few of the old court customs practised in past years were more curious than that of “whipping by proxy.” it appears that the office of whipping-boy doomed its unfortunate occupant to undergo all the corporal punishment which the heir-apparent to the throne—whose proper person was, as the lord’s anointed, considered sacred—might chance to incur “in the course of travelling through his grammar and prosody.”
one of the most celebrated instances of the observance of this custom was the appointment of barnaby fitzpatrick as king edward vi.’s whipping-boy, to which we find numerous allusions. thus, burnet[126] says, “this fitzpatrick did afterwards fully answer the opinion this young king had of him. he was bred up with him in learning; and, as it is said, had been his whipping-boy who, according to the rule of educating our princes, was always to be whipped for the king’s faults. he was afterwards made by queen elizabeth, baron of upper ossory in ireland, which was his native country.”
strype[127] makes several allusions to barnaby fitz{307}patrick, and relates how he was “much favoured by king edward vi., having been bred up with him from a child. him the king sent into the french king’s court, furnished him with instructions under his own hand for his behaviour there, appointed him four servants, gave him three hundred french crowns in his purse, and a letter to the french king in his favour, declaring that the king had sent him thither to remain in his court to learn fashions, for the better serving him at his return.”
burnet,[128] further speaking of elizabeth dysart, who afterwards became duchess of lauderdale, tells us that her father, william murray, had been page and whipping-boy to charles i. but, as it has been pointed out, we hear nothing of such an office being held by any one in the household of prince henry, the elder brother of charles i.
it appears, too, that it was customary to have such a substitute in france, for fuller says that d’ossat and du perron, afterwards cardinals, were whipped by clement viii. for henry iv. of france. louis xiv., however, on one occasion when he was conscious of his want of education, exclaimed, “est ce qu’il n’y avait point de verges dans mon royaume, pour me forcer à étudier?”—a remark which seems to show that such a practice was not always observed in france.
it may be remembered how sir walter scott,[129] on introducing sir mungo malagrowther, of girnigo castle, to his readers, gives a graphic account of{308} this custom. after narrating how he had been early attached to court in the capacity of whipping-boy to king james vi., and trained to polite learning with his majesty, by his celebrated preceptor, george buchanan, he adds: “under his stern rule—for he did not approve of the vicarious mode of punishment—james bore the penance of his own faults, and mungo malagrowther enjoyed a sinecure. but james’s other pedagogue, master patrick young, went more ceremoniously to work, and appalled the very soul of the youthful king by the floggings which he bestowed on the whipping-boy when the royal task was not suitably performed. and be it told to sir mungo’s praise that there were points about him in the highest respect suited to his official situation. he had, even in youth, a naturally irregular and grotesque set of features which, when distorted by fear, pain, and anger, looked like one of the whimsical faces which present themselves in gothic architecture. his voice was also high-pitched and querulous, so that when smarting under master peter young’s unsparing inflictions, the expression of his grotesque physiognomy, and the superhuman yells which he uttered, were well suited to produce all the effects on the monarch who deserved the lash, that could possibly be produced by seeing another and an innocent individual suffering for his derelict.”
we can easily understand that such a custom would afford our old dramatists abundant opportunity for enlivening their audience by the witty introduction of it, as they generally contrived to{309} gain popularity for their performances by upholding or ridiculing any foolish usage of the time. in an old play, entitled “when you see me, you know me,” the custom is thus noticed:—
“prince (edward vi.). why, how now, browne! what’s the matter?
“browne. your grace loiters, and will not ply your book, and your tutors have whipped me for it.
“prince. alas, poor ned! i am sorry for it; i’ll take the more pains, and entreat my tutors for thee. yet, in troth, the lectures they read me last night out of virgil and ovid i am perfect in, only i confess i am behind in my greek authors.
