fate of other conquerers: Efter his schort prosperitie, He deit with gret miseritie. 41 (11. 5672-75) One anti-war passage in the Monarchs bears a considerable similarity to Folly's comments in his sermon in the Satyre. In this section (part of “A Schort Remembrance of the Moste Terrabyll Day of the Extreme Iugement"), Experience calls attention to the same wars between Christian princes that Folly had satirizsd. To EXperience, Christ is dishonored when such leaders call themselves Christian (11. 5586-87); they are more like Turks or pagans, though even Turks seldom fight among themselves (11. 5589-90). Christian princes shOuld agree, as brother to brother (11. 5591-92), but instead, 'ilke ans dyngis doun any vther" (l. 5595). Echoing Folly (as well as his own earlier statement, 11. 1947-49 and 2015), Experience says he knows no reasonable causes for the wars plaguing the world, 'Exspt Pryde, Couatyce, and veins Clare" (1. 5595). In 41 It is difficult to find an earlier parallel in English to Lyndsay's treatment of Alexander's fall as a result of wrong- ful conquest. Cf. Cursor Mundi for an account of Alexander's unfortunate fate, related for a different purpose: "And there- fore take hede what things in this world is au th worth withowten 75 a significant digression he considers the war-like relations between England and Scotland, and offers only one hope for peace: Bstuix thir Realmes of Albione, Quhare Battellis hes bene mony one, Can be maid none Affinitie, Nor, git, no Consanguinitie; Nor, be no ways, they can consydder That thay may haue lang Peace to gydder. I dreid that weir makis none endyng, Tyll thay be, boith, onder ans kyng. (11. 5404-11) All this warfare is in spite of Christ's teaching of love and peace, Experience points out (11. 5412-15). But he fears that Our Kyngis frome weir wyll nocht refrans, Tyll thare by mony ans thousand slane,-- Gret heirshipis maid be see and land, As all the warld may vnderstand. (11. 5414-17) Courtier interrupts his master, saying that he believes temporal kings may defend their reigns, for he has seen Pope Julius 'manfullye" attack King Louis of France(ll. 5418-27). But to Experience this merely supports his point: both “Sonne and Mone“--the spiritual and temporal estates-- are devoid of light, and the stars--the commons--suffer (11. 5428-55). At the close of this digression on war, Experience says they must leave this "morall sens" (l. 5446), And of this mater speik no more, Bsgynning quhare we left affore. (11. 5447-48) But the problem is more important than the promise. A few humdred lines later, in describing the day of Judgment, Experience places the warmakers at the head of "that bailfull grace. 5iff we speks of lordshipp or riches, who was gretter conqueroure than kynge Alisaunder? And gitt in is most rialte he was poysond, and never after myght none of ye erss rewysen the furthe parts of is lordshinpe...I 76 band' which shall be assembled at the left hand of Christ: Woo, than, to Kyngis and Empriouris Quhilkis wer vnrychteus Conquerouris, For thare glore and perticular gude, Gart schsd so mskls saiklee bluds! But Ceptour, Crown, and Robe Royall, That day thay sall mak compt of all, And, for thare creuell tyrranngf, Sall punyste be perpetuallye.4 (11. 5698-5705) On Lyndsay's satire of women we can be somewhat more brief. Not that the Monarchs is neglectful of feminine short- comings; rather, with one maJor exception, the sins of women are the same as those of men. This exception is the breaking of divinely constituted order. by women who seek dominion over men. The theme is a familiar one in legends and stories,. commentaries and histories. It was still vital to Milton, and one could hardly say that it is missing entirely from the en- lightened present. The position of women, of course, was determined by God's sentence following man's first sin. After relating the miseries to which women were to be destined by this punishment, Experience says, Be this sentence God did conclude Wemen frome lybsrtie denude, Quhilk, be experience as may ss,-- Quhow Quenis of moste his degre 43 In addition to the MOnarche and other works cited earlier in this paper, Lyndsay attacks purposelsss war in Th3 Tragedie g£_the Cardinall. Cf. particularly 11. 176- 205. For a discussion of this general field, cf. Robert P. Adams, Pacifism ig the English Renaissance, 1497-1550, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1957. There is an interesting sidelight re arding the re- lations of Erasmus' pacifiem to Scottish afPairs: Erasmus ends his essay of was in the Adagia with an account of his 'frisnd and pupil Alexander Stuart, bastard son of James IV. Cf. Holinehed, The Scottish Chronicle, 11,404, and Margaret PhilLips, "Erasmus and Propaganda? MLR, XXXVII (1942) p. 15. 77 Ar vnder moste subiectioun, And sufferis moste correctioun; For thay, lyke byrdis in tyll ane cage, Ar keipit ay vnder thirlage: So all wemen, in thare degre, Suld to thare men subiectit be. (11. 1061-70) He warns, however, that not all women take this sentence meekly: Quhowbeit, sum sit wyll stryue for stait, And for the maistrye mak debait, Quhilk gyf thay want, boith ewin and morrow Thare men wyll suffer mekle sorrow. Off Eue thay tak that qualite, To desyre Soueranite. (11. 1071-76) The outstanding example which Lyndsay cites of violation of God's decree is Semiramis, wife of Ninus, who became queen of Assyria. Experience tells his companion that her husband loved her so dearly that he would obey any command she made. Knowing this, she grew proud and presumptuous, and gained from Ninus permission to govern his empire for five days (11. 2812-18). 0n the second day of her triumphant rule she had her husband thrown into prison. 'I reid weill of his prescning,‘ EXperience says, "Bot nocht of his deluering" (11. 2854-55). After she had disposed of her husband, Semiramis took a “curagious consait' that she would rule the kingdom as a man (1. 2867). She followed the clothing and manners of men, and Quhen scho was in tyll Armour dycht, Mycht no man knaw hir be one knycht. (11. 2874-75) Experience relates how she fought at the head of her troOps and enlarged and glorified Babylon (11. 2877-2952). Neither Penthesilea, queen of Amazonia, nor the "fair Madin of France" could compare with her in valor or military skill (11. 2955-40). 78 She might have been a queen “A per se," says EXperience (seem- ing to forget for a moment his point), had she not violated chastity in a considerable variety of manners (11. 2961-84). But while her reign was long, the 'prydefull perswasioun' of this "ambitious, wyckit Quene" (11. 5196-97) finally brought her to defeat. She was cruelly murdered by her own son (1. 5216). The moral which Experience draws is purely conventional. He cannot in any way commend women for assuming the ways and prerogatives of men. It is the Lord's will, he says, for All Creature tyll vse thare kynde; Men for tyll haue preheminens, And wemen vnder obediens; Thocht all wemen inclynit be Tyll haif the Soueranite. (11. 5258-42) Lyndsay's official position--he seems as prominent at the time of the composition of the Monarchs as he had been under James V--was dependent on the regency of the queen-mother, but he makes no effort to exclude her or her daughter mary when he has Experience bring his advice up to date: Ladyis no way I can commend Presumpuouslye quhilk doith pretend Tyll vse the office of ans kyng, 0r Realmes tak in gouernyng, Quhowbeit thay wailseant be and wycht, Goyng in Battell lyke one knycht.45 (11. 5247-52) 45 Experience goes on here, and in the following section, to denounce the rulership of an effeminate king. The tragedy is quite as great, and the violation of God's commandment equally serious. But the problem of the king who behaved as a woman was of only historical importance to Lyndsay; queens and queen regents presented a situation with which he had twice come in contact. 79 Nor does he modify his point of view to fit a woman-ruled Scotland when, later in the poem, he relates the fate of various queens destined for eternal damnation. (11. 5820-55). Lyndsay's attack on the rule of women in the Monarchs preceded by less than half a decade the El£§$,§l§§£.2£.222 'Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment 9:,Egggg. It would be difficult to measure the possible influence of the earlier work on Knox's diatribe; the feminine government was pain- fully obvious to Knox, whether or not he had read the Monarche.44 It is surprising, though, to discover that the religious reformer placed less emphasis on doctrine and more on political affairs than did Lyndsay. There is another major difference between the two works (besides the obvious one that Lyndsay's discussion of women is a relatively minor digression to a much more general theme): Lyndsay tempered his attack with a corresponding picture of virtuous women(who were sometimes successful in matters not rigidly feminine); Knox pulled no punches. But both men agreed on the basic issue: women should not occupy high places of state. The reasons behind their common conclusion and their intended applications of their beliefs suggest less agreement. 44 Knox originally intended to sound three blasts on his trumpet, expecting the monstrous regiment to topple with the third blow. The opposition of some of his religious allies no doubt contributed to his dropping of this plan. A letter from John Calvin to Sir William Cecil indicates the Genevan's dis- agreement with Knox on this score, for reasons based on both politics and principle. The letter is paraphrased by David Laing in his edition of Knox' Works, II, 557. 80 After considering Lyndsay's satire on women in high places, his attacks on the foibles of feminine dress seem anti-climactic. This, however, is quite as he intended. In an earlier work, Ans Suplication in Contemptioun g£_Syde Taillis, he tells the king that the matter which he is considering is "ans small falt, quhilk is nocht Tressoun" (l. 5). What Lyndsay says regarding this sub- Ject in the Monarchs is in essence an sight-line summary of the 176-line Suplication. It is also a retelling of an old theme which was common in medieval sermons, drama, and literature in general.45 Lesser issues than the two already discussed also feel the weight of Lyndsay's invective in the Monarchs. But for the most part his treatment of abuses in this work follows patterns al- ready examined. He does introduce some new views on idleness (11. 1265-72), but nothing emerges comparable to the positive stand of Piers Plowman on the virtues of labor.46 Such vices of 45 Lyndsay describes the long-tailed dresses which women of the day affected as Flappand the fylth amang sour feit, Rasyng the dusts in to the streit. (Monarchs, 11.5856- Chaucer, in the Parson's Tale, has considerable to say 57) about "the superfluitee in lengths of the forseide gownes, trailynge in the dong and in the mire" (l. 419). In the mystery plays, satire on women's dress is often found in scenes per- taining to the last Judgment, which is also the setting of the above quoted passage from the Monarchs. For a discussion of the satire on extravagancss of feminine apparel to be found in vernacular sermons, cf. Owst, pp. 595-402. The Thre Deid Pollis, attributed to Henryson, provides an earlier SEEttish contribution to satire on women's clothing (11. 25-40). 46 Experience says that idleness was the root of the evils of the world in Noah's time, but he makes no effort to apply this observation to the contemporary period. men were idle in those days, he tells Courtier, because the richness of the earth pre- cluded the necessity of labor. Even the rivers were pleasant and potent, so that men would not exert themselves to make wins (11. 