  If the ways and slang of Vagabonds and Beggars interested Martin Luther enough to make him write a preface to the Liber Vagatorum The first of these three tracts, Awdeley’s Fraternitye of Vacabondes, has been treated by many hasty bibliographers, who can never have taken the trouble to read the first three leaves of Harman’s book, as later than, and a mere pilfering from, Harman’s Caueat. No such accusation, however, did Harman himself bring against the worthy printer-author (herein like printer-author Crowley, though he was preacher too,) who preceded him. In his Epistle dedicatory to the Countes of Shrewsbury, p. 20, below, Harman, after speaking of ‘these wyly wanderers,’ vagabonds, says in 1566 or 1567, There was a fewe yeares since a small brÉefe setforth of some zelous man to his countrey,—of whom I knowe not,—that made a lytle shewe of there names and vsage, and gaue a glymsinge lyghte, not sufficient to perswade of their peuishe peltinge and pickinge practyses, but well worthy of prayse. {ii} This description of the ‘small brÉefe,’ and the ‘lytle shewe’ of the ‘names and vsage,’ exactly suits Awdeley’s tract; and the ‘fewe yeares since’ also suits the date of what may be safely assumed to be the first edition of the Fraternitye, by John Awdeley or John Sampson, or Sampson Awdeley,—for by all these names, says Mr Payne Collier, was our one man known:— It may be disputed whether this printer’s name were really Sampson, or Awdeley: he was made free of the Stationers’ Company as Sampson, and so he is most frequently termed towards the commencement of the Register; but he certainly wrote and printed his name Awdeley or Awdelay; now and then it stands in the Register ‘Sampson Awdeley.’ It is the more important to settle the point, because ... he was not only a printer, but a versifier, These verses of Awdeley’s, or Sampson’s, no doubt led to his ‘small brÉefe’ being entered in the Stationers’ Register as a ‘ballett’: “1560–1. Rd. of John Sampson, for his lycense for pryntinge of a ballett called the description of vakaboundes ....iiijd. “[This entry seems to refer to an early edition of a very curious work, printed again by Sampson, alias Awdeley, in 1565, when it bore the following title, ‘The fraternitie of vacabondes, as well of rufling vacabones as of beggerly,
As above said, I take Harman’s ‘fewe yeares’—in 1566 or 7—to point to the 1561 edition of Awdeley, and not the 1565 ed. And as to Awdeley’s authorship,—what can be more express than his own words, {iii} p. 2, below, that what the Vagabond caught at a Session confest as to ‘both names and states of most and least of this their Vacabondes brotherhood,’ that,—‘at the request of a worshipful man, I [‘The Printer,’ that is, John Awdeley] have set it forth as well as I can.’ But if a doubt on Awdeley’s priority to Harman exists in any reader’s mind, let him consider this second reference by Harman to Awdeley (p. 60, below), not noticed by the bibliographers: “For-as-much as these two names, a Iarkeman and a Patrico, bÉe in the old briefe of vacabonds, and set forth as two kyndes of euil doers, you shall vnderstande that a Iarkeman hath his name of a Iarke, which is a seale in their Language, as one should make writinges and set seales for lycences and pasporte,” and then turn to Awdeley’s Fraternitye of Vacabondes, and there see, at page 5, below: ¶ A IACK MAN. A Iackeman is he that can write and reade, and sometime speake latin. He vseth to make counterfaite licences which they call Gybes, and sets to Seales, in their language called Iarkes. (See also ‘A Whipiacke,’ p. 4.) Let the reader then compare Harman’s own description of a Patrico, p. 60, with that in ‘the old Briefe of Vacabonds,’ Awdeley, p. 6:
And surely no doubt on the point will remain in his mind, though, if needed, a few more confirmations could be got, as We may conclude, then, certainly, that Awdeley did not plagiarize Harman; and probably, that he first published his Fraternitye in 1561. The tract is a mere sketch, as compared with Harman’s Caueat, though in its descriptions (p. 6–11) of ‘A Curtesy Man,’ {iv} ‘A Cheatour or Fingerer,’ and ‘A Ring-Faller’ (one of whom tried his tricks on me in Gower-street about ten days ago), it gives as full a picture as Harman does of the general run of his characters. The edition of 1575 being the only one accessible to us, our trusty Oxford copier, Mr George Parker, has read the proofs with the copy in the Bodleian. Let no one bring a charge of plagiarizing Awdeley, against Harman, for the latter, as has been shown, referred fairly to Awdeley’s ‘small breefe’ or ‘old briefe of vacabonds’ and wrote his own “bolde Beggars booke” (p. 91) from his own long experience with them. Harman’s Caueat is too well-known and widely valued a book to need description or eulogy here. It is the standard work on its subject,—‘these rowsey, ragged, rabblement of rakehelles’ (p. 19)—and has been largely plundered by divers literary cadgers. No copy of the first edition seems to be known to bibliographers. It was published in 1566 or 1567,—probably the latter year, The edition called the second
