Endless Ebook, One Click Away – Start Downloading at ebookname.

com

Practical Methods for Optimal Control and

Estimation Using Nonlinear Programming Second
Edition Advances in Design and Control John T.
Betts
https://ebookname.com/product/practical-methods-for-optimal-
control-and-estimation-using-nonlinear-programming-second-
edition-advances-in-design-and-control-john-t-betts/

OR CLICK HERE

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Browse and Get More Ebook Downloads Instantly at https://ebookname.com

Click here to visit ebookname.com and download ebook now
Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Practical methods for optimal control using nonlinear

programming 1st Edition John T. Betts

https://ebookname.com/product/practical-methods-for-optimal-
control-using-nonlinear-programming-1st-edition-john-t-betts/

Nonlinear optimal control theory 1st Edition Leonard

David Berkovitz

https://ebookname.com/product/nonlinear-optimal-control-
theory-1st-edition-leonard-david-berkovitz/

Linear Feedback Control Analysis and Design with MATLAB

Advances in Design and Control 1st Edition Dingyu Xue

https://ebookname.com/product/linear-feedback-control-analysis-
and-design-with-matlab-advances-in-design-and-control-1st-
edition-dingyu-xue/

Words of the Lagoon R. E. Johannes

https://ebookname.com/product/words-of-the-lagoon-r-e-johannes/
Ironclads at War The Monitor vs The Merrimac 1st
Edition Dan Abnett

https://ebookname.com/product/ironclads-at-war-the-monitor-vs-
the-merrimac-1st-edition-dan-abnett/

Liquid and Crystal Nanomaterials for Water Pollutants

Remediation 1st Edition Uma Shanker (Editor)

https://ebookname.com/product/liquid-and-crystal-nanomaterials-
for-water-pollutants-remediation-1st-edition-uma-shanker-editor/

Catherine the Great 2009 1st US Edition Edition Simon

Dixon

https://ebookname.com/product/catherine-the-great-2009-1st-us-
edition-edition-simon-dixon/

The Complete Guide to Customer Support How to Turn

Technical Assistance Into a Profitable Relationship 1st
Edition Joe Fleischer (Author)

https://ebookname.com/product/the-complete-guide-to-customer-
support-how-to-turn-technical-assistance-into-a-profitable-
relationship-1st-edition-joe-fleischer-author/

iPhone The Missing Manual 1st Edition David Pogue

https://ebookname.com/product/iphone-the-missing-manual-1st-
edition-david-pogue/
Law for Criminologists A Practical Guide 1st Edition
Ursula Smartt

https://ebookname.com/product/law-for-criminologists-a-practical-
guide-1st-edition-ursula-smartt/
Practical Methods
for Optimal Control
and Estimation Using
Nonlinear Programming
Advances in Design and Control
SIAM’s Advances in Design and Control series consists of texts and monographs dealing with all areas of
design and control and their applications. Topics of interest include shape optimization, multidisciplinary
design, trajectory optimization, feedback, and optimal control. The series focuses on the mathematical and
computational aspects of engineering design and control that are usable in a wide variety of scientific and
engineering disciplines.

Editor-in-Chief
Ralph C. Smith, North Carolina State University

Editorial Board
Athanasios C. Antoulas, Rice University
Siva Banda, Air Force Research Laboratory
Belinda A. Batten, Oregon State University
John Betts, The Boeing Company (retired)
Stephen L. Campbell, North Carolina State University
Eugene M. Cliff, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Michel C. Delfour, University of Montreal
Max D. Gunzburger, Florida State University
J. William Helton, University of California, San Diego
Arthur J. Krener, University of California, Davis
Kirsten Morris, University of Waterloo
Richard Murray, California Institute of Technology
Ekkehard Sachs, University of Trier

Series Volumes
Betts, John T., Practical Methods for Optimal Control and Estimation Using Nonlinear Programming, Second
Edition
Shima, Tal and Rasmussen, Steven, eds., UAV Cooperative Decision and Control: Challenges and Practical
Approaches
Speyer, Jason L. and Chung, Walter H., Stochastic Processes, Estimation, and Control
Krstic, Miroslav and Smyshlyaev, Andrey, Boundary Control of PDEs: A Course on Backstepping Designs
Ito, Kazufumi and Kunisch, Karl, Lagrange Multiplier Approach to Variational Problems and Applications
Xue, Dingyü, Chen, YangQuan, and Atherton, Derek P., Linear Feedback Control: Analysis and Design
with MATLAB
Hanson, Floyd B., Applied Stochastic Processes and Control for Jump-Diffusions: Modeling, Analysis,
and Computation
Michiels, Wim and Niculescu, Silviu-Iulian, Stability and Stabilization of Time-Delay Systems: An Eigenvalue-Based
Approach
Ioannou, Petros and Fidan, Baris,¸ Adaptive Control Tutorial
Bhaya, Amit and Kaszkurewicz, Eugenius, Control Perspectives on Numerical Algorithms and Matrix Problems
Robinett III, Rush D., Wilson, David G., Eisler, G. Richard, and Hurtado, John E., Applied Dynamic Programming
for Optimization of Dynamical Systems
Huang, J., Nonlinear Output Regulation: Theory and Applications
Haslinger, J. and Mäkinen, R. A. E., Introduction to Shape Optimization: Theory, Approximation, and
Computation
Antoulas, Athanasios C., Approximation of Large-Scale Dynamical Systems
Gunzburger, Max D., Perspectives in Flow Control and Optimization
Delfour, M. C. and Zolésio, J.-P., Shapes and Geometries: Analysis, Differential Calculus, and Optimization
Betts, John T., Practical Methods for Optimal Control Using Nonlinear Programming
El Ghaoui, Laurent and Niculescu, Silviu-Iulian, eds., Advances in Linear Matrix Inequality Methods in Control
Helton, J. William and James, Matthew R., Extending H∞ Control to Nonlinear Systems: Control of Nonlinear
Systems to Achieve Performance Objectives
Practical Methods
for Optimal Control
and Estimation Using
Nonlinear Programming
SECOND EDITION

John T. Betts

Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics

Philadelphia
Copyright © 2010 by the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM)

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this book may be
reproduced, stored, or transmitted in any manner without the written permission of the
publisher. For information, write to the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics,
3600 Market Street, 6th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19104-2688 USA.

Trademarked names may be used in this book without the inclusion of a trademark
symbol. These names are used in an editorial context only; no infringement of trademark
is intended.

Dell is a registered trademark of Dell, Inc.

KNITRO is a registered trademark of Ziena Optimization, Inc.

Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.

Maple is a registered trademark of Waterloo Maple, Inc.

NPSOL is a registered trademark of Stanford University.

