niversity wit” is a designation usually reserved for those University men who went down to London and functioned in a literary milieu distinctly anticipatory of Grub Street. Thus used, this term tends to gloss over the fact that there was also plenty of keen and inventive wit, in both the Elizabethan and modern senses of the word, exhibited by others who chose not to leave the Universities and went on to academic careers, or who entered the learned professions. Such men also wrote clever and ingenious stuff for amusement. A fine specimen of academic wit is the lengthy satire Iter Boreale NOTE 1 by Richard Eedes or Edes (1555 - 1604), NOTE 2 a student of Christ Church, Oxford. The circumstances of its composition were described by Sir John Harington in his memoir of Dr. Tobie Mathew, Archbishop of York: NOTE 3

Among some speciall men that enjoyed, and joyed most in his friendship and company in Oxford, and in remembrance of it since they they were sundred, was Doctor Eedes, late Dean of Worcester, one whose company I loved as well as he loved his Thoby Matthew. He for their farewell, upon his remove to Durham, intending first to go with him from Oxford, but one dayes Journey, was so betrayed by the sweetness of his Company, and their old friendship, that he not onely brought him to Durham, but for a pleasant penance wrote their whole Journey in Latine verse, which Poem he himselfe gave to me, and told me so many pretty Apothegmes of theirs in their younger yeeres, as might make a Booke almost by it selfe.

2. A product of the Westminster School, Eedes matriculated from Christ Church in 1571. NOTE 4 He enjoyed a distinguished academic career, being elected Junior Proctor of the University for 1583, and appointed Canon of the fourth stall of Christ Church in 1586. In the same year he was made Chaplain to Queen Elizabeth, NOTE 5 and created Doctor of Divinity in 1589. He died in 1604, perhaps a victim of the plague then ravaging England. Eedes was a playwright as well as an author of occasional verse. On the strength of his lost play Caesar Interfectus Francis Meres included him in his list of “our best for tragedy” in Palladis Tamia (1598); the work seems to have been staged on the same occasion as the first performance of William Gager’s Meleager, in 1582. Only the epilogue of the play survives, which is regrettable, because such a relatively early example it would have been of some interest for the development of the Elizabethan history play, and has even been suggested to have been a source for Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. NOTE 6 Other than the Iter Boreale Eedes’ only surviving Latin poetry consists of gratulatory verses prefacing various contemporary publications, chiefly by other members of his Oxford circle, and contributions to University commemorative anthologies. Some English work also exists. A prose dialogue on love printed in the 1593 anthology The Phoenix Nest (pp. 24 - 9) is attributed to Eedes in one manuscript, but to others by different sources. NOTE 8
3. Even in an age when University students and faculty were often distinctly younger than their modern counterparts, Tobie Mathew’s career was alarmingly precocious. NOTE 9 Born in Herefordshire in 1546 and educated at Wells, he came up to Oxford in 1559 at the age of thirteen. A B. A. by seventeen and ordained by twenty, he was unanimously elected University Orator in 1569 and chosen as one of the eight Canons of Christ Church a year later. He defeated Dr. William James, his eventual successor, in an election for the Deanship of Christ Church in 1576. NOTE 10 Mathew seems to have owed his success to his considerable amiability as well as to his charismatic abilities in the pulpit. Now he was about to take another step up the ecclesiastical ladder, as Dean of Durham Cathedral. Later he would succeed to the bishopric of Durham, and was later translated to the archbishopric of York, not dying until 1628.
4. A distinctive feature of Christ Church life during the 1580’s, was a fashion for passionate friendships, or perhaps more accurately homosexual pairings that were at least supposed to remain platonic. Energetic young libidos may of course have been set in this direction by the exclusively male nature of the universities, but this fashion was probably in large part fueled by a desire to imitate the friendship of Sir Philip Sidney and Fulke Greville. There is plenty of evidence for this fad in the occasional poetry of Eedes’ friend and contemporary William Gager, Oxford’s premiere poet and playwright. In a commonplace book of poems unprinted in his lifetime (British Library Additional ms. 22583), Gager documents several such pairings, such as that of Sir Thomas Clinton, grandson of the Earl of Lincoln, and Sir Walter Devereux, younger brother of Essex, and records the ups and downs of his own similar friendship with another Christ Church student, Richard Brainche, evidently a kinsman. On the showing of Wood’s account, it would appear that Mathew and Eedes paired off in this way. NOTE 11 This friendship supplied the motive for a spur-of-the-moment decision to accompany Mathew to Durham. Mathew’s party consisted of two fellow academics, Eedes and Anthony Blencowe, Provost of Oriel College, who came along for the companionship. As a sort of traveling factotum and general provider of food and good cheer, a local innkeeper named Matthew Harrison made up the fourth member of the party. Mathew must have been grateful for all the support and comfort his comrades could offer. For he was headed for a tense and tricky situation. NOTE 12
5. The previous Dean of Durham, Thomas Wilson, had died in mid-June 1581. NOTE 13 Choosing a successor and putting him in place proved to be a protracted affair. The story of Mathew’s installation is told by John Strype. NOTE 14 After an attempt on the part of the Cathedral chapter to procure the post for one of the Canons had come to naught, Lord Burleigh nominated Mathew for the post in 1582. NOTE 15 Royal assent could not be procured until the following year, so he did not go up to Durham until the summer of 1583, when he was formally installed on August 31. NOTE 16 Thanks to the incompetence if not actual venality of Bishop Richard Barnes, diocesan finances were in a shambles, and the interregnum (to use Eedes’ word at 261) between Deans had not helped matters. Strype quotes a couple of highly illuminating letters from an impatient Mathew (who seems to have enjoyed writing about himself in the third person) to Burleigh written during the interval between his nomination and his installation. The first was written in May 1582. in which he urged Burleigh to press his appointment with the Queen:

That by his good word, which it pleased his lordship to afford him unto her highness towards the deanery of Durham, to his great furtherance, and greater credit, he was encouraged to move her highness again for her resolution and his despatch. And that he was nothing so importune with his honour, as many good men of that church and country were earnest with him to do what in him lay for expedition…For that he was credibly informed that many things there went to wrack. The houses decayed; the game spoiled; the woods wasted; the grounds unlet…

Not getting anywhere, he wrote even more explicitly on August 25, 1582, promising:

That he would be his good lord, as he had hitherto been, in the despatch of the deanery: and that especially as unless the dean that next should be might be inducted, and keep his residence there by the space of one and twenty days together, before Michaelmas next, the whole crop, as well of hay as corn, as all other fruits, belonging to the tithes and glebe land, (which was valued two parts of three in that living), must by a local statute of that church accrue to the prebendaries resident this year past: so as the next dean should for the year to come have no manner of provision wherewith to keep house; and so be the less able to do good in preaching or government: where, they said, many regarded hospitality very much; who being lost at the first, would hardly be won a good while after.

He requested Burleigh:

To remember his lordship withal in what decay and dilapidations the dean’s mansion houses were fallen; what spoil and waste, as well of woods as of other commodities belonging to their dignity, had been, and would be, during the vacation; and in how great need the divided church did stand of some indifferent governor: how incommodious the season of the year would hereafter be to remove so far from these parts, &c. Consideration whereof he most humbly referred unto his lordship’s great wisdom and favourable furtherance.