81 the common man Lyndsay ordinarily passes over lightly. His interest was in the problems of the commonwealth as they af- fected the average citizen, but his method of attack was large- ly from the top down. The examples cited illustrate the general pattern of Lyndsay's satire on the abuses of his times. While it was in this province of attacking wrong where he saw it that Lyndsay gained his chief reputation, he also presented fre- quently a more positive program on social and political con- ditions. Here and there in his works can be found these ideas and principles mentioned, but they are never organized into a formal expression of social philosophy. Piecing these isolated passages together, however, a fair picture of Lyndsay's conception of the practical, well-run state can be established. The connotations of "ideal" do not seem fitting to a descrip- tion of Lyndsay's beliefs on government: there is every in- dication that he considered the achievement of the state he visioned to be completely possible. This state, as might be expected, would be built upon the forms with which he was familiar: Within the framework that he knew, Lyndsay saw the potentialities which could be developed into a better Scotland in a better world. On the nature of the king who would head such a nation Lyndsay is very specific. "Quhat is ane King?" he has Correction ask in the Sat re, ...nocht bot ans officiar To caus his Leiges liue in equitie, And, vnder God, to be ans punischer 0f trespassours against his Maiestie. (11. 1605-08) 82 Such a conception of the function of a monarch is backed by centuries of medieval tradition, but seldom did the idea re- ceive as forceful a presentation as Lyndsay gives it. The words are those of the most exalted character of the morality, spoken in his introductory speech. And the words were heard- by the king and queen at the 1540 performance and by the Queen regent in 1554. The divine origin of a king's powers, and his responsibility to God to carry out his duties properly, is also maintained in the Satyre: Good Counsel advises King Humanity, if he wishes to reign long,. First dread gour God, abuif all vther thing; For 5e bot ans mortall instrument To that great God and King Omnipotent, Preordinat, be his divine maiestie, To reull his peopill intill vnitie. 47 (11. 1877-83 The prince is to be an example of Virtue unto his people. In the Papyggo, the dying bird warns its royal master to rule himself so that his virtue would advance his honor. For how can princes rule great territories, the parrot asks, if they cannot guide their own conduct aright (ll. 290-96)? Addressing James V directly in the conclusion to the Dreme, 47 Other examples of the divine origin of royal powers are numerous. In the Dreme, Lyndsay reminds James V that God, in his "preordinance," has granted him the ruling of his people (11. 1057- 42). Again in the same poem he states that James is "predestinate' to govern I'this kynrik“ (11. 1056-57). The idea that the king is but an instrument of God is likewise variously developed. In the Complaynt, again addressing James V, he says, For thow art bot ans Instrument, To that gret kyng Omnipotent. (11. 499—500) Cf., also, in the Papyngo, Considder weill, thow bene bot officiare And wassall to that kyng Incomparabyll. (11. 255- 56) 85 Lyndsay tells the monarch to ...be exampyll to thy peple all, ' Exersing verteous deidis honorabyll, (11. 1074-75) and catalogues for him the vices which a monarch should avoid (11. 1076-1108). On various occasions Lyndsay lists the duties which a king should follow. The parrot admonishes the king to be diligent in his office, for if he is found slothful, unjust, or negligent, he will suffer divine punishment (11. 279-82). The king, he says, should be skilled in the gentle arts of singing and playing instruments as well as in horsemanship and handling weapons. But the most important part of his training is to ...lerns to be ans kyng; - Kyith, on that craft, thy pringnant fresche ingyne Grantit to the be Influence Diuine. (11.287-89 He should study the "Regiment of princslie gouernyng' for half an hour every day (11. 504-05). (First in his studies should be history. The parrot exhorts him to know the contents of the chronicles so that he can profit by the wisdom and the_ errors of past princes. Fifty-five of Scotland's one hundred five rulers were slain, James is warned, and the most of them were brought to ruin through their own misgoverning (ll.5ll-5l)fl9 The king should not neglect having competent advisers, according 48 For another treatment of this theme, cf. Satyre, 11. 1045-59. James did not succeed in following Lyndsay‘s advice, at least in so for as lechery is concerned. Knox referred to him as “that blynded and most vitious Man." "Most vitious, we shall call him,“ Knox wrote in his history of the Scottish Reformation, "for his nether spaired mania wieff nor madyn, no more after his mariage then he did befoir." Works, I, 66. 49 A repetition of the advice to read the chronicles is found in the Satire, 11. 1892-1901. 84 to Lyndsay. Perhaps the strongest advice he gives on this matter is to be found in the Satire. With Good Counsel as his spokesman, the poet says that princes who are not well advised "ar nocht woth ane leik" (l. 564).“) There are many other duties and responsibilities of’a monarch suggested in Lyndsay's works. Several of these, which can be found almost at random throughout his poems, are conveniently summarized in one stanza of the Papyngo. In these seven lines, the king is advised to treat each baron as if he were his brother, to settle arguments among his people with Justice, tempered with mercy, and to do all in his power to possess the love of his countrymen (11. 552-58). While this particular stanza is directed primarily towards the king's relationship with his nobles, the ideas expressed in it are all repeated elsewhere with a slant towards the commons. James V became known in Scotland as the 'Commons' King;" how far David Lyndsay--his friend, teacher, adviser, and conscience--is responsible for James"attitude towards his people is only conjecture. To work hand in hand with the king, Lyndsay advocated a powerful and representative parliament. Assembling such a body was the first act of Correction in the Satyre. In his Opening speech he says, I will do nocht without the conveining Ans Parleament of the estaits all. (11. 1577-78)- No prince can act in an honorable manner, he adds, unless his council assist him; for how can he know what is best without his estates' instruction (11. 1581-85)? 5° Cf., also, Dreme, 11. 1109-17, and Panggo, 11. 297-505. 85 This new parliament, which forms the central action around which the Satyre is constructed, can reasonably be assumed to represent the sort of legislative and advisory body which Lyndsay desired for Scotland. In it, John the Commonweal was represent- ed (11. 1769-72). This apparently signifies Lyndsay's favoring of representation for the common people in parliament--common people in the sense of American campaign oratory rather than in the more limited usage of British law and custom. For even be- fore John had been given his seat there is an implication of weight given to the 'commons'" in the technical sense. When Spirituality asked the notary to record the dissent of his estate to the reformations advocated, Temporality replies, My Lord, be him that al the warld hes wrocht! Wee set nocht by quhicder 59 consent or nocht. 5s ar bot ans estait, and we ar twa; Et vbi maior pars ibi tota. (11. 2855-56) The third estate earlier had been represented by ”BurgesSis and Merchands" (l. 2566), with Merchant as their spokesman. This addition of the common man to parliament is the first reason Correction gives for the rejoicing of all virtuous people (1. 2774). The acts of parliament in the Satyre form the heart of Lyndsay's philosOphy regarding the welfare of Scotland. From the summary of these laws which follows, can also be obtained a summary of what Lyndsay considered to be the minimum essential rights and duties of the citizens of Scotland: 1. Christ's church and religion shall be strengthed and de- fended.. 2. The acts passed by the last parliament shall be enforced rigidly. 86 5. In order to advance the commonweal, all church-held agricultural lands shall be leased to diligent husbandmen, subject to reasonable restrictions. 4. The lords are to be responsible for the suppression of theft within their lands. 5. Justices shall be acpointed to serve in the distant northern areas. 6. The orders of nuns are to be abolished, and their rev- enues turned into channels more useful to the commonweal; two senates are to be established, carrying fixed salaries of five hundred marks, with sixteen members in each. One group will remain in the north; the other will meet in Edinburgh and act as royal advisers. The senators shall be chosen from among the "maist cunning Clarke,“ and their chan- cellor shall be a learned man, whose stipend shall be one thousand marks.51 7.. Temporal and spiritual matters shall be handled in dif- ferent courts. 8. Benefices shall be given only to learned and virtuous men who shall be well qualified to preach or to teach. 9. The bishops shall ordain none as teachers except men of erudition who are qualified for the priesthood. 10. No pluralities shall be tolerated, except for members of the royal family. 51 This interpretation of the sixth act differs from the gloss provided in the E.E.T.S. edition, p. 525, and the summary of Miss Mill in her "Representations...“, p. 645. Both of them, apparently, consider the section of 'Senaturs" to be separate from that regarding royal counsellors. 87 11. The church and the nobility are no longer to exact corpse-present and heriot. 12. Members of the clergy shall remain in the areas of their charges. 15. No money shall be sent to Rome for church offices, . except archbishoprics. 14. Members of the clergy shall be allowed to marry. 15. Those of noble birth are not to marry the "bastard bairns" of members of the spiritual estate.53 Two facets of Lyndsay's social philosOphy merit fur- ther discussion, his attitude towards justice and his stand on relations with England. There has already been observed, obliquely, something of the attention he paid to law and its enforcement. One of the most positive treatments of this theme can be found in a speech of Verity in the Satire: Luif Iustice, 5e quha hes ans Iudges cure In earth, and dreid and awfull Iudgement Of him that sall cum iudge baith rich and pure, Rycht terribilly, with bludy wounds rent. That dreidfull day into gour harts imprent; Beleuand weill, how and quhat maner 5e Vse Iustice heir, til vthers, thair, at lenth, That day, but doubt, sa sall 5e iudgit be. (11. 1027-54) Another line, later in this speech, illustrates an expres- ‘ sion which occurs frequently throughout Lyndsay's works, often in virtually the same phrasing. Verity says, 'Hauld the 53 Ruth Mohl, in her The Three Estates in Medieval and Renaissance Literature, cites this passage as contributing to the establishment of Lyndsay's belief in separation of the estates (p. 174). Lyndsay may also have been objecting to the nobility's practice of considering the important ecclesiastical positions as their private hunting ground for wealth and honor. 88 Ballance euin till everie wicht" (1. 1044).55 On the basis of emphasis, this principle of fair and impartial administra- tion of justice appears as one of the most important tenets of Lyndsay's political and social dogma. Lyndsay's often repeated advice on the folly of war has a direct application to the relations of England and Scotland. Aside from civil upheaval, Scotland's warfare had been confined to her southern neighbor since the times of Wallace and Bruce. Lyndsay frequently made digressions con- cerning this subject, but an overall view of his stand on intra-island affairs is somewhat difficult to establish. Murison says Lyndsay was 'nobly inconsistent“ regarding this important issue.54 He grants that the poet ordinarily allied himself with the peace party, but he interprets part of Folly's sermon and a general attitude of good feeling towards France as inconsistencies of Lyndsay's.) Folly had told the estates, Quhat cummer haue 5e had, in Scotland, Be our auld enemies of Ingland? Had nocht bene the support of France, We had bene brocht to great mischance. (11. 