A few things only kept me from my books, and so careless was I of human society that I hardly noticed how my acquaintanceship was diminishing. Lower slowly transferred himself to London and was so successful that (favoured by the patronage of Clarendon and the death of many serious rivals) he soon became the most successful physician in the country, was given a place at court and took to having not only a fine house but even a coach with his family crest on the door – for which he was criticised greatly by those who thought it a presumptuous display. It did him no harm, however, for the wealthy and well born like to be treated by those they consider of proper background. On top of all this, he even paid his sisters’ dowries and re-established his family in Dorset, for which he was greatly admired. But while he published his great work on the brain, he never did any serious investigation again. All that he considered truly noble, the pursuit of knowledge through experiment, he abandoned in search of worldly gain. I alone, I think, understood the sorrow of this, that what the world considered success was, in Lower’s mind, waste and a failure.
As for Mr Boyle, he also went to London and, I think, came to Oxford only twice more in his life. A greater loss to the town could not be imagined for, even though he was never of the university, yet his presence illuminated it, and brought it renown. That fame he took with him when he left, and in London he built on it incessantly with a never-ending stream of ingenuity which has guaranteed that his name will live for ever. Locke also left, once he found himself a suitable sinecure, and he too abandoned experiment for the world, although in his case he became so involved in the most dangerous form of politics that his position is for ever shaky. He may, one day, achieve fame through his writings, but he may equally become so swept up in events that he ends on the gallows if he dares return to these shores from his exile. That remains to be seen.
Mr Ken, as was inevitable, gained the living that would have been Dr Grove’s had that man lived, and thus was perhaps the only man to benefit from the tragedies I relate. He became a good man, of moderate religion and noted for his charity. All this came as something of a surprise to me, but occasionally, I feel, people rise up to match the dignity of their office, rather than dragging its honour down to their own level. It happens only rarely, but often enough for reassurance. And, for the general good of all mankind, he gave up playing the viol through being too busy with his duties, and we must all thank those who gave him a bishopric for visiting this kindness on God’s creation.
Thurloe died a few years after, and took his secrets to the grave – except for those which, I believe, are among the papers he hid somewhere when he first felt illness coming upon him. He was the strangest of men, and I regret very much not knowing him. I am convinced that he not only knew all the secrets of which I talk, he was instrumental in guiding many of the government’s actions in those days. This may seem remarkable considering his devotion to Cromwell, but he served that great man because he brought order to our poor country, and he worshipped order and civilised quiet far more than he reverenced men, king or commoner.
Dr Wallis changed little, but became ever more irascible and violent as his eyesight deteriorated. Apart from myself he is the only one, I think, who is still living the same life now as then. Publications – on English grammar, on how to teach the mute to talk, on the most obscure and incomprehensible forms of mathematics which no one but he and a half-dozen others in the world can understand – flow from his pen, and from his mouth comes a matching stream of criticism and abuse of those colleagues that he always believes to be his worthless rivals. He has many admirers, and no friends. I have no doubt he continues his work for the government, for his skills in decipherment are as great as ever. Now Thurloe is dead, and Bennet has faded from power as all men of politics are bound to do, only the old king knows the true secret of how Wallis was deceived, lied to, and made a fool.
And myself. For, on my own and unaided, I deciphered that letter which Wallis intercepted on its way to Cola in the Low Countries, and laid bare the entire secret it contained. It was not easy. As I say, I avoided even looking at it for a long time, and did not seriously engage myself until well after the plague and the fire of London, which filled Oxford once again with poor frightened people trying to escape destruction. I was frightened myself, and it was only when I was certain from several months of inactivity that the matter was forgotten by all concerned that I removed the papers from my secret hiding place underneath the floorboard in my room, and began to examine them.