6. Mathew’s ominous words “in how great need the divided church did stand of some indifferent governor” hint at mismanagement and the need for a strong and impartial administrative hand. This remark is illuminated by another passage in Strype: NOTE 17

This bishop had a brother John, who was his chancellor, a bad man, addicted to covetousness and uncleanness. He was to be bribed by money to pass over crimes presented and complained of. Which reflected upon the bishop himself, and gave him an ill name everywhere. And when these things were brought to the bishop, he would say, Others were in the fault; but it never came to his knowledge. Gilpin, a reverend and pious preacher in those parts, in a sermon preached before him, told him plainly, that whatsoever he did himself, or suffered through his connivency to be done by others, was wholly his own. The bishop took this well, and, taking him by the hand, said, Father Gilpin, I acknowledge you are fitter to be bishop of Durham, than I to be parson of Houghton; which was Gilpin’s parsonage.

Clearly, the diocese was beset by corruption and maladministration. Biographers and ecclesiastical historians tend to fix the blame on grasping brother John rather than on Bishop Barnes himself, who was only guilty of inability to rectify the situation. NOTE 18 Eedes provides evidence that the Cathedral chapter was also guilty, at least in the matter of the Deanery estates and income. Eedes took a vigorous dislike to Barnes, in part because the Bishop had Puritan leanings, and so our poet, who detested Puritans, offers a withering portrait. But though he represents Barnes as eccentric, oafish, and cheeseparing, and describes plenty of equivocal behavior on his part, he does not accuse him of peculation. It may be noteworthy that he fixes blame for the despoliation of the Dean’s country estate on the Canons collectively, not on Barnes. Then too, collegiate and diocesan wealth consisted chiefly of landholdings, and in reading both academic and ecclesiastical histories of the period, one rapidly becomes aware that squabbles involving real or imagined abuse of rents and leases were endemic; charges of incompetence or maladversion were easily made and readily heard. William Gager, for example, at least imagined that some sort of scandal, probably of this type, was occurring at Christ Church during Mathew’s time as Dean. NOTE 19 And manufacturing a crisis atmosphere so one can come forward as the man of the hour is a time-honored ploy for incoming administrators.
7. One thing, in any event, is beyond dispute. Eedes accepted Mathew’s assessment of the situation at face value, and so came up to Durham with a strong predisposition to dislike whatever he found. This attitude colors everything he writes and generates the rather savage satire that marks the Durham part of the poem.
8. Understandably, as far as his dealings with ecclesiastics went, Mathew’s visit went off disastrously and supplied Eedes with plenty of material for splenetic comedy. Bad blood existed on both sides. Barnes seems to have snubbed him when they first met, at least by Eedes’ standard of how Mathew deserved to be treated, and avoided him as much as possible thereafter. It may be significant, for example, that in Eedes’ admittedly sketchy description of Mathew’s installation ceremony his presence goes unmentioned: did he boycott the event? Barnes had a well-developed talent for making himself scarce, which Eedes attributes to a desire to avoid the expenses involved in entertaining visitors. One might see in his equivocal behavior the furtiveness of guilt, or perhaps strong resentment if he knew Mathew had been complaining to the government about the quality of his stewardship. Or we could be more charitable and attribute Barnes’ absences to an otherworldy character (Grosart’s assessment) or to simple shyness, though Eedes describes the man as gross, fleshy, and anything but ethereal. In the same way, Eedes provides a strong hint that the welcome extended Mathew by the Canons of the Cathedral chapter was equally chill. The newcomers’ Oxonian superciliousness (with which Iter Boreale is saturated, inadvertently supplying another level of humor) doubtless did its part to worsen the situation. This was the rather daunting situation which Mathew encountered, with the support of Eedes, Blenkowe, and Harrison. He was obliged to stay longer than planned in order to the lay the foundation of his future administration, and took a first step towards righting matters by prolonging his stay so that Sir Francis Walsingham, Elizabeth’s Secretary of State, could force Barnes and his Canons to cough up the rent monies accruing to the Deanship, which they had been diverting for the past two years. Equally forward-looking was the time invested in social entertaining, forging of ties with prominent local families, and cultivation of such Durhamite clergy as were willing to be won over (Henry Ewbanke being a case in point). All this activity seems to have been sensibly subsumed by Mathew under the general heading of foundation-laying.
8. Mathew simultaneously encountered a second difficulty. Matters between England and Scotland appeared to be near the breaking-point. Scotland was under the control of the ineffable James Stewart, Earl of Arran, a former partner of the now-departed Esmé Stuart who now held all the threads of government. This was a man whom the English had to regard as anything but reliable, who gave the Presbyterians hard-handed treatment and scorned the pro-English policy that had guided such earlier Regents of Scotland as the Earls of Moray and Morton. J. B. Black has sketched the result of the failed diplomatic mission of Walsingham, who met James VI of Scotland in early September: NOTE 20

Meanwhile Elizabeth was anxiously watching Scotland, where another revolution had taken place in July 1583, leading to the overthrow of the Ruthven clique and the return of Arran to power. In September, hearing of a renewal of French machinations in the northern kingdom, she sent Walsingham with a splendid embassy to remonstrate with James, and to see what he could do to restore English influence. The veteran diplomatist was no lover of the Scots, whom he regarded as a mercenary nation to be won only by hard cash — a method of persuasion he knew Elizabeth would never sanction. From the first, therefore, he fought a losing battle. He had nothing to offer — no gifts of money, no promises with regard to the succession: the anti-English party was in a strong position; and the king, through friendly, was in no mood to listen to expostulation on his ’crooked ways.’ It is hardly surprising that Walsingham’s report was a bitter one. He pronounced James ’an ingrate and such a one as if his power may agree to his will, will be found ready to make as unthankful a requital as ever any did that was so greatly beholding unto a prince, as he hath been unto your Majesty.’ Nay, he concluded that the only way to deal with him was to have him ’bridled and forced, whether he will or no.’