4564-67) But Folly had just warned them about the pride of princes, which by implication was responsible for the troubles between the two British kingdoms.55 The excerpt is part of a general satire on war, and might better be interpreted as a reminder that Scotland needed foreign help to extricate herself from 55 Cf., also, Monarchs, l. 77, Dreme, l. 1075, Pa n o, 54 P. 17. 55 Folly goes on, 11. 4568-81, to discuss the war then- going on between France and the Papacy, but doesn't suggest that Scotland offer aid to her former partner. 89 difficulties of her own responsibility, rather than as an advocacy of a French as opposed to an English alliance. Two points might be made concerning Lyndsay's occasional tributes to France. First, in such a work as the Deplora- t;ggg,g£_the Deith 9;_Qp§ne Magdalene, Lyndsay was writing as the official court post. We might well expect compliments to France in a poem about the death of the daughter of the French king, who only a few months earlier had first left her native land. Secondly, there seems no basic conflict between a policy advocating peace with England and one of friendship towards France--so long as both kept out of Scot- land.56 It has already been seen, in the Monarchs, that Lyndsay believed in a union of the two kingdoms under one ruler as the only h0pe for peace. This hope for a peaceful relationship, at least, is constant, whatever interpretation may be made regarding other factors involved in Scotland's foreign relations. Lyndsay never advocated a "peace without honor." Twice in the Satyre he makes a plea that the nation be prepared for war,57 and he advised, in this work and elsewhere, that military training (with a decided chivalric cast) be made part of the schooling of princes. Like many other Scots, 56 Of. Ross, p. 409. 57 Good Counsel: Now, into peace, 3s sould provyde for weirs, And be sure of how mony thowsand speirs The King may be, quhen he hes ocht ado. (11. 2557- 59) Merchant advises (11.2810-15) that the commons should be ready with military equipment in case the king is involved in war. 90 Lyndsay had reason for dissatisfaction with the regency of the French-born Duke of Albany during the minority of James V. But national pride brought most of the Scots Opposition to Albany's defense when Henry VIII issued a virtual ultimatum that he be deposed. In general, however, Lyndsay was an upholder of friendly relations with England insofar as possible. Henry VIII no doubt knew this at the time he dictated a tribute to Lyndsay, for British spies were everywhere in Scotland and would hardly have neglected this adviser who frequently represented his country abroad. The poet had an audience with Henry when he returned the garter which had been awarded to James V, then two years dead. In a letter dated 24 May, 1544, Henry wrote to the Earl of Arran, Scotland's regent, We have thought good by these our letters to signify the same unto you with this also, that the said Lyon in the delivery thereof hath used himself right discreetly and much to our content.57 Lyndsay was a consistent advocate of peace and was an equally consistent supporter of Scottish territorial integrity. When military pressure from the south forced him to compromise on one of these issues, patriotism apparently pushed pacifiem into the realm of theory. 57 National Manuscripts 2: Scotland, part III, no. XXVII, quoted by Murison, p. 15. 91 much of Lyndsay's satire and social program was general; occasionaly, however, his stand was specific enough that only close friendship with the king could make possible his freedom. He favored a strong monarchy, but passages previously cited indicate that he advocated moderation of James' heavy handed treatment of the nobility. He wanted the king to be a friend and co-worker with his barons, rather than an arbitrary despot. More surprisingly, he favored a strong and intelligent parliament which included representation of small landholders and skilled workmen as well as the influential burghers. The three-cornered interdependence of peace, justice, and human welfare which he developed in the Eggmg presents a form of keynote to all of his social and political writing. The king was an officer charged with carrying out divine dictates for the well-being of his country; the parliament counselled him, and put into law the necessary regulations for government. By implication, a king who violated his position as an officer could be deposed; by direct statement, a tyrannous or power-seeking king was destined to burn in hell for violation of his charge. Lyndsay's satire and constructive philosOphy covered the entire scope of Scottish activities. No individual or institu- tion was too powerful to be exempt from his pen. Wherever he saw Oppression or injustice he moved to the attack; his struggle against social abuses and for reform was lifelong. But he was not eminently successful in this field. Reform came to Scotland within a few years of Lyndsay's death, but it was a reformation 92 centered around religious doctrine and church polity. Lyndsay's hand in this overwhelming upheaval shall be examined in the next chapter. But it should not be forgotten, as Scottish Presbyterian critics have so often done, that the "Father of the Scottish Reformation“ also devoted much of his poetical and personal energies to a reformation of man's inhumanity to man. LXNDSAI ON RELIGION AND THE CHURCH Bot gif we sall consider and wey the tyme, quhen Lyndesay did wryte the most pairt of thir warkis, being a tyme of as greit & blind ignorance, of manifest and horribill abhoninationis and abusis: it is to be meruellit how he durst sa planelie inuey aganis the wycis of all men, bot cheiflie of the spirituall estait, being sa bludie & cruell boucheouris...Thay conusnit thair prouinciall counsellis, thay consultit how they suld best sustene thair kingdoms inclynand to ruyne, quhilk laitilie had gottin sa publict ans wound: thay 3eid about to haue his haill warkis condempnit for hereticall, and cessit not, in Kirk and market, publictlie and priuelie, to rage and rayll aganis him, as ans Hereticke...Nochtwithstanding the birnand fyre borne aganis him in their breistis, the hatrent consauit in their hartis, thair puissance . and power euin in that tyme, quhen thay had the ball at thair fute, quhen nouther Prince, nor vther was abil to withstand thame, git culd thay neuer get power ouer this sempil man, nor haif yair hartis satiat of him.1 Two major questions pertaining to religion arise in any discussion of the life and writings of Sir David Lyndsay. Neither of these questions has been satisfactorily answered; perhaps neither ever will be. But centered around them is so much of the interpretation of Lyndsay‘s writings and the importance of his career that both deserve detailed consider- ation. The first problem--Lyndsay's escape from persecution-- is suggested by the passage quoted above from Henry Charteris' 1 Charteris, pp. 5*-4*, 5*. 94 1568 edition of Lyndsay; the second is the establishment of what Lyndsay actually believed. This latter issue has been treated summarily by those who would overlook anything tend- ing to preclude Lyndsay's presence in the Protestant fold, but it is by no means a matter which can be settled in a sentence. Aside from a few confusing biographical facts, the only source of information regarding these problems is in what he wrote. And this means, primarily, that his satire must be examined so that more positive matters can be estab- lished by working backwards. Lyndsay wrote more to expose what he considered wrong than to supply a testament of his 'Own faith. The temptation to regularize his creed in one of .the many available medieval molds either did not occur to him, or he was notably successfull in putting it aside. In examining any phase of Lyndsay's life or works which pertains to religion, paradox clouds the entire issue. Among ' his belongings found after his death were two items illustrat- ing this religious enigma--a rosary and a Bible in English. Except for the one overinterpreted aside in Knox already men- tioned, there is very littlefurther biographical indication of Lyndsay's position in the incipient battle for reformation. Two vague and contradictory hints come from the publication of the Monarchs. The title page of the 1554 edition says that the work was 'imprentit at the command and expensis of Doctor Machabeus, in Copmanhovin" in 1552. For some time it was thought that "Machabeus' was merely thrown in to confuse those who were overly curious about the publication of the 95 work, just as the date was altered.2 It has since been established that Lyndsay knew a Scot in Denmark who used this pseudonymn. John MacAlpine had been prior of the Dominicans at Perth, but left the order and was professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen at the time of Lyndsay's mission to the Danish capital in 1548. But counterbalancing this evidence of a misleading title page and the connection with a reformed exile is the fact that John Hamilton, archbishop of St. Andrews, shares the ded- ication of this work.3 Biography can hardly be eXpectsd to answer satisfactorily questions concerning the nature of Lyndsay's faith and religious practices. The best, and virtually the only source we have about what Lyndsay believed and what reforms he favored is found in his writings. By sifting through his religious satire we can find pieces which fit into a fair picture of his creed, in spite of occasional apparent contradictions. 2 And the place of publication also, unless COpenhagen is interpreted only as indicating the residence of Machabsus and not as applying to "imprintit.' This matter of modifier has been seriously debated. Cf. Nackay, p. 295b. Murison suggests (p. 54) that Lyndsay may have supervised the print- ing of this work.~ 3 Cited with the archbishOp was his brother, the Earl of Arran, regent of Scotland. Of course, the interpretation might be offered that this dedication was only a formality or perhaps even a conscious effort to sidetrack prosecution. It should be remembered, however, that Lyndsay made no attempt to conceal his authorship of the Mggarche, a step he might well have taken had self-protection been his primary aim. 96 This satire in itself offers some of Lyndsay's most interest- ing work, and also shows him at his closest to the great stream of British literature of complaint. In poetry and drama, sermon and commentary, the corruption and abuses of the church offered a major subject for satirists and reformers. A substantial element of complaint of this nature stemmed from the northern sections of English-speaking Britain. The fluctuating border between England and Scotland, incapable even of stopping the frequent raids in both directions, offered no barrier to ideological forces. Through its close linguistic and intellectual ties with adjacent English regions, far more influencial than the military and political alliances with France, Scotland kept in close touch with the progress of ideas in western EurOpe.‘4 If we examine one conventional phase of this literature of complaint--the Donation of Constantine as the root of clerical degeneracy--we can get sOme idea of how Lyndsay fits into this larger tradition of attack on profligacy, immorality, and worldliless in general among the members of the spiritual estate. The "Donation of Constantine" dates from about the third quarter of the eighth century, but this_document by virtue of which the church claimed temporal possessions purported to be the deed of the emperor Constantine to Pope Sylvester, his confessor, about four centuries earlier. The essence of the donation reads: ...we convey to the...most blessed Sylvester, universal pope, both our palace, as preferment, 4 Knox no doubt had this border osmosis in mind when he espent the latter days of his exile preaching in Northumbria. '97 and likewise all provinces, palaces and districts of the city of Rome and Italy-and of the regions of the West; and, bequeathing them to the power and sway of him and the pontiffs, his successors... as a permanent possession to the holy Roman Church. The reputed deed also provided that the emperor and his court should be removed to Constantinople, for it is not right that an earthly emperor should have authority there, where the rule of priests and the head of the Christian religion have been established by the Emperor of heaven...5 The common argument, used by Lyndsay and so many others, was that the wealth brought to the clergy by Constantine's gift was responsible for the decline in virtue of the primitive church. Lyndsay develops with all of his force this theme of the emperor's role in bringing about the evils in religion. He treats the subject with relative brevity in his earliest work, the Dreme. The members of the clergy whom Lyndsay saw in hell knew the cause of their downfall: Full sore wepyng, with vocie lamentabyll, Thay cryit lowde: O Empriour Constantyne, We may wyit thy possessioun poysonabyll Off all our gret punysioun and pyne. Quhowbeit thy purpose was tyll ans gude fyne, Thow baneist frome ws trew deuotioun, Haiffand sic Es tyll our promotioun. (11. 