This alone settles the priority of the Bodley edition, as no printer, having an index alphabetical, would go and muddle it all again, even for a lark. Moreover, the other collations confirm this priority. The colophon of the Bodley edition is dated A. D. 1567, ‘the eight of January;’ and therefore A. D. 1567–8. The second state of the second edition—which state I call the third edition—is shown by the copy which Mr Henry Huth has, with his never-failing generosity, lent us to copy and print from. It omits ‘the eight of January,’ from the colophon, and has ‘Anno Domini 1567’ only. Like the 2nd edition (or 2 A), this 3rd edition (or 2 B) has the statement on p. 87, below: ‘Whyle this second {vi} Impression was in printinge, it fortuned that Nycholas Blunte, who called hym selfe Nycholan Gennyns, a counterefet Cranke, that is spoken of in this booke, was fonde begging in the whyte fryers on Newe yeares day last past, Anno domini .1567, and commytted vnto a offescer, who caried hym vnto the depetye of the ward, which commytted hym vnto the counter;’ and this brings both the 2nd and 3rd editions (or 2 A and 2 B) to the year 1568, modern style. The 4th edition, so far as I know, was published in 1573, and was reprinted by Machell Stace (says Bohn’s Lowndes) in 1814. From that reprint Mr W. M. Wood has made a collation of words, not letters, for us with the 3rd edition. The chief difference of the 4th edition is its extension of the story of the ‘dyssembling Cranke,’ Nycholas Genings, and ‘the Printar of this booke’ Wylliam Gryffith (p. 53–6, below), which extension is given in the footnotes to pages 56 and 57 of our edition. We were obliged to reprint this from Stace’s reprint of 1814, as our searchers could not find a copy of the 4th edition of 1573 in either the British Museum, the Bodleian, or the Cambridge University Library. Thus much about our present edition. I now hark back to the first, and the piracies of it or the later editions, mentioned in Mr J. P. Collier’s Registers of the Stationers’ Company, i. 155–6, 166. “1566–7 Rd. of William Greffeth, for his lycense for printinge of a boke intituled a Caviat for commen Corsetors, vulgarly called Vagabons, by Thomas Harman ...iiijd. “[No edition of Harman’s ‘Caveat or Warning for common Cursetors,’ of the date of 1566, is known, although it is erroneously mentioned in the introductory matter to the reprint in 1814, from H. Middleton’s impression of 1573. It was the forerunner of various later works of the same kind, some of which were plundered from it without acknowledgment, and attributed to the celebrated Robert Greene. Copies of two editions in 1567, by Griffith, are extant, and, in all probability, it was the first time it appeared in print: Griffith entered it at Stationers’ Hall, as above, in 1566, in order that he might publish it in 1567. Harman’s work was preceded by several ballads relating to vagabonds, the earliest of which is entered on p. 42 [Awdeley, p. ii. above]. On a subsequent page (166) is inserted a curious entry regarding ‘the boke of Rogges,’ or Rogues.] “1566–7. For Takynge of Fynes as foloweth. Rd. of Henry {vii} Bynnyman, for his fyne for undermy[n]dinge and procurynge, as moche as in hym ded lye, a Copye from wylliam greffeth, called the boke of Rogges ...iijs. “[This was certainly Harman’s ‘Caveat or Warning for Common Cursetors’; and here we see Bynneman fined for endeavouring to undermine Griffith by procuring the copy of the work, in order that Bynneman might print and publish it instead of Griffith, his rival in business. The next item may show that Gerard Dewes had also printed the book, no doubt without license, but the memorandum was crossed out in the register.] “Also, there doth remayne in the handes of Mr Tottle and Mr Gonneld, then wardens, the somme of iijli. vijs. viijd., wherto was Recevyd of garrad dewes for pryntinge of the boke of Rogges in ao 1567 ...ijli. vjs. viijd. “[All tends to prove the desire of stationers to obtain some share of the profits of a work, which, as we have already shown, was so well received, that Griffith published two editions of it in 1567.]” The fact is, the book was so interesting that it made its readers thieves, as ‘Jack Sheppard’ has done in later days. The very woodcutter cheated Harman of the hind legs of the horse on his title, prigged two of his prauncer’s props (p. 42). To know the keen inquiring Social Reformer, Thomas Harman, the reader must go to his book. He lived in the country (p. 34, foot), in [Crayford] Kent (p. 30, p. 35), near a heath (p. 35), near Lady Elizabeth Shrewsbury’s parish (p. 19), not far from London (p. 30, p. 35); ‘he lodged at the White Friars within the cloister’ (p. 51), seemingly while he was having his book printed (p. 53), and had his servant there with him (ib.); ‘he knew London well’ (p. 54, &c.); and in Kent ‘beinge placed as a poore gentleman,’ he had in 1567, ‘kepte a house these twenty yeares, where vnto pouerty dayely hath and doth repayre,’ and where, being kept at home ‘through sickenes, he talked dayly with many of these wyly wanderars, as well men and wemmen, as boyes and gyrles,’ whose tricks he has so pleasantly set down for us. He did not, though, confine his intercourse with vagabonds to talking, for he says of some, p. 48, ¶ Some tyme they counterfet the seale of the Admiraltie. I haue diuers tymes taken a waye from them their lycences of both sortes, {viii} wyth suche money as they haue gathered, and haue confiscated the same to the pouerty nigh adioyninge to me. p. 51–6. Our author also practically exposed these tricks, as witness his hunting out the Cranke, Nycholas Genings, and his securing the vagabond’s 13?s. and 4?d. for the poor of Newington parish, p. 51–6, his making the deaf and dumb beggar hear and speak, p. 58–9 (and securing his money too for the poor). But he fed deserving beggars, see p. 66, p. 20. Though Harman tells us ‘Eloquence haue I none, I neuer was acquaynted with the Muses, I neuer tasted of Helycon’ (p. 27–8), yet he could write verses—though awfully bad ones: see them at pages 50 and 89–91, below, perhaps too at p. 26?
