FOOLS AND JESTERS.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XV, Issue V, 3 August 1895, Page 129

FOOLS AND JESTERS.

THE OLD AND THE NEW.

THE class of fools, buffoons, and jesters, which reached its culminating point of influence during

the middle ages, appears to have existed in one form or another in all times and in all countries. Not only have there always been individuals naturally inclined and endowed to amuse others ; there has been besides in most communities a definite class, the members of which have used their powers or weaknesses in this direction as a means of getting a livelihood.

A NINETEENTH CENTURY JESTER.

Savage jugglers, medicine men, and even priests have certainly much in common with the jester by profession. There existed in ancient Greece a distinct class of professed fools, whose habits were not essentially different from those of the jesters of the middle ages. Of the behaviour of one of these, named Philip, Zenephon has given a picturesque account in The Banquet. Philip of Macedon is said to have possessed a Court fool, and certainly these —as well as Court philosophers, with whom they have been not unreasonably confounded —were common in a number of the petty courts at the era of civilization. Scuvice and morioles were the women counterparts of the mediaeval witty fools, and during the empire the manufacture of human monstrosities was a regular practice, slaves of this kind being much in request to relieve the languid hours. Tlje jester, again, has from time immemorial existed at Eastern Courts. Witty stories are told of Vahalul, the jester of Haroun'Al Rashid, which have long had a place in Western fiction. On the conquest of Mexico, court fools and deformed human creatures of all kinds were found at the Court of Montezuma. But that monarch, no doubt, hit upon one great cause of the favour of monarchs for this class when he said that ‘ more instruction was to be gathered from them than from wiser men, for they dared to tell the truth.’

Mr Douce, in his essay on the 1 Clowns ami Fools of Shakespeare,’ has made a ninefold division of English fools according to quality and place of employment, as the domestic fool, the city or corporation fool, the tavern fool, the fool of the mysteries and moralties. The last was generally called the * vice,’ and is the

original of the stage clowns so common among the dramatists of the time of Elizabeth, and who embody so much of the wit of Shakespeare. The dress of the regular court fool of the Middle Ages was not altogether a rigid uniform. To judge from the prints and illuminations which are the sources of our knowledge on this matter, it seems to have changed considerably from time to time. The head- was shaved, the coat was motley and the breeches tight, with generally one leg different in colour to the other. The fool’s business was to amuse his master, to excite him to laughter by sharp contrast, to prevent the overrepression of state affairs, and, in harmony with a wellknown physiological precept, by his liveliness at meals to assist his lord’s digestion. The names and witticisms of many of the official jesters at the Courts of Europe have been preserved by popular or state records. In the court of Janies I. were three fools of note: Tom Derry,whose name was given to a gallery in Somerset House ; Stone, mentioned in Selden's Table Talk ; and the celebrated Archibald Armstrong, a native of Arthuret, Cumberland. From an early age Archie Armstrong was attached to the king’s_household. and as well as

jester, often appearing in court with a gay set of fiddlers, of whom Sir George Goring was master.

Archie was often ill-treated by the young prince and his friends, one of their favourite pranks being to toss the poor jester in a blanket. But he accompanied Prince Charlie on his expedition to Spain in 1623, and was in great favour at the court. After the death of his king Archie remained at court to serve Charles 1., who provided for him with great generosity. He held the post of jester until 1637, when he was deposed, owing to his irreverent jokes on the religious dissensions of the period and his discourtesy to the prelates. His gravest offence was in poking fun at Archbishop Laud. One day, when his eminence and several noblemen were dining with the king, Archie begged the privilege of saying grace. This granted, he

folded his hands and pronounced these words in solemn tones : ‘ Great praise be given to God and little Laud to the devil,’ which made the Archbishop wild with rage. Another time, when meeting the Archbishop on his way to the council, and quite aware that he was the cause of the religious trouble, Archie planted himself in front of the prelate and asked : ‘ Wlia's fool noo ? Doth not your Grace hear the news from Striveling about the liturgy ?’ The jester was taken at once before the star chamber, where the king sat in council, and though he pleaded his cause with wit, all was in vain ; he was discharged from the king’s service and banished from the court. Exasperated and chagrined, he exclaimed : ‘lf neither fool nor wise man may escape the council, I will be neither.’

Archie now procured a suit of sables and attached himself to the tombs of the dead sovereigns. It was probably his last appeal to the living king. * I met Archie at the abbey,’ says an old writer, ‘ all in black. Alas ! poor fool, thought I ; he mourns for his country ! I asked him about his fool's coat, “ Oh,” quoth he. “ my lord of Canterbury hath taken it for me, because either he or some of the Scots' bishops may have use of it themselves. But he hath given me a black coat for it; and now I may speak what I please, so it be not against the prelates, for this coat hath a greater privilege than the other had.” ’ Archie amassed considerable wealth while he held the office of royal fool, and purchased land in his native place, where he spent the rest of his life. He died in 1646, and strange to say, was buried on April 1 —* All Fools’ Day.’ In order to make a large sale for the fifth edition of a little book entitled ‘ A Banquet of Jeasts ’ (1636), Archie’s name was prefixed, and under it these lines were printed :

‘.Archee. by kings and princes grac'd of la'e. Jested himself into a fair estate: And in this book doth to his friends commend His jeeres, taunts, talcs, which no man can otfend.

All that is known of Archie’s successor. Muckle John, are the following entries in the account books, which give some idea of his costumes : ‘ A long coat and suit of scarlet-colour serge, for Muckle John /io tos 6d. One pair of crimson silk hose and one pair of garters and roses for Muckle John, 61s. For a pair of silk and silver garters and roses and gloves suitable for Muckle John, tos. For a hat covered with scarlet, and a band suitable, and for two rich feathers, one red, the other white, for Muckle John, 50s. Stag’s-leather gloves, fringed with gold and silver. A hatband for Muckle John. One pair of perfumed gloves, lined with sables, 5 s -

Another character that should be mentioned here is Henrietta Maria’s dwarf, Jeffrey Hudson,who,though not a jester, frequently entertained the court by his merriment. His first advent at court was peculiar for he was presented to the qeeen in a pie at a banquet, as the gift of a courtier.

Muckle John is supposed to have been the last of the official court fools of England, for the cold, hard temper of Puritanism drove merry-hearted Folly from the court. Some authorities claim that Charles 11. brought back the official jester in the person of Thomas Killigrew, Master of the Revels, Groom of the Bedchamber, and

the privileged companion of the king. But the chain had been broken, and the jester was not the same as of old. An instance of Killigrew’s familiar banter with Charles 11. is told in the following story : Ouce he stood before the king in cockled hat and shoon. ‘ Whither away ?' asks Charles. ‘ I'm going,’ replies the jester, ‘to hell, to ask the devil to send back Oliver Cromwell to take charge of the affairs of England ; for, as to his successor, he is always employed in other business.’ Pepys calls him ‘ a merry droll anti gentleman of great esteem with the king,’ but another writer says that his wit was • poor and frothy discourse.’ However, he managed the masks and revels at court, introduced the Italian opera into England, and gave many practical hints in times of national perplexity. The days of fools and jesters are over, but are there not a few witty foolsand foolish wits remaining amongst us ? Are there not some bright spirits left who, like Touchstone, can give the ' retort courteous,’ the ‘ quip modest,’ the ‘reply churlish,' the ‘reproof valiant,* the ‘ countercheck quarrelsome,’ the ‘ lie with circumstance,* and ‘ the lie direct ?’ After all, we may exclaim with the melancholy Jaques, ' Motley's the only wear,’ for laughter is better than a frown, a jest ofter wiser than a sermon.