The situation was serious and might lead to war, as Eedes indicates at 474f. Various measures had to be taken. A commission was established to inquire into the repair of the borderland defenses, NOTE 21 and the convocation of the Council of the North described by Eedes was for the purpose of meeting with these commissioners as well as with Walsingham. Durham occupied a critically sensitive position in the border country. The County Palatine of Durham, governed by a Prince-Bishop with considerable secular powers, had an important role to play in defensive preparations. During his Deanship Mathew held a kind of watching brief for the Queen’s principal advisors vis-a-vis Scotland, and also was active in curbing recusants. NOTE 22 Eedes describes a meeting of the Council at which Walsingham was present on his way back from Scotland. Mathew extended his visit and played a part in the resulting confabulations. It is likely that at their meeting Walsingham recruited him as a political observer and instructed him how the government wanted the diocese to be managed. Nothing could be clearer than that Bishop Barnes was unsuited for such responsibilities; it is possible that the real reason he went into hiding was not to avoid the costs of hosting such a large number of guests or because he had been looting his diocese, but because he wanted to dodge any involvement in this matter. In view of his general gormlessness, the government must have eagerly fixed on Mathew as the right man to put some spine into Durham diocese. NOTE 23
9. This delay turned out to be a lucky break for Eedes. For all his grumbling about the protracted stay at Durham — though he confesses that the place came to grow on him — he had the opportunity to be introduced to Walsingham and favorably impress him. It would be excessive to claim that this meeting laid the foundation for his future academic and ecclesiastical success: having been elected a University Proctor, he was already a marked man. NOTE 24 But students of preferment (and there must have been many in his Christ Church audience) would have appreciated that this meeting did not exactly harm his chances. A third source of anxiety for our traveling companions as they headed for the North country was more generalized: not entirely without reason, southerners tended to regard the North as uncivilized, uncouth, and dangerous. In several respects the North was a violence-prone place. If war with Scotland (supported, perhaps, by France or Spain) were to break out, it would bear the brunt of invasion. Memories of the northern rebellion of 1569 led by the Earls of Northumbria and Westmoreland, and of its bloody suppression, were fresh, and indeed some of the individuals we shall meet in Iter Boreale, notably the Earl of Huntington, were involved in putting it down. The Council of the North may have governed the region, but so far it had failed to impose anything like true law and order on the region. Eedes provides evidence for this when he records that fear of a robber currently plying his trade in the vicinity under the name Jock the Scot, deterred Blenkowe and himself from amusing themselves by a side-trip to Newcastle.
10. Southerners were also prejudiced against the North because it was perceived as culturally backward. This attitude colors a complaining letter from Bishop Barnes, a Lancashireman, to Burleigh written soon after his appointment to Durham: NOTE 25

I assure your good Lordship, [the people of Yorkshire] are far more plyable to all good order, than those stubborn, churlish people, of the country of Durham, and their neighbours in Richmondshire, who shew but, as the proverb is, Jack of Napes charity in their hearts. The customes, the lives of these people, as their country is, are truly salvage [sic]; but truly such hast to amend (though it be fore some) as is zelous, and yet non extremity shewed to any, otherwise than be threatening, which hath wrought panicum timorem in their minds, and in the Clergy a good readiness to apply their travells NOTE 26 to their calling, only that Augie Stabulum, the Church of Durham, exceedes; whose stinke is grievous in the nose of God and man, and which to purge far passeth Hercules’ labours. The malicious of this country are mervailously exasperated against me; and whereas at home, they dare, neither by words nor deeds, deal undutifully against me, yet abroad, &c. they deface me by all slanders, false reports, and shameless lyes; though the same were never so inartificial or incredible, according to the Northern guise, which is never to be ashamed, however they bely and deface him whom they hate, yea though it be before the honorablest. Pessimum hoc genus hominum ex aliqua invidia laudem sibi quaerens.

In his poem written as a sequel to Iter Boreale, Musa Australis, NOTE 27 Eedes’ friend Gager is obviously indulging in a good deal of clowning, but in his humorous way he gives voice to all these prejudices about the North. He portrays Durham as a gelid and sunless region somewhere up around Ultima Thule (although in another poem in his series on Mathew’s departure he adds that it is infested by tigers), populated by marauding bandits and mean-minded yokels who wouldn’t know a decent preacher when they heard one, but who would resent his presence if they did. But for all the comic exaggeration, his concern for Mathew’s welfare may well have been genuine.
11. If such attitudes about the North helped shape Eedes’ reportage, Iter Boreale is informed by various other views and prejudices. Two of these, obviously, are a dislike for Puritanism, evidenced by the disdain with which he describes his encounter with extreme Low Church practice at Northampton, and a standard Oxonian sense of general superiority. Another concerns the nature of Christian preaching. Here, Gager is a valuable witness. In Musa Australis he says a lot about the prestige that accrues to an excellent and learned preacher. In an oration in praise of eloquence, delivered at Christ Church in early 1585, NOTE 28 he lays it on the line even more explicitly:

Quid porro tam gloriosum quam cum auditum sit hominem eloquentem esse dicturum, loca in subselliis occupari, compleri forum, gratiosum unum quemque esse in dando et cedendo loco, coronam multiplicem omnes erectos videre? Cum vero surgit is qui dicturus sit significari a corona silentium, deinde crebras assensiones, multas admirationes, risum cum velit, cum velit fletum esse? Hic enim unus est in quo homines exhorrescunt, quem stupefacti dicentem intuentur, in quo clamores illos non potest melius plaususque etiam tollant.

[“And what more glorious than for every seat to be occupied when it has been heard that an eloquent man is about to speak; for the forum to be filled, everyone graceful in giving and yielding place; to see everybody bolt upright in a packed throng; when the speaker rises to his feet, to have the crowd cry silence; for there to be much applause, much approval; for there to be laughter or weeping, as he wants? He is the sole man in whose presence all men tremble, whom they gaze at with amazement as he speaks, for whom they shout ’couldn’t be better’ and raise their applause.”]

Unless Gager is stating a very idiosyncratic philosophy — but he had the habit of appointing himself spokesman for orthodox views --it would seem as though Anglican preaching was valued largely as an occasion for rhetorical display. Like one of those Greek rhetoric professors of the Second Sophistic, the successful preacher, eloquent and learned, was lionized.
12. So Eedes was accompanying a sort of touring superstar. NOTE 29 This consideration renders understandable a number of things: it explains why Mathew was repeatedly invited to preach along the way, and why so many people were eager to offer him hospitality. It also explains why Eedes mordantly reviews the generally deplorable professional competence of the Durham clergy with virtually exclusive reference to their forensic abilities. In some passages it is almost as if he is describing a contest, smugly reporting that his Oxford paladin always comes out on top.
13. The rest of the story can be told briefly. Mathew and his party lingered in Durham for a full month after the installation, then returned to Oxford. This protracted stay was purchased at the cost of good traveling weather, and their return journey was repeatedly disrupted by storms and floods. Mathew remained in Oxford through the winter, not demitting the Christ Church Deanship until early 1584. NOTE 30 Even then, giving a good imitation of a yo-yo, he came down to Oxford yet again and preached a farewell sermon to Comitia on July 12, leaving, we are told, nary a dry eye among his auditory. NOTE 31
14. At its beginning Eedes states that he composed the Iter Boreale on the road as a diversion. Whether such was or was not his original intention, it may be the case that the poem was put to a specific use. NOTE 32 Gager’s sequel Musa Australis is dated November 11, 1583. The only other dated poems in Gager’s commonplace book collection of unprinted work, which preserves this item, were written for recitation at a Christ Church Michaelmas dinner on September 26 of the same year, NOTE 34 and so it would seem that the Musa Australis was written to be read at a testimonial dinner for Mathew. Iter Boreale may have been recited on this same occasion. At the very least, Gager’s poem shows that Eedes’ poem had circulated through Christ Church to the point that he could presume familiarity with it on the part of his hearers.
15. From what has been said so far, it might seem that Iter Boreale is a recherché collegiate work, of interest only to specialist historians. But it acquires national significance as a specimen of travel literature, for within the scope of the regions traversed by Eedes the quality and detail of his observations are in no wise inferior to those of those two great Tudor travel writers, John Leland and William Camden. In the appendix to Johann Bucheler’s Phrasium Poeticarum Thesaurus printed at London in 1624 is a taxonomy of Renaissance poetic genres, NOTE 35 one of which is the Hodoeporicon, or journey-describing poem, a class to which Iter Boreale belongs. The classical model for such poetry is Horace, Sermo I.v, the account of a journey to Brundisium as a member of Maecenas’ retinue. While Eedes does not assiduously imitate this work, NOTE 36 the general dramatic situation of a poet accompanying a Great Man on a journey is obviously similar and he provides much the same sorts of notes: about other members of the company, sights seen along the way, traveler’s hardships, exceptionally good or bad food and lodging, and so forth. In writing this he was no doubt catering to his audience’s curiosity about their national geography. The evident originality of this idea is noteworthy. It would be three years before William Camden first published his Britannia, a later edition of which moved Thomas Campion to write (Epigram I.lxix, printed in 1619):