SNOPT is a trademark of Stanford University and UC San Diego.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Betts, John T. 1943-
Practical methods for optimal control and estimation using nonlinear programming /
John T. Betts. — 2nd ed.
p. cm. — (Advances in design and control)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-898716-88-7
1. Control theory. 2. Mathematical optimization. 3. Nonlinear programming. I. Title.
QA402.3.B47 2009
629.8’312—dc22
2009025106

is a registered trademark.
For Theon and Dorothy

He Inspired Creativity
She Cherished Education


 Contents

Preface xiii

1 Introduction to Nonlinear Programming 1

1.1 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Newton’s Method in One Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Secant Method in One Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Newton’s Method for Minimization in One Variable . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.5 Newton’s Method in Several Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.6 Unconstrained Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.7 Recursive Updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.8 Equality-Constrained Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.8.1 Newton’s Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.9 Inequality-Constrained Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.10 Quadratic Programming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1.11 Globalization Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1.11.1 Merit Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1.11.2 Line-Search Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
1.11.3 Trust-Region Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
1.11.4 Filters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1.12 Nonlinear Programming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1.13 An SQP Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1.14 Interior-Point Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1.15 Mathematical Program with Complementarity Conditions . . . . . . . . 36
1.15.1 The Signum or Sign Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
1.15.2 The Absolute Value Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
1.15.3 The Maximum Value Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
1.15.4 The Minimum Value Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
1.15.5 Solving an MPEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
1.16 What Can Go Wrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
1.16.1 Infeasible Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
1.16.2 Rank-Deficient Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
1.16.3 Constraint Redundancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
1.16.4 Discontinuities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
1.16.5 Scaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
1.16.6 Nonunique Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

vii
viii Contents

1.17 Derivative Approximation by Finite Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

1.17.1 Difference Estimates in Differential Equations . . . . . . . . . 48

2 Large, Sparse Nonlinear Programming 51

2.1 Overview: Large, Sparse NLP Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.2 Sparse Finite Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
2.2.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
2.2.2 Sparse Hessian Using Gradient Differences . . . . . . . . . . 53
2.2.3 Sparse Differences in Nonlinear Programming . . . . . . . . . 54
2.3 Sparse QP Subproblem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
2.4 Merit Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2.5 Hessian Approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
2.6 Sparse SQP Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.6.1 Minimization Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.6.2 Algorithm Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
2.7 Defective Subproblems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
2.8 Feasible Point Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
2.8.1 QP Subproblem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
2.8.2 Feasible Point Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
2.8.3 An Illustration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
2.9 Computational Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
2.9.1 Large, Sparse Test Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
2.9.2 Small, Dense Test Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2.10 Nonlinear Least Squares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
2.10.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
2.10.2 Sparse Least Squares . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
2.10.3 Residual Hessian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
2.11 Barrier Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
2.11.1 External Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
2.11.2 Internal Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
2.11.3 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
2.11.4 Logarithmic Barrier Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
2.11.5 Computing a Search Direction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
2.11.6 Inertia Requirements for the Barrier KKT System . . . . . . . 82
2.11.7 Filter Globalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
2.11.8 Barrier Parameter Update Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
2.11.9 Initialization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
2.11.10 Outline of the Primary Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
2.11.11 Computational Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

3 Optimal Control Preliminaries 91

3.1 The Transcription Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
3.2 Dynamic Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
3.3 Shooting Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
3.4 Multiple Shooting Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
3.5 Initial Value Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
3.6 Boundary Value Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Contents ix

3.7 Dynamic Modeling Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

3.8 Function Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
3.8.1 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
3.8.2 NLP Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
3.9 Dynamic System Differentiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
3.9.1 Simple Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
3.9.2 Discretization versus Differentiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
3.9.3 External and Internal Differentiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
3.9.4 Variational Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

4 The Optimal Control Problem 123

4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
4.1.1 Dynamic Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
4.1.2 Algebraic Equality Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
4.1.3 Singular Arcs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
4.1.4 Algebraic Inequality Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
4.2 Necessary Conditions for the Discrete Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
4.3 Direct versus Indirect Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
4.4 General Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
4.5 Direct Transcription Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
4.6 NLP Considerations—Sparsity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
4.6.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
4.6.2 Standard Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
4.6.3 Discretization Separability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
4.6.4 Right-Hand-Side Sparsity (Trapezoidal) . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
4.6.5 Hermite–Simpson (Compressed) (HSC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
4.6.6 Hermite–Simpson (Separated) (HSS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
4.6.7 K-Stage Runge–Kutta Schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
4.6.8 General Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
4.6.9 Performance Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
4.6.10 Performance Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
4.7 Mesh Refinement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
4.7.1 Representing the Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
4.7.2 Estimating the Discretization Error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
4.7.3 Estimating the Order Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
4.7.4 Constructing a New Mesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
4.7.5 The Mesh-Refinement Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
4.7.6 Computational Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
4.8 Scaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
4.9 Quadrature Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
4.10 Algebraic Variable Rate Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
4.11 Estimating Adjoint Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
4.11.1 Quadrature Approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
4.11.2 Path Constraint Adjoints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
4.11.3 Differential Constraint Adjoints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
4.11.4 Numerical Comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
4.12 Discretize Then Optimize . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
x Contents

4.12.1 High Index Partial Differential-Algebraic Equation . . . . . . 192

4.12.2 State Vector Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
4.12.3 Direct Transcription Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
4.12.4 The Indirect Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
4.12.5 Optimality Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Unconstrained Arcs (s < 0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Constrained Arcs (s = 0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
Optimality Conditions: Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
4.12.6 Computational Comparison—Direct versus Indirect . . . . . . 199
Direct Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Indirect Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
4.12.7 Analysis of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
The Quandary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
The Explanation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
4.13 Questions of Efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Question: Newton or Quasi-Newton Hessian? . . . . . . . . . 210
Question: Barrier or SQP Algorithm? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
4.14 What Can Go Wrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.14.1 Singular Arcs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
4.14.2 State Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
4.14.3 Discontinuous Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216

5 Parameter Estimation 219

5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
5.2 The Parameter Estimation Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
5.3 Computing the Residuals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
5.4 Computing Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
5.4.1 Residuals and Sparsity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
5.4.2 Residual Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
5.4.3 Auxiliary Function Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
5.4.4 Algebraic Variable Parameterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
5.5 Computational Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
5.5.1 Reentry Trajectory Reconstruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
5.5.2 Commercial Aircraft Rotational Dynamics Analysis . . . . . . 233
5.6 Optimal Control or Optimal Estimation? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241

6 Optimal Control Examples 247

6.1 Space Shuttle Reentry Trajectory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
6.2 Minimum Time to Climb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
6.2.1 Tabular Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
6.2.2 Cubic Spline Interpolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
6.2.3 Minimum Curvature Spline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
6.2.4 Numerical Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
6.3 Low-Thrust Orbit Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
6.3.1 Modified Equinoctial Coordinates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
6.3.2 Gravitational Disturbing Acceleration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
Contents xi