252-58) 5 This translation is found in Documents 9; the Christian Church, ed. Henry Bettenson, pp. 157-142. (The above passages are taken from pp. 141, 142.) The document was unquestioned until the fifteenth century when many prominent churchmen began to challenge its authenticity. Its genuineness was completely diaproved in 1440 by Lorenzo Valla in his Qg_Falso Credita 33 Mentita Constantini Donations Declamatio. But the long-stand- ing tradition died a slow death, particularly among those who chose to lament its supposed existence. Apparently Lyndsay did not know that Valla and others had eXposed the donation as a forgery. His ignorance is hardly a matter for surprise considering that Skeat more than three centuries later still saygaguardfidlgithat it is "suspected" that the donation was a I'fabr ion. erg th the Redeless, II, 253_35. ._____ e Plowman and Richard 98 A variation in emphasis and meter is provided in the Satyre. Chastity, who had a hard time wherever she went, was put in the stocks in Scotland by the false advisers of King Humanity. She complains, I I wyte the Empreour Constantine, That I am put to sic ruins, And baneist from the Kirk; For, sen he maid the Paip ans King, In Home I could get na ludging; Bot heidlangs in the mirk. (11. 1447-55) Lyndsay's most lengthy develOpment of this theme comes in the Pa n o, where more than two hundred lines are based on the simple allegory of the marriage of the church and prop- erty. Constantine "Pereauit the kirk had spowsit pouertis" (l. 804), and with good intention was moved by pity to find cause for divorce between the two (11. 805-7), and to banish poverty from the men of religion (11. 811-14). Saint Sylvester was the pOpe who consented to the remarriage of the church (11.815-17), and the post, using the king's dying parrot as his spokesman, asks, O Syluester, quhare was thy discretioun! thilk Peter did renounce thou did resaue. Androw and Ihone did leif thare possissioun, Thar schippis, & nettis, lyinnes, and all thay laue: Off temporall substance no thing wald thay haue, Contrarius to thare contemplatioun, Bot, soberlye, thare sustenatioun. (11. 822-28) The bird cites other New Testament characters who eschewed wealth in order to carry out their religious duties the better. Here the parrot is interrupted by the "gled," or kite, who had earlier introduced himself as a "holy freir' with the "power to bring 50w quyke to heuin" (11. 669-70). The kits heard “no thyng bot gude" (l. 856) in the marriage. In 99 answer to his statement, the parrot tells of the twin daughters which Dame Property bore, Sensuality and Riches (11. 842-44), and relates how the pair grew powerful, and distracted the clergy from their duties (11. 850-59). As he hinted in the Satyre, Lyndsay writes here that Sensuality was the cause of the decision of the "gret counsall" to outlaw marriage for members of the clerical estate (11. 860-65). The poet drifts gradually away from consideration of the donation as he has the parrot expound on the plight of Chastity and her sister Devotion who joined their mother, Poverty, in exile. Lyndsay's allegorical treatment of the effect of Sen- suality and Riches on the church leaves him little untapped material to exploit in the Monarchs. But we have seen that repetition from work to work was a common practice of his, and hers is an outstanding example of this custom. Lyndsay introduces the blaming of Constantine after a discussion of the virtues of the papacy in the days before its corruption (11. 4575-400). Thirty-two good popes ruled in Rome before the "Thrinfold'Deadame" replaced the "crown of Martyrdome' (11. 4405-7). Then Sylvester received the "Realms of Italie" from the emperor, the pope became a king, and Lady Sensuality moved in on Home to stay (11. 4409-22). One significant new touch to the Constantine legend is added in the Monarchs. Parallel to the Roman grant except that it reflected an historical actuality was the bestowal of temporal lands to the clergy by David I of Scotland. Lyndsay elaborates a little on the similarity, saying that David's "holy simplicite... 100 left the Crown in Pouerte“ (11. 4427-52).6 Blaming the shortcomings of the church on Constantine's _ grant occurs with great frequency in medieVal literature. Dante often used the idea. In Canto XIX of the Inferno, he writes, Ah Constantine, of how much 111 was cause Not thy conversion, but those rich demaines That the first wealthy Pope receiv'd of thee. 7 Already the tradition that Constantine drew no guilt from his act shows itself. In Paradiso, Canto XX, Dante meets him among the Christian rulers who have attained salvation. Des- cribing the emperor, the poet says, The next who followeth, with the laws and me, with good intention that bore evil fruit, to give place to the pastor, made himself a Greek; now knoweth he that the ill deduced from his good deed hurteth not him though the world be destroyed thereby. 3 5 David I (also Saint David) ruled from 1124 to 1153. He was the grandson of the Duncan of Macbeth. His gift also be- , comes an issue in the Satyre. John the Commonweal speaks of the "publick huirdomes“ and "harlotries" which had resulted from David's gift (11. 2952-61). When a member of the spirit- ual estate defends David as a saint, John replies, King Iames the first, Roy of thts Regioun, Said that he was ans sair Sanct to the croun. I heir men say that he was sumthing blind, That gave away mair nor he left behind. (11. 2976-79) 7 Milton's translation in infigformation Touching Church- Discipline ig England, in Works, III, 26. Milton frequently refers to the donation as the root of the clergy's decline, with- out attempting to show that it was a forgery. His repeated use of "poison" in describing the effects of the gift (venenum in the Latin Defensio Secundo...) suggests his following the tradition closely. 8 Carlyle-Wickstead translation. Another reference to the donation in the Divina Commedia can be found in Purgatorio, Canto XXXII. Dante also discussed the donation, calling it invalid in his 22_Mona§phia, III, 10, 11. Cf. Edmund Gardner, Dante, pp. 116- 17. Other Italian posts to lament to donation include Petrarch (Sonnet 108) and Ariosto (Orlando, Canto XXXIV). Cf. Milton, Q£_ .Eeformation..., Works, III, 27. 101 This same idea enjoyed a hearty life in English literature long before Lyndsay adopted it. Gower developed the theme with even more persistence than the Scotish poet. He devotes about 510 lines in the second book of the Confessio Amantis to the tale of Constantine, "worthi Emperour of Rome" (1. 5189), and Sylvester. Gower says that he read in a chronicle that on the day the emperor made his legacy all Rome heard a voice from the heavens which warned, A ...To day is venym schod In holi cherche of temporal, 9 Which medleth with the spirital. (11. 5491-95) The theory, including the prophecy of the angelic voice, was also cited by those who Opposed this interpretatiOn. Pecock, in his Repressor g; Overmuch Blaming g; the Clergy, remarks that the prOphecy "is fabild to be trew” by the. Lollards, then proceeds to deny their interpretation of the ill-effects of the donation.10 To find the source of the Lollard's use of this argu- ment we must go closer, geographically at least, to Lyndsay. 9 This voice “on hih the lifts" (1. 5490) is also re- ferred to in the Mirour g2 l'Omme, where it is described as "une voix q'estoit celestre" (1. 18642). The lamentation over Constantine's act in the Mirour is generally parallel to that in the Confessio. Cf. also Vox Clamantis, book III, 11. 285ff. That the emperor was a virtuous ruler in spite of the consequences of his donation is also maintained by Gower; cf. Mirour, ll. 25055-58 and Confessio, VII, 1. 5157. Milton includes the three lines quoted above in a 22-line quotation in Ag ApolOgy..., Works, III, 559-60. 10 I, ,1 525. Cf. also Babington's comments, II, 699. 102 Two main developments of the convention are found in giggg Plowman and wyclif. In Passus X of the "B" text of Piers, the idea is briefly presented: And thanne freres in here freitoure shal fynden a keye 0f Constantynes coffres in which is the catel That Gregories god-children han yuel dispended}l (11. 535-25) Wyclif expounds at length on the donation as the maJor cause of the worldliness of the clergy. He credits the prophecy (which Lyndsay avoids) in one case to a “fend," in another to an 'aungel.“125ut the story of Constantine and Sylvester had been known in Britain at least since the thirteenth-century version of the Legenda $3525, and the treatments of it in the manner described are too extensive to credit any one of them as the “source" of Lyndsay's ideas. This conventional interpretation of Constantine's allecged gift suggests correctly that Lyndsay offered little that was new in his attacks on the clergy. The observation is borne out wherever we examine in detail any phase of his satire pertaining to religious issues or to men of religion. The abuses which he cites and the methods and metaphors which he uses in exposing them fit into clearly defined tradition. But Lyndsay goes beyond the merely conventional in one import- ant respect: He is never satisfied with aloof generalities or with theoretical discussions of historical problems. It is his examples and illustrations of the problems with which he was concerned that made his works vital to his own 11 In the parallel passage in the "C" text, Constantine is referred to as the cook who shall supply "Bred with-cute beggynge" to the friars (VI, 11. 175-76). A more detailed version of the donation, including the warning of the angel, can be found in B, XV, 11. 519-51, and C, XVIII, 11. 380-55. 12 §giggt English Works 9; Wyclif, ed. T. Arnold, III, p. 541, 103 generation and make them significant and interesting to any- one interested in the history of his times. Even Lyndsay's relative lack of literary finesse con- tributes to the overall forcefulness of his attacks. He is incapable or unwilling to create--as did Chaucer and Dunbar-- a character who will reveal with some subtlety the excesses of the clergy. He does not attempt to sting with deft touches but to wound with body-blows. At those times when he is general, he uses all-inclusive generality. He offers no exceptions to his lazy and lecherous friars, his unlearned and irreligious parsons, or his power-seeking and prideful bishops. A discussion of Lyndsay's attacks on the immorality and irresponsibility of the clergy would present sufficient material nor a book, as indeed the subject has been treated in William Murison's gig gazig Lyndsay, 222$,ggd Satirist.g§_ the Old Church in_Scotland. Some phases of his satire will be given indirect comment later in discussion of Lyndsay's personal beliefs; for the present, a few examples which also illustrate his tendencies towards inclusiveness or concrete- ness will of necessity suffice. Near the beginning of the Satyre Q: the Threi Estaitis Lyndsay presents something of a false lead on this latter score. Diligence tells the audience, Prudent peopill, I prs.y 50w all, Tak na man greif in speciall; For wee sall speik in generall For pastyme and for play. Thairfoir, till all our rymis be rung, And our mistoinit sangis be sung, Let euerie man keip weill ans toung, And euerie woman tway. (11. 