lectorem utque pium decet, hoc tibi reddo merenti,
per te quod patriam tam bene nosco meam.

[“As befits a pious reader, I give you this deserved thanks, for it is your doing that I am familiar with my native land.”]

Far-flung regions such as Wales, the North country, and Scotland were still remote, exotic, and rather forbidding locales. Information about them must have been eagerly accepted, all the more so when it was colorful and sometimes blood-curdling. Likewise, Mathew’s Christ Church contemporaries would have been glad to have their curiosity satisfied about the place their Dean was going and matters of high politics. Those who were, or were in training to become, churchman would take a professional interest in the ecclesiastical information he provides. But the Iter Boreale is no mere travelogue of the Horace variety. Eedes was a divine singularly deficient in Christian charity. From the standpoint of his spiritual welfare this may be deplorable, but the reader can only be grateful, for he has given us a memorable example of muscular and interestingly malicious Renaissance satire. It is as if Juvenal rather than Horace had taken the trip to Brundisium.
16. It is worth comparing Eedes’ observations with those of others who traveled, at least in part, the same roads he did, and what they wrote occasionally illuminate his remarks. John Leland made his journey around England in the 1530’s or ’40’s. Although he made his observations a generation before Eedes, he visited many of the same places and saw many of the same sights, and it is often interesting to compare their notes. NOTE 37 Then too, though in his Britannia William Camden was more often concerned with gathering antiquarian information than in reporting his own observations and impressions, at various points his testimony is useful. In his expanded 1607 edition Camden, who had by then read the Iter Boreale, incorporated one of Eedes’ remarks, which permitted a later traveler, Daniel Defoe, to make a shrewd comment on his observations about the great bridge over the Wharfe at Tadcaster (cf. 73f. with the note ad loc.). NOTE 38 Finally, on the theory that much of the English road net did not substantially change between the sixteenth and eighteenth century, I have traced our companions’ route on the county maps provided in an early atlas of Britain, The Royal English Atlas, printed in 1760 by Emmanuel Bowen and Thomas Kitchen. NOTE 39 In this collection, on all of the relevant maps save those for the three Yorkshire Ridings road distances are noted in English statute miles. I reproduce these distances in appropriate Commentary notes. A pair of lines on the Tadcaster bridge is not the only mark Eedes made on later literature. A later Dean of Christ Church, Richard Corbett [1582 - 1635, Dean 1620 - 28], wrote a lengthy and satirical travelogue also entitled Iter Boreale, that begins: NOTE 40

Foure Clerkes of Oxford, Doctours two, and two
That would be Docters, having lesse to do
With Augustine then with Galen in vacation
, NOTE 41
Chang’d studyes, and turn’d bookes to recreation:
And on the tenth of August, Northward bent
A iourney not so soon conceiv’d as spent.

17. Both the work’s title and its content strongly suggest that Corbett knew Eedes’ poem and learnt from it. Corbett, Leonard Hutten, the Sub-Dean of Christ Church, NOTE42 two other unidentified academics, and Hutten’s servant Thomas, a somewhat Harrison-like figure, took a summer trip into the Midlands slightly before Corbett assumed the Deanship. He fills his poem with observations of the people and places encountered along the way, some mordantly satirical, all identified by sidenotes precisely in the manner of those found in the manuscripts of Eedes’ work. Like Eedes, Corbett was a churchman — he went on to become Bishop of Oxford and latterly of Norwich, and so both observers tend to focus on ecclesiastical matters, often reviewing them with a critical professional eye. The only element in his observations that finds no counterpart in Eedes is a tendency to include historical and antiquarian notes as well as personal observations; doubtless these are inserted after the example of Camden. NOTE 43 His poem proved enormously successful — it exists in a number of manuscripts as well as printed versions, and spawned a series of Oxonian imitations throughout the seventeenth century written in both English and Latin. Corbett’s editors NOTE 44 cite Richard James’ Iter Lancastriense (1636), Thomas Master’s Iter Boreale (1637, published 1675), Thomas Bispham’s Iter Australe (1658); Jeremiah Well’s Iter Orientale (1667); George Wither’s lost Iter Boreale, and even Davenant’s Journey into Worcester (1673). Hence, via Corbett, Eedes fathered an entire genre of topographical poetry, a special manifestation of rising national self-consciousness.

18. Anthony à Wood wrote of the Iter Boreale circulating freely in manuscript, and in this form it was read by Harington, Camden, and Corbett. It is preserved in four known copies, the remnants of what must have been a considerably richer tradition:

B British Library Additional ms. 30352. Eleven numbered pages written in a scrawling hand; much necessary punctuation is omitted. The poem is entitled Musae Boreales sive Iter Boreale. On the title page are written two names, “John Burrows of Harford” and “John Erdwell (?) of Sydmouthe.” Therefore this ms. appears to have been owned successively by two members of Magdalene College, John Borroughs (B. A. 1594) and John Erdall (B. A. 1601).

C Corpus Christi College (Oxford) ms. 309 (pp. 85ff.). Included in a commonplace book of vernacular and Latin poetry (including, inter alia, an early biographical sketch of Shakespeare and some unedited material by William Alabaster of Cambridge) compiled by William Fulham, a Fellow of Corpus Christi (expelled 1648, restored 1660). For a history of this manuscript cf. E. K. Chambers, William Shakespeare (Oxford, 1930) II.255f. [In the copy supplied me by the firm acting as commercial agent for Corpus Christi, pp. 86v - 87r, containing lines 81 - 142, are omitted. Since the significant readings of C are also contained in the closely related ms. W this is not troublesome.]

R Bodleian Library ms. Rawlinson B 223 (once owned by the antiquarian Dr. Richard Rawlinson), a short manuscript containing sixteen numbered pages It is written in a tolerably good secretary hand, with a few corrections by a later reader. Provided as appendices on unnumbered pages are short biographical sketches of Eedes and Mathew, written in the original hand (the one for Mathew also appears in Anthony à Wood’s biography). Since Eedes’ death is recorded, the manuscript cannot have been written prior to 1604. At a later time someone else has entered further biographical notes drawn from Wood’s Athenae Oxonienses (first printed in 1692) and a reconstruction of the itinerary, with some calculations of mileage, almost all wrong.