Thus much about Harman we learn from his book and his literary contemporaries and successors. If we now turn to the historian of his county, Hasted, we find further interesting details about our author: 1, that he lived in Crayford parish, next to Erith, the Countess of Shrewsbury’s parish; 2, that he inherited the estates of Ellam, and Maystreet, and the manor of Mayton or Maxton; 3, that he was the grandson of Henry Harman, Clerk of the Crown, who had for his arms ‘Argent, a chevron between 3 scalps sable,’ which were no doubt those stampt on our Thomas’s pewter dishes; 4, that he had a ‘descendant,’—a son, I presume—who inherited his lands, and three daughters, one of whom, Bridget, married Henry Binneman—? not the printer, about 1565–85 A.D., p. vi–vii, above. Hasted in his description of the parish of Crayford, speaking of Ellam, a place in the parish, says:— “In the 16th year of K. Henry VII. John Ellam alienated it (the seat of Ellam) to Henry Harman, who was then Clerk of the Crown, The manor of Maxton, in the parish of Hougham “passed to Hobday, and thence to Harman, of Crayford; from which name it was sold by Thomas Harman to Sir James Hales..... William Harman held the manor of Mayton, alias Maxton, with its appurtenances, of the Lord Cheney, as of his manor of Chilham, by Knight’s service. Thomas Harman was his son and heir: Rot. Esch. 2 Edw. VI.”—Hasted’s History of Kent, vi. p. 47. “It is laid down as a rule, that nothing but an act of parliament can change the nature of gavelkind lands; and this has occasioned several [acts], for the purpose of disgavelling the possessions of divers gentlemen in this county..... One out of several statutes made for this purpose is the 3rd of Edw. VI.”—Hasted’s History of Kent, vol. i. p. cxliii.
And in the list of names given,—taken from Robinson’s Gavelkind—twelfth from the bottom stands that of THOMAS HARMAN. Of Thomas Harman’s aunt, Mary, Mrs William Lovelace, we find: “John Lovelace, esq., and William Lovelace, his brother, possessed this manor and seat (Bayford-Castle) between them; the latter of whom resided at Bayford, where he died in the 2nd year of K. Edward VI., leaving issue by Mary his wife, daughter of William Harman, of Crayford, seven sons....”—Hasted’s History of Kent, vol. ii. p. 612. The rectory of the parish of Deal was bestowed by the Archbishop on Roger Harman in 1544 (Hasted, vol. iv. p. 171). Harman-street is the name of a farm in the parish of Ash (Hasted, vol. iii. p. 691). {xi} The excellent parson, William Harrison, in his ‘Description of England,’ prefixed to Holinshed’s Chronicles (edit. 1586), quotes Harman fairly enough in his chapter “Of prouision made for the poore,” Book II, chap. 10. “Such as are idle beggers through their owne default are of two sorts, and continue their estates either by casuall or meere voluntarie meanes: those that are such by casuall means “Vnto this nest is another sort to be referred, more sturdie than the rest, which, hauing sound and perfect lims, doo yet, notwithstanding {xii} sometime counterfeit the possession of all sorts of diseases. Diuerse times in their apparell also “It is not yet full threescore “The seuerall disorders and degrees amongst our idle vagabonds:—
Of Women kinde—
{xiii} “The punishment that is ordeined for this kind of people is verie sharpe, and yet it can not restreine them from their gadding: wherefore the end must needs be martiall law, to be exercised vpon them as vpon theeues, robbers, despisers of all lawes, and enimies to the commonwealth and welfare of the land. What notable roberies, pilferies, murders, rapes, and stealings of yoong
Among the users of Harman’s book, the chief and coolest was the author of The groundworke of Conny-catching, 1592, who wrote a few introductory pages, and then quietly reprinted almost all Harman’s book with an ‘I leaue you now vnto those which by Maister Harman are discouered’ (p. 103, below). By this time Harman was no doubt dead.—Who will search for his Will in the Wills Office?—Though Samuel Rowlands was alive, he did not show up this early appropriator of Harman’s work as he did a later one. As a kind of Supplement to the Caueat, I have added, as the 4th tract in the present volume, such parts of the Groundworke of Conny-catching as are not reprinted from Harman. The Groundworke has been attributed to Robert Greene, but on no evidence (I believe) except Greene’s having written a book in three Parts on Conny-catching, 1591–2, and ‘A Disputation betweene a Hee Conny-catcher and a Shee Conny-catcher, whether a Theafe or a Whore is most hvrtfull in Cousonage to the Common-wealth,’ 1592. Another pilferer from Harman was Thomas Dekker, in his Belman of London, 1608, of which three editions were published in the same year (Hazlitt). But Samuel Rowlands found him out and showed him up. From the fifth edition of the Belman, the earliest that our copier, Mr W. M. Wood, could find in the British Museum, he has drawn up the following account of the book: The Belman of London. Bringing to Light the most notorious Villanies that are now practiced in the Kingdome. Profitable for Gentlemen, Lawyers, Merchants, Citizens, Farmers, Masters of Housholds, and all sorts of Servants to mark, and delightfull for all Men to Reade. Lege, Perlege, Relege. The fift Impression, with new additions. Printed at London by Miles Flesher. 1640. {xv} On the back of the title-page, after the table of contents, the eleven following ‘secret villanies’ are described, severally, as
