Chapter 1

Awdeley’s Fraternitye of Vacabondes, Harman’s Caueat, Haben’s Sermon,
&c.; Edited by Edward Viles and Frederick James Furnivall; Authored by
John Awdeley (flourished 1559–1577), Thomas Harman (active 1567), and
Parson Haben (or Hyberdyne). Published in 1869 for the Early English
Text Society, by Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press.

Awdeley’s

Fraternitye of Vacabondes,

Harman’s Caueat,

Haben’s Sermon, &c.

――――

Early English Text Society.

Extra Series. No. IX.

1869.

The Fraternitye of Vacabondes

BY JOHN AWDELEY

(LICENSED IN 1560–1, IMPRINTED THEN, AND IN 1565)

FROM THE EDITION OF 1575 IN THE BODLEIAN LIBRARY.

――――

A Caueat or Warening for Commen Cursetors
vulgarely called Vagabones

BY THOMAS HARMAN ESQUIERE,

FROM THE 3RD EDITION OF 1567, BELONGING TO HENRY HUTH, ESQ.

COLLATED WITH THE 2ND EDITION OF 1567 IN THE BODLEIAN
LIBRARY, OXFORD, AND WITH THE REPRINT OF THE
4TH EDITION OF 1573.

――――

A Sermon in Praise of Thieves and Thievery

BY PARSON HABEN OR HYBERDYNE,

FROM THE LANSDOWNE MS. 98, AND COTTON VESP. A. 25.

――――

THOSE PARTS OF
The Groundworke of Conny-catching (ed. 1592)
THAT DIFFER FROM _HARMAN’S CAUEAT_.

――――

EDITED BY
EDWARD VILES & F. J. FURNIVALL.

――――

LONDON:

PUBLISHED FOR THE EARLY ENGLISH TEXT SOCIETY

BY HUMPHREY MILFORD, OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

AMEN HOUSE, E.C. 4

[_Reprinted 1898, 1937._]

Extra Series, IX.

――――

CONTENTS.

PAGE

Preface i

AWDELEY’S _Fraternitye_, not plagiarized from, but
published ‘a fewe yeares’ before, Harman’s _Caueat_ i

HARMAN’S _Caueat_: two states of the 2nd edition. The
latter, now called the 3rd edition, is reprinted here iv

Piraters from Harman: Bynnyman, and G. Dewes vi

Short account of Thomas Harman vii

HARRISON’S quotation of Harman, and his account of
English Vagabonds, and the punishments for them xi

_The Groundworke of Conny-catching_ is a reprint of
Harman’s _Caueat_, with an Introduction xiv

DEKKER’S _Belman of London_: its borrowings from Harman xiv

S. ROWLANDS’S _Martin Mark-all_ shows up Dekker, and has
new Cant words xvi

DEKKER’S _Lanthorn and Candle-light_ borrows from
Harman: Canting Song from it xix

_The Caterpillers of this Nation anatomized_ xxi

_A Warning for Housebreakers_ xxi

_Street Robberies consider’d_ xxii

Parson HABEN’S or HYBERDYNE’S _Sermon in Praise of
Thieves and Thievery_ xxiv

Shares in the present work xxiv

1. Awdeley’s Fraternitye of Vacabondes, _with_ the .xxv.
Orders of Knaues (p. 12–16) 1–16

2. Harman’s Caueat or Warrening for Commen
Cvrsetors vulgarely called Vagabones 17–91

3. Parson Haben’s (or Hyberdyne’s) Sermon in Praise of
Thieves and Thievery 92–95

4. The Groundwork of Conny-catching: those parts that are
not reprinted from Harman’s _Caueat_ 96–103

5. Index 104–111

{i}

PREFACE.

If the ways and slang of Vagabonds and Beggars interested Martin Luther
enough to make him write a preface to the _Liber Vagatorum_[1] in
1528, two of the ungodly may be excused for caring, in 1869, for the
old Rogues of their English land, and for putting together three of
the earliest tracts about them. Moreover, these tracts are part of the
illustrative matter that we want round our great book on Elizabethan
England, Harrison’s _Description of Britain_, and the chief of them is
quoted by the excellent parson who wrote that book.