70-77) 104 But throughout the drama, there are references to specific religious establishments, occasional mentions of individuals by name, and numerous allusions to loosely disguised con- temporary figures which would not be missed by the well-in- formed in attendance, if by any. The first step in this all-out attack comes from Wan- tonness, who begins his defence of the characteristic he represents by asking King Humanity, Beleiue 5e, Sir, that Lecherie be sin? Na, trow nocht that: this is my ressoun quhy: First, at the Romane Kirk will 5e begin,-- Quhilk is the lemand lamp of lechery,-- Quhair Cardinals and Bischops, generally, To luif Ladies thay think ane pleasant sport, And out of Rome hes baneist Chastity, Quha with our Prelats can get na resort. (11. 255-42) Solace brings the matter closer to home by telling the king, For all the Prelats of this natioun, For the maist part, Thay think na schame to haue ane huir; And sum has thrie vnder thair cuir. (11. 255-56) He goes on to advise the king that if he thought the matter through, he would follow the clerics' example (11. 250-60). Solace's speech ends in an aside typical of Lyndsey, Speir at the Monks of Bamirrinoch, Gif lecherie be sin. (11. 261-62) The satire on clerical immorality becomes more telling else- where in the drama. Pauper, in a speech before the assembled estates, speaks of bishops who, ...lyke rams, rudlie in thair rage, Vnpysalt, rinnis amang the silie sowis, Sa lang as kynde of nature in them growis;5(ll. 2764-66) 15 A virtual repetition of these three lines in an octo- syllabic meter is found in the Monarche, 11. 4706-8. Another animal figure applied to prelates' morals is used in the Papyngo: “Thay fall to work, as thay war commoun bullis" (l. 1059). 105 Chastity complains of the "feingeit holines“ (l. 5582) of the abbot and prioress, who "line in huirdome and in harlotry" (l. 5586). When asked if he kept his three vows, this abbot boasts, My paramours is baith als fat and fair As ony wench into the toun of Air. (11. 5404—5) He also reports on the status of his illegitimate children; he sends his sons to Paris to be educated and provides well for his daughters (11. 5406-8).14 Falsehood also gives a fairly typical view of the poet's opinions on the morality of men of religion. As he repents before being hanged for his sins, Falsehood gives a final warning: 5e maryit men, evin as so luife sour lyfis, Let never preists be hamelie with sour wyfis. my wyfe with preists sho doith me greit onricht, And maid me nine tymes cuckald, on ane nicht. (11.4256-59) The parson serves as reminder that the clergy can be guilty of other sins besides lechery. Though he admits he cannot preach, he seems satisfied with his outstanding abilities at “fut-ball" and his skill at "carts, the tabils, and the dyes“ (11. 5411-14). He also displays pride in "our round bonats...of richt fyne stuiff" (11. 5416-17). This same character is responsible for some interesting saphistry in the form of comments on the sermon by the doctor of religion. Parson charges that Doctor is completely confused and offers 14 The Satyre is well sprinkled with similar instances. Attention has already been called to the provision in the laws passed by the estates to the "bastard bairns of Stait Spirituall“ (1. 5951). Other examples of th llegitimate offspring of the clergy can be found in 11. 5181- 6, 5559-61, and 5756-58 of the Satyre, and in Papyngo, 1. 1057. 106 his own version of a gloss on various sins. Pride, he says, is but honesty; covetousness is wisdom; ire, slothlsand glut- tony are nothing else than life's food, while the "naturall sin of lecherie" is but true love (11. 5555-40). These few examples by no means give a complete picture of Lyndsay's treatment of the clergy's shortcomings in the Bat re, nor is the Satyre in any respect unique among his works as a repository of criticism of the first estate. The Monarche repeats many of these charges, sometimes almost verbatim, and adds a few new ones. While religious satire can be found throughout the poem, one section of the third book concentrates a large part of his attacks in the form of contrasts of the corruptions of the church to the purity of the times of Christ and his apostles. As his first ex- ample he cites Christ's final commandment to His disciples that they teach and preach in every land (11. 4471-80). But now, prelates ”Takis little cure of Christie command" (1. 4484); popes, bishops, and cardinals would not suffer'them- selves to teach or preach, but send forth friars to do the Job they themselves wereinstructed to fulfil (11. 4491-94). Usually Lyndsay is able to present the primitive virtue much more concisely than the contemporary vice in this series of balanced portrayals. Christ's refusal of temporal authority is handled in fdr lines (4495-98); the contrasting power- seeking and pride demonstrated by the papacy takes seven times as many (11. 4499-526). Likewise, he tells of Christ's ‘ 15 "Hardines." Cf. "sweirness," Dunbar's Dance g£_the Seven Deadly Sins, 1. 67. In the Satyre, l. 5505, Lyndsay 11888 "sweirness" for sloth. 107° poverty in two lines (4555-54), followed by an eight-line discussion of the riches left by Pope John (11. 4555-62). In addition to the contrasts already mentioned, Lyndsay pairs Christ's humility in washing the disciples feet against the pOpe's pride in letting kings kiss his (11. 4527-50). Christ and the apostles were poorly housed; the clergy have magnificent palaces (11. 4551-40). Christ's crown was made of thorns, while the triple crown of the popes is fashioned from the finest gold and set with precious stones (11. 4547-50). It was by their virtue in acts of charity, their patience and their humility that Christ's disciples were known; the pope's flock is best known by their "clyppit crounis” (11. 4565-68). After several similar parallel treatments, mainly further contrasts of humility and pride, Lyndsay develOps an attack on persecution.16 His technique remains the same: first he says that Peter, Andrew, John, James, and Paul defended their faith by using God's word, never resorting to burning or . scalding (11. 4659-42). His corresponding view of the papal practices is remarkable for the flanking attacks he makes on side issues without completely losing sight of the frontal force of his main point: The pope defendis his traditioun Be flammand fyre, without remissioun: 16 A more detailed presentation of Lyndsay's ideas on persecution is worked into the digression on images earlier in the Monarchs. Here he advises religious leaders to take the offender aside and counsel him regarding his error. If this does not succeed, he should be declared to the congre- gation, and excommunicated if he remains obstinate. But the faithful should be willing to accept him bask when he repents (11. 2549-64). 108 Quhowbeit men breik the law Diuyne, Thay ar nocht put to so gret pyne. For huredome, nor Ydolatrye, For Incest, nor Adultrye, 0r quhen goung‘Uirginnis ar deflorit,-- For sic thyng men ar nocht abhorit. Bot quho that eitis flesche in to lent Ar terriblye put to torment; And gyf ans preist happinnis to marye, Thay do hym baneis, cursse, and warye, Thocht it be nocht aganis the law Off God, as men may cleirlie knaw. Betuix thir two quhat difference bene, Be faithfull folks it may be sens. (ll. 4645-58) 'Lyndsay says he must end with this set of opposites, though he has many more "Antithesis" involving pomp and vanity (11. 4659-62). But the reader is hardly surprised when he never- theless goes on to discuss in detail (11. 4465-94) the ex- amples which he says he cannot 'tary to compyle." More or less as a postscript, he satirizes the simple nuns who style themselves "madame,“ the priests who demand the title of "sin" and the monks who insist upon being called Ideans." Nor does he spare the pretenses of the higher clergy--abbots, bishops, cardinals, and popss--who wish to be shown more honors than temporal lords and princes. As with Chaucer, with Gower, with Piers and Wyclif, the regular clergy receive the special attention of the Scottish poet. Lyndsay lists the lot of them in the Monarchs: Abbottis and Priouris, as 5e ken, Misrewlaris of relegious men; Officiallis, with thare Procuratouris, Quhose langsum law spolseis the puris; 0.0.00... ...Monkis and Freiris, Off diuers Ordouris mony one,-- Fair Ladyis of Rslegioun, Proffessit in euery Regioun; Fals Heremitis, fassonit lyke the freris; 109 Proude parische clerkis, and pardoneris, Thare Gryntaris, and thare Chamberlanis, With thare temporall Courtissianis.(ll. 4291/510) Some of the attacks on them have already been mentioned. In their moral weaknesses, in their pride, hypocrisy and greed they parallel the seculars. John the Commonweal in the Satyre criticized them for their uselessness; the Tragedie attacked them for their duplicity and their hunger for power. Religious orders for women receive their share of abuse, and Lyndsay leaves no doubt about what he thought should be done with them. The prioress in the Satyre denounces her pro- fession, after she has been revealed as wearing a dress of. silk under hwr habit (stage direction, following 1. 5652). She blames her becomCing a nun on the greed of her friends (11. 5657-61). According to her testimony, the constant singing of the sisters is from the mouth only, not from the heart (11. 5665-64). They serve no real purpose in Christ's congregation (11. 5667-68). Now that she has been eXposed, she will marry some good, honest man, for she believes that marriage is more religious than being a friar or a nun (11. 5670-74). It had already been charged by Chastity that the prioress made her vows not for Christ but for preferment (11. 1210-11); after many other such touches, Lyndsay ad- vocates the complete abolishment of nunneries and feminine orders in the acts passed by the estates (11. 5857-44). The poet never quite takes such a drastic stand regard- ing the male orders. Perhaps he was somewhat in awe of the greater influence and power of the monks and friars, although 110 he makes an occasional hint that there might be some use for them if they reformed. Correction in the Satyre orders the banishing of the friar (l. 5619), who was actually Flattery, still wearing his disguise.17 But the action never takes place. Flattery in friar's dress offers to expose other evildoers, and he alone among the trio of vices excapes hang- ing. John, in a speech already cited, maintains that the slothful idleness of friars is injurious to the state (11. 2645-44), but his objection is that they do not labor spirit- ually (l. 2619). Furthermore, he suggests the possibility of worthy men setting themselves apart from the world. He gives five such instances, including Diogenes, and says that he could add a hundred more (11. 2627-45). Another indica- tion that Lyndsay did not definitely advocate the elimination of the regular clergy occurs in the search for a learned man to deliver the sermon in the Satyre. Correction suggests finding a doctor of divinity or a learned clerk (11. 5165-67). Diligence, who is to do the searching, asks if a minister of the gray friars, or any friar who could preach wisely, would be acceptable. Correction answers, whether he be monk, canon, priest, or friar, any competent preacher would be satisfactory (11. 5177-78). 17 The two sergeants designated to carry out the decree joke about the friar's seeking refuge in his exemption from civil law. The second sergeant says, On Dumisday, quhen Christ sall say Venite benedicti,’ The Freirs will say, without delay, Nos sumus exempti. (11. 5659-42) 111 While Lyndsay's stand is indefinite on this one point, on two other important subjects pertaining to the clergy and on two issues involving religious practices he is both specific and unequivocal in his positive stand: Marriage of the clergy should be tolerated, preaching to the people should be the cleric's first duty; pilgrimages and the wor- ship of images should be discontinued. 0n the first issue, Lyndsay maintained that the prohibition of clerical matrimony was unchristian. Christ had honored the institution of mar- riage, and nothing in His teachings forbids any man to take a wife (Monarchs, 11. 