That was only the start, of course. What Dr Wallis could have done in a few hours took me many weeks, as I had to search out books in many places before I understood the principles involved. The simple explanation which Wallis gives in his manuscript would have saved me much pain and labour had I possessed it then, but he was the one person I could not ask. None the less, I eventually grasped what was required through my own efforts. The letter starting the code every twenty-five characters was not the next letter in the text, nor the first letter of the next word, but the next letter which had been underlined. It sounds simple, and thus explained it is so: so simple a soldier on campaign could write it up in an instant, given the right book. That was the point of it.
And so, once this marvellous discovery had come to my mind, the whole secret of those letters was revealed to me after a morning’s labour. And it took many months more before I could believe what I had read.
I have destroyed everything, as I promised. Only one copy of the translation I made is in existence, and I will destroy that, along with this manuscript of mine, when I know my last illness is upon me. I have asked Mr Tanner, a young librarian and scholar of my acquaintance, to arrange my estate on my death and this will be part of his duties. He is a good, and honest man, who will keep his word. Let it not be said that I have broken faith with anyone, or revealed anything which should be kept in the dark.
The letter, written in code to Andrea da Cola by Henry Bennet, Secretary of State and (the greatest joke of all) employer of Dr Wallis, read as follows, after the usual introductory remarks:
The matter discussed in our recent correspondence is now come to fruition, and His Majesty has indicated his desire to be received, as soon as possible, into the Church of Rome, this being in full conformity with his true faith and belief. I am instructed that a priest who can be relied on be sent in the most total secrecy to fulfil his wishes, and I very much hope you will take this task on yourself, since you are already well known to us and trusted. It will be understood that the greatest disaster would result should any of this become known; rather, a steady policy to loosen the ties which bind Catholics will be adopted, and hatred insensibly reduced over a period of years, before any public acknowledgement can be made. At present, all that can be done will be done, as a gesture of intent. The king will try to persuade Parliament to allow greater toleration of Catholics, and is confident that this first step will lead to many others, before the reunification of the churches can proceed. An emissary, Mr Boulton, will travel to Rome once the reception is accomplished, to discuss the manner and style which will be needed.
As for yourself, dear Father, you may travel in peace to this land; although no official protection can be offered you for obvious reasons, we will endeavour to ensure your safe keeping, and make sure your identity does not become known.
The king of England, the supreme governor of the Protestant Church of England, is, and has been since 1663, a professed Catholic, acknowledged in secret and taking the rites of the Catholic Church. His chief minister, Mr Bennet, was also a Catholic, and had as his secret policy the destruction of that national church he was sworn to protect. Far from a failed assassination attempt, Cola came to England to receive the king into the Church of Rome and, I believe, did so when he went to Whitehall that evening with his holy oil, his crucifix and his relic.
And all along Wallis had his obsessions, and Henry Bennet listened, and encouraged him, so that not only did the story never emerge into the light of day, it wou
ld be more obscured than ever. I am sure (but have no proof) that it was Bennet who ordered the destruction of Wallis’s servant Matthew to ensure the secret was guarded, for I do not believe that Cola could have done such a thing: he was not a man of violence, while the cutting of throats had all the hallmarks of the man John Cooth, whom Wallis himself employed on occasion.
If I published this letter, or even delivered it in secret to someone like Dr Wallis, the monarchy of this country would come to an end within a week, consumed by civil war, so great is the present public detestation of all things Roman. Wallis’s wrath at the humiliation he suffered would be so great he would whip up a campaign of such vitriol that the Protestants of England would soon be on the march, baying for the blood of another king. If I had gone to the king himself I could have been a wealthy man, living in comfort for the rest of my days, for the value of this paper – or its continued obscurity – is beyond price.
I will not do so, for how paltry all this is to a man who has seen such marvels, and felt such grace, as I have seen and felt. I do believe and know that I have seen and heard and touched the incarnate God. Quietly, out of sight of mankind, divine forgiveness descends again, and we are so blind we do not even realise what inexhaustible patience and love is ours. Thus it happened, and has happened in every generation and will happen again in every generation to come, that a beggar, a cripple, a child, a madman, a criminal or a woman is born Lord of us all in entire obscurity, and is spurned and ignored and killed by us to expiate our sins. And I am commanded to tell no one, and I will keep that one commandment.