“will (summers). and for that speech they have declined it upon his breech.”
the custom was perhaps practised in spain for the improvement of philip iii. le sage has introduced such a mode of correction in his gil blas, with the following amusing anecdote. he tells us how don raphael was, when twelve years of age, selected by the marquis de leganez to be the companion of his son of the same age, who hardly knew a letter of his alphabet. in spite of the patient endeavour of his masters to induce him to apply himself to his studies, he persisted in frittering away his time, till at last the head-master resolved to give le fouet to young raphael whenever the little leganez deserved it. this, however, he did so unsparingly that the boy raphael made up his mind to run away from the roof of the marquis de leganez; and to revenge for all the cruel and unjust treatment{310} which he had received, he took with him 150 ducats of the master.
once more, in the pekin gazette for 1876, we find the appointment of, among other instructors to the young emperor, a hahachutcz, or “whipping-boy,” who by reason of his office suffers in his person for all the sins and shortcomings of his imperial fellow-student.
there were exceptions, however, to this rule, for when dr. markham inquired of george iii. “how his majesty would wish to have the princes treated,” he replied, “like the sons of any private english gentleman. if they deserve it, let them be flogged. do as you used to do at westminster.”
among instances of marriage by proxy may be mentioned that of joanna of navarre with henry iv., april 3, 1402, antoine riczi acting as proxy of the bride. the act was performed with great solemnity in the presence of the archbishop of canterbury, the king’s half-brothers, the beaufort princes, the earl of worcester, lord chamberlain of england, and other officers of state, and pronounced in these words:—“i, antoine riczi, in the name of my worshipful lady, joanna, the daughter of charles, lately king of navarre, duchess of bretagne, and countess of richmond, take you, henry of lancaster, king of england, and lord of ireland, to be my husband, and thereto i, antoine, in the spirit of my said lady, plight you my troth.”
suffolk espoused the lady margaret of anjou as the proxy of henry vi.; and king james i. and the{311} princess anne were married by proxy at cronenburg. in 1673 the marriage of mary beatrice of modena with the duke of york was solemnised by proxy. in 1791 lord malmesbury married a princess of prussia as proxy for the duke of york.
and the same practice prevailed from an early period on the continent. thus when clovis was married to the princess clotilde, he offered by his proxy a sou and a denier, which became by law the usual marriage offering in france.
the archduke maximilian married anne, duchess of bretagne, by proxy; and he consummated the union by his ambassador attending with a train of lords and ladies, baring his leg to the knee, and putting it into the bed of the duchess, thereby taking possession of her bed and body. the marriage, however, was annulled, and she afterwards in 1491 became the wife of charles viii. of france. it may be added that henry ii. of france was killed in a tournament in 1559, in honour of the nuptials of philip ii. to the princess elizabeth of france. it appears that the duke of alva, as proxy for philip, had espoused elizabeth on the 20th of june. the nuptials of the duke of savoy with margaret were to follow. on the 27th, 28th, and 29th the lists were opened in the rue st. antoine. the king, the dukes of guise and nemours, were the holders, and had shown their usual prowess and address. the tournament, writes crowe,[130] was at an end, when henry declared he must break another lance, and ordered montgomery,{312} one of the captains of the guard, to tilt with him. the latter declined, but the king forced him. both lances were duly broken in the shock, but, as the horses and riders passed on in their headlong career, the king was struck by the broken end of the lance which montgomery, against rules, retained in his hand. on reaching the end of the course the monarch fell; a splinter had penetrated his eye, and the king, on being conveyed to the palace, only lingered for eleven days, expiring on the 10th of july 1559.
marie louise in her engagement to charles ii. of spain looked upon herself as a victim of state policy, and appealed in vain to louis xiv. she had seen the portrait of her future husband, whose character and imbecility were as well known at fontainebleau as at madrid. but her protestations were in vain. after a marriage by proxy at fontainebleau, the comte d’harcourt was commissioned to conduct her to the frontier, where in the famous isle of pheasants, on the bidassoa, the sad-hearted bride was delivered over to the tender mercies of the duchess of di terra nueva and the marquis de astorgas.