After a short description of the four ages of the world, there is an account of a feast, at which were present all kinds of vagabonds. Dekker was conveyed, by ‘an old nimble-tong’d beldam, who seemed to haue the command of the place,’ to an upper loft, ‘where, vnseene, I might, through a wooden Latice that had prospect of the dining roome, both see and heare all that was to be done or spoken.’ ‘The whole assembly being thus gathered together, one, amongest the rest, who tooke vpon him a Seniority ouer the rest, charged euery man to answer to his name, to see if the Iury were full:—the Bill by which hee meant to call them beeing a double Iug of ale (that had the spirit of AquavitÆ in it, it smelt so strong), and that hee held in his hand. Another, standing by, with a toast, nutmeg, and ginger, ready to cry Vous avez as they were cald, and all that were in the roome hauing single pots by the eares, which, like Pistols, were charged to goe off so soone as euer they heard their names. This Ceremony beeing set abroach, an Oyes was made. But he that was Rector Chory (the Captain of the Tatterdemalions) spying one to march vnder his Colours, that had neuer before serued in those lowsie warres, paused awhile (after hee had taken his first draught, to tast the dexterity of the liquor), and then began, Iustice-like, to examine this yonger brother vpon interrogatories.’ This yonger brother is afterwards ‘stalled to the rogue;’ and the ‘Rector Chory ‘The spirit of her owne mault walkt in her brain-pan, so that, what with the sweetnes of gaines which shee had gotten by her Marchant {xvi} Venturers, and what with the fumes of drinke, which set her tongue in going, I found her apt for talke; and, taking hold of this opportunity, after some intreaty to discouer to mee what these vpright men, rufflers and the rest were, with their seuerall qualities and manners of life, Thus shee began.’ And what she tells Dekker is taken, all of it, from Harman’s book. Afterwards come accounts of the five ‘Laws’ and five jumps at leap-frog mentioned on the back of the title-page, and which is quoted above, p. xv. Lastly ‘A short Discourse of Canting,’ which is, entirely, taken from Harman, pages 84–87, below. As I have said before, Dekker was shown up for his pilferings from Harman by Samuel Rowlands, who must, says Mr Collier in his Bibliographical Catalogue, have published his Martin Mark-all, Beadle of Bridewell, in or before 1609,—though no edition is known to us before 1610,—because Dekker in an address ‘To my owne Nation’ in his Lanthorne and Candle-light, which was published in 1609, refers to Rowlands as a ‘Beadle of Bridewell.’ ‘You shall know him,’ (says Dekker, speaking of a rival author, [that is, Samuel Rowlands] whom he calls ‘a Usurper’) ‘by his Habiliments, for (by the furniture he weares) hee will bee taken for a Beadle of Bridewell.’ That this ‘Usurper’ was Rowlands, we know by the latter’s saying in Martin Mark-all, leaf E, i back, ‘although he (the Bel-man, that is, Dekker) is bold to call me an vsurper; for so he doth in his last round.’ Well, from this treatise of Rowlands’, Mr Wood has made the following extracts relating to Dekker and Harman, together with Rowlands’s own list of slang words not in Dekker or Harman, and ‘the errour in his [Dekker’s] words, and true englishing of the same:’ Martin Mark-all, Beadle of Bridewell; his defence and Answere to the Belman of London, Discouering the long-concealed Originall and Regiment of Rogues, when they first began to take head, and how they haue succeeded one the other successiuely vnto the sixe and twentieth yeare of King Henry the eight, gathered out of the Chronicle of Crackeropes, and (as they terme it) the Legend of Lossels. By S[amuel] R[owlands]. {xvii} Orderunt peccare boni virtutis amore, Orderunt peccare mali formidine poenÆ. London Printed for Iohn Budge and Richard Bonian. 1610. ‘Martin Mark-all, his Apologie to the Bel-man of London. There hath been of late dayes great paines taken on the part of the good old Bel-man of London, in discouering, as hee thinks, a new-found Nation and People. Let it be so for this time: hereupon much adoe was made in setting forth their liues, order of liuing, method of speech, and vsuall meetings, with diuers other things thereunto appertaining. These volumes and papers, now spread euerie where, so that euerie Iacke-boy now can say as well as the proudest of that fraternitie, “will you wapp for a wyn, or tranie for a make?” The gentle Company of Cursitours began now to stirre, and looke about them; and hauing gathered together a Conuocation of Canting Caterpillars, as wel in the North parts at the Diuels arse apeake, ‘They (the vagabonds) haue a language among themselues, composed of omnium gatherum; a glimering whereof, one of late daies hath endeuoured to manifest, as farre as his Authour is pleased to be an {xviii} intelligencer. The substance whereof he leaueth for those that will dilate thereof; enough for him to haue the praise, other the paines, notwithstanding Harman’s ghost continually clogging his conscience with Sic Vos non Vobis.’—Sign. C. 3 back. ‘Because the Bel-man entreateth any that is more rich in canting, to lend him better or more with variety, he will repay his loue double, I haue thought good, not only to shew his errour in some places in setting downe olde wordes vsed fortie yeeres agoe, before he was borne, for wordes that are vsed in these dayes (although he is bold to call me an vsurper (for so he doth in his last round), and not able to maintayne the title, but haue enlarged his Dictionary (or Master Harman’s) with such wordes as I thinke hee neuer heard of (and yet in vse too); but not out of vaine glorie, as his ambition is, but, indeede, as an experienced souldier that hath deerely paid for it: and therefore it shall be honour good enough for him (if not too good) to come vp with the Reare (I doe but shoote your owne arrow back againe), and not to haue the leading of the Van as he meanes to doe, although small credite in the end will redound to eyther. You shall know the wordes not set in eyther his Dictionaries by this marke §: and for shewing the errour in his words, and true englishing of