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,[2] and ought to have been included by
Ritson in his _Bibliographica Poetica_. (Registers of the Stationers’
Company, A.D. 1848, vol. i. p. 23.)

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 . . . . iiij^d.

“[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, [3]†as well of women as of men,
†and as well of gyrles as of boyes, with their proper names and
qualityes. Also the xxv. orders of knaves, otherwise called a quartten
of knawes. Confirmed this yere by Cocke Lorel.’ The edition without
date mentioned by Dibdin (iv. 564) may have been that of the entry.
Another impression by Awdeley, dated 1575 [which we reprint] is
reviewed in the _British Bibliographer_, ii. 12, where it is asserted
(as is very probable, though we are without distinct evidence of
the fact) that the printer was the compiler of the book, and he
certainly introduces it by three six-line stanzas. If this work came
out originally in 1561, according to the entry, there is no doubt
that it was the precursor of a very singular series of tracts on the
same subject, which will be noticed in their proper places.]”—J. P.
Collier, _Registers_, i. 42.

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:

Awdeley. Harman.
¶ A PATRIARKE CO. there is a PATRICO . . .
A Patriarke Co doth _make mariages_, whiche in their language is a
& that is _vntill death priest, that should _make
depart_ the maried folke. mariages tyll death dyd depart_.

And surely no doubt on the point will remain in his mind, though, if
needed, a few more confirmations could be got, as

Awdeley (p. 4). Harman (p. 44).
¶ A PALLIARD. ¶ A Pallyard.
A Palliard is he that goeth in a These Palliardes . . go with patched
patched cloke, and hys Doxy clokes, and haue their Morts with
goeth in like apparell. them.

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,[4]—and must (I conclude) have
contained less than the second, as in that’s ‘Harman to the Reader,’ p.
28, below, he says ‘well good reader, I meane not to be tedyous vnto
the, but haue added fyue or sixe more tales, because some of them weare
doune whyle my booke was fyrste in the presse.’ He speaks again of his
first edition at p. 44, below, ‘I had the best geldinge stolen oute of
my pasture, that I had amongst others, whyle this boke was _first a
printynge_;’ and also at p. 51, below, ‘Apon Alhol enday in the morning
last anno domini 1566, or my booke was halfe printed, I meane _the
first impression_.’ All Hallows’ or All Saints’ Day is November 1.

The edition called the second[5], also bearing date in 1567, is known
to us in two states, the latter of which I have called the third
edition. The first state of the second edition is shown by the Bodleian
copy, which is ‘Augmented and inlarged by the fyrst author here of,’
and has, besides smaller differences specified in the footnotes in
our pages, this great difference, that the arrangement of ‘The Names
of {v} the Vpright Men, Roges, and Pallyards’ is not alphabetical, by
the first letter of the Christian names, as in the second state of the
second edition (which I call the third edition), but higgledy-piggledy,
or, at least, without attention to the succession of initials either of
Christian or Sur-names, thus, though in three columns:

¶ VPRIGHT MEN.

Richard Brymmysh.
John Myllar.
Wel arayd Richard.
John Walchman.
Wyllia_m_ Chamborne.
Bryan Medcalfe.
Robert Gerse.
Gryffen.
Richard Barton.
John Braye.
Thomas Cutter.
Dowzabell skylfull in fence.
[&c.]

¶ ROGES.

Harry Walles with the little mouth.
John Waren.
Richard Brewton.
Thomas Paske.
George Belbarby.
Humfrey Warde.
Lytle Robyn.
Lytle Dycke.
Richard Iones.
Lambart Rose.
Harry Mason.
Thomas Smithe with the skal skyn.
[&c.]

¶ PALLYARDS.

Nycholas Newton carieth a fayned lycence.
Bashforde.
Robart Lackley.
Wylliam Thomas.
Edward Heyward, hath his Morte following hym Whiche fayneth y^e crank.
Preston.
Robart Canloke.
[&c.]

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 co_m_mytted 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 . . . iiij^d.

“[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 . . . iij^s.

“[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 iij^{li}. vij^s. viij^d., wherto was
Recevyd of garrad dewes for pryntinge of the boke of Rogges in a^o
1567 . . . ij^{li}. vj^s. viij^d.