W Bodleian Library ms. Wood 8853 (the antiquarian Anthony à Wood’s personal copy). Eleven numbered pages written in a handsome italic hand, possibly a presentation copy. No evidence for dating.

NOTE: I have been informed by Ms. Cillian O’Hagen, Curator of Classical and Byzantine Studies, The British Library, that she has discovered a fifth text of Iter Borealis in B. L. ms. Lansdowne 740, which the Library catalogue dates to the first half of the seventeenth century. The manuscript also contains miscellaneous English poems and some extracts from various Greek authors. I hope to obtain photographs of this manuscript, and intend to modify this edition accordingly [September 30, 2013].

19. B and W have strong affinities with each other, over against R. They frequently, though not invariably, share the same readings where R has something else (though often an equally acceptable lection), and R has a pronounced tendency to drop lines retained by BW. One of Eedes’ rhetorical mannerisms is to repeat words or phrases in successive lines, and this led R’s copyist, or at least that of some manuscript in R’s background, either to skip lines or to telescope them by wrongly splicing together the first part part of one line with the latter part of the next. So BW and R represent different sectors of the textual tradition. In this context, it may be relevant that R was not executed until over twenty years after the composition of our poem.
20. B and W each contain readings, errors, and omissions not found in the other. NOTE 45 This principle is illustrated, for example, by omitted, telescoped, or otherwise mangled lines. B botches 308f., leaves out 406, telescopes 576f. into a single line, and garbles the passage at 617ff. W for its part shares with R the single telescoped line that substitutes for 421f., and omits 526. Observations of this sort exclude the possibility that either manuscript is an apograph of the other. Leaving out of consideration the evidence of sidenotes, it would almost be possible to think that both B and W are copies of the same manuscript; but W’s telescoped line at 421, a feature shared with R, suggests that their relationship is somewhat more complex. NOTE 46 The closeness of BW is especially illustrated by the shared misplacement of 617ff.
21. The position of C in the history of the text poses a more complicated problem inasmuch as it has a hybrid ancestry. According to the marginal notations of its copyist, William Fulman, the first 309 lines are copied from one manuscript with corrections written both marginally and in the text itself ex ms. Sheldon. The exemplar must have been a copy of inferior quality, for a large number of corrections needed to be introduced. That manuscript evidently broke off at 310, unless for some reason Fulman lost access to it when he reached this point, for a marginal note at that point reads ex hinc Ms. Sheld. sol. From now on the number of foolish copying errors and subsequent corrections decreases markedly.
22. The place of this bad manuscript in the tradition is difficult to ascertain (save that it had no obvious affinities with R). More important is that of the lost Sheldonian manuscript against which it was collated and corrected, and which supplied the text from 310 onward. It is clear that this latter copy was closely related to BW, and that it had a special affinity to W. In the portion of the poem beginning at 310 there are 30 readings common to BCW and 34 common to CW, including a number of uniquely shared sidenotes and the placement of 617ff. after 622. This may be contrasted with only 7 readings uniquely shared with B. On the other hand, the only signficant resemblance of C to R is the omission of 475. It looks permissible to think that W and the Sheldonian manuscript standing behind C (call it S) were copied from the same manuscript (call it Y, with Z used to represent C’s second source), and that B and X were in turn descended from a common ancestor. The relationship of R is obviously remoter. The general scheme can be represented by a diagram in which Ω represents what Eedes actually wrote:

Remarkably few errors have infiltrated the tradition in its entirety: the only mistakes shared by all four extant copies not involving proper names are at 292, 541 and 656 (to which may possibly be added 53). Save for simple mistakes that could occur independently, readings shared by R and one or more of the BCW family are likely to be correct.
23. Frequent confusions abound in manuscript renderings of proper nouns. I have written the correct proper name in the Latin text under the theory that unfamiliar names easily confused copyists (sometimes Eedes himself may have been confused by northern pronunciation of the names of people to whom he was introduced).
24. A distinctive feature of these manuscripts is their more or less copious marginal annotation. Doubtless most of these are the responsibility of the author himself. This is strongly suggested because a number of them supply information that serves to clarify the text or even, in some cases, to render it intelligible. A couple (B’s sidenotes against 193 and 469) are written in the first person. Others, notably B’s annotations on 159 and 338, unambiguously represent readers’ observations. One suspects that there was a core of the author’s own annotations which was freely paraphrased, modified, and supplemented by subsequent readers and copyists who added extra facts, inferences from the text itself, and interpretational material. Thomas Legge’s trilogy Richardus Tertius of 1579 is extant in eleven copies, which contain many stage directions. Most manuscripts include these selectively and sometimes more or less freely paraphrased, and few contain the whole set. Copyists felt no need to be scrupulous in reproducing such extra-textual material. NOTE 47 Something similar is probably true in the present case, so that the absence of a sidenote from one or more manuscripts is no necessary reason for doubting the accuracy of the information it contains. Factual problems posed by several of them will be dealt with in appropriate Commentary notes.
25. I should like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to C. B. L. Barr, Sub-Librarian of the York Minster Library and a specialist on Tobie Mathew; Peter Cane, Fellow Librarian of Corpus Christi College, Oxford; and Mrs. M. Kirwan, Librarian of Oriel College, Oxford, for useful assistance, information, and advice. And I owe a special word of thanks to my U. C. L. A. colleague, Professor M. W. Haslam, a sagacious critic and a Yorkshireman, for a number of suggested improvements. This electronic edition was preceded by a print one, Oxford Poetry by Richard Eedes and George Peele (New York, 1995). I take this opportunity to expand on a few points and make some corrections.



NOTE 1 The proper title of this poem is discussed in a note.

NOTE 2 So the D. N. B. biography (by Gordon Goodwin), on unstated grounds. Eedes was likelier born in 1552, the birthdate of his exact contemporary at Westminster and Oxford, Martin Heton. William Gager, who matriculated from Christ Church three years after Eedes and Heton, was born in 1555.

NOTE 3 A Briefe View of the State of the Church of England as it Stood in Q. Elizabeths and King James his Reigne, to the Yeere 1608, edited by John Harington under the title Nugae Antiquae (London, 1779, repr. Hildesheim, 1968) I.228f., copied by Anthony à Wood, Athenae Oxonienses, Fasti Oxonienses, and Life of Anthony à Wood (ed. Philip Bliss, in four volumes, London, 1813 - 22, reprinted Hildesheim, 1969) II.749. [Because of the frequency with which these works will be cited, they will henceforth be abbreviated A. O. and F. O. ] Wood added that Eedes “wrote their whole journey in Latin verse, entit. Iter boreale, several copies of which did afterwards fly abroad.” He was able to quote the first line of the poem because he owned a copy, one of the mss. on which this edition is based.