the same and other, this marke ¶ shall serue § Abram, madde § He maunds Abram, he begs as a madde man ¶ Bung, is now vsed for a pocket, heretofore for a purse § Budge a beake, runne away § A Bite, secreta mulierum § Crackmans, the hedge § To Castell, to see or looke § A Roome Cuttle, a sword § A Cuttle bung, a knife to cut a purse § Chepemans, Cheape-side market ¶ Chates, the Gallowes: here he mistakes both the simple word, because he so found it printed, not knowing the true originall thereof, and also in the compound; as for Chates, it should be Cheates, which word is vsed generally for things, as Tip me that Cheate, Giue me that thing: so that if you will make a word for the Gallous, you must put thereto this word treyning, which signifies {xix} hanging; and so treyning cheate is as much to say, hanging things, or the Gallous, and not Chates. § A fflicke, a Theefe § Famblers, a paire of Gloues § Greenemans, the fields § Gilkes for the gigger, false keyes for the doore or picklockes § Gracemans, Gratious streete market § Iockam, a man’s yard § Ian, a purse § Iere, a turd § Lugges, eares § Loges, a passe or warrant § A Feager of Loges, one that beggeth with false passes or counterfeit writings § Numans, Newgate Market ¶ Nigling, company keeping with a woman: this word is not vsed now, but wapping, and thereof comes the name wapping morts, whoores. § To plant, to hide ¶ Smellar, a garden; not smelling cheate, for that’s a Nosegay § Spreader, butter § Whittington, Newgate. “And thus haue I runne ouer the Canter’s Dictionary; to speake more at large would aske more time then I haue allotted me; yet in this short time that I haue, I meane to sing song for song with the Belman, ere I wholly leaue him.” [Here follow three Canting Songs.] Sign. E 1, back—E 4. “And thus hath the Belman, through his pitifull ambition, caused me to write that I would not: And whereas he disclaims the name of Brotherhood, I here vtterly renounce him & his fellowship, as not desirous to be rosolued of anything he professeth on this subiect, knowing my selfe to be as fully instructed herein as euer he was.”—Sign. F.
In the second Part of his Belman of London, namely, his Lanthorne and Candle-light, 1609, Dekker printed a Dictionary of Canting, which is only a reprint of Harman’s (p. 82–4, below). A few extracts from this Lanthorne are subjoined: Canting. “This word canting seemes to bee deriued from the latine verbe canto, which signifies in English, to sing, or to make a sound with words,—that is to say, to speake. And very aptly may canting take his deriuation, a cantando, from singing, because, amongst these beggerly consorts that can play vpon no better instruments, the language of canting is a kind of musicke; and he that in such assemblies can cant {xx} best, is counted the best Musitian.”—Dekker’s Lanthorne and Candle-light, B. 4. back. Specimen of “Canting rithmes.” “Enough—with bowsy Coue maund Nace, Tour the Patring Coue in the Darkeman Case, Docked the Dell, for a Coper meke His wach shall feng a Prounces Nab-chete, Cyarum, by Salmon, and thou shalt pek my Iere In thy Gan, for my watch it is nace gere, For the bene bowse my watch hath a win, &c.” Dekker’s Lanthorne, &c., C. 1. back.A specimen of “Canting prose,” with translation, is given on the same page. Dekker’s dictionary of Canting, given in Lanthorne and Candle-light, is the same as that of Harman. “A Canting Song. The Ruffin cly the nab of the Harman beck, If we mawn’d Pannam, lap or Ruff-peck, Or poplars of yarum: he cuts, bing to the Ruffmans, Or els he sweares by the light-mans, To put our stamps in the Harmans, The ruffian cly the ghost of the Harman beck, If we heaue a booth we cly the Ierke. If we niggle, or mill a bowsing Ken Or nip a boung that has but a win Or dup the giger of a Gentry cofe’s ken, To the quier cuffing we bing, And then to the quier Ken, to scowre the Cramp ring, And then to the Trin’de on the chates, in the lightmans The Bube and Ruffian cly the Harman beck and harmans Thus Englished. The Diuell take the Constable’s head, If we beg Bacon, Butter-milke, or bread, Or Pottage, to the hedge he bids vs hie Or sweares (by this light) i’ th’ stocks we shall lie. The Deuill haunt the Constable’s ghoast If we rob but a Booth, we are whip’d at a poast. If an ale-house we rob, or be tane with a whore, Or cut a purse that has inst a penny, and no more, Or come but stealing in at a Gentleman’s dore To the Iustice straight we goe, And then to the Iayle to be shakled: And so {xxi} To be hang’d on the gallowes i’ th’ day time: the pox And the Deuill take the Constable and his stocks.” Ibid. C. 3. back.Richard Head (says Mr Hotten), in his English Rogue, described in the Life of Meriton Latroon, a Witty Extravagant, 4 vols. 12mo., 1671–80, gave “a glossary of Cant words ‘used by the Gipsies’; but it was only a reprint of what Decker had given sixty years before,” and therefore merely taken from Harman too. ‘The Bibliography of Slang, Cant, and Vulgar Language’ has been given so fully at the end of Mr Hotten’s Slang Dictionary, that I excuse myself from pursuing the subject farther. I only add here Mr Wood’s extracts from four of the treatises on this subject not noticed by Mr Hotten in the 1864 edition of his Dictionary, but contained (with others) in a most curious volume in the British Museum, labelled Practice of Robbers,—Press Mark 518. h. 2.,—as also some of the slang words in these little books not given by Harman 1. The Catterpillers of this Nation anatomized, in a brief yet notable Discovery of House-breakers, Pick-pockets, &c. Together with the Life of a penitent High-way-man, discovering the Mystery of that Infernal Society. To which is added, the Manner of Hectoring and trapanning, as it is acted in and about the City of London. London, Printed for M. H. at the Princes Armes, in Chancery-lane. 1659.