6.3.3 Thrust Acceleration—Burn Arcs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267

6.3.4 Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
6.3.5 Numerical Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
6.4 Two-Burn Orbit Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
6.4.1 Simple Shooting Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
6.4.2 Multiple Shooting Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
6.4.3 Collocation Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
6.5 Hang Glider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
6.6 Abort Landing in the Presence of Windshear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
6.6.1 Dynamic Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
6.6.2 Objective Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
6.6.3 Control Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
6.6.4 Model Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
6.6.5 Computational Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
6.7 Space Station Attitude Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
6.8 Reorientation of an Asymmetric Rigid Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
6.8.1 Computational Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
6.9 Industrial Robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
6.10 Multibody Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
6.11 Kinematic Chain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
6.12 Dynamic MPEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
6.13 Free-Flying Robot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326
6.14 Kinetic Batch Reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331
6.15 Delta III Launch Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
6.16 A Two-Strain Tuberculosis Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
6.17 Tumor Anti-angiogenesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348

7 Advanced Applications 353

7.1 Optimal Lunar Swingby Trajectories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
7.1.1 Background and Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
7.1.2 Optimal Lunar Transfer Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
Synchronous Equatorial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
Polar, 24 hr (A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
Polar, 24 hr (B) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
Retrograde Molniya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357
7.1.3 Equations of Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357
7.1.4 Kepler Orbit Propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358
7.1.5 Differential-Algebraic Formulation of Three-Body Dynamics . 360
7.1.6 Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
7.1.7 A Four-Step Solution Technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 362
Step 1: Three-Impulse, Conic Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . 362
Step 2: Three-Body Approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364
Step 3: Fixed Swingby Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365
Step 4: Optimal Three-Body Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366
7.1.8 Solving the Subproblems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366
Is Mesh Refinement Needed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368
DAE or ODE Formulation? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370
xii Contents

7.2 Multiple-Pass Aero-Assisted Orbit Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372

7.2.1 Orbital Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372
7.2.2 Atmospheric Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
7.2.3 Boundary Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375
7.2.4 Initial Guess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
7.2.5 Numerical Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
7.3 Delay Differential Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385
7.4 In-Flight Dynamic Optimization of Wing Trailing Edge Surface
Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396
7.4.1 Aircraft Dynamics for Drag Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . 398
7.4.2 Step 1: Reference Trajectory Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
7.4.3 Step 2: Aerodynamic Drag Model Approximation . . . . . . . 401
7.4.4 Step 3: Optimal Camber Prediction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402
7.4.5 Numerical Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402
777-200ER Flight Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402
Performance Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403

8 Epilogue 411

Appendix: Software 413

A.1 Simplified Usage Dense NLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
A.2 Sparse NLP with Sparse Finite Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
A.3 Optimal Control Using Sparse NLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414

Bibliography 417

Index 431
 Preface

Solving an optimal control or estimation problem is not easy. Pieces of the puzzle
are found scattered throughout many different disciplines. Furthermore, the focus of this
book is on practical methods, that is, methods that I have found actually work! In fact
everything described in this book has been implemented in production software and used to
solve real optimal control problems. Although the reader should be proficient in advanced
mathematics, no theorems are presented.
Traditionally, there are two major parts of a successful optimal control or optimal
estimation solution technique. The first part is the “optimization” method. The second part
is the “differential equation” method. When faced with an optimal control or estimation
problem it is tempting to simply “paste” together packages for optimization and numerical
integration. While naive approaches such as this may be moderately successful, the goal of
this book is to suggest that there is a better way! The methods used to solve the differential
equations and optimize the functions are intimately related.
The first two chapters of this book focus on the optimization part of the problem. In
Chapter 1 the important concepts of nonlinear programming for small dense applications
are introduced. Chapter 2 extends the presentation to problems which are both large and
sparse. Chapters 3 and 4 address the differential equation part of the problem. Chapter
3 introduces relevant material in the numerical solution of differential (and differential-
algebraic) equations. Methods for solving the optimal control problem are treated in some
detail in Chapter 4. Throughout the book the interaction between optimization and integra-
tion is emphasized. Chapter 5 describes how to solve optimal estimation problems. Chapter
6 presents a collection of examples that illustrate the various concepts and techniques. Real
world problems often require solving a sequence of optimal control and/or optimization
problems, and Chapter 7 describes a collection of these “advanced applications.”
While the book incorporates a great deal of new material not covered in Practical
Methods for Optimal Control Using Nonlinear Programming [21], it does not cover every-
thing. Many important topics are simply not discussed in order to keep the overall presen-
tation concise and focused. The discussion is general and presents a unified approach to
solving optimal estimation and control problems. Most of the examples are drawn from
my experience in the aerospace industry. Examples have been solved using a particular
implementation called SOCS. I have tried to adhere to notational conventions from both
optimization and control theory whenever possible. Also, I have attempted to use consistent
notation throughout the book.
The material presented here represents the collective contributions of many peo-
ple. The nonlinear programming material draws heavily on the work of John Dennis,
Roger Fletcher, Phillip Gill, Sven Leyffer, Walter Murray, Michael Saunders, and Mar-

xiii
xiv Preface

garet Wright. The material on differential-algebraic equations (DAEs) is drawn from the
work of Uri Ascher, Kathy Brenan, and Linda Petzold. Ray Spiteri graciously shared his
classroom notes on DAEs. I was introduced to optimal control by Stephen Citron, and I
routinely refer to the text by Bryson and Ho [54]. Over the past 20 years I have been for-
tunate to participate in workshops at Oberwolfach, Munich, Minneapolis, Victoria, Banff,
Lausanne, Griefswald, Stockholm, and Fraser Island. I’ve benefited immensely simply
by talking with Larry Biegler, Hans Georg Bock, Roland Bulirsch, Rainer Callies, Kurt
Chudej, Tim Kelley, Bernd Kugelmann, Helmut Maurer, Rainer Mehlhorn, Angelo Miele,
Hans Josef Pesch, Ekkehard Sachs, Gottfried Sachs, Roger Sargent, Volker Schulz, Mark
Steinbach, Oskar von Stryk, and Klaus Well.
Three colleagues deserve special thanks. Interaction with Steve Campbell and his
students has inspired many new results and interesting topics. Paul Frank has played a
major role in the implementation and testing of the large, sparse nonlinear programming
methods described. Bill Huffman, my coauthor for many publications and the SOCS soft-
ware, has been an invaluable sounding board over the last two decades. Finally, I thank
Jennifer for her patience and understanding during the preparation of this book.

