The Law of Civilization and Decay: An Essay on HistoryAdams, Brooks
Philosophy
The Law of Civilization and Decay: An Essay on History
Adams, Brooks
Civilization -- History; Degeneration; History -- Philosophy
“And as for my Lord Prevye Sealle, I wold not be in his case
for all that ever he hathe, for the King beknaveth him twice
a weke, and some-tyme knocke him well about thee pate; and yet
when he hathe bene well pomeld aboute the hedde, and shaken up,
as it were a dogge, he will come out into the great chambre,
shaking of the bushe with as mery a countenance as thoughe he
mought rule all the roste.”[210]
Though good-natured where his interests were not involved, he appears
to have been callous to the sight of pain, and not only attended to
the racking of important witnesses, but went in state to see Father
Forest roasted in chains for denying the royal supremacy, which he was
labouring to establish. His behaviour to Lambert, whom he sent to the
fire for confessing his own principles, astonished even those who knew
him well. How he became a Protestant is uncertain; Foxe thought, by
reading Erasmus’s translation of the New Testament. More probably he
was sceptical because he was of the economic type. At all events, he
hated Rome, and Foxe said that in 1538 he was “the chief friend of the
gospellers.”
In that same year Lambert was tried for heresy regarding
transubstantiation, and it was then Cromwell sentenced him to be burned
alive. Characteristically, he is said to have invited him to breakfast
on the morning of the execution, and to have then begged his pardon for
what he had done.
Pole described a conversation he had with Essex about the duty of
ministers to kings. Pole thought their first obligation was to consider
their masters’ honour, and insisted on the divergence between honour
and expediency. Such notions seemed fantastic to Cromwell, who told
Pole that a prudent politician would study a prince’s inclinations and
act accordingly. He then offered Pole a manuscript of Machiavelli’s
_Prince_. Such a temperament differed, not so much in degree as in
kind, from that of Godfrey de Bouillon or Saint Louis, Bayard or the
Black Prince. It was subtler, more acquisitive, more tenacious of
life, and men and women of the breed of Cromwell rose rapidly to be
the owners of England during the sixteenth century. Social standards
changed. Even in semi-barbarous ages a lofty courtesy had always
been deemed befitting the great. Saint Anselm and Héloïse, Saladin
and Cœur-de-Lion have remained ideals for centuries, because they
represented a phase of civilization; and Froissart has described how
the Black Prince entertained his prisoners after Poitiers:--
“The prince himself served the king’s table, as well as the
others, with every mark of humility, and would not sit down
at it, in spite of all his entreaties for him so to do, saying
that ‘he was not worthy of such an honour, nor did it appertain
to him to seat himself at the table of so great a king, or of
so valiant a man as he had shown himself by his actions that
day.’”[211]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account