2. A Warning for Housekeepers; or, A discovery of all sorts of thieves and Robbers which go under these titles, viz.—The Gilter, the Mill, the Glasier, Budg and Snudg, File-lifter, Tongue-padder, The private Theif. With Directions how to prevent them, Also an exact description of every one of their Practices. Written by one who was a Prisoner in Newgate. Printed for T. Newton, 1676. Glasiers, thieves who enter houses, thro’ windows, first remouing a pane of glass (p. 4). {xxii} The following is a Budg and Snudg song:— “The Budge it is a delicate trade, And a delicate trade of fame; For when that we have bit the bloe, We carry away the game: But if the cully nap us, And the lurres from us take, O then they rub us to the whitt, And it is hardly worth a make. But when that we come to the whitt Our Darbies to behold, And for to take our penitency, And boose the water cold. But when that we come out agen, As we walk along the street, We bite the Culley of his cole, But we are rubbed unto the whitt. And when that we come to the whitt, For garnish they do cry, Mary, faugh, you son of a wh—— Ye shall have it by and by. But when that we come to Tyburn, For going upon the budge, There stands Jack Catch, that son of a w—— That owes us all a grudge And when that he hath noosed us And our friends tips him no cole O then he throws us in the cart And tumbles us into the hole.”—(pp. 5, 6.) On the last page of this short tract (which consists of eight pages) we are promised: “In the next Part you shall have a fuller description.” 3. Street Robberies consider’d; The reason of their being so frequent, with probable means to prevent ’em: To which is added three short Treatises—1. A Warning for Travellers; 2. Observations on House-breakers; 3. A Caveat for Shopkeepers. London, J. Roberts. [no date] Written by a converted Thief. Shepherd is mentioned in this book as being a clever prison breaker (p. 6). There is a long list of slang words in this tract. The following are only a few of them:
“The King of the Night, as the Constables please to term themselves, should be a little more active in their employment; but all their business is to get to a watch house and guzzle, till their time of going home comes.” (p. 60.) “A small bell to Window Shutters would be of admirable use to prevent Housebreakers.” (p. 70.) 4. A true discovery of the Conduct of Receivers and Thief-Takers, in and about the City of London, &c., &c. London, 1718. This pamphlet is “design’d as preparatory to a larger Treatise, wherein shall be propos’d Methods to extirpate and suppress for the future such villanous Practices.” It is by “Charles Hitchin, one of the Marshals of the City of London.” I now take leave of Harman, with a warm commendation of him to the reader. {xxiv} The third piece in the present volume is a larky Sermon in praise of Thieves and Thievery, the title of which (p. 93, below) happened to catch my eye when I was turning over the Cotton Catalogue, and which was printed here, as well from its suiting the subject, as from a pleasant recollection of a gallop some 30 years ago in a four-horse coach across Harford-Bridge-Flat, where Parson Haben (or Hyberdyne), who is said to have preached the Sermon, was no doubt robbed. My respected friend Goody-goody declares the sermon to be ‘dreadfully irreverent;’ but one needn’t mind him. An earlier copy than the Cotton one turned up among the Lansdowne MSS, and as it differed a good deal from the Cotton text, it has been printed opposite to that. Of the fourth piece in this little volume, The Groundworke of Conny-catching, less its reprint from Harman, I have spoken above, at p. xiv. There was no good in printing the whole of it, as we should then have had Harman twice over. The growth of the present Text was on this wise: Mr Viles suggested a reprint of Stace’s reprint of Harman in 1573, after it had been read with the original, and collated with the earlier editions. The first edition I could not find, but ascertained, with some trouble, and through Mr H. C. Hazlitt, where the second and third editions were, and borrowed the 3rd of its ever-generous owner, Mr Henry Huth. Then Mr Hazlitt told me of Awdeley, which he thought was borrowed from Harman. However, Harman’s own words soon settled that point; and Awdeley had to precede Harman. Then the real bagger from Harman, the Groundworke, had to be added, after the Parson’s Sermon. Mr Viles read the proofs and revises of Harman with the original: Mr Wood and I have made the Index; and I, because Mr Viles is more desperately busy than myself, have written the Preface. The extracts from Mr J. P. Collier must be taken for what they are worth. I have not had time to verify them; but assume them to be correct, and not ingeniously or unreasonably altered from their originals, like Mr Collier’s print of Henslowe’s Memorial, of which {xxv} Dr Ingleby complains, F. J. FURNIVALL. 