John T. Betts
Chapter 1

Introduction to Nonlinear
Programming

1.1 Preliminaries
This book concentrates on numerical methods for solving the optimal control problem.
The fundamental principle of all effective numerical optimization methods is to solve a
difficult problem by solving a sequence of simpler subproblems. In particular, the solution
of an optimal control problem will require the solution of one or more finite-dimensional
subproblems. As a prelude to our discussions on optimal control, this chapter will focus
on the nonlinear programming (NLP) problem. The NLP problem requires finding a finite
number of variables such that an objective function or performance index is optimized
without violating a set of constraints. The NLP problem is often referred to as parameter
optimization. Important special cases of the NLP problem include linear programming
(LP), quadratic programming (QP), and least squares problems.
Before proceeding further, it is worthwhile to establish the notational conventions
used throughout the book. This is especially important since the subject matter covers a
number of different disciplines, each with its own notational conventions. Our goal is to
present a unified treatment of all these fields. As a rule, scalar quantities will be denoted by
lowercase letters (e.g., α). Vectors will be denoted by boldface lowercase letters and will
usually be considered column vectors, as in
 
x1
x2 
 
x =  . , (1.1)
 .. 
xn

where the individual components of the vector are x k for k = 1, . . ., n. To save space, it will
often be convenient to define the transpose, as in

xT = (x 1 , x 2 , . . . , x n ). (1.2)

A sequence of vectors will often be denoted as xk , xk+1 , . . . . Matrices will be denoted by

1
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
 The burning of M. Iohn Rogers, vicar of Saint Pulchers, and Reader of Paules in London.

The bare list of burnings in London alone, not nearly complete, as

enumerated by Henry Machyn in his Diary (1550–1563), conveys a
sense of the overwhelming horror which filled England during this
reign, perhaps clearer than a laboured treatise on the Lives and
Deaths of the Martyrs. In reading the list we can see the crowds
flocking to Smithfield: all their sympathies are with the sufferer; they
see him dragged on his hurdle, undressed to the shirt and tied to the
stake; they see that he flinches not nor offers to retract; the faggots
are piled about him, Heaven grant they be of dry wood; from the
flames and through the smoke they hear the voice of the martyr
praising God and praying till the end comes, when his tongue swells
up in his mouth and he can speak no more, or is suffocated with the
smoke, or with the intensity of his agony his heart stops and
merciful Death seizes him. Then the crowd go home again; they
dare not speak to each other; but they remember.

“1555. The iiij day of Feybruary the bysshope of London went

into Nugatt and odur docturs to dysgratt (degrade) Hoper, and
Rogers sumtyme vycker of sant Polkers. The sam day was
Rogers cared be-twyn x and xj of the cloke into Smythfeld and
bornyd, for aronyus opinions, with a grett compene of the gard.
1555. The xvj day of Marche was a veyver (weaver) bornyd in
Smyth-feld dwellynge in Sordyche, for herese, by viij of the
cloke in the mornyng, ys nam was Tomkins.
1555. The xiiij day of Aprell, the wyche was Ester day at sant
Margatt parryche at Westmynster after masse was done, one of
the menysters, a prest of the abbay, dyd helpe hym that was
the menyster to the pepull who wher reseyvyng of the blessyd
sacrement of the Lord Jhesus Cryst, ther cam in-to the chyrche
a man that was a monke of Elly, the wyche was marryed to a
wyff: the sam day ther that sam man saud to the menyster,
What doyst thow gyff them? and as sone as he had spokyn he
druw his wod-knyffe, and hyt the prest on the hed and struck
hym on the hand, and cloyffe ys hand a grett way and after on
the harme a grett wond; and ther was syche a cry and showtt
as has not byne; and after he was taken and cared to presun,
and after examyned wher-for he dyd ytt. The xxiij day of Aprell
was the sam man cared to Westmynster that dyd hurt the prest,
and had ys hand stryken of at the post, and after he was
bornyd aganst sant Margett chyrche with-owt the cherche-
yerde.
1555. The sam day of May was arraigned iiij men at Powlles
a-for none and after-non, of Essex, and thay wher cast for
heresse and all iiij cast to be bornyd and so cared unto Nugat.
1555. The xxv day of May were arraigned at St. Paul’s for
heresy, before the bishop, master Cardmaker sometime vicar of
St. Bride’s in Fleet-street, and one John Warren a cloth-worker
in Walbrook and a-nodur of ... and cast to be brent and carried
back to Nugatt.
1555. The xxx day of May was burnt in Smythfeld master
Cardmaker sum-tyme veker of sant Bryd, and master Varren
clothworker, dwellyng aganst sant John in Walbroke, an
hupholster, and ys wyff behyng in [Newgate].
1555. The x day of Juin was delevered owt of Nugatt vij men
to be cared into Essex and Suffoke to borne.
1555. The furst day of July whent into Smythfield to borne
master Bradford, a grett precher by Kyng Edward’s days, and a
talow chandler’s prentice dwellyng by Nugatt, by viij of the cloke
in the mornyng, with a grett compene of pepull.
1555. The viij day of July were three more delivered out of
Nugate and sent into the country to be burned for heretics.
1555. The xij day of July was bornyd y Canturbery iiij men for
herese, ij prestes and ij laye men.
1555. The ij day of August was a shumaker bornyd ay sant
Edmundbere in Suffoke for herese.
1555. The viij day of August, between iiij and v in the
morning, was a presoner delevered into the shreyff of Medyllsex
to be cared unto Uxbryge to be bornyd; yt was the markett day
—owt of Nugatt delevered.
1555. The xxiij day of August was bornyd ay Stratford of
bowe, in the conte of Mydyllsex, a woman, wife of John Waren,
clothworker, a huphulster over against sant Johns in Walbroke;
the whyche ... John her hosband was bornyd with on Cardmaker
in Smythfield for herese boyth; and the sam woman had a sune
taken at her bornyng and cared to Nugatt to his syster, for they
will born boyth.
1555. The xxxj day of August whent out of Nugatt a man of
Essex unto Barnett for herese, by the shreyff of Medyllsex, to
borne ther.
 1555. The same day were burnt at Oxford for heresy doctor
Latimer, late Bishop of Worcester, and doctor Ridley, late
bysshope of London; they were some tyme grett prychers as
ever was; and at ther bornyng dyd pryche doctur Smyth,
sumtyme the master of Vetyngtun colege.
1555. The xviij day of Dessember be-twyn 8 & 9 of the cloke
in the mornyng was cared into Smythfeld to be bornyd on
master Philpot, archdeacon of Winchester, gentyllman, for
herese.

