The earliest and the most trustworthy account which we possess of the great changes in Church and State that were wrought in the reign of Henry VIII. was written by the celebrated Dr. Nicolas Sander, and published in the year of our Lord 1585, at Cologne, with the following title:

"Doctissimi viri Nicolai Sanderi, de origine ac progressu Schismatis Angli can! liber. Continens historian! niaxime ecclesiasticam, annorum circiter sexaginta, lectu dignissimam : nimirum, ab anno 21 regni Henrici 8 quo primum cogitare coepit de repudianda legitima uxore serenissima Catherina, usque ad hunc vigesimum septimum Elizabethse, quse ultima est ejusdem Henrici soboles. Editus et auctus per Edouardum Rishtonum. Prsecipua capita totius operis post praefationem authoris continentur. Colonise Agrippinse, Anno Domini, 1585."

On Easter Eve in the following year, April 7, 1577, Mr. Rishton was ordained priest at Cambrai¹, and on the second Sunday after Easter, April 21, said Mass for the first time. He sang on that day the high Mass at the high altar of the parish church, according to the rite there in use ; but the priests who were trained at Douai, vexatione dante intellectum, abandoned the local rites to which their forefathers had been accustomed in England, and said Mass according to the Eoman rite, in obedience to the decrees of St. Pius V.² He left Douai August 2 of this year, and went to Borne³ to perfect his theological learning. On the 18th of April 1580 he left Borne⁴, and on the last day of May was in the seminary, then in Bheims, together with the future martyr, Edmund Campian, of the Society of Jesus, and the celebrated Father Persons. Six other priests also were there on that day, two of whom, Balph Sherwin and Luke Kirby, who had left Borne with him, not long after obtained the crown of the martyrs in England.⁸

Note 1. Ibid., p. 118.

Note 2. Collegii Anglo-Duaceni Diarium, Diar. ii. p. 118.

Note 3. Ibid., p. 126.

Note 4. Ibid., Appen., p. 297.

Note 5. Ibid., p. 166.

[Text not included here. Introduction xvi-xx]

The name and writings of Dr. Sander are in honour among all people except his own. There is no stain upon his character : he was honest, fearless, and spoke plainly, without respect of persons, according to the obligations of his state. His writings are grave, solid, and learned, without conceit or affectation, showing the simplicity and directness of his nature. Grave histori ans have been satisfied if they found a fact told by him; and it is not improbable that the reason why his countrymen dealt so hardly with his name is founded on their conviction that his authority was too great to be over turned by any means except those which some of them too readily adopted — scurrilous railing. Thus Dr. Cox, tutor to Edward VI., and under Elizabeth bishop of Ely, writing to Rodolph Gualter, February 1572, speaks as follows of him:

" There came out last summer an immense volume — monstrosum volumen cujusdam Nicolai Sanderi — by one Nicolas Saunders, who is, they say, a countryman of ours, the title of which is 'The Monarchy of the Church.' He appears to have been a mercenary employed by certain Cardinals, aided by the assistance of others, and decked out like Æsop's jackdaw."¹

Note 1. Zurich Letters, ist series, No. 167, ed. Parker Society. The translation is by Dr. Hastings Robinson.

Dr. Cox thus wrote of the book in the fulness of his knowledge; for as late as August 26 in the following year, 1573, he says, "I have not seen the book of Nicolas Saunders about Monarchy : should I see it, and think it deserving of an answer, I will do as the Lord shall enable me."¹

Note 1. Ibid., 2d series, No. 94.

Then when men heard of his history of the Anglican Schism, they allowed themselves a licence, probably unparallelled, in dealing with the author. Francis Mason¹, in his "Vindication of the Church of England," thus speaks of the book — his words are thus rendered by Lindsey:

"Though in that libel of Sanders, concerning the schism, the number of lies may seem to vie with the multitude of lines."

Note 1. Vindicise Eccles. Anglican., lib. iii. c. 9. " Quamquam in famoso isto Sanderi de Schismate libello, mendaciorum mimerus cum linearum multitudine certare videatur."