29 Nov., 1869. P.S. For a curious Ballad describing beggars’ tricks in the 17th century, say about 1650, see the Roxburghe Collection, i. 42–3, and the Ballad Society’s reprint, now in the press for 1869, i. 137–41, ‘The cunning Northerne Beggar’: 1. he shams lame; 2. he pretends to be a poor soldier; 3. a sailor; 4. cripple; 5. diseased; 6. festered all over, and face daubed with blood; 7. blind; 8. has had his house burnt. “and haveinge some knowledge and acquaintaunce of him as a player, requested me to be his baile,” which is evidently intended to mean, as I had some knowledge and acquaintance of Lodge as a player, he requested me to be his baile. But in this place the original paper reads thus, “and havinge of me some knowledge and acquaintnunce requested me to be his bayle,” meaning, of course, Lodge, having some knowledge and acquaintance of me, requested me to be his bail. The interpolation of the five words needed to corroborate Mr Collier’s explanation of the misquoted passage from Gosson, and the omission of two other words inconsistent with that interpolation, may be thought to exhibit some little ingenuity; it was, however, a feat which could have cost him no great pains. But the labour of recasting the orthography of the memorial must have been considerable; while it is difficult to imagine a rational motive to account for such labour being incurred. To expand the abbreviations and modernize the orthography might have been expedient, as it would have been easy. But, in the name of reason, what is the gain of writing wheare and theare for “where” and “there;” cleere, yeeld, and meerly for “clere,” “yealde,” and “merely;” verie, anie, laie, waie, paie, yssue, and pryvily, for “very,” “any,” “lay,” “way,” “pay,” “issue,” and “privylie;” sondrie, begon, and doen for “sundrie,” “began,” and “don;” and thintent, thaction, and thacceptaunce for “the intent,” “the action,” and “the acceptaunce”?—p. 11 of Dr C. M. Ingleby’s ‘Was Thomas Lodge an Actor? An Exposition touching the Social Status of the Playwright in the time of Queen Elisabeth.’ Printed for the Author by R. Barrett and Sons, 13 Mark Lane, 1868. 2?s. 6?d. p. vii. ix, p. 19, 20. Elizabeth, Countess of Shrewsbury, and her parish. The manor of Erith was granted to Elizabeth, Countess of Shrewsbury, by Henry VIII. in the 36th year of his reign, A.D. 1544–5. The Countess died in 1567, and was buried in the parish church of Erith. “The manor of Eryth becoming part of the royal revenue, continued in the crown till K. Henry VIII. in his 36th year, granted it in fee to Elizabeth, relict of George, Earl of Shrewsbury, by the description of the manor, of Eryth, alias Lysnes, with all its members and appurts., and also all that wood, called Somersden, lying in Eryth, containing 30 acres; and a wood, called Ludwood, there, containing 50 acres; and a wood, called Fridayes-hole, by estimation, 20 acres, to hold of the King in capite by knight’s service. p. ix. In Lambarde’s Perambulation of Kent (edit. 1826), p. 66, he mentions “Thomas Harman” as being one of the “Kentish writers.” Lambarde, in the same volume, p. 60, also mentions “Abacuk Harman” as being the name of one “of suche of the nobilitie and gentrie, as the Heralds recorded in their visitation in 1574.” There is nothing about Harman in Mr Sandys’s book on Gavelkind, &c., Consuetudines CantiÆ. To future inquirers perhaps the following book may be of use: “Bibliotheca Cantiana: A Bibliographical Account of what has been published on the History, Topography, Antiquities, Customs, and Family History of the County of Kent.” By John Russell Smith. p. 1, 12. The xxv. Orders of Knaues.—Mr Collier gives an entry in the Stationers’ Registers in 1585–6: “Edward White. Rd. of him, for printinge xxijtl ballades at iiijd a peece—vijs iiijd, and xiiij. more at ijd a peece ijs iiijd ............. ixs viijd” And No. 23 is “The xxvtle orders of knaves.”—Stat. Reg. ii. 207. p. 22. The last Duke of Buckingham was beheaded.—Edward Stafford, third Duke of Buckingham, one of Henry VIII’s and Wolsey’s victims, was beheaded on Tower Hill, May 17, 1521, for ‘imagining’ the king’s death. (‘The murnynge of Edward Duke of Buckyngham’ was one of certain ‘ballettes’ licensed to Mr John Wallye and Mrs Toye in 1557–8, says Mr J. P. Collier, Stat. Reg. i. 4.) His father (Henry Stafford) before him suffered the same fate in 1483, having been betrayed by his servant Bannister after his unsuccessful rising in Brecon.—Percy Folio Ballads, ii. 253. {xxviii} p. 23. Egiptians. The Statute 22 Hen. VIII. c. 10 is An Acte concernyng Egypsyans. After enumerating the frauds committed by the “outlandysshe people callynge themselfes Egyptians,” the first section provides that they shall be punished by Imprisonment and loss of goods, and be deprived of the benefit of 8 Hen. VI. c. 29. “de medietate linguÆ.” The second section is a proclamation for the departure from the realm of all such Egyptians. The third provides that stolen goods shall be restored to their owners: and the fourth, that one moiety of the goods seized from the Egyptians shall be given to the seizer. p. 48, l. 5. The Lord Sturtons man; and when he was executed. Charles Stourton, 7th Baron, 1548–1557:—“Which Charles, with the help of four of his own servants in his own house, committed a shameful murther upon one Hargill, and his son, with whom he had been long at variance, and buried their Carcasses 50 foot deep in the earth, thinking thereby to prevent the discovery; but it coming afterwards to light, he had sentence of death passed upon him, which he suffer’d at Salisbury, the 6th of March, Anno 1557, 4 Phil. & Mary, by an Halter of Silk, in respect of his quality.”