|
THE MARPRELATE TRACTS
1588-1589
New HTML editions with original and modernised spellings, prepared with an introduction by John D. Lewis, Department of Theology, Murdoch University Western Australia.
CONTENTS
Introduction by John D. Lewis
Original Spelling
Tract 1. Oh Read Over Dr. John Bridges – The Epistle, October 1588.
Tract 2. Oh Read Over Dr. John Bridges – The Epitome, November 1588.
Tract 3. Certain Mineral and Metaphysical Schoolpoints, 20 February 1589.
Tract 4. Hay any Work for Cooper, March 1589.
Tract 5. Theses Martinianæ, 22 July 1589.
Tract 6. The Just Censure and Reproof of Martin Junior, 29 July 1589.
Tract 7. The Protestation of Martin Marprelate, September 1589.
Modernised Spelling
Tract 1. Oh Read Over Dr. John Bridges – The Epistle, October 1588.
Tract 2. Oh Read Over Dr. John Bridges – The Epitome, November 1588.
Tract 3. Certain Mineral and Metaphysical Schoolpoints, 20 February 1589.
Tract 4. Hay any Work for Cooper, March 1589.
Tract 5. Theses Martinianæ, 22 July 1589.
Tract 6. The Just Censure and Reproof of Martin Junior, 29 July 1589.
Tract 7. The Protestation of Martin Marprelate, September 1589.
INTRODUCTION
The Marprelate Tracts are mentioned in
almost all histories of the Elizabethan era, in histories of the
Anglican Church, and in all considerations of the religious
disputes between the Puritans and the Church of England in the
late sixteenth century. The pamphlets are briefly described in
terms of their presumed scurrility and opposition to the office
of bishop and the Elizabethan Religious Settlement, but the
contents of the writings, the underlying theology of the writer
and the degree to which they agree or disagree with other, better
known Puritan writings are not considered. Yet two men lost their
lives because of these pamphlets: Rev. Mr. Penry was hung for his
part in the production, and the Rev. Mr Udall died in prison. The
printer, Waldegrave, had his press confiscated, and there was a
full-scale search made for the author(s) of the tracts, the
identity of whom is still not known for certain.
The tracts ceased as suddenly as they
had begun: seven pamphlets or small books in less than a year,
between October 1588 and September 1589. Presumably the
Government had either caught the author or had cowed him into
silence. The incident was over—a dangerous seditious libel
in the eyes of the establishment, an embarrassment to the more
judicious Puritan who wished to campaign more openly without fear
of losing his head. The incident came in the closing years of a
campaign which had gone on through most of Elizabeth’s
reign; the original campaigners were getting old, they had lost
support in the court and Parliament, and the Anglican Church was
defending the established order more effectively. The first
volumes of Richard Hooker’s Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity
were published in the same year as Marprelate, and for
a generation Puritanism could continue only as a subculture while
the Anglican Church consolidated its position.
Nevertheless, it does appear that Martin
Marprelate deserves to be better known than he is. The only
full consideration of the texts and historical setting prior to
1970 is that of William Pierce: An historical introduction to
the Marprelate Tracts (1908), and: The Marprelate Tracts
1588, 1589 edited with notes historical and explanatory (1911).
Neither of these books is widely available. In 1970, the Scolar
Press published a facsimile edition of the tracts from copies in
the Bodleian and Lambeth Palace Libraries, but this is not easily
read as the first four pamphlets are in ‘Black Letter’(Gothic)
type, and the remainder in a Roman type of small size. It is this
volume which is transcribed here.
In the first series I have transcribed
the text directly into modern characters, with no alterations.
Lower case ‘u’ and ‘v’ are commonly
transposed, and in Roman type the typesetter often had difficulty
with ‘u’ and ‘n’. Variations in spelling, and
a few typographical errors, are retained. Punctuation is kept as
in the original text. In tracts 1-4, the Black Letter type is
transcribed to upright Roman type, while Roman type, used for
quotations, is transcribed as italic Roman. In tracts 5-7,
upright and italic Roman type are directly transcribed. For the
title page of each tract I have attempted to copy the layout, to
give some feel for the original.
In the second series I have modernised
spelling and punctuation, but changed very few words. Throughout,
the word order is the same as the original. Most change is
brought about by dropping the second person singular: thee,
thou and thine, become ‘you, you, and your’. With
this change, the -eth and -est verb endings have
also gone. Punctuation is more difficult to change without
changes to the words. Martin sometimes complains that the
prose of his opponents is poor and sentences so long that ‘there
are not two full points to the page’, yet his own sentences
are sometimes equally long and convoluted, with subordinate
clause piled on subordinate clause, or rambling parentheses
inserted between verb and object, such that the meaning is often
difficult to determine. Under these conditions, and with the
determination not to change the words or word order, dividing the
text into modern, relatively short sentences, is not easy and
some passages will still need to be read carefully.
I have not attempted to provide more
than the minimum of footnotes. These may be to explain allusions
in the text or to ‘translate’ specific words. The name
of the Bishop of London is not mentioned in the text but knowing
that he was John Elmar adds understanding to the pun of John Mar-elm
for a bishop who would cut down elm trees. Leaving words such as
‘trow’ or ‘bewray’ adds to the flavour of the
text, and throughout I have tried to maintain the original as
closely as possible.
The result of this effort for myself
has been to be able to read a popular and racy account of the
Puritan arguments for their ideas, their objections to the
religious settlement of Elizabeth, and to sample the Puritan mode
of disputation. A modern Martin would, I am sure, upset
many modern bishops and parliamentarians, just as he would
scandalise some who oppose bishops in the Church, but I doubt he
would have half the police force out looking for him.
John D. Lewis,
Dept of Theology,
Murdoch University
Western Australia.
June 1996.
Note: In these texts I have produced a number of
endnotes. In the original there are no endnotes, but instead, a
number of references to opponents’ texts, and comments,
arranged as margin notes. Unfortunately, it is not easy to
reproduce the original, and some of the ‘spice’ of the
text is lost in looking up endnotes.
Page numbers: Original page numbers are given in square
brackets, thus [51], the number
indicating the top right hand corner of the page. Some of the
originals had no printed page numbers and I have numbered the
pages sequentially for ease of reference.
[Table of Contents]
The Anglican Library, copyright © 2000. Introduction and modernized spelling edition copyright © John D. Lewis, 2000.
|