NOTE 4 No study has ever been devoted to Eedes. The principal source of biographical information is Wood’s notes (ib. 749 - 50), which provide the basis for the life in the D. N. B. Available notices and discussions of his literary work include Frederick S. Boas, University Drama in the Tudor Age (Oxford, 1914, repr. New York, 1966), 163 - 5; Leicester Bradner, Musae Anglicanae: A History of Anglo-Latin Poetry 1500 - 1925 (New York, 1940, reprinted New York, 1965) 66; and David H. Horne, The Life and Minor Works of George Peele (New Haven, 1952) 169 - 73. See also Binns, Intellectual Culture index s.v.

NOTE 5 Evidently an honorific appointment, as he remained at Oxford. Likewise in the dedicatory epistle to Leicester, Chancellor of the University, prefacing the Exequiae Illustrissimi Equitis D. Philippi Sidnaei, Gratissimae Memoriae ac Nomini Impensae that he edited in 1587 — to which Eedes contributed — William Gager refers to Dr. William James, Tobie Mathew’s successor as Dean of Christ Church, as Leicester’s chaplain. Maybe the individuals honored with such designations were to function in this capacity when Elizabeth and Leicester visited the University. Was this, then, a specialized form of patronage relationship? Eedes continued as Chaplain to James I, though he was Dean of Worcester, and was selected as a Bible translator by James, but his contribution to the K. J. V. was precluded by his death soon thereafter.

NOTE 6 John Semple Smart, Shakespeare Truth and Tradition (London, 1928) 179 - 82 and C. F. Tucker Brooke, “The Life and Times of William Gager (1555 - 1622),” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 95 (1951) 415 (though this idea is denied by Boas, loc. cit.). The epilogue, which reveals nothing important about the play’s contents, is preserved by the Bodleian ms. Top. Oxon. e. 5, fol. 359; Boas reproduced it. In his biography (A. O. 749) Wood writes “His younger years he spent in poetical fancies and composing of plays (mostly tragedies).” Caesar Interfectus is the only play he is known to have written, unless he helped write William Gager’s Dido produced in June 1583, which shows signs of multiple authorship, athough Gager’s collaborator may have been George Peele.

NOTE 7 For example, for Alberico Gentili’s Lectionum et Epistolarum quae ad Ius Civile Pertinent, Liber 1 (1583), John Case’s Speculum Moralium Quaestionum (1585), and William Gager’s Ulysses Redux (1592) and Meleager (1593).

NOTE 8 Inner Temple ms. Petyt 538.43, fols. 299f. According to this manuscript the dialogue was spoken before the Queen at Woodstock, evidently in 1592. Both The Phoenix Nest and other sources state that it was spoken before the Queen at the house of Sir Henry Lee. For a discussion of authorship — several candidates have been proposed --m see the annotated edition of The Phoenix Nest by Hyder Edward Rollins (Cambridge, Mass., 1931) 134ff.; E. K. Chambers, Sir Henry Lee (Oxford, 1936) 276f.; and Horne, loc. cit. It may be the case that one or two anonymous poems in this collection are also by Eedes (see the General Introduction to the poetry of William Gager. Some vernacular poetry preserved by the Bodleian ms. Rawlinson Poet. 148 has been published in Edward Doughtie, Liber Lilliati (Newark, N. J., 1985). Cf. also Bodleian ms. Rawlinson Poet. 172 fol.. 6v and British Library ms. Harleian 6910 fol. 151v (“Luigi Groto his New Philosophie Englished by Doct. Eedes”). In the seventeenth century two volumes of Eedes’ sermons were printed: bibliographical information on these is provided under Eedes’ name in the list of Works Consulted at the end of this volume. [Eedes is not to be confused with his Presbyterian namesake, who also published sermons later in the century and died in 1686.]

NOTE 9 For his life cf. Wood, A. O. II.869 - 77 and the D. N. B. entry (by William Holden Hutton) with references cited. There is also a contemporary biographical sketch by Sir John Harington, op. cit. I.224 - 35.

NOTE 10 Christ Church, or more accurately The Cathedral College of Christ, is simultaneously an academic college and the seat of the diocese of Oxford. As such, instead of the normal organization of an Oxbridge college, it has the administrative structure characteristic of a cathedral. It is governed by a Dean, Sub-dean, and a chapter of Canons, and its other members are termed students.

NOTE 11 One of Gager’s poems, CXVI, suggests that at one point he too had such a relationship with Eedes; if so, it must have been of brief duration, as it leaves no further mark on Gager’s private poetry although he wrote copiously about his pashes.

NOTE 12 Blenkowe was trained in the law, and Mathew may have felt the need for a legal advisor and also, perhaps, for somebody who could help make sense out of the Durham finances. Then too, Blenkowe haled from Cumberland and Mathew may have wanted the support of a friend who was himself a northerner.

NOTE 13 Wood, A. O. II.174.

NOTE 14 John Strype, Annals of the Reformation and Establishment of Religion and Various Other Occurrences in the Church of England during Queen Elizabeth’s Happy Reign (Oxford, 1824, reprinted New York, n.d.) III.i.257 - 9. Strype quoted source documents in modernized orthography.

NOTE 15 This nomination rapidly became common knowledge. There is preserved in the library of the College of Arms a letter dated May 3, 1582, from Dr. Robert Lougher, a lay official of York diocese, to the family of the Earl of Shrewsbury announcing Mathew’s selection. Mathew had lobbied shamelessly for the post. Cf. his quite discreditable letter to Sir Christopher Hatton, the Lord Chancellor, on September 7, 1581, reproduced by Sir Harris Nicholas, Memoirs of the Life and Times of Sir Christopher Hatton, K. G. (London, 1847) 191f., largely devoted to the disparagement of his rival, the Durham Canon Ralph Bellamy. Mathew’s main talking-points were that Bellamy’s medical background and general obscurity rendered him unfit for the Deanship (he sneeringly asserts that Bellamy would make an ideal Dean if the job involved dispensing quack nostrums such as aurum potabile). Other specimens of Mathew’s aggressive letter-writing campaign reproduced by Nicholas are a letter to Hatton of Feb. 12, 1582 (pp. 232f.), and one to Ann, Countess of Warwick of July 22, 1582 (pp. 255f.). The subject of a further undated letter to Hatton is unclear (pp. 355f.). Interestingly, in canvassing for the position Mathew did not level charges of diocesan corruption.

NOTE 16 So A. O. II.870, supported by such other authorities as P. Mussett, Lists of Deans and Major Canons of Durham 1541 - 1900 (Durham, 1974). Robert Surtees, The History and Antiquities of the Country Palatine of Durham (London, 1816 - 40, repr. Ardsley, Wakefield, Yorkshire, 1972) I.lxxxv note d, erred in giving the date as September 3. [Unless noted to the contrary, all dates cited are old style.]

NOTE 17 Strype III.i 680f. — the parish rector in question was Bernard Gilpin of Houghton-le-Spring. The anecdote about Gilpin denouncing Barnes is told more fully by Surtees II.168f. (extracted from Carleton’s biography cited in the next note). Gilpin plays no part in our story because he had died in March 1583. There is a certain unfortunate symbolic value in the fact that, after Gilpin’s death, Bishop Barnes appointed his own son to the vacant parish in the next year (cf. the note on 483ff.).