This is the truth, the one and only truth, manifest, complete and perfect. Besides it, what importance have the dogma of priests, the strength of kings, the rigour of scholars or the ingenuity of our men of science?
Mr Tanner sorted all the papers, some of which Mr Wood laid by in order to be burnt when he himself should give the sign. When he himself found himself ready to leave this world, he gave the sign, and Mr Tanner burnt those papers which were put by for that intent.
Thomas Hearne, account of Anthony à Wood,
Athenae Oxoniensis, 3rd edition (London 1813),
vol. I, p. CXXXIV
Dramatis Personae
* * *
John AUBREY (1626–97). Antiquary and gossip, a man of great knowledge and few publications. Best known now for his Brief Lives, a set of character sketches of contemporaries. He was interested in all branches of learning, lived in constant financial difficulties and was a member of the Royal Society from 1663 onwards.
Henry BENNET (1628–85). Created Baron Arlington 1663, then Earl of Arlington, 1672. ‘A man whose practices have not left his character free from reproach. The deficiency of his integrity was forgotten in the decency of his dishonesty . . . he lived a protestant in his outward profession, but died a catholic.’ Ambassador to Spain, then appointed Secretary of State (effectively Foreign Minister) in October 1662; impeached for promotion of Catholicism in 1674 and dismissed from office.
Sarah BLUNDY – fictitious. The account of her trial and execution is based on that of Anne Greene, hanged in Oxford in 1655.
Robert BOYLE (1627–91). The ‘Father of Chemistry’, fourteenth child of the fabulously wealthy Earl of Cork, discoverer of ‘Boyle’s Law’, describing the relationship between the elasticity and pressure of gases. In the Sceptical Chemist he used the word element in its modern sense for the first time; speculated about the existence of atoms. Thought himself to be as much a theologian as scientist and was keenly interested in alchemy as well as modern chemistry.
George Digby, Earl of BRISTOL (1622–77). Long-time supporter of Charles II, who was denied office on the Restoration because of his Catholicism. Formerly a close friend of Clarendon, he spent the 1660s plotting against him, and in particular launched a badly planned and abortive attainder on corruption charges in 1663 after failure to secure a Spanish alliance. No one supported the move and Bristol had to flee into exile. Returned to conspire in the downfall of Clarendon in 1667.
CHARLES II (1630–85). Succeeded by the openly Catholic James II, who was forced off the throne by the Glorious Revolution of 1688. Lived in exile in France, Spain and the Low Countries until the Restoration of 1660. Charles’s negotiations of 1663 to be received into the Catholic church were first published in the Monthly Review (13 December 1903).
Edward Hyde, Earl of CLARENDON (1609–74). Lord Chancellor and effective Prime Minister after the Restoration of Charles II. Clarendon was the king’s most loyal supporter, having been with him throughout his exile. His position weakened when his daughter Anne married the king’s brother without permission, but he survived in power until 1667, when he was forced into exile and supplanted by Henry Bennet, Baron Arlington.
George COLLOP. Of Dorset, receiver-general for the Duke of Bedford from 1661 until his death in 1682, and overseer of the later phases of the drainage schemes which converted huge parts of Lincolnshire into farmland.
Sir William COMPTON (1625–63). Royalist soldier and conspirator, knighted 1643. Described by Oliver Cromwell as ‘a sober young man and godly cavalier’. Imprisoned for plotting against the Commonwealth in 1655 and 1658, died London 1663 and buried at Compton Wynyates, Warwickshire.
John CROSSE. Oxford apothecary, now mainly known to history as Robert Boyle’s landlord while in the city.
