earth, yet shortly she was to yield an account of her stewardship to the King of kings. After this, he began to pray, and all that were by did answer him. After he had continued long in prayer, till the old man's knees were weary, he blessed her, and meant to rise and leave her. The queen made a sign with her hand. My sister Scroop knowing her meaning, told the bishop that the queen desired he would pray still. He did so for a long half hour after, and then sought to leave her. The second time she made a sign to have him continue in prayer. He did so for the second time, with fervent cries to God for her soul's health; which he uttered with that fervency of spirit, that the queen, to all our sight, much rejoiced thereat; and gave testimony to us all of her Christian and comfortable end. By this time, it grew late, and every one departed; all but the women who attended her. This I heard with my ears, and did see with my eyes." Elizabeth then relapsed into a state of insensibility, in which she expired at three in the morning of March 24. At six the council assembled, when orders were issued that James should be proclaimed king, as next in succession by descent, and as having the sanction of the departed sovereign.

This was the end of queen Elizabeth, having lived nearly to the advanced age of seventy. She survived all the leading characters, whether popes, or kings, or nobles, who formed plots against her at the beginning or middle of her reign. Few monarchs have been more threatened with public and private violence, yet she was protected through the period declared to be the full allotment of the children of men. She knew from whence that protection came, never hesitating to declare, according to the words of the psalmist, "Thou, Lord, only makest me dwell in safety." Under all these threatenings she acted with this impression, neither increasing her guards, nor appearing less frequently in public. With Elizabeth ended the house or dynasty of Tudor, which had held the crown of England rather more than a century, through a period, eventful not

only for the rapid progress of the nation under their sway, but for the influence which the acts of their government had upon succeeding generations, not only in England, but throughout the world.

Something must be said of the personal character of Elizabeth: if she has been over praised by some, she has been most unfairly libelled by others. In person she was well formed, tall, and stately, "of lion port," as a contemporary describes her; upon the whole pleasing, though not possessing feminine beauty. In her twentieth year, the Venetian ambassador spoke of her person as large, but well formed; more pleasing than handsome, with fine eyes, a fine complexion of an olive tint, and a beautiful hand. Hentzner thus describes her in 1598, at the age of sixty-five: "Her face long and fair, but wrinkled; her eyes small, but black and gracious; her nose a little bent; her lips close; her teeth darkish; her hair tawny, but not her own. Her hands were thin, her fingers long, but her words mild and very courteous.'

Vanity was the prevailing foible of Elizabeth. Being far above mediocrity, both in personal and mental accomplishments, she was exposed to the deceptions of flattery, which induced her to take frequent opportunity for display, often so as to make herself an object of ridicule. This led sir Robert Cecil to speak of her as one "who was more than a man, and in truth sometimes less than a woman." Thus the ambassador for Scotland was admitted privately, and as if unexpectedly, that he might see her dance; and was then questioned as to the comparative beauty of herself and Mary! Upon this, and similar anecdotes, many have founded portentous tales, representing her conduct to that princess as the mere result of female jealousy, disappointed by the superior charms of another! But Elizabeth far surpassed Mary in mental powers and character, which raised her above the Scottish queen. Admitting, as we do, that Mary was treated with too much severity, still we need not resort to female vanity

for the reason. There were causes for that treatment far stronger, and more obvious than any such petty jealousy.