"He was the first man" says Camden¹, " that broached that damnable lie concerning the birth of queen Eliza beth's mother, which no man in those days — though the hatred and malice of the Papists was then fresh against her, and might remember it— ever knew, Eng land in full forty years after never heard of, the com putation of time doth egregiously convince of falsehood and vanity, and he, forgetting himself, which a liar should not do, doth himself plainly confute. Yet are there some ill-disposed people who blush not at this day to beslur their writings with so impudent a lie."

Note 1. Annals of queen Elizabeth, adan. 1583, in Kennet's History of England.

Heylyn¹, calling him Dr. Slanders, speaks of "his pestilent and seditious book, entituled "De Schismate Anglicano" whose frequent falsehoods make him no fit author to be built on in any matter of importance."

Note 1. Ecclesia Restaurata, pt. iii. p. 122.

"Liars by a frequent custom grow to such a habit," writes Burnet¹ — and there have been people who said that Burnet knew it well — "that in the commonest things they cannot speak truth, even though it might conduce to their ends more than their lies do. Sanders had so given himself up to vent reproaches and lies, that he often does it for nothing, without any end but to carry on a trade that had been so long driven by him that he knew not how to lay it down."

Dr. Sander, according to the same writer², "intended to represent the reformation in the foulest shape that was possible; to defame queen Elizabeth, to stain her blood, and therefore to bring her title to the crown in question ; and to magnify the authority of the See of Kome, and celebrate monastic orders with all the praises and high characters he could devise : and therefore, after he had writ several books on these subjects with out any considerable success, they being all rather filled with foul calumnies and detracting malice than good arguments or strong sense, lie resolved to try his skill another way, so he intended to tell a doleful tale which should raise a detestation of heresy, an ill opinion of the queen, cast a stain on her blood and disparage her title, and advance the honour of the Papacy."

Note 1. Hist, of the Reformation, v. p. 585, ed. Pocock.

Note 2. Ibid., iv. p. 583.

Dr. Sander certainly did commit to writing the horrible story of Anne Boleyn's birth, but it is not proved that he was either the first or the only one to do so, still less clear is it that he invented the "doleful tale." All that is certain and clear is that he believed the story to be true. In this he may have been in error, as other historians have been in error concerning many facts which they confidently related.

He says distinctly that Anne Boleyn was the daughter of Henry VIII, and he says also with equal distinctness that she was so considered during her lifetime. Now, as Dr. Sander could not have been more than nine years old at the utmost when Anne Boleyn came to her unhappy end, and when the story of her birth was published in the streets of Paris¹, few people will venture to say with Camden that he was the first person — primus omnium — "that broached that damnable lie concerning the birth of queen Elizabeth's mother."

If Dr. Sander had been silent on one point, the morals of Anne Boleyn, it is probable that he might have been held to be an accurate historian. But as he has not been silent, his adversaries have been content to use the information he has supplied us, and to repay him with senseless abuse. The writers of a certain kind seem to agree in chanting the praise of Anne Boleyn, and indeed Dr. Burnet admits that it is necessary to maintain the perfect honesty of that person, because the true story of her life "derogates so much from the first reformers."²

Note 1. See below, bk. i. chap. xvii. p. 135, note i.

Note 2. See the passages quoted below.

As to the reputation of Anne Boleyn, Dr. Sander did it no harm. It is true that the weight of his authority is added to the testimony of others, but he is neither the first nor the loudest in publishing the matters which make the life of Anne Boleyn so sad, for Simon Grynæus¹ speaks of her as a woman entitled to no respect. Mr. Pocock² has produced proofs that she was evil spoken of at a time when Dr. Sander had probably learned neither to write nor to read. The French am bassador did not spare her³, and the king's own sister, the duchess of Suffolk, is said to have uttered "opprobrious language" against her.⁴

Note 1. P. 26. Note 2.

Note 2. Records of "the Reformation, ii. pp. 468, 566.

Note 3. Le Grand, iii. 325.

Note 4. Venetian Calendar, Rawdon iv. 761.

The evil temper of Dr. Sander is supposed to have found satisfaction in decrying the person of Anne Boleyn ; but even in this he is not singular, for in the Venetian Calendar of State Papers¹, edited by Mr. Eawdon Brown, is a contemporary account of Anne, not more fiattering than that of Dr. Sander.

Note 1. Venetian Calendar, Rawdon iv. 824.