“[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[6];—he knew Latin—see his comment on
Cursetors and Vagabone, p. 27; his _una voce_, p. 43; perhaps his
‘Argus eyes,’ p. 54; his _omnia venalia Rome_, p. 60; his _homo_, p.
73; he quotes St Augustine (and the Bible), p. 24; &c.;—he studied
the old Statutes of the Realm (p. 27); he liked proverbs (see the
Index); he was once ‘in commission of the peace,’ as he says, and
judged malefactors, p. 60, though he evidently was not a Justice when
he wrote his book; he was a ‘gentleman,’ says Harrison (see p. xii.
below); ‘a Iustice of Peace in Kent,[7] in Queene Marie’s daies,’ says
Samuel Rowlands;[8] he bore arms (of heraldry), and had them duly
stamped on his pewter dishes (p. 35); he had at least one old ‘tennant
who customably a greate tyme went twise in the weeke to London, (over
Blacke Heathe) eyther wyth fruite or with pescoddes’ (p. 30); he
hospitably asked his visitors to dinner (p. 45); he had horses in his
pasture,[9] the best gelding of which the Pryggers of Prauncers prigged
(p. 44); he had an unchaste cow that went to bull every month (p. 67,
if his ownership is not chaff here); he had in his ‘well-house on
the backe side of {ix} his house, a great cawdron of copper’ which
the beggars stole (p. 34–5); he couldn’t keep his linen on his hedges
or in his rooms, or his pigs and poultry from the thieves (p. 21); he
hated the ‘rascal rabblement’ of them (p. 21), and ‘the wicked parsons
that keepe typlinge Houses in all shires, where they haue succour and
reliefe’; and, like a wise and practical man, he set himself to find
out and expose all their ‘vndecent, dolefull [guileful] dealing, and
execrable exercyses’ (p. 21) to the end that they might be stopt, and
sin and wickedness might not so much abound, and thus ‘this Famous
Empyre be in more welth, and better florysh, to the inestymable joye
and comfort’ of his great Queen, Elizabeth, and the ‘vnspeakable
. . reliefe and quietnes of minde, of all her faythfull Commons and
Subiectes.’ The right end, and the right way to it. We’ve some like you
still, Thomas Harman, in our Victorian time. May their number grow!

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,[10]
and {x} who likewise purchased an estate called Maystreet here, of
Cowley and Bulbeck, of Bulbeck-street in this parish, in the 20th
year of King Edward IV.[11] On his decease, William Harman, his son,
possessed both these estates.[12] On his decease they descended to
Thomas Harman, esq., his son; who, among others, procured his lands
to be disgavelled, by the act of the 2 & 3 Edw. VI.[13] He married
Millicent, one of the daughters of Nicholas Leigh, of Addington, in
the county of Surry, esq.[14] His descendant, William Harman, sold
both these places in the reign of K. James I. to Robert Draper,
esqr.”—_History of Kent_, vol. i. p. 209.

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.[15] And as he gives a statement of the sharp
punishment enacted for idle rogues and vagabonds by the Statutes of
Elizabeth, I take a long extract from his said chapter. After speaking
of those who are made ‘beggers through other mens occasion,’ and
denouncing the grasping landlords ‘who make them so, and wipe manie
out of their occupiengs,’ Harrison goes on to those who are beggars
‘through their owne default’ (p. 183, last line of col. 1, ed. 1586):

“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 [16]†are in the
beginning† iustlie to be referred either to the first or second sort
of poore †afore mentioned†; but, degenerating into the thriftlesse
sort, they doo what they can to continue their miserie; and, with such
impediments as they haue, to straie and wander about, as creatures
abhorring all labour and euerie honest excercise. Certes, I call these
casuall meanes, not in respect of the originall of their pouertie,
but of the continuance of the same, from whence they will not be
deliuered, such[17] is their owne vngratious lewdnesse and froward
disposition. The voluntarie meanes proceed from outward causes, as by
making of corosiues, and applieng the same to the more fleshie parts
of their bodies; and also laieng of ratsbane, sperewort, crowfoot,
and such like vnto their whole members, thereby to raise pitifull[18]
and odious sores, and mooue †the harts of† the goers by such places
where they lie, to [19]‡yerne at‡ their miserie, and therevpon† bestow
large almesse vpon them.[20] How artificiallie they beg, what forcible
speech, and how they select and choose out words of vehemencie,
whereby they doo in maner coniure or adiure the goer by to pitie
their cases, I passe ouer to remember, as iudging the name of God
and Christ to be more conuersant in the mouths of none, and yet the
presence of the heuenlie maiestie further off from no men than from
this vngratious companie. Which maketh me to thinke, that punishment
is farre meeter for them than liberalitie or almesse, and sith Christ
willeth vs cheeflie to haue a regard to himselfe and his poore members.

