HENRY OF MONMOUTH'S CHARACTER. -- UNFAIRNESS OF MODERN WRITERS. -- WALSINGHAM EXAMINED. -- TESTIMONY OF HIS FATHER -- OF HOTSPUR -- OF THE PARLIAMENT -- OF THE ENGLISH AND WELSH COUNTIES -- OF CONTEMPORARY CHRONICLERS. -- NO ONE SINGLE ACT OF IMMORALITY ALLEGED AGAINST HIM. -- NO INTIMATION OF HIS EXTRAVAGANCE, OR INJUSTICE, OR RIOT, OR LICENTIOUSNESS, IN WALES, LONDON, OR CALAIS. -- DIRECT TESTIMONY TO THE OPPOSITE VIRTUES. -- LYDGATE. -- OCCLEVE. The hour of his father's death having been fixed upon as the date of Henry's reputed conversion from a career of thoughtless dissipation and reckless profligacy to a life of religion and virtue, this may appear to be the most suitable place for a calm review of his previous character and conduct. In the very threshold of our inquiry, perhaps the most remarkable circumstance to be observed is this, that whilst the charges now so unsparingly and unfeelingly brought against his character, rest solely on the vague, general, and indefinite assertions of writers, (many of whom appear to aim at exalting his repentance into somewhat approaching a miraculous conversion,) no one single act of violence,[296] intemperance, injustice, immorality, or even (p. 314) levity of any kind, religious or moral, is placed upon record. Either sweeping and railing accusations are alleged, unsubstantiated by proof or argument; or else his subsequent repentance is cited to bear testimony to his former misdoings. Thus one writer asserts;[297] "This monarch, in the former part of his life, was remarkable for dissipation and extravagance of conduct; in the latter, he became the slave of the popedom. Voluptuousness, ambition, superstition, each in their turn had the ascendant in this extraordinary character." Thus does another sum up the whole question in one short note:[298] "The assertions of his reformation are so express, that the fact cannot be justly questioned without doubting all history; and, if there were reformation, there must have been previous errors."[299] [Footnote 296: The story of the Chief Justice, &c. will be examined separately and at length. The charge from Calais of peculation (we have already seen) brought with it its own refutation: whilst the evidence on which alone the charge against him of undutiful conduct towards his father rests is proved to be altogether devoid of credit.] [Footnote 297: Milner, Church History, Cent. XV.] [Footnote 298: Turner, History of England, book ii. ch. x.]