NOTE 18 Besides the authorities just quoted cf., for example, Thomas Fuller, The History of the Worthies of England (ed. P. Austin Nutall, London, 1840, repr. New York, 1965) II.197, a biographical sketch based on Bishop George Carleton’s The life of Bernard Gilpin, a man most holy and renowned among th’ northerne English, printed by William Jones at London, 1629, and Alexander Grosart’s D. N. B. life.

NOTE 19 In his notebook poetry Gager writes rather obscurely of some Christ Church fiscal scandal involving courtiers, expressing his irritation at Mathew for being unable to suppress it (after Mathew left the scandal continued unabated and Gager went on fuming). See particularly poem CXXI, an item entitled Wulsaei Umbra. At a guess, some members of the Christ Church chapter were renting out college lands to courtiers at knocked-down rates in exchange for absentee ecclesiastical livings, a common academic scam. Presumably the courtiers in question were too highly placed to be defeated. To give another example involving a member of Eedes’ circle of Christ Church friends, Martin Heton’s later rule over the see of Ely (commencing in 1601) was seriously tainted by similar issues. Cf. James Bentham, History and Antiquity of the Cathedral Church of Ely (Cambridge, 1771) 195 - 7.

NOTE 20 J. B. Black, The Reign of Elizabeth, 1558 - 1603 (Oxford, 1936). A more detailed account is furnished by Conyers Read, Mr. Secretary Walsingham (Oxford, 1925) II.204 - 24, though Read does not mention Walsingham’s stopover at Durham on the way back from Scotland. Source documents emanating from Walsingham’s embassy may be read in Volume VI of William K. Boyd (ed.), Calendar of the State Papers Relating to Scotland and Mary Queen of Scots (Edinburgh, 1910).

NOTE 21 Cf. the charge issued to this commission on August 18, at Mary Anne Everett Greene (ed.), Calendar of State Papers (Domestic) (London, 1872, repr. Nendeln, 1967) XII.92 - 4.

NOTE 22 So the D. N. B. biography; some of his political reports are extant.

NOTE 23 But one must admit that the fact that Mathew assumed the Deanship under crisis conditions makes the leisure with which he moved up from Oxford difficult to understand.

NOTE 24 The next vacancy in the Christ Church chapter of Canons was reserved for Martin Heton, who soon became Sub-dean; Eedes got the following one.

NOTE 25 (February 11, 1576). Quoted by Surtees I.lxxxi.

NOTE 26 I. e., their travails, I suppose. (I cannot identify the Latin quote at the end of this passage.)

NOTE 27 For other poems he wrote at this time cf. Note 33.

NOTE 28 The oration may be read here.

NOTE 29 This word is not inappropriate: Harington, op. cit. I.228 wrote of his Christ Church supporters “[his] name grew so popular and plausible, that they thought it a derogation to their love, to adde any title of Doctor or Deane to it,” almost like Fabian or Prince.

NOTE 30 Gager’s commonplace book of unprinted poetry contains several items about Mathew’s departure from Oxford. One of them, written to Mathew when he was laid low by a fever (poem CXLIX), suggests that bad health may have been a reason why it took Mathew so long to remove to Durham, though one must also allow for winter weather and bad roads.

NOTE 31 This phrase comes from a biographical notice appended to the Bodleian Rawlinson ms., found also at Wood, A. O. II. 877.

NOTE 32 But it was written to be read rather than recited: a number of allusions would be virtually incomprehensible to a hearer without access to Eedes’ marginal annotations.

NOTE 33 Gager wrote a number of other items having to do with Mathew’s departure from Oxford (CXXXVIII - CXL, CXLIX, CL). The Aegloga ad Matthaeum (CL) was a major farewell poem unprinted in his lifetime, from which he later borrowed much material for the second of the two eclogues on the death of Sir Philip Sidney printed in the 1587 Oxford memorial anthology (XXXIV).


NOTE 35 Discussed by Binns, op. cit. 62ff.7

NOTE 36 The closest imitation is in the last two lines of the poem, sic coepit, sic clausit iter locus unus et idem, / quique dies conclusit iter, mihi carmina clausit, which may be compared with Horace’s conclusion, Brundisium longae finis chartae viaeque est.

NOTE 37 I have read Leland’s Itinerary in the edition of Lucy Toulmin Smith (Oxford, 1907 - 10, repr. Carbondale, Ill, 1964). A glance at Map I, included at the end of Vol. I, shows that he visited virtually all of the places mentioned by Eedes. Especially in Yorkshire and County Durham they often traveled over the same roads.

NOTE 38 I have consulted both Camden’s original 1586 edition and the expanded one of 1607; for the reader’s convenience, since the latter has been selected for modern reproduction (Hildesheim, 1970), page references for the 1607 version are cited. All of Camden’s words quoted here also stand in the 1586 edition.

NOTE 39 Reprinted Newton Abbot, Devonshire, 1970.

NOTE 40 The poem can be read in J. A. W. Bennett and H. R. Trevor-Roper (edd.), The Poems of Richard Corbett (Oxford, 1955) 31 - 49.

NOTE 41 Corbett’s editors thought this line may be corrupt. The gentlest emendation would be to change then to and.

NOTE 42 Hutten provided a living link with Eedes’ generation of Christ Church literati: William Gager had written a new prologue and epilogue for a performance of his 1581 Bellum Grammaticale in connection with the Queen’s 1592 Oxford visit; on the same occasion Hutten, Gager, and Matthew Gwinne, another member of Gager’s literary circle, were members of the entertainment committee.

NOTE 43 Like Eedes, Corbett wrote Iter Boreale purely for the amusement of his Christ Church audience: the poem has as a concluding colophon a couple of lines from Horace, Sermones I.iv, non recito cuiquam nisi amicis, idque coactus, / non ubivis, coramve quibuslibet.

NOTE 44 Ib. 118f.; they also mention John Earle’s manuscript poem Satyra Itineraria and further items cited by R. A. Aubin in his Topographical Poetry in Eighteenth Century England (New York, 1936).

NOTE 45 For the purpose of this discussion I do not take into account the fact that the sidenotes in these manuscripts are often quite different, which is possibly liable to a special explanation, given below.

NOTE 46 This process of omitting or telescoping lines may have been gradual rather than a phenomenon introduced at one time.

NOTE 47 This is why it is dangerous to rely overmuch on the evidence of sidenotes in ascertaining the history of the text: the considerable differences between B, C and W in this respect do not call into question the conclusion that these manuscripts are closely related.



Printed works

Aubin, R. A., Topographical Poetry in Eighteenth Century England (New York, 1936).

Bentham, James, History and Antiquity of the Cathedral Church of Ely (Cambridge, 1771).

Binns, J. W., Intellectual Culture in Elizabethan and Jacobean England: The Latin Writing of the Age (Leeds, 1990).

Black, J. B., The Reign of Elizabeth, 1558 - 1603 (Oxford, 1936).

Boas, Frederick S., University Drama in the Tudor Age (Oxford, 1914, reprinted New York, 1966).

Boggs, Edmund, Old Kingdom Emet: York and the Ainsty District (London, 1902).