The chief weakness of Elizabeth was, that she took pleasure in being addressed in the romantic language of admiring love. This was the taste of the age, partly a relic of chivalry, but stimulated by the fondness of Elizabeth for it. It was, indeed, very absurd, and even worse; but there is no reason to suppose it proceeded from any grossness of mind, or that it degenerated into licentious practices. When, at the age of sixty, Raleigh compared the queen to Venus, it was only poetic nonsense; but it was being "less than woman to allow such nonsense to be uttered, unless, as probably was the case, she permitted those who uttered it to do so for their own amusement. The libels circulated respecting Elizabeth on this head are destitute of proof. They abounded in her own times, but proceeded from her popish assailants. The assertions retailed by Mary Stuart, in a well-known angry letter, as having been told her by the countess of Shrewsbury, Mary expressly says, she did not herself believe, and she had not long before appealed for protection against the slanderous assertions of lady Shrewsbury respecting herself. No dependence can be placed upon the assertions of one who is characterized by her husband as "his wicked and malicious wife;" repeated, probably with exaggerations, by an angry and vindictive woman, with the especial hope that Elizabeth might be induced to see her personally, from the hope of further disclosures. And that Allen was well paid for his slanders, appears from the fact, that by pursuing the contest with his sovereign, he, who at first was only a poor exiled priest, obtained the rank of a cardinal, with an income of fifteen thousand crowns, equal, as Turner says, to twenty thousand pounds of our money now-a pleasing result of persecution, purchased, not by his own sufferings, but those he instigated others to undergo! The tales of Elizabeth's public freedoms and levities do not corroborate

any worse reports-they rather contradict them; while it is evident, from her public rebukes of Leicester, when occasions arose, that she kept even her greatest favourites from any undue presumption. The French ambassador, De Castelnau, did not hesitate to say, that any imputations of improper attachment were inventions forged by malevolent persons; and this he stated, not in a public document or official communication-it stands written by him in his private memoirs, where no object could be served by any false statement on this head.

In addition to the female vanity already mentioned, and the inclination to coquetry which she indulged, Elizabeth had strong reasons for endeavouring to secure the personal regards of Leicester and others. As early as 1559, the year after her accession, the ambassador of the emperor sent her an express caution to be well guarded by her friends, for he knew it had been offered that she should be slain: we have seen how frequent these plots afterwards became. Even her sister Mary, without any well-grounded reason for alarm, had her chamber protected every night for a considerable period by armed men. How painful the situation of princes! how correct the numerous descriptions of their anxieties! There can be no doubt that Elizabeth secured this protection the better, by permitting Leicester and others to offer it on stronger grounds than those of mere duty, though she never allowed them to presume on her favour: but she coquetted with her admirers, or suitors, and has been reflected upon in consequence. She probably was ill-judged enough to think her influence increased by this course, when to her authority as queen apparently was added submission as to an object of love and admiration. She was not aware how much that seemed respect paid to her qualities as a female, was in reality homage paid to her rank; yet there can be no doubt that she possessed an influential power, no king would have been permitted to exercise.

Dismissing, then, the groundless charges of popish

H

malevolence, which have been thoroughly sifted by Turner and others, we have to censure Elizabeth's vanity, love of dress, and the freedom of language, abounding often in profane oaths, in which she indulged. Harrington records anecdotes which illustrate these: "One Sunday, my lord of London preached to the queen's majesty, and seemed to touch on the vanity of decking the body too finely. Her majesty told the ladies, that if the bishop held more discourse on such matters, she would fit him for heaven; but he should walk thither without a staff, and leave his mantle behind him.' Perchance, the bishop had never sought her highness's wardrobe, or he would have chosen an

other text.' In 1601, he says, "Her highness swears much at those that cause her grief, in such wise, to the no small discomfiture of all about her." This language may be said to be derived from her father, Henry VIII., whom she strongly resembled in many of the qualities of her mind, especially the love of sway. Whether the desire to rule, or any other cause, determined her against marriage, it is plain, that from the first she was disinclined to matrimony. Her independent spirit never would allow even her most esteemed minister to interfere with her sovereign will and pleasure; yet she had the good sense and wisdom to select wise councillors, and to form her decisions upon their opinions.

Latterly, the queen was very irresolute when pressed to decide. Harrington tells us, "By art and nature together so blended, it was difficult to find her right humour at any time. Her wisest men and best councillors were oft sore troubled to know her will in matters of state, so covertly did she pass her judgment as seemed to leave all to their discreet management; and when the business did turn to their better advantage, she did most cunningly commit the good issue to her own honour and understanding; but when aught fell out contrary to her will and intent, the council were in great strait to defend their own acting, and not blemish the queen's good judgment."