The description of Doctour Cranmer, howe he was plucked downe from the stage, by Friers and
Papists, for the true Confession of hys Faith.
The burning of the Archbishop of Canturbury, Doctor Thomas Cranmer, in the Towne-ditch at
Oxford, with his hand first thrust into the fire, wherewith he subscribed before.

1556. The xxij day of January whent into Smythfeld to berne

betwyn vij and viij in the mornyng v men and ij women; on of
the men was a gentyllman of the ender tempull, ys nam master
Gren; and they wer all bornyd by ix at iij postes; and ther wher
a commonment thrughe London over nyght that no yong folke
shuld come ther, for ther the grettest number was as has byne
sene at shyche a tyme.
1556. The xxj day of Marche was bornyd at Oxford doctur
Cranmer, late archebysshope of Canturbere.
1556. The xv day of May was cared in a care from Nugatt
thrug London unto Strettford-a-bow to borne ij men; the on
blyne, the thodur lame; and ij tall men, the one was a penter,
the thodur a clothworker; the penter ys nam was Huw
Loveroke, dwellyng in Seythin lane; the blynd man dwellyng in
sant Thomas apostylles.
1556. The xxvij day of June rod from Nugatt unto Stretford-a-
bowe in iiij cares xiij, xj men and ij women, and ther bornyd to
iiij postes, and ther wher a xx M. pepull.
1557. The iij day of April five persons out of Essex were
condemned for herese, iij men and ij women (one woman with
a staff in her hand), to be bornyd in Smythfeld.
1557. The vj day of Aprell was bornyd in Smythfeld v, iij men
and im women, for herese; on was a barber dwellyng in Lym-
strett; and on woman was the wyff of the Crane at the Crussyd-
frers be-syd the Towre-hylle, kepyng of a in ther.
1557. The xiiij day of May was bornyd in Chepe-syd and odur
places in London serten melle that was not sweet; and thay
sayd that hey had putt in lyme and sand to deseyffe the pepull
and he was had to the conter.
1557. The sam mornyng was bornyd be-yond sant George’s
parryche iij men for heresee, a dyssyd Nuwhyngtun.
1557. The xviij day of June was ij cared to be bornyd beyonde
sant Gorgeus, almost at Nuwhyngtyn for herese and odur
matters.
1557. The xxij day of December were burned in Smyth-feld ij,
one ser John Ruffe the frere and a Skott, and a woman for
herese.” (Diary of Henry Machyn.)
 CHAP TER II
THE PROGRESS OF THE REFORMATION

The question as to the proportion of Protestants to Catholics at the

accession of Elizabeth, and at her death, has received various
answers, depending upon the religion of the respondent. Lingard,
the fairest of all the Catholic writers, estimates the number of
Catholics at one-half the whole population. This was thirty years
before Elizabeth’s accession. Dr. Allen thought they were two-thirds
(Strype, iii. 415). A great many of the better class were Catholics.
Venner (1649) says that fifty years before, all physicians were
Catholics. This may have been caused by study in Italian schools of
medicine. A good many people in London attended mass at some
Ambassador’s chapel. The Spaniards when the Armada was
projected relied upon the opinion that the half of England would join
them. The North of England was filled with Catholics, yet they did
not join the Rebellion of 1569. One-fourth of the population of
Cheshire were Catholics; on the other hand, there is testimony to
the effect that the number of Catholics had enormously decreased in
the first thirty years of Elizabeth’s reign. In 1569 there were in
London twelve to fifteen places where mass was regularly said. In
1594 a Jesuit speaks of the “little sparkle of Catholic religion yet
reserved amongst us” as soon to be extinguished. The common-
sense view of the case seems to be this. The people of London who,
as we have seen, were filled with Lollardry from the beginning of the
fifteenth century; who welcomed the Dissolution of the Religious
Houses; who rejoiced at such a shadow of free thought as Henry
afforded them; who shuddered with horror at the flames of
Smithfield;—were overjoyed at the return of the Protestant Faith.
But it would be wrong to suppose that all the scholars, all who had
lived among the better-class priests and friars, went over to the new
Faith; they did not: a large number of gentlewomen remained
steadfast; the Government showed its good sense by taking no
notice, or as little as possible, of recusants. Burleigh advised against
punishing these people by death; best not make martyrs; there was
no true method of lessening their numbers “but by preaching and by
education of the younger under good schoolmasters.”
In a word, if it is intended to make any form of faith decay, there
is no need of persecution: it has only to be surrounded by
disabilities. If a Roman Catholic could hold no municipal office, and
no State office, could not enter a grammar school or the university,
could not take a degree, could not become a lawyer, could not sit in
either House, could not serve in the army or the navy, then the
Roman Catholic religion would fall rapidly into decay. This is exactly
what happened; at the present moment, though all disabilities have
been removed, the proportion of Catholics in England and Scotland
is certainly not more than one in twenty. The “old” Catholics were
those wealthy families which could continue in spite of all disabilities,
a few noble houses and a few county people. Similar results
attended the disabilities of the Nonconformists. Dissent survived its
disabilities among people who cared nothing for office, people at the
lower end of society, people for the most part of small trade. Among
the better class, Dissent lost ground and mostly disappeared till the
abolition of disabilities.
It is commonly believed that in the parish churches there was but
one step from the mass to the Reformed service. This was not so
(see an article by Mr. T. T. Micklethwaite on “Parish Churches in the
year 1548,” Arch. Journ. xxxv.). The Dissolution of the Religious
Houses made at first very little difference in the churches. The guilds
were suppressed, and therefore the lights which they kept up; the
endowed lights were also suppressed; but people went on endowing
new lights for the parish churches. In the year 1547 certain rules or
injunctions were issued which commanded that all images which had
been made the object of pilgrimage should be destroyed; that no
lights should be set up before any picture except two wax tapers on
the altar, and these because Christ is the Light of the World. Images
which had not been abused were to remain “for remembrance only.”
The English Bible and the Paraphrases of Erasmus on the Gospel
were to be set up in every church where the people could have
access to them. Shrines, pictures of miracles, and glass depicting
miracles, were to be destroyed; a pulpit was to be provided, and an
alms chest to be placed by the altar.
As regards the services, changes were gradual. The High Mass
continued, but the Gospel and Epistle were read in English, and a
chapter from the New Testament was read after lessons at Matins
and after Magnificat at Evensong. The English Litany was sung after
High Mass. The Pater Noster, Creed, and Ten Commandments were
sometimes publicly rehearsed in English, and Communion was
refused to those who did not know them.
In the year 1548 the “Order of Communion” was put forth; in
1549 the Prayer Book appeared. Mr. Micklethwaite has drawn up an
account of the parish church of 1548 before the Reformed Prayer
Book, and with the alterations made in the service up to that date.
The principal entrance was by the south door; in the porch was a
basin of holy water; the font stood sometimes in the middle of the
nave, sometimes against the west side of one of the pillars; it had a
cover which could be locked down. Near it was a locker in which
were kept the oils, salt, etc., required for the old rite of baptism.