Valentine GREATOREX (aka Greatrakes). Irish faith-healer, who came to England and used a technique of stroking to heal victims of scrofula and other ailments. Believed his ability to cure was a special gift from God. His success impressed Boyle and others, and he achieved some success among the English aristocracy. ‘A strange fellow, full of talk of devils and witches.’ Subsequently resumed career in Ireland as Justice of the Peace and landowner.
Robert GROVE (1610–63). Fellow and ‘amateur astrologer’ of New College, Oxford. ‘Mar 30, being Munday, Mr Robert Grove, senior fellow of New Coll., died. [He] was buried in the west cloister of that Coll.’ Anthony Wood, Life and Times, vol.1, p. 471. Previously expelled from his Fellowship in 1648 for Royalist sympathies and only returned in 1661.
Thomas KEN (1637–1711). Bishop of Bath and Wells, lecturer in logic and mathematics, New College, Oxford, 1661–3, then presented to living of Easton Parva by Lord Maynard and built up a reputation for piety and charity. A noted preacher, he was made a bishop in 1684. Opposed James II’s Catholic policies, then also opposed his deposition, for which he was deprived of his see by William III after the revolution of 1688.
John LOCKE (1632–1704). Probably the greatest philosopher in the English language, Locke’s work defined English political thought for more than a century. He was trained as a doctor, before becoming tutor in the family of the Earl of Shaftesbury – a man who was imprisoned for opposition to the government in the 1670s. Locke lived in Holland from 1683 to 1688, when the accession of William III made it safe for him to return. Author of Essay Concerning Toleration, Essay on Human Understanding, Two Treatises on Government.
Richard LOWER (1631–91). Physician and physiologist, friend of Anthony Wood and the most successful London doctor of his generation. One of the kernel of the Oxford group who founded the Royal Society but not a member until 1667. Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians 1675, but career damaged by his political affiliations and did not recover properly until the revolution of 1688. Conducted experiments on transfusion in the 1660s, published Tractatus de Corde (1669).
Thomas LOWER (1633–1720). Brother of Richard and Quaker, married stepdaughter of George Fox; imprisoned 1673 and 1686, had interest in Quaker settlements and property in America.
Count PATRICIODI MOLODI, Spanish Ambassador to England 1662–7.
John MORDAUNT, Baron Mordaunt (1627–75). Second son of the first Earl of Peterborough, sent abroad for his education, then became leading Royalist conspirator. Arrested 1658 and acquitted at his trial. Appointed Constable of Windsor Castle at the Restoration, but was impeached in parliament in 1666 and never attained high government offi
ce. Spent his last years embroiled in a legal dispute with members of his family.
Sir Samuel MORLAND (1625–95). Diplomat and inventor, clerk to Secretary of State Thurloe 1654 and accredited by Cromwell to lead mission to Savoy in 1655. Switched sides in 1659 by identifying traitor in Royalist ranks, knighted on the Restoration. Made calculating machine in 1663 and experimented with pumps and early steam engines from the 1660s onwards. Consultant on water supply to Louis XIV at Versailles, 1681.
Jack PRESTCOTT – fictitious. His story, and that of his father, is based on the disgrace and exile of Sir Richard Willys for treason in 1660. Willys’s son later died insane.
Sir John RUSSELL (d.1687). Leading member of the ‘Sealed Knot’, a group of active Royalists in England which plotted ceaselessly and fruitlessly in the 1650s to overthrow Cromwell and bring back the king.
Peter STAHL (d.1675). ‘The noted chimist and Rosicrucian Peter Stahl of Strasburgh in Royal Prussia was a Lutheran and a great hater of women, [and] a very useful man . . . he was brought to Oxon by Mr Robert Boyle, an. 1659 . . . About the beginning of the year 1663 he removed his elaboratory to a draper’s house in the parish of Allsaints. In the yeare following, he was called away to London, died there about 1675, and was buried in the church of St Clement Danes.’ Anthony Wood, Life and Times, vol.1, p.473.