4569, 4577-80, 4884-85). He chose married men, including Peter himself, as disciples (Monarchs, 11. 4575-76, 4897-905). The contrary laws are the work of the papacy, and result in concubinage, rather than chastity (Monarchs, 11. 4581-88, Satire, 11. 2751-66, and passim). The root of the papal action is found, as has been mentioned, in the donation of Constantine: with wealth came sensuality and the desire for more carnal pleasure than one wife could afford.18 Lyndsay's entire point of view is summed up in the laws presented in the Satyre: since most of the priests lack the gift of chastity, they shall all have freedom to marry so that they can keep matrimonial chastity.(ll. 5921-27). Likewise, the duty of clerics to preach to the peOple 18 Examples of Lyndsay's satirical treatments of the clergy's taking advantage of their inability to marry can be found in these references: Papyngo, 11. 852-70, Satyre, 11. 1562-67, Monarchs, 11. 4701-08. 112 is specifically provided in the §§£X£21§ legal code. All men to be ordained must be able to preach or teach (11. 5878- 80), and no benefices are to be given to those unqualified to preach to "thair awin folk" (11. 5870-71). Bishops must remain in their dioceses and parsons in their parishes so that they may teach their people to refrain from vice (11. 5910-12). Earlier in the Satyre, Good Counsel had said that tithes should be made only to reward preaching (11. 2905-6). All of these ideas regarding preaching are repeated elsewhere in the Satyre, and their importance is further emphasized in virtually every work which Lyndsay wrote.19 While neither pilgrimages nor images are mentioned in the Satyre's laws, there can be no doubt about Lyndsay's stand regarding them. As did Chaucer in the prologue to the fli£e_g£ Bath's Tale, Lyndsay occasionally made humorous warnings about the effect of pilgrimages on women. In the Monarchs, he warns married men not to permit their wives and daughters, whose honesty they should love as their own lives, to go on pilgrimages (11. 2691-2700). This issue, of course, cannot be separated from Lyndsay's stand regarding-use of images. He discusses both subjects in the same digression in the Monarche--one of the few such digressions that does not have a close parallel in the Satyre. The idolatry of Ninus introduced the subject (11. 1845-46), and the poet 19 A few citations to the Satyre help give an indication of the poet's preoccupation with this theme: 11. 2748, 2900, 5044, 5412, 5572, 5428, 5441. 115 proceeds somewhat later to apply a moral to the practices of his own times. He calls attention to various types of images, which serve primarily to offer profit to priests and to skilled workmen (11. 2199-200). After citing Boc- caccio regarding the history of images among the gentiles (11. 2247-58), he asks what difference there is between pagan superstition and the practices of his own day (11. 2519-20). Twenty saints are mentioned whose images are worshipped, and Lyndsay says he could add a thousand more (1. 2508).. He admits only one purpose for images: they may be used legitimately as books for the unlearned to aid in fortifying their faith (11. 2527-51). Praying to them, however, is no better than praying to Jupiter or Venus (11. 2545-59). Pilgrimages to their shrines are likewise purpose- lsss, but it is the priests and not the well-intentioned though ignorant laymen who are to be blamed (11. 2587-91). Images, he repeats over and over, are but idols, and the clergy who do not prevent their worship will suffer in hell. Unlike the men directly responsible for the Reformation, Lyndsay did not concern himself particularly with the sac- raments. Aside from Kitteis Confessioun, he devotes nothing more than mention to these problems on which so many hairs and throats were split. And the story of Kitty is more of a satire on the general moral degeneracy of the clergy than a treatise on the efficacy of confession. Besides being more interested in her sex than in her desire to be confessed, both curates in the poem abuse the sacrament. The first 114 made known his intention to violate the secrecy of the con- fession by informing the authorities that Kitty's master read English books--ths only item which seemed to interest him. The second seemed abnormally interested in the minute details of Kitty's sins but offered her no counsel or advice, and was raving drunk even before their interview was completed. In addition to satire, however, the poem does present the poet's ideas on confession: The institution is human, not from God (11. 101-7), and confession to God in prayer is sufficient (11. 109-10).‘ He admits a value in seeking advice and consolation from a worthy preacher (11. 115-54). Such voluntary confession, he maintains, was the only kind known to the "gude Kirk Primityue" (l. 158), and it is the only kind which he recognized as valid or necessary. In contrast to his customary treatment of the abuses and practices which he denounces, Lyndsay's positive presenta- tion of his faith receives relatively little repetition. Three of the most revealing passages on this count are John's creed and Doctor's sermon in the Satyre and Experiencs's discussion of faith in the Monarchs. When John is charged with heresy by members of the clergy, he is given an op- portunity to defend himself before the estates by presenting his beliefs. What he tells them is a virtual paraphrase of portions of the Apostle's Creed, offering nothing inconsistent with the doctrines of the established church (11. 5009-22). He concludes by stating that he believes in "Sanctam Ecclesiam," but not in the bishops and friars who represent her at the 115 meeting of the estates (ll. 5024-25). Nor is there any part of Doctor's sermon which could be used to show Lyndsay's variation from orthodox doctrine. Doctor says first that God's love and mercy are beyond the capabilities of man (11. 5446-50). He tells how God through Christ saved man from the penalties of Adam's sin, even though the fallen angels are never to be restored (11. 5454-77). Interspersing his sermon with texts from the vulgate, Doctor introduces the metaphor of a ladder with two rungs. Only by these two steps--love of God and love of neighbor--can man obtain salvation (11. 5488-505). The sermon concludes with a brief mention of the seven sins. Doctor says that men who fall into these sins or who fail to do good works will lose their hold on the ladder of salvation (11. 5505-10). These two statements of belief would not indicate that Lyndsay was any farther from the fold of the Roman Catholic church than Erasmus or Thomas More; the third major state- ment of his belief reinforces those two, and suggests a possible variance from the reformers with whom Lyndsay is usually associated. Courtier interrupts EXperience to ask for a definition of faith. EXperiencs's answer is sound doctrine, but hardly satisfactory definition: Faith without Hope and Charitie Aualit nocht, my Sonne, said he. (11. 482-85) Experience then proceeds to explain charity by paraphrasing the same text Doctor had used: love God above all things and love thy neighbor whicheartedly (11. 486-87). Using a 116 p0pu1ar argument, Experience continues, Geue [it] charitis into the failis, Thy Faith nor Hope no thyng auailis. The Deuyll hes Faith, and trymlis for dreid. (11. 494-96) The interpretation of Experience offers considerable con- trast to the p0pu1ar opinions regarding the relative merits of faith and works in the doctrines of the Calvinist reform- ers. Actually, such contrast as exists is primarily one of emphasis. Knox, in condensing Balnaves' treatise on just- ification, shows a point of view which Lyndsay never adopted in his works: And where our adversaries asks them, What availed workes? wee answers, that workes are an outward testimony to Faith, by which only man is first made just, and therafter his workes pleas God, because the persons in acceptable. And so no godly man forbiddeth good workes, but of necessitie must they bee excluded from the justification of man... And therefore, who maksd workes a part of their owns Justification, spoils God of his glorie.3O 20 "The Sommaris of the Sevinteinth Chapter" of A Briefs Sommaris 2§.§he Work by_Balnaves 22 Justification. Works, III, p. 20. Cf. also the summary of Balnaves' nineteenth Chapter, “the man is just before the works be good,“ etc. (p. 21). _ Calvin's interpretation of the passage Lyndsay uses (Corinthians, I, 15') shows the difference even more clearly: It is, however, surprising how much pleasure Papists thke in thundering forth these words. "If faith justifies,“ say they, "then much more does love, which is declared greater." A solution of this objection is already stated, but let us grant that love is in every respect superior; what sort of reasoning is that--that because it is greater, therefore it is of more avail for justifying men! Commentarngg_the Epistles 9: Paul the gpostle 32 the Corinthians, translated byJohn Pringls, I, 452-55. The dedicatory epistle to this commentary is dated 24 January 1546. 117 It should not be inferred from this passage that any un- 'bridgeable gap existed between Lyndsay and the reform party. But a minimum interpretation suggests that Lyndsay did not consistently follow a Scottish Calvinist line. The Dgegg indicates that Lyndsay, at the beginning of his literary career, at least, believed in purgatory and perhaps in the adoration of Mary. While the journey through purgatory (ll. 557-64)-reflected a well-established literary convention, it cannot be doubted that the poet maintained this part of Roman Catholic doctrine, at least at this time.21 Nor does he ever specifically deny such belief during his extensive satire in the Monarchs on the clergy's use of it. In contrast to the simple fishermen who served Christ as apostles, the fishermen of Rome have spread their net for riches rather than prospective believers (11. 4750-56).33 The biggest catch of all is “That maruelous monstour callit Purgatorye" (1. 4775). Lyndsay writes that many priests would have hearts of sorrow if they lost that 'painefull Palyce" (11. 4785-84), but he offers no further indication than such a hint that he has changed his belief from that eXpressed in the Qgegg. There is less evidence of what Lyndsay thought considering the status of the Virgin Mary. One of his few 21 Hamer, in his note to line 557, points out that the 1568 edition here contains the marginal note: "He semis rather to elude than allow of Purgatorie" (III, 19). 22 Luther uses the net image in reference to the money seeking of the clergy in the sixty-fifth through the sixty- seventh of his Ninety-five Theses. 118 references to her comes in the description of Heaven found in the Dreme. After viewing the "blyste Humanitie" of Christ (1. 547), the poet sees His mother: Nyxt to the Throne we saw the Quene of Quenis, Weill companyit with Ladyis of delyte: Sweit was the sang of those blyssit Uirginnis: No mortall man thare solace may indyte. The Angellis brycht, in nummer infinyts,-- Euerilk ordour in thare awin degre,-- War officiaris vnto the deite. (11. 555-60) Examined by itself, this passage reveals little which would associate Lyndsay with either of the chief religious camps. Again, however, the matter of emphasis is of some importance. While no Calvinist would deny any part of Lyndsay's statement, he would not be particularly likely to say the same thing himself. Another reference to the Virgin found in the poet's works implies that the poet never completely departed from Roman Catholic tradition in this respect. In the Monarchs, Lyndsay glosses the Genesis account regarding the enmity between the seed of woman and the serpent. To him, it was clearly a prophecy that Sic seid salbe in woman sawin, That thy power salbe doun thrawin; This was his promys and menyng, That the Immaculat Virgyng Sulde bsir the Prince Omnipotent, Quhilk suld tred doun that fals Serpent, Sathan, and all his companye, And thame confunde alluterlye. (11. 