“At the beginning of the sixteenth century all but very poor
parish churches seem to have been furnished with pews, but
the whole area was not filled with them, as at a later date. Old
pews west of the doors are very rare, but they are found
sometimes, as at Brington, Northants. Generally all this space
was left clear, and there was a clear area of at least one bay,
and often much more at the west end. A church with aisles had
nearly always four blocks of pews, and the passages were broad
alleys, that in the middle being often more than a third of the
width of the nave, and the side passages were not much less.
The appropriation of special places to individuals seems to have
been usual, and even that bugbear of modern ecclesiastical
reformers, the lock-up pew or closet, was not unknown. These
 in parish churches were generally chantry chapels, arranged for
private services at their own altars and for use as pews during
the public services.”

The pulpit had no fixed position: it was made movable; one of that
period still remains at Westminster. It was ordered in 1547 that the
priests and choir should kneel in the midst of the church and sing or
say the Litany; the Litany desk came into use afterwards. The
confessional had been continued in certain London churches: at St.
Margaret Patens there was the “shrivyng pew”; at St. Christopher le
Stock the “Shriving House.” The usual custom was for the penitent
to kneel or stand before the priest, who sat in a chair. The Bible and
the Paraphrases of Erasmus were chained to a desk somewhere in
the nave.
The Rood screen, which was a music gallery, carried a loft and the
organ when there was one. The loft contained desks for singers; it
was also provided with pricks for candles. The great cross rose
above the loft. In the chancel stood the high altar; when there were
no aisles two smaller altars stood one on either side. Above the altar
was a reredos of carved work; at the ends of which hung curtains.
There was generally a super altar. On the high altar stood the cross,
with figures, reliquaries, and images to adorn it. Also they laid on
the altar the Textus or Book of the Gospels, with the paxbrede or
tablet for the kiss of peace. There were generally two lights on the
altar.

“It is convenient to mention here the other lights, which were

kept in 1548, by the retention of the ceremonies with which
they were connected. These were the two tapers carried by
boys in processions at High Mass, and at other services when
solemnly performed; the herse light, used at Matins or Tenebres
on the last three days of Holy Week; the paschal candle, which
stood in a tall candlestick, or hung in a bason on the north side
of the high altar, and was lighted with much ceremony on Easter
Eve, and burned at all the principal services throughout Paschal
 tide; the torches carried in the procession on Corpus Christi
Day; the lantern carried before the Sacrament when it was
taken to the sick; the large standing tapers which were placed
round a corpse during the funeral service; and the candle used
at baptism. Most of the lights, which a little earlier had been
common round tombs, were endowed, and as such had been
taken away, but the custom of survivors placing lights round the
graves of their departed friends would probably be continued
still for a few years.”

Chapels were the most usual places for tombs, but they are found
in every part of the church. The various forms of them are too
familiar to require description, but the use of colour gave them much
more decorative importance in an interior than they have now. Many
were painted, and others were covered with rich cloths. Flat
gravestones had often carpets laid over them, and raised tombs had
palls of cloth of gold or other costly stuff. The church of Dunstable
still possesses such a pall: it is of crimson velvet, richly embroidered.
Tapestries and cloths of various kinds were very much used,
especially in chancels, as curtains and carpets, and as coverings for
seats and desks and the like. Every church also had special hangings
for Lent, when images and pictures were covered up generally with
white or blue cloths, marked with crosses and the emblems of the
Passion. The Lenten veil between the choir and the high altar seems
also to have been retained in 1547, but in 1548 Cranmer and his
party had partly succeeded in doing away with it. All parts of the
church were more or less adorned with imagery and pictures on
walls, in windows, or on furniture. None had been ordered to be
taken away except such as had been superstitiously abused, or
which were representations of “feigned miracles.”

“When the priest took the Sacrament to the sick he was

accompanied by clerks, who carried a cross, bell, and light. The
Sacrament itself was enclosed in a pyx, and with it was taken a
cup in which the priest dipped his fingers after giving the
communion. The chrismatory was generally a little box of metal
 containing three little bottles for the three oils, which seem
generally to have been kept together. For use at funerals, every
church had a cross, a bier, and a handbell, the last being a
good-sized bell which was rung before the corpse as it was
being carried to the church. It was also used for ‘crying’ obits
about the parish, and asking for prayers for the deceased. Some
churches had what was called the common coffin, which was
used to carry bodies to the church, the most general custom
being to bury without coffin. And they had palls and torches for
funerals, for the use of which a charge was made according to
the quality of the pall and the ‘waste’ of the torches. At
weddings it was the custom to hold a large square cloth of silk
or other material, called the care cloth, over the heads of the
bride and bridegroom whilst they received the benediction, and
it was kept for that use amongst the church goods. At St.
Margaret’s, Westminster, we find also a crown or circlet for
brides, which appears to have been a thing of some value.”

It will be seen from these quotations that the parish church

contained in essentials the whole of the Catholic ritual except the
parts which were ordered to be read in English. At the same time by
reading, by hearing sermons, by the newly awakened spirit of
examination and discussion, the people were preparing for more
drastic changes. When they came there was no violent revolution,
and though many remained faithful to the old creed, the bulk of the
people in London were Protestant at heart. The weak point of the
Reformation was that as yet no one was sure that it was stable and
assured. Nor was there any such assurance till the defeat of the
Spanish Armada and fifty years of the Maiden Queen had turned
Protestantism into patriotism.
It is apparent (see Archæologia, vol. xlv.) that the ancient
vestments were worn in some of the churches after the Reformation,
until they fell to pieces. At the church of St. Christopher le Stock
they were worn until the third year of Elizabeth, when being worn
out, and no funds existing to replace them, the simple surplice was
used. Twelve tables hung on the wall of the church: one containing
the Ten Commandments; eleven containing prayers to the saints.
The Reformers, therefore, did not introduce a new thing when they
hung up the Table of the Commandments.