—The Peerage of England, vol. ii. p. 24 (Lond., 1710). p. 77. Saint Quinten’s. Saint Quinten was invoked against coughs, says Brand, ed. Ellis, 1841, i. 196. p. 77. The Three Cranes in the Vintry. “Then the Three Cranes’ lane, so called, not only of a sign of three cranes at a tavern door, but rather of three strong cranes of timber placed on the Vintry wharf by the Thames side, to crane up wines there, as is afore showed. This lane was of old time, to wit, the 9th of Richard II., called The Painted Tavern lane, of the tavern being painted.”—Stow’s Survey of London, ed. by Thoms, p. 90. “The Three Cranes was formerly a favourite London sign. With the usual jocularity of our forefathers, an opportunity for punning could not be passed; so, instead of the three cranes, which in the vintry used to lift the barrels of wine, three birds were represented. The Three Cranes in Thames Street, or in the vicinity, was a famous tavern as early as the reign of James I. It was one of the taverns frequented by the wits in Ben Jonson’s time. In one of his plays he says:— ‘A pox o’ these pretenders! to wit, your Three Cranes, Mitre and Mermaid men! not a corn of true salt, not a grain of right mustard among them all!’—Bartholomew Fair, act i. sc. 1. “On the 23rd of January, 166 12 Pepys suffered a strong mortification of the flesh in having to dine at this tavern with some poor relations. The sufferings of the snobbish secretary must have been intense:— ‘By invitation to my uncle Fenner’s, and where I found his new wife, a pitiful, old, ugly, ill-bred woman in a hatt, a mid-wife. Here were many of his, and as many of her, relations, sorry, mean people; and after choosing our gloves, we all went over to the Three Cranes Taverne: {xxvix} and though the best room of the house, in such a narrow dogghole we were crammed, and I believe we were near 40, that it made me loath my company and victuals, and a very poor dinner it was too.’ “Opposite this tavern people generally left their boats to shoot the bridge, walking round to Billingsgate, where they would reenter them.”—Hotten’s History of Signboards, p. 204. p. 77. Saynt Iulyans in Thystellworth parish. ‘Thistleworth, see Isleworth,’ says Walker’s Gazetteer, ed. 1801. That there might well have been a St Julyan’s Inn there we learn from the following extract: “St. Julian, the patron of travellers, wandering minstrels, boatmen, ‘Therfore yet to this day, thei that over lond wende, They biddeth Seint Julian, anon, that gode herborw he hem sende; And Seint Julianes Pater Noster ofte seggeth also For his faders soule, and his moderes, that he hem bring therto.’ And in ‘Le dit de s Heureux,’ an old French fabliau:— ‘Tu as dit la patenotre Saint Julian À cest matin, Soit en Roumans, soit en Latin; Or tu seras bien ostilÉ.’ In mediÆval French, L’hotel Saint Julien was synonymous with good cheer. ‘—Sommes tuit vostre. Par Saint Pierre le bon Apostre, L’ostel aurez Saint Julien,’ says Mabile to her feigned uncle in the fabliau of ‘Boivin de Provins;’ and a similar idea appears in ‘Cocke Lorell’s bote,’ where the crew, after the entertainment with the ‘relygyous women’ from the Stews’ Bank, at Colman’s Hatch, ‘Blessyd theyr shyppe when they had done, And dranke about a Saint Julyan’s tonne.’ Hotten’s History of Signboards,” p. 283.“Isleworth in Queen Elizabeth’s time was commonly in conversation, {xxx} and sometimes in records, called Thistleworth.”—Lysons’ Environs of London, vol. iii. p. 79. p. 77. Rothered: ?Rotherhithe. p. 77. The Kynges Barne, betwene Detforde and Rothered, can hardly be the great hall of Eltham palace. Lysons (Environs of London, iv. p. 399) in 1796, says the hall was then used as a barn; and in vol. vi. of the ArchÆologia, p. 367, it is called “King John’s Barn.” p. 77. Ketbroke. Kidbrooke is marked in large letters on the east of Blackheath on the mordern Ordnance-map; and on the road from Blackheath to Eltham are the villages or hamlets of Upper Kidbrooke and Lower Kidbrooke. “Kedbrooke lies adjoining to Charlton, on the south side of the London Road, a small distance from Blackheath. It was antiently written Cicebroc, and was once a parish of itself, though now (1778 A.D.) it is esteemed as an appendage to that of Charlton.”—Hasted’s History of Kent, vol. i. p. 40. p. 100. Sturbridge Fair. Stourbridge, or Sturbich, the name of a common field, extending between Chesterton and Cambridge, near the little brook Sture, for about half a mile square, is noted for its fair, which is kept annually on September 19th, and continues a fortnight. It is surpassed by few fairs in Great Britain, or even in Europe, for traffic, though of late it is much lessened. The booths are placed in rows like streets, by the name[s] of which they are called, as Cheapside, &c., and are filled with all sorts of trades. The Duddery, an area of 80 or 100 yards square, resembles Blackwell Hall. Large commissions are negotiated here for all parts of England in cheese, woolen goods, wool, leather, hops, upholsterers’ and ironmongers’ ware, &c. &c. Sometimes 50 hackney coaches from London, ply morning and night, to and from Cambridge, as well as all the towns round, and the very barns and stables are turned into inns for the accommodation of the poorer people. After the wholesale business is over, the country gentry generally flock in, laying out their money in stage-plays, taverns, music-houses, toys, puppet-shows, &c., and the whole concludes with a day for the sale of horses. This fair is under the jurisdiction of the University of Cambridge.—Walker’s Gazetteer, ed. 1801. See Index to Brand’s Antiquities. |
|