“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[21] they will be like seruing men
or laborers: oftentimes they can plaie the mariners, and seeke for
ships which they neuer lost.[22] But, in fine, they are all theeues
and caterpillers in the commonwealth, and, by the word of God not
permitted to eat, sith they doo but licke the sweat from the true
laborers’ browes, _and_ beereue the godlie poore of that which is
due vnto them, to mainteine their excesse, consuming the charitie of
well-disposed people bestowed vpon them, after a most wicked[23] _and_
detestable maner.

“It is not yet full threescore [24] yeares since this trade began:
but how it hath prospered since that time, it is easie to iudge; for
they are now supposed, of one sex and another, to amount vnto aboue
10,000 persons, as I haue heard reported. Moreouer, in counterfeiting
the Egyptian roges, they haue deuised a language among themselues,
which they name _Canting_ (but other pedlers French)—a speach compact
thirtie yeares since of English, and a great number of od words of
their owne deuising, without all order or reason: and yet such is
it as none but themselues are able to vnderstand. The first deuiser
thereof was hanged by the necke,—a iust reward, no doubt, for his
deserts, and a common end to all of that
profession. A gentleman, also, of late hath taken great paines to
search out the secret practises of this vngratious rabble. And among
other things he setteth downe and describeth [25]§three _and_ twentie§
sorts of them, whose names it shall not be amisse to remember, wherby
ech one may [26]*take occasion to read and know as also by his
industrie* what wicked people they are, and what villanie remaineth in
them.

“The seuerall disorders and degrees amongst our idle vagabonds:—

1. Rufflers.
2. Vprightmen.
3. Hookers or Anglers.
4. Roges.
5. Wild Roges.
6. Priggers of Prancers.
7. Palliards.
8. Fraters.
9. Abrams.
10. Freshwater mariners, or Whipiacks.
11. Dummerers.
12. Drunken tinkers.
13. Swadders, or Pedlers.
14. Iarkemen, or Patricoes.

Of Women kinde—

1. Demanders for glimmar, or fire.
2. Baudie Baskets.
3. Mortes.
4. Autem mortes.
5. Walking mortes.
6. Doxes.
7. Delles.
8. Kinching Mortes.
9. Kinching cooes.[27]

{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[28] children,
[29]††burning, breaking and disfiguring their lims to make them
pitifull in the sight of the people,†† I need not to rehearse; but for
their idle roging about the countrie, the law ordeineth this maner of
correction. The roge being apprehended, committed to prison, and tried
in the next assises (whether they be of gaole deliuerie or sessions
of the peace) if he happen to be conuicted for a vagabond either
by inquest of office, or the testimonie of two honest and credible
witnesses vpon their oths, he is then immediatlie adiudged to be
greeuouslie whipped and burned through the gristle of the right eare,
with an hot iron of the compasse of an inch about, as a manifestation
of his wicked life, and due punishment receiued for the same. And this
iudgement is to be executed vpon him, except some honest person woorth
fiue pounds in the queene’s books in goods, or twentie shillings in
lands, or some rich housholder to be allowed by the iustices, will
be bound in recognisance to reteine him in his seruice for one whole
yeare. If he be taken the second time, and proued to haue forsaken
his said seruice, he shall then be whipped againe, bored likewise
through the other eare and set to seruice: from whence if he depart
before a yeare be expired, and happen afterward to be attached
againe, he is condemned to suffer paines of death as a fellon (except
before excepted) without benefit of clergie or sanctuarie, as by the
statute dooth appeare.