S. B. Bolas & Co., London.

TOMB OF QUEEN ELIZABETH IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY

It used to be a custom in many City churches to ring the bell at 5

A.M.; not the “apprentice bell,” but a continuation and a survival of
the ancient practice to call the people to the early service. Thus, at
St. Margaret’s, Lothbury, in 1573, it was “resolved that after every
workday we shall have morning prayer at five o’clock; also to have a
lecture every Wednesday and Friday, beginning at five o’clock and
ending at six o’clock, the bell to toll half an hour after five every
afternoon.” The books show a good deal of whipping of men and
women. They were chiefly wanderers, tramps, and their great
offence was in carrying the plague about the country.
The services of the church could be made Lutheran in their
character or Puritanic. The great difference was in the manner of
singing. The Puritans sang in a plain tune all together; the
Protestants “tossed” the Psalms from one side to the other with
music of the organ. Congregational singing was one of the most
important changes introduced by the Reformation. In September
1559 the new morning prayer “after Geneva fashion” was introduced
at St. Antholin’s, the bell ringing at 5 A.M.
There were still some processions kept up. On St. Andrew’s Day a
procession was conducted at St. Paul’s with one priest out of every
parish in the City, and on the 25th of September the boys of St.
Anthony’s school marched together from Mile End down Cornhill with
streamers and flags, whifflers and drums.
In the church of St. Christopher le Stock we find that certain old
customs were preserved: the church was decorated at Christmas
with holly and ivy; at Easter with “rosemary, bay, and strawings.”
The parish system seems to have been well worked; the streets
were kept clean; evildoers were not allowed to harbour within the
limits; taxes were collected; the sick were watched and tended.
The efforts of the more sober leaders were directed to change, it
is true, but to gradual not revolutionary change. The restraint of the
zealous, however, was in some churches very difficult; certain
quarters of the City were far more Protestant than others:
Blackfriars, for instance, became an early centre of Puritanism; at St.
Martin’s-in-the-Fields, on the other hand, we find the church-
wardens quietly obeying every new ordinance, but keeping the old
things in boxes ready for a possible return to the old order. The
Dissolution of the Houses brought with it certain unexpected
accompaniments. The servants of the Commissioners took away the
sacred vestments and used them either for their own common wear
or for saddlecloths, thus inflicting wanton insults on the faithful and
bringing into contempt, with the desecration of the vestments, the
very doctrines of which they were symbolical. Again, there were the
relics and the images which the people had so long adored; it is true
that the Church would not acknowledge the adoration of an image,
but that was the practice of the common people, as it is at this day
in every Roman Catholic Church. Thus sacred objects came to be
treated with the utmost scorn: reliquaries were emptied and the
relics thrown away; images of the Virgin were deprived of their
lovely vestments, and sent about the country, shapeless lumps of
wood, or brought to London to be publicly burned. In some cases an
ancient and venerable fraud was discovered and pitilessly exposed.
Who could resist contempt for the priests and monks who had for
many generations of simple believers made the head on the Holy
Rood of Boxley incline benignantly and roll its eyes upon the
kneeling multitude? With all these aids to disbelief who can wonder
if the wave of Protestant indignation mounted steadily higher; if the
fiery spirit of Reform seized upon town and country, upon the sober
merchant and the hot-headed ’prentice? We hear of the young men
reading the Bible aloud in the churches, shouting the words they
read; of girls who carried the English Primer with them to church
and studied it during the singing of Matins; of men who insulted the
Consecration of the Host; who attacked the priest who carried it
through the streets. It is certain that London itself, almost from the
beginning, was for the Reformation. (See Appendix V.)
FOR CONTINUATION SEE BACK OF THE OTHER HALF OF THE ILLUSTRATION.
Go to transcription of text
 W. A. Mansell & Co.
“POPISH PLOTS AND TREASONS.”
For descriptions in rhyme see back.
Go to transcription of text
 CONTINUED FROM BACK OF FIRST HALF OF ILLUSTRATION.
Go to transcription of text

A pressing difficulty, in the opening years of Elizabeth, was the

illiterate and immoral condition of the clergy. So many refused the
oath of supremacy that it became necessary to create lay readers.
Indeed, the condition of England, including London, was calculated
to fill the minds of the most ardent Protestants with dismay. During
the first fifteen years of the reign, the House of Commons
complained to the Queen that men were ordained who were
infamous in their lives and conversation; the Bishop of London
complained that even the Bishops were “sunk and lamentably
disvalued by the meanest of the peoples”; the County of Essex
represented that the new clergy were ignorant, riotous and
drunkards; the Lords in Council represented to the Archbishop of
Canterbury the evil lives of the clergy. Out of all the clergy in the City
of London there were but nineteen preachers. Yet in 1559 Elizabeth
ordered that there should be a sermon once a month on doctrine.
And in 1586 the Bishop of London ordered the clergy to write one
Sermon every week. It is said that the clergy fell so low in esteem as
to be treated like outcasts, incurably drunken, ignorant, and
licentious.

KNIGHT SEIZING AN ARCHBISHOP

From an illuminated MS. in British Museum.

With the general charges against the Elizabethan Clergy it appears

unnecessary to bring forward specific acts which may very well be
taken to be isolated cases, in no way proving general corruption.
There are, however, a few which seem to show the general condition
of things.
In 1562, a priest was carted through the City for saying mass.
 In 1554 priests, who would not leave their wives, did penance in
St. Paul’s, and were beaten over the head with rods.
In 1561 the Queen, who never approved the marriage of priests,
ordered those who were married not to bring their wives into
Colleges.
In the same year there were found to be many conjurors in
Westminster including priests, one of whom was put in pillory.
In 1557 the priest of St. Ethelburga was pilloried for sedition, and
had his ears nailed to the pillory.
In 1559 there was a great burning of copes, censers, crosses,
altar cloths, rood cloths, books, banners, etc.
In 1560 a priest was hanged for cutting a purse; it was his second
offence.
The priest who sold his wife to a butcher, and was carried through
the streets for an open shame, must hardly, one hopes, be quoted
as an example. We picture him as a drunken and dissolute hog, lost
to all sense of decency. The other priest who for an act of immorality
was also carried about the streets may have been more common.
When all the clergy married as a matter of course such scandals
ceased.
As I have reproduced certain charges against the clergy and
Religious of the old Faith, it is but fair to give an example of the bad
character of one, at least, belonging to the clergy of the
Reformation. The following letter is addressed to the Lady Bowes:—
“Right Worshipfull,