1019/28) The Calvinist view of this passage considered the seed of woman to refer to the body of Christians in general, rather than to a special glorification of the Virgin through her Son's passion.35 In itself, Lyndsay's differing interpretation 35 Cf. Williams, pp. 129-50. 119 establishes very little. Milton, of course, took the same stand. But we can assume at least that at the time of his most mature religious production, the Scottish post was either uninformed or unconcerned with the nicetiss of reform- ist theology. While Lyndsay may have been out of the fold of the saints on certain minor matters, he was well within the territory of the Calvinists on the issue of predestination. He refers in the Monarchs to the heaven That God, affore that he the warld creatt, Preparit to thame quhilk ar predestinat. (11. 6111-12) In the same section,24 he develops the idea further: 0 Lords, our God and Kyng Omnipotent, Quhilk knew, or thow the heuin and erth creatt, Quho wald to the be inobedient, And so disarue for to be Reprobatt, Thow knew the nomer of predestinat, Quhome thow did call, and hes thame Iustifeit, And sall, in Heuin, with the be Glorifsit. (11. 6225-51) But just as emphasis on good works does not prove that Lyndsay remained loyal to the church of his birth, belief in predestina- tion fails to prove that he was any more a Protestant than St. Augustine of Hippo. Questions naturally arise regarding the fact that his only uses of the doctrine of predestination come in the closing passages of his last work. Does the point of view conflict with his presentation of the theory of salvation in the sermon of the Sgpyre or with his discussion of good works as the means of entering heaven earlier in the Mpgggghej The speculation that Lyndsay heard of this doctrine first late in his life, perhaps during the composition of his last 24 "Off Certane Plssouris of the Glorifeit Bodeis." 120 work, is an interesting one. To a man not expert in theology, the theory that God, by definition omniscient, knew whom He would call to His kingdom is hard to disprove. This much can be assumed on the basis of Lyndsay's customary disinterest in the technicalities of doctrine: If he examined the theory of predestination and found it logical, he would not be likely) to concern himself with probing into its theological ramifications. There are many other minor phases of Christian doctrine which Lyndsay touches upon here and there in his poetry. These follow the pattern which has already been illustrated; they are thrown in as asides or presented as fact with very brief glossing. All of them together, subjected to the most rigid Roman Catholic inspection, would not add up to a good case of heresy against him. It was in his presentation of matters» essentially non-doctrinal that Lyndsay clashed with the church. But his satire alone was sufficient cause to make him the foremost opponent which the Scottish clergy had in the days before Knox returned from exile. 'The problem which Charteris posed in the excerpt quoted at the beginning of this chapter merits an attempt at solution. The Scottish editor-bookseller phrases the question specifically: How cummis it than, that this our Authour being as plane aganis thame [the clergy] , culd eschaip thair snairis, quhen vtheris, in doing les, hes cruellie perischit735 He dismisses the possibility that Lyndsay's use of humor ("as Chaucer and vtheris had done befoir") might have been 35 P. 5*. 121 his protection; "Bot this can not satisfie," he writes, “for na mowis [jesta] culd mitigate thair bludie breistis." Nor is Charteris willing to accept the common eXplanation that Lyndsay's immunity resulted from his court position and his close friendship with King James V. Patrick Hamilton, he points out, was of royal blood, and Robert Forester was a gentleman of considerable standing; yet both these men suffered death by fire.36 Charteris might well have added George Buchanan to his list of men whose prominence offered them little protection. Buchanan was the outstanding Scottish humanist and had a reputation abroad as one of Europe's fore- most scholar-authors. James appointed him as tutor to one of his bastards, and suggested the writing of part of his satire on the Franciscans which was the root of much of his conflict with the clergy. But Buchanan's connection with the court did not prevent the Open display of wrath by the religious authorities, which became so serious that he fled Scotland.37 James V was allied with the clergy in his struggle to restrict the power of the nobility. While he apparently recognized the need of reform in certain of the most flagrant clerical abuses, he was nevertheless a firm supporter of 35 Ibid. 27 After a short confinement in prison, Buchanan escaped to the continent in 1559, about the time when Lyndsay must have been working on his Satyre. 122 church doctrine. Knox records that he "maid a solempned vow, that none should be spaired that was suspect of Heresye, yea, althought it war his owin sons." 38 If Lyndsay were so "plane agains' the established church as Charteris maintains, quite likely he would not have obtained so completely the protection of his royal patron. Certainly an avowed Protestant would have been in a difficult position in the Scottish court after James' death. The queen mother came from a family noted for its persecutions of those who varied from Roman Catholic doctrine, and her daughter--Mary, Queen of Scots--was brought up in strict adherence to the old religion. Neither did the "governor," the Earl of Arran, show any unorthodox tendencies.89 Lyndsay's immunity is obviously tied up largely with the more general problem of what he actually believed. But putting aside for the moment the extreme opinions of his Protestantism, Charteris' question still stands: Why did he escape when others who did less went to the stake? An answer, though admittedly.not a completely satisfactory one, can be found in several factors. Henderson says Lyndsay was “less interested in diaputss about doctrine and forms of church polity than in the social and political well-being of the people.”0 Perhaps a somewhat different emphasis would 38 I, p. 66. 29 Although Arran was generally Opposed to Cardinal Beaton's faction, he had several close relatives in positions of importance in the Scottish hierarchy. His brother, John Hamilton, was Archbishop of St. Andrews, as has already been pointed out. ' 50 P. 159. Cf. also Tucker, pp. 209-10. 125 be more appropriate here: Lyndsay was more interested in the salvation of the human soul than in the doctrine of salvation; he was more interested in church administration and the activities of churchmen than in the forms of church government. To be sure, the l'social and political well-being of the peOple" was his primary concern. But even if Lyndsay had not been a religious man, he could not have avoided con- sidering the church as a vital element in the welfare of the - Scottish commonalty in a country where the church was a major landholder and where clerics traditionally held high places in government. As has been pointed out, where Lyndsay did concern him- self with doctrine, he took a neutral or at the most serious a borderline position. No doubt the clergy attempted to catch him off guard, but he never was far enough from a "safe" interpretation to present a clearcut case of heresy. Further- more, he confined himself to a literary attack--the common pattern of martyrdom or enforced exile involved public preach- ing. And whatever Lyndsay was, it would be difficult to establish a case for his being an early day Puritan. We 'shall have to accept these factors--coupled with the important matter of his friendship with the king and his reputation as a trustworthy counsellor-~as forming the shield which successfully protected him from the wrath of those whom he attacked. Lyndsay's religious ideas as they are presented in his works reveal him as a man deeply concerned with salvation and with morality, but not much interested or particularly-well 124 informed about the theological disputations which were raging around him. His beliefs can be re-created only in general terms; where he stood on the issues which actually split the mother church can be established only by inference. His con- tribution to the Scottish Reformation came in the form of satire on the abuses of the spiritual estate, which he made with no more freedom than he showed in his attacks on the shortcomings of temporal power. In his efforts for reform he kept literary company with many Scots who remained loyal to the Roman Catholic church. Since the time Henryson wrote of popes, cardinals, and bishops condemned to hell for their worldliness and corruption,51 Scottish literature had kept intact a tradition of complaint about the activities of the clerics. Usually such attacks paralleled the good-natured story telling of Dunbar's Friars 23 Berwick, but at times even from the church there came voices resembling Lyndsay in vigor and directness. Patrick Hamilton, Scotland's proto- martyr, was himself an abbot; even John Knox, hardly a friend of the regular clergy, tells of the reform efforts of the friars after Hamilton's execution: Yea, within few yearis efter, began baith Black and Gray Friaris publictlie to preache against the pride and idule lief of Bischoppis, and against the abuses of the whole ecclesiasticall estaite.53 Alexander Setoun, the "Blak Friar" who was confessor to James V, was credited by Knox with "ever beatting the saris of his 51 Orpheus and Eurydice, 11. 558-44. 53 I, p. 56. 125 auditouris" about the "currupt doctrin of the Papistrys.“55 One friar described by Knox found himself in the situation of having fled Scotland as a result of the reaction to his attacks, only to be imprisoned because in England he re- mained loyal to the pope.54 Lyndsay's loud and clear voice of complaint was not unique, but his escape from persecution was. 1 There is some evidence in his writings that Lyndsay hoped for a reform of the universal church, rather than for the breaking away which was the actual result. In the Monarchs, he offers a prayer for the conversion of the court of Rome from sin and worldliness. He prays for a "generall reformatioun" inepired by that court which would spread among the clergy of every nation (11. 4960-64). It is his desire that church- men would become "ans holy eXemplair Tyll ws, thy pure lawid . commoun populair,“ hungry for lack of spiritual food (11. 4965- 68). Even when Experience prophesies the downfall of this fifth monarchy, he carefully qualifies his statement; after saying that apparently papal glory shall have an end (11. 4451- .52), he adds, I mene, thare temporall Monarchie Sall turns in tyll humylitie. (11. 4455-54) In such passages Lyndsay appears in the company of a great body of pre-Reformation writers who could damn the Roman hierarchy as the new Babylon (he uses this figure in the 53 Ibid., p. 45. 54 Ibid., pp. 40-41. 126 Monarchs, l. 4959) and at the same time consider themselves loyal members of the church. Any further analysis of Lyndsay's tendencies towards Protestantism would be little more than speculation. That he took strong steps in the direction of reform is clearly indicated; he was on the path which led to the Reformation before John Knox or any other of such calibre was there to lead the way. Probably the final step away from the church would have been relatively easy--in no other country of Europe was the final break as widespread or as little dis- ruptive as in Scotland. Had Lyndsay lived long enough to see the Lairds of the Congregation replace the spiritual princes of Rome, he might well have taken the final step with the rest of his country. But Sir David Lyndsay, who had led the demands for reform, would not likely have been more than a follower in this last step to Reformation. AN EVALUATION There seems little prospect that any literary critic will take his Scottish leanings seriously enough to make an attempt at establishing David Lyndsay as a major post. By all literary standards he is convincingly buried in the "minor poet“ category. But on the basis of popular acceptance, he was unquestionably the ranking Scottish post before Burns. More than twenty British editions of his works were published within two centuries of his death, and numerous foreign editions-- some in Lyndsay's own language, some “englished,” and some in translation--were published during or shortly after his life- time.1 "Ye'll no find that in Davie Lyndsay" attained proverb status in Scotland, and "Out 0' Davis Lyndsay into Wallace" long denoted promotion in the schools.3 The poet often has been mentioned in later Scottish literature, particularly by Ramsay and Scott. These literary references have usually portrayed the post as a sort of pre-Reformation reformer, bent solely on undermining Roman Catholic doctrine and the Roman hierarchy. Scott, however, in Waverly (Chapter XIII), The Antiquary (Chapters VI and XXII), and in Marmion, presents a somewhat 1 Ross, p. 415. 