FAWKES, Guy (1570-1606), the most notorious of the Gunpowder Plot conspirators, was born at York, of a gentle family, in the year 1570. His grandfather and father were notaries and proctors of the ecclesiastical courts of York, the former being registrar of the exchequer court of the province, the latter an advocate of the consistory court of the cathedral. It is believed that the family was connected with the ancient house of the Fawkeses of Farnley in Yorkshire, but the evidence of such connexion does not amount to proof. Guy was educated at the free school at the “Horsefayre,” just outside the city of York, and had for schoolfellows Thomas Morton, afterwards bishop of Durham, and Thomas, grandson of Sir John Cheke. The school was under the superintendence of the dean and chapter, and this, and the fact of his immediate ancestors being employed in the ecclesiastical courts, would have led us to conclude that Fawkes was brought up in conformity to the established church. But we have more direct evidence of this, for the names, both of his parents and of his grandmother, occur several times in the list of communicants of the parish of St Michael-le-Belfrey in which they lived. Perhaps the most determinant event in Fawkes’s life happened when he was quite young. His father died when he was about eight years old, and before he came of age his mother married again. Her second husband was one Dionis Baynbridge, settled at Scotton near Knaresborough. Baynbridge was connected with several Roman Catholic families. Several families, steadfast in the old faith, were settled near Scotton,—among them, that of Sir William Ingilby of Ripley, whose sister was mother of the Robert, Thomas, and John Winter with whom, later in life, Fawkes was brought into such close contact. For some years he lived under the roof of his stepfather, who, we have every reason to believe, was a Roman Catholic. Guy was the only son and, as there was no will, the sole heir of his father. He said in confession, “My father left me but small living, which I spent.” There is, in fact, evidence that when he came of age he sold the little land left him, and soon after, as it appears, enlisted as a soldier of fortune in the army of Flanders, and is said to have been present at the taking of Calais by the Archduke Albert in 1598. He was sent by Sir William Stanley and the Jesuits in Flanders to join Christopher Wright in a mission to the king of Spain immediately after the death of Elizabeth. Early in 1604 he was again in Flanders and with Stanley.

The Catholics in England had hoped much from the accession of J amés I. To facilitate his passage to the throne, he had given great cause for such hopes, promising that the fines against recusants should not be exacted, and bestowing honours upon several Roman Catholic gentlemen. Therefore, when, after James was securely seated on the throne, the severe laws of Elizabeth against priests and recusants were again put into execution, many Roman Catholic gentlemen experienced feelings of deep resentment. Robert Catesby, a man steeped in plots, conspiracies, and secret embassies, but a gentleman of great personal power and fascination, conceived a plan for the remedy of all this. His parents had suffered much for their religion, and he himself had been an incessant plotter among the discontented Catholics of the later years of Elizabeth’s reign, and for joining in Essex’s rebellion had been heavily fined. But there is no reason to believe that he, or indeed any of the conspirators, were actuated by selfish motives or feelings of revenge in assenting to that scheme for the carrying out of which they dared and suffered so much. Catesby’s own words probably express best the way in which they regarded the matter. “The nature of the disease,” he said, “requires so sharp a remedy.” It should also be remembered that the plot was conceived and entered upon before the more severe execution of the laws against recusants. Catesby’s plan was to blow up king, lords, and commons in the Parliament House with gunpowder. Early in 1604 he wrote to his cousin Thomas Winter desiring him to come to London. Winter, after some hesitation, having consented, found Catesby at Lambeth with John Wright. All three were old plotters and companions in plots and conspiracies. Catesby now broached his new scheme to Winter, who at first wondered at the strangeness of the conception and doubted of success, but finally gave his consent to it or to anything that Catesby should decide to enter upon. Wishing, however, to leave no quiet way untried to obtain their end, it was decided that Winter should go over to Flanders, to meet Velasco, the constable of Castile, who was coming to England to negotiate the peace with Spain. Winter was to inform the constable of the state of the Catholics in England, and to entreat him to solicit the king that the penal laws against them might be recalled. Catesby named Fawkes as a likely man in case this quiet way failed. Winter saw the constable at Bergen, and giving up the hope that much would be done by his means, sought out Fawkes, whom he found with Stanley at Ostend. Representing to him that something was in hand to be done in England, they passed together from Gravelines to Greenwich, April 22, 1604, and at once went to Catesby. At a meeting soon after they were joined by Thomas Percy, another zealous Romanist, a relative of the earl of Northumberland, and one of the king’s pensioners. The plot was propounded and approved of; all took a solemn oath of secrecy and perseverance, and afterwards received the sacrament from Gerard, a Jesuit, who was in another room. In May a house adjoining the Parliament House was hired in Percy’s name, from the cellars of which the conspirators proposed to work a mine. Having, however, with great labour worked about half-way through the nine feet of stone which composed the wall, they discovered that a vault, immediately under the House of Lords, was to let, and as this exactly suited their purpose, it was at once engaged by Fawkes, who, being little known in England, passed as Percy’s servant, and took the name of Johnson. Barrels of gunpowder which had been stored in a house at Lambeth were brought over in the night, large stones and bars of iron were placed upon them, and the whole covered with billets of wood, so that no suspicion might be excited in case it wa3 found necessary to admit a stranger. All was prepared about May 1605. The plan of the plot was that after the blow had been given, as most probably the prince of Wales would attend and perish with the king, the duke (Charles) was to be seized and carried into the country if possible; or otherwise possession was to be obtained of the person of the Princess Elizabeth, who was then at Combe Abbey in Warwickshire, and a rising was to be prepared among the Catholics of the midland counties. Fawkes wa3 to fire the train, and then to get over as quickly as possible into Flanders in a ship prepared for his passage. After being several times prorogued, parliament was to meet on the 5th of November.