Bonney, Margaret, Lordship and the Urban Community (Cambridge, U. K., 1990).

Bowen, Emmanuel and Thomas Kitchen, The Royal English Atlas (London, 1760, reprinted Newton Abbot, Devonshire, 1970).

Boyd, William K. (ed.), Calendar of the State Papers Relating to Scotland and Mary Queen of Scots (Edinburgh, 1910).

Bradner, Leicester, Musae Anglicanae: A History of Anglo-Latin Poetry 1500 - 1925 (New York, 1940, reprinted New York, 1966).

Burton, Elizabeth, The Elizabethans at Home (London, 1958).

Camden, William, Britannia, first edition printed by Ralph Newbery, London, 1586; final and considerably expanded edition printed by George Bishop and John Norton, London, 1607.

Carleton, Bishop George, The life of Bernard Gilpin, a man most holy and renowned among the northerne English (London, 1629).

Chambers, E. K., Sir Henry Lee (Oxford, 1936).

Child, Francis James, The English and Scottish Popular Ballads (Boston - New York, 1888 - 90).

Clark, The Rev. Andrew, Register of the University of Oxford (Oxford, 1887).

Corbett, Richard, The Poems of Richard Corbett (edd. J. A. W. Bennett and H. R. Trever-Roper, Oxford, 1955).

Cross, Claire, The Puritan Earl (London, 1966).

The Royal Supremacy in the Elizabethan Church (London - New York, 1969).

Defoe, Daniel, A Tour Thro’ the Whole Island of Great Britain (London, 1727, reprinted London, undated).

Eccles, Mark, “Barnabe Barnes” in C. J. Sisson (ed.) Thomas Lodge and Other Elizabethans (Cambridge, Mass., 1933, repr. New York, 1966) 165 - 242.

Eedes, Richard, Six learned and godly sermons (printed by A. Islip for E. Bishop, London, 1604).

Three sermons now published by R. Horn (printed by C. Meredith for P. Stevens, London, 1627).

Foster, Joseph, Alumni Oxonienses (London, 1891 - 92, reprinted Nendeln, Luxembourg, 1968).

The Visitation of Yorkshire made in the Years 1584/5 by Robert Glover, Somerset Herald (London, 1875).

Freer, W. H., The English Church in the Reigns of Elizabeth and James I (1558 - 1625) (London, 1905, reprinted New York, undated).

Fuller, Thomas, The History of the Worthies of England (ed. P. Austin Nutall, London, 1840, reprinted New York, 1965).

Gerard, John, The Herball or Generall Historie of Plants (London, 1633, repr. New York, 1973).

Greene, Mary Anne Everett (ed.), Calendar of State Papers (Domestic) (London, 1872, reprinted Nendeln, Luxembourg, 1967) vol. XII.

Harington, Sir John, A Briefe View of the State of the Church of England as it Stood in Q. Elizabeths and King James his Reigne, to the Yeere 1608, edited by his descendant John Harington under the title Nugae Antiquae (London, 1779, reprinted Hildesheim, 1968).

Hibbert, Christopher and Edward, The Encyclopaedia of Oxford (London, 1988).

Holinshed, Raphael, Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland (1587); I have consulted the London edition of 1807 - 8 (reprinted New York, 1965).

Kelley, J. N. D. The Oxford Dictionary of Popes (Oxford, 1986).

Leland, John, Itinerary (ed. Lucy Toulmin Smith, Oxford, 1907 - 10, reprinted Carbondale, Ill., 1964).

Lilliat, John, Liber Lillliati (ed. Edward Doughtie, Newark, N. J., 1985).

Melville, Sir James, Memoirs of His Own Life (Edinburgh, 1827).

Metcalfe, Walter C., The Visitations of Northamptonshire made in 1564 and 1618-19 (London, 1887).

Mussett, P., Lists of Deans and Major Canons of Durham 1541 - 1900 (Durham, 1974).

Nicholas, Sir Harris, Memoirs of the Life and Times of Sir Christopher Hatton, K. G. (London, 1847).

Page, William (ed.), The Victoria History of the County of Durham (London, 1968).

The Victoria History of the Country of Northamptonshire (London, 1970).

The Victoria History of the Counties of England: Yorkshire (London, 1974).

Poole, Mrs. Reginald Lane, Catalogue of Portraits in the Possession of the University, Colleges, City and County of Oxford (Oxford, 1927).

Read, Conyers, Mr. Secretary Walsingham (Oxford, 1925).

Reid, R. R., The King’s Council in the North (London - New York, 1921).

Rollins, Hyder Edward (ed.), The Phoenix Nest (Cambridge, Mass., 1931).

Ryder, Peter F., Medieval Buildings of Yorkshire (Ashbourne, Derbyshire, 1982).

Seccombe, Thomas and H. Spencer Scott (edd.), In Praise of Oxford: An Anthology in Prose and Verse (London, 1910).

Smart, John Semple, Shakespeare Truth and Tradition (London, 1928).

Strype, John, Annals of the Reformation and Establishment of Religion and Various Other Occurrences in the Church of England during Queen Elizabeth’s Happy Reign (Oxford, 1824, reprinted New York, undated).

Surtees, Robert, The History and Antiquities of the County Palatine of Durham (London, 1816 - 40, reprinted East Arsley, Wakefield, Yorkshire, 1972).

Tilmot, P. M. (ed.), A History of Yorkshire: The City of York (printed at London for the Oxford University Press, 1961).

Venn, John and J. A., Alumni Cantabrigienses (Cambridge, U. K., 1922 - 24).

Wood, Anthony à, Athenae Oxonienses, Fasti Oxonienses, and Life of Anthony à Wood (abbreviated A. O. and F. O., edited by Philip Bliss, London, 1813 - 22, reprinted Hildesheim, 1969).

Survey of the Antiquities of the City of Oxford Composed in 1661 - 6 (ed. the Reverend Andrew Clark, Oxford, 1899).

Yates, Frances A., John Florio (Cambridge U. K., 1934).

Manuscripts (by provenance)

London: British Library Additional ms. 22583, containing dramatic, poetic, and prose works by William Gager including Musa Australis.

London: British Library Additional ms. 30352, containing Richard Eedes’ Iter Boreale under the title Musae Boreales sive Iter Boreale, 1584.

: British Library ms. Harleian 6910, containing “Luigi Groto his New Philosophie Englished by Doct. Eedes.”

: Inner Temple ms. Petyt 538.43, containing a dialogue on love attributed to Richard Eedes in this manuscript (but to other writers elsewhere).

Oxford: Bodleian Library ms. Rawlinson B 223, containing Richard Eedes’ Iter Boreale and related material.

Oxford: Bodleian Library ms. Rawlinson Poet. 148, containing English poetry by Richard Eedes.

Oxford: Bodleian Library ms. Rawlinson Poet. 172, containing English poetry by Richard Eedes.

Oxford: Bodleian Library ms. Wood 8853, containing Richard Eedes’ Iter Boreale.

Oxford: Corpus Christi College ms. 309, containing Richard Eedes’ Iter Boreale.