3 Cf. Murison, p. ix. 128 more rounded picture of Sir David. In “Canto Fourth" of Marmion, he offers his most detailed portrait, parts of which have been widely quoted. In his description of Lyndsay at the time of Flodden, Scott writes: He was a man of middle age;5 In aspect manly, grave, and sage, As on King's errand come; But in the glances of his eye, A penetrating, keen, and sly Expression found its home; The flash of that satiric rage, Which, bursting on the early stage, Branded the vices of the age, And broke the keys of Rome. Still is thy name in high account, And still thy verse has charms, Sir David Lindssay of the Mount, Lord Lion King-at-arms! ‘ (Stanza VII) Scott's general evaluation of Lyndsay in this canto still seems sound. Sir David was, as the later post portrayed him, a frank and trusted counsellor, an alert and careful observer. From Buchanan and Knox, from Lindssay of Pitscottie and John Major, and from King Henry VIII comes support for this view. That Lyndsay was appointed to his high position by the devout Roman Catholic James V and maintained there by his vigorously devout successors indicates that this impres- sion is more than Protestant propaganda. While Lyndsay's reputation is based largely on his attacks on churchmen, he was equally concerned with other abuses, wherever he found them. The ruler who misused his 5 According to the general belief of Scott's day, the "middle aged" post was twenty-three at the time of Flodden. Even according to much later research, Lyndsay was well under thirty. 129 divine trust, the war for territorial aggrandizement or personal pride or glory, selfish and high-handed treat- ment of the common people--no person or institution was immune where Lyndsay saw the welfare of Scotland challenged. Even his attitude towards the clergy fits into this orienta- tion of defense of the commonweal. The clerical landowners, the prelates in high political positions were satirized as much for their inhumanity and power seeking as for their neglect of their religious duties. Where Lyndsay did attack the church his interest was primarily tied up with his social views. He Opposed bishops who failed to perform their functions, but he did not attack the episcopal system. His denouncing the corruption of the papal court did not prevent his praying for its reformation. While he opposed the flow of money to Rome (in which he followed Scots law dating from the reign of James I) and on many other counts advocated reforms which would have weakened the power of the pope over Scotland, it is nevertheless likely that he viewed settlement of the major difficulties as both desir:able and possible. No place in his surviving works does he advocate a break with the existing church. This, of course, may have been because he feared to give his enemies a clear case of heresy. Whatever his reason, it remains significant that he did not outwardly support the movement for separation. Had he believed such a step were necessary, he could have joined numerous fellow Scots in easy exile 150 across the border.. His remaining in Scotland does prove, at least, that a complete severance with the mother church was not what he considered the paramount issue of his time. From his uses of disputed doctrinal material little can be established about his relative Protestantism. For the most part, Lyndsay avoided the issues which formed the crux of the religious conflict. There is much to support the belief that this failure to take a stand on important doctrinal issues was caused by his lack of interest in theological disputation. The essentials of his religious beliefs were carried in the creeds of both the Protestants and the Roman Catholics. He was a Christian who believed in the importance of the salvation of the human soul, and he showed no decided preference for going to heaven by way of Home or by way of Wittenbsrg. On the basis of theology or theory of church government Lyndsay was neither a Protestant nor a Roman Catholic. But intellectual exercises on matters of religion were not his primary concern in this field. He was interested in reform of the clergy as individuals and of the Scottish church as an effective agency for the propagation and maintainancs of the faith. It is in this field that he allies himself clearly, in spirit, at least, with the reformers. How far Lyndsay would have gone to obtain the reforms he desired is a matter of conjecture. As has already been stated, he never advocated an open break, but it is of at least equal significance that he never took a stand in opposition to separation. Actually, 151 there can be little doubt that had Lyndsay lived long enough to have had the necessity for decision forced upon him, he would have become the Protestant which so many critics have credited him with being. But at the same time there is by no means enough evidence to establish that he considered him- self a member of the Protestant party. There is, furthermore, little in his biography which suggests that he possessed intellectual bushels capable of concealing the light of any intense Protestantism. How far Lyndsay's writings may have paved the way for the eventual break is another matter. Unfortunately, it is a subject on which proper evidence is almost entirely lacking. No one knows how widely his works were read, how many people witnessed or heard about the Satyre, or how much second-hand influence his ideas had. Nor is such evidence likely to be forthcoming. Guesses which have been made are of more use in evaluating Lyndsay's later reputation than in attempting to measure the effect he had on his own times. It has been suggested that Lyndsay might have been more of a poet had he been less of a reformer. Perhaps so. Glimpses of poetic possibility show through even in his most routine passages. It does not seem probable, however, that the dimin- ishing of his "satiric rags” could have uncovered such untapped skills as to have made him the equal of such a post as his older contemporary, William Dunbar. And even equality with a pleasurable post like Dunbar would not establish a reputation beyond a very narrow (and very fortunate) circle. The possible gain to the world of belle-lettres had Lyndsay developed to such poetic stature would have been small considered in view of a corresponding loss to the world of practical ideas. What Lyndsay attempted to do, he did well. Reform was his goal and attack was his method. It is true that more posts have exceeded him in literary skill than could be casually counted, but it is equally true that few have equalled him in the vigor, force, and intensity of his satire. One can lament that he was not a post without forgetting that he was a highly effective satiric versifier. To belittle his literary achieve- ment is sensible criticism only if the critic remembers that it was towards other goals that Sir David Lyndsay worked. II. 155 BIBLIOGRAPHY Texts of Lyndsay's Works The Works of Sir David Lindsay_9f_the Mount, 1490-1555, ed. Douglas—Hamer, Scottish Text Society (Series 3, vol. 1’ 2, 6, 8), 1951, 1952. ‘ . [The Works of Sir David Lyndesay], ed. John Small, F. Hall, J.A.H. Murray, Early English Text Society, 0.3. 11, 1865; 0.3. 19, 1866 (rev. 1885); O.S. 55, 1868; 0.8. 57, 1869; 0.8. 47, 1871. Other Sources Calvin, John, Commentary on the Epistles 9; Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, trans. John Pringle (2 vol.), Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1948 Charteris, Henry, Preface to 1568 edition of Lyndsay's works, included in E.E.T.S. edition of Lyndsay, pp. 1-15. (Page numbers are followed by asterisks.) Chaucer, Geoffery, Complete Works, ed. W.W. Skeat (2nd ed., 7 vol.), Oxford, 1899. Chief Pre-Shakespearean Dramas, ed. J.Q. Adams, Boston, 1924. Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy, Carlyle-Wickstead translation, New York, 1944. Documents of the Christian Church, ed. Henry Bettenson, Oxford, 1947. Dunbar, William, Poems, ed. H.B. Baildon, Cambridge, 1907. Erasmus, Desiderius, The Praise of Folly, trans. and ed. H.H. Hudson, Princeton, 1941. Gower, John, Complete Works, ed. G.C. Macaulay (4 vol.), Oxford, 1899—1902. Henryson, Robert, The Poems and Fables of Robert Henryson, 6d. H.H. WOOd, Edinburgh, 1955. Hollinshead, Rapheal, The Scottish Chronicle (2 vol.), Arbroath, 1805. 154 Knox, John, Works, ed. David Laing (6 vol.), Edinburgh, 1895. Langland, William, Piers the Plowman and Richard the Redeless, ed. W.W. Skeat (2 vol.), Oxford, 1886. Lindssay of Pitscottie, Robert, The Historie and Cronicles of Scotland, ed. A.J.G. Mackay, Scottish Text Society TVoiL'42,'4s, 60), 1899-1911. Milton, John, Works, ed. F.A. Patterson gt_al (18 vol.), New York, 1951-68 (Columbia Edition). 'Pecock Reginald The Re ressor g; Overmuch Blaming g; the Clergy, ed. 0. Babington (2 vol.§, Rolls Series, 1860. Scott, Walter, Marmion, ed. F.T. PalgraVe, London, 1887. Wyclif, John, Select English Works, ed. T. Arnold (3 vol.), Oxford, 1869-7IT (Note: Miscellaneous citations to literary works are based on J.W. Hebel and H.B. Hudson, Poetry 9; .the English Renaissance, 1509-1660, New York, 1929, or H.L. Nackie, 5 Book of Scottish Verse, Oxford, 1934.) III. Critical Studies Bennett, H.S., Chaucer and the Fifteenth Century, Oxford, 1947. Brooke, C.F.T., The Tudor Drama, Boston, 1911. Burton, John, The History of Scotland (8 vol.), Edinburgh, 1897. Chambers E.K., The Mediaeval Stage (2 vol.), Oxford, 1905. Craigie, William, The Northern Element in English Literature, Toronto, 1951. ' Gardner, E.G., Dante, New York, 1923. Grierson, H.J.C., and J.C. Smith, A Critical History of English Poetry, London, 1947. Hamer, Dou las, "The Bibliography of Sir David Lindsay (1490-1555 ," The Library, x (1929), 1-42. Henderson T.F. "Sir David nds " HE - New York,,19ll.’ LU ay, 9__L. 11:. pp. 151 40, 155 Mackay, A.J.G., “David Lindsay," DNB, XXXIII, 289b-294a, New York, 1895. MacPherson, Hector, The Intellectual Development 9: Scotland, London, 1911. Mill, Anna Jean, Mediaeval Plays in Scotland (St. Andrews University Publications XXIV), Edinburgh, 1927. , “Representations of Lyndsay' s Satyre of the Thrie Estaitis,” PMLA, XLVII (1933), pp 656- 51. Miller E. S., "The Christening in The Three Estates," LLN, LX (1945), pp. 42- 44. “chl, Ruth, The Three Estates in Medieval and Renaissance Literature, New York, 1955. Murison, William, Sir David Lyndsay: Post and Satirist of the Old Church inScotland, Cambridge, 1958. Nichol, John, "A Sketch of Scottish Poetry up to the Time of Sir David Lyndesay, with an Outline of His Works," preface to E.E.T.S. edition, 0.8. 11, 1865. Owst, G.R., Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England, Cambridge, 1955. Phillips, margaret, "Erasmus and Propaganda," MLR, XXXVII (1942). pp. 1- 17. “‘ Ross, J. M., Scottish History and Literature to the Period of the Reformation, ed. James Brown, Glasgow, 1884. Smith, G.G., Specimens of Middle Scots, Edinburgh, 1902. Swain, Barbara, Fools and Folly During the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, New York, 1952. $gggelyan, G. M., England in the Age 2; Wycliffe, London, Tucker, S. M. , Verse Satire in England Before the Renaissance, New York, 1908. Williams, Arnold, The Common Expositor, Chapel Hill, 1948. M'THifiiflflWfilflflfflifiiflflflflflffififllflES