During the progress of the preparations many other gentlemen, Robert Winter, Christopher Wright, Keyes, Rook wood, Sir Everard Digby, and Francis Tresham, had been sworn in by Catesby to assist with labour or money. In the interval between the completion of the preparations and the opening of parliament, Fawkes wa3 sent into Flanders to acquaint Stanley and Owen the Jesuit with the plot, and to secure their co-operation after the event of the explosion. A great cause of disagreement among the conspirators was the fact that the Catholic lords and members of parliament would be destroyed in a common catastrophe with those whom the plot was specially intended to strike. That the Catholics should somehow be warned there was general agreement, but not as to the method in which the warning should be given. This disagreement no doubt caused the failure of the whole transaction. Ten days before the opening of parliament, Lord Monteagle, a Catholic and a friend of several of the conspirators, received an anonymous letter giving him a warning, couched in ambiguous terms, not to attend the opening, for “they shall receyve a terrible blowe this parleament.” It is not known who wrote the letter. Tresham was, and is, generally suspected; but when Catesby accused him of it, he vehemently and with oaths denied all knowledge of the matter. Something in the character of the letter and of the attendant circumstances seems to render it probable that the whole thing was prepared beforehand to quash the plot, but in such a manner that the Government should not be fully alive to the danger until the conspirators had had time to escape. It has also been suggested that the whole plot itself was got up by Cecil, and was nothing but a state trick. However, Monteagle at once took this letter to Salisbury, who communicated it to the king, directly his Majesty returned from Royston, where he had been hunting, and it seems to have been at once decided that every precaution should be taken. Winter received warning that all was discovered. Tresham also warned Catesby and the others that all was known, and passionately desired them to make good their escape to foreign lands. They, however, determined to await further events, and Fawkes especially stuck to his post in the vault with that coolness of courage which seems to have been one of his chief characteristics.

The Lord Chamberlain, on the 4th November, going over the Parliament House to see that all was prepared for the morrow, visited the vault, and there saw this “very tall and desperate fellow,” who, together with the large quantity of fuel, exciting suspicions which he communicated to the king, it was decided that a more strict search should be made. Sir Thomas Knevet, a Westminster magistrate, wa3 ordered to direct this search, and going down to the house suddenly, just before midnight, he came upon Fawkes just stepping out of the door. The 36 barrels of powder were discovered; Fawkes was seized, bound with his own garters, and searched. Upon him were found a watch, a tinder box, and some touch wood. He at once avowed his purpose, and said that if he had been within the house when taken he would have blown up house, takers, himself, and all. He was taken to Whitehall and examined before the king. Answering all questions with careless sarcastic indifference, he would say nothing to implicate his confederates. The other conspirators fled into the country to Dunchurch, where a meeting of the Catholic gentry had been convened under pretence of a hunting party. In the hue and cry which followed, all were either killed or taken. Fawkes and the others were repeatedly examined, and torture was, no doubt, in his case used to break the wonderful will and nerve of the man. On 27th January 1606 the trial took place. All were condemned to be drawn, hanged, and quartered. On Thursday the 30th, Digby, R. Winter, Grant, and Bates (Catesby’s servant) suffered in St Paul’s churchyard; the next day, T. Winter, Rookwood, Keyes, and Fawkes, at Westminster. So all yet alive who, from belief in the cause or from love of Catesby, had joined his outrageous plot ascended the scaffold, Fawkes last; “his body being weak with torture and sickness, he was scarce able to go up the ladder.” He “made no long speech, but after a sort seeming sorry for his offence, asked a kind of forgiveness of the king and the state for his bloody intent,” and so died.

Jesuit evidence describes Fawkes as a man “of great piety, of exemplary temperance, of mild and cheerful demeanour, an enemy of broils and disputes, a faithful friend,” and assert3 that his society was sought by all the most distinguished in the archduke’s camp for nobility and virtue. There seems to be no doubt that he had qualities which under a different rule would have carried him to honour instead of to ignominy. There is something in the whole character of his actions and undertakings in this plot which seems to imply absolute self-renunciation for the cause believed to be just. But nothing could possibly have been more disastrous to the interest of the Catholics of England. The stringency of the laws against recusants was greatly increased, and their observance more severely exacted. The 5th November was ordered to be kept as a day of thanksgiving for ever, by an Act which was not repealed for over two centuries. The festivities which were long common on what is called Guy Faw kes’s day are now perhaps dying out. The custom was to dress up an absurd figure in rags with a tall cap and a lantern, to parade with this through the streets singing rhymes, and finally at night to burn the effigy. This holocaust was in some places an important annual ceremony, presided over by the local officials.

The question as to the part taken by the Jesuits in the Gunpowder Plot has been a much debated one. There seems to be no doubt that Garnet, the superior of the order in England, had a guilty knowledge of the plot, if he did not even actively encourage it. He was tried and condemned March 28 and executed May 3, 1606.

Many valuable letters and memorials connected with this plot are preserved in the Public Record Office. The anonymous letter to Lord Monteagle and the reports of Fawkes’s various examinations are there, as well as the reports of the examinations of Winter and other conspirators, supposed conspirators, suspected persons, and persons in any way connected with them. These were some years ago collected and bound in a volume called the Gunpowder Blot Book. They are not, however, separately calendared in the published series of calendars, but are noticed chronologically with the other papers. Win wood’s Memorials contain valuable letters from cecil anti others to Sir C. Cornwallis about the plot, from the Cotton Library. See Fawkeses of York in the Sixteenth Century, and Jardine’s Narrative of the Gunpowder Plot.