I understand that one Raphe Cleaton ys curate of the

chappell at Buxton; his wages are, out of his neighbour’s
benevolence, about VLI yearely; Sir Charles Cavendishe had the
tythes there this last years, ether of his owne right or my Lord’s,
as th’ inhabitants saye. The minister aforenamed differeth little
from those of the worste sorte, and hath dipt his finger both in
 manslaughter and p’jurie, etc. The placings or displacing of the
curate there resteth in Mr. Salker, commissarie of Bakewell, of
which churche Buxton is a chappell of ease.
I humbly thanke your Worship for your letter to the justices at
the cessions; for Sir Peter Fretchvell, togither with Mr. Bainbrigg,
were verie earnest against the badd vicar of Hope; and
lykewyse Sir Jermane Poole, and all the benche, savinge Justice
Bentley, who used some vaine (talk) on his behalfe, and
affirmed that my Lady Bowes had been disprooved before Mr.
Lord of Shrowesburie in reports touching the vicar of Hope; but
such answere was made therto as his mouthe was stopped; yet
the latter daie, when all the justic’s but himselffe and one other
were rysen, he wold have had the said vicar lycensed to sell ale
in his vicaredge, althoe the whole benche had comanded the
contrarye; whereof Sir Jermane Poole being adv’tised, retyrned
to the benchs (contradicting his speeche) whoe, with Mr.
Bainbrigge, made their warrant to bringe before them, him, or
anie other person that shall, for him, or in his vicaridge, brue, or
sell ale, etc. He ys not to bee punished by the Justices for the
multytude of his women, untyll the basterds whereof he is the
reputed father bee brought in. I am the more boulde to wryte
so longe of this sorrie matter, in respect you maye take so much
better knowledge of Sir Jo. Bentley, and his p’tialytie in so vile a
cause; and esteeme and judge of him according to that
wisdome and good discretion. Thus, humbly cravinge p’don, I
comitt your good Wors. to the everlasting Lorde, who ever
keepe you.” This is quoted by N. Drake in Shakespeare and his
Times, vol. i. p. 92.

And here is Ben Jonson’s portrait of the City Parson—none too

flattering:—
 “He is the prelate of the parish here
And governs all the dames, appoints the cheer,
Writes down the bills of fare, pricks all the guests,
Makes all the matches and the marriage feasts
Within the Ward; draws all the parish wills,
Designs the legacies, and strokes the gills
Of the chief mourners; and, whoever lacks,
Of all the kindred, he hath first his blacks.
Thus holds he weddings up and burials,
As his main tithing; with the gossips’ stalls,
Their pews; he’s top still at the public mess;
Comforts the widow and the fatherless,
In funeral sack; sits ’bove the alderman;
For of the wardmote quest, he better can
The mystery than the Levitic law;
That piece of clerkship doth his vestry awe.
He is as he conceives himself, a fine,
Well furnished, and apparelled divine.”

Harrison, however, speaks up for the credit of the Reformed

Clergy.
The observance of Lent was maintained by law, but with difficulty,
and the law was continually broken. It was a distinguishing mark of
the Puritan to eat flesh on the forbidden days. Queen Elizabeth
ordered that no flesh should be eaten on “fish days,” namely, the
forty days of Lent, Ember Days, Rogation Days, and Fridays.
Licenses, however, were granted for those who either on account of
bodily infirmity, or any other cause, were forbidden to fast. The
license cost, for a nobleman or his wife, 26s. 8d. per annum; for a
knight or his wife, 13s. 4d. per annum; and for those of lower
degree, 6s. 8d. per annum.
Thus began the evasion of the law. Butchers were licensed to kill
for those privileged to eat flesh. In 1581 the House of Lords call
upon the Mayor to explain why forty butchers are allowed to kill
during Lent, and how it is that the eating of flesh at that season is
common in the City. The Mayor replies that the facts are otherwise,
and that the number of licensed butchers is only five, viz. two for
either Shambles and one for Southwark.
 In 1552 only three butchers are licensed. Evidently the Mayor tries
strong measures. But there are more complaints from the Lords.
In 1586 the House of Lords again send representations to the
Mayor.
In 1587 the Mayor, evidently wishing to shift responsibility, says
that it is difficult to restrain butchers. Perhaps the House of Lords
will undertake the duty of licensing. The House of Lords declines to
undertake the work of the Mayor.
In 1590 the Mayor complains of butchers being licensed in
privileged places. What does this mean?
In 1591 he gives licenses to six butchers. He then finds out what
we have been suspecting all along, that cattle and sheep were killed
outside his jurisdiction, and that flesh was brought into the City by
the gates. He also proves that within the City itself a great deal more
meat is killed than was wanted for Shrovetide. Here we have a proof
of the Puritanic spirit. The unlicensed butchers, on the eve of Lent,
kill a great deal more than is wanted for Shrovetide; the licensed
butchers go on killing. Do they sell to none but persons who have
paid for the privilege? And every day carcases are brought in at the
gates wrapped up in some kind of cloth for disguise.
In 1615 the Mayor gives up the attempt. He says that all butchers
kill and sell meat in Lent, on Fridays, and that the people buy it
freely on Fridays and on the other forbidden days.
Still there is maintained the pretence of an enforced fast during
Lent until the Civil War, after which there are no more attempts to
make the people fast, while many of the better class, clergy and
others, continue to abstain from meat on the forbidden days.
There are grave complaints, both before and after the
Reformation, about the behaviour of the people in church. The
complaints point to two widely different causes. The first cause, that
which operated before the Reformation, was undoubtedly the
formalism into which religion had fallen. To be present at Mass,
merely to be present, to kneel at the right time, was the whole of
religion. Sir Thomas More, a most devout Catholic, complains bitterly
of the irreverence of people at church service. Outward behaviour,
he says, “is a plain express mirror or image of the mind, inasmuch
as by the eyes, by the cheeks, by the eyelids, by the brows, by the
hands, by the feet, and finally by the gesture of the whole body,
right well appeareth how madly and fondly the mind is set and
disposed.” He applies this observation to himself and the
congregation. Sometimes “we solemnly get to and fro, and other
whiles fairly and softly set us down again.” “When we have to kneel
we do it upon one knee, or we have one cushion to kneel upon and
another to support the elbows. We never pretend to listen: we pare
our nails; we claw our head.”
 A ROYAL PICNIC
From Turberville’s Book of Hunting, 1575.

The second cause was the rise of the new Religion. It was
inevitable that with the destruction of the old forms a period of
irreverence should set in. The churches quickly began to show signs
of neglect. The windows were broken, the doors were unhinged, the
walls fell into decay, the very roofs were in some places stripped of
their lead. “The Book of God,” says Stubbes, “was rent ragged, and
all be-torn.” Some of the churches were used for stabling horses.
Armed men met in the churchyard, and wrangled, or shot pigeons
with hand-guns over the graves. Pedlars sold their wares in the
church porches during service. Morrice-dancers excited inattention
and wantonness by their presence in costume, so as to be ready for
the frolics which generally followed prayers. “Many there are,” said
Sandys, preaching before Elizabeth even after her reforms, “that
hear not a sermon in seven years, I might say in seventeen.” The
friends of the new doctrine expected that all the evils of the time
would be instantly remedied. But the work of reform was extremely
gradual.
A third reason is offered for the irreverence of the people during
service, this time during the Anglican service. Many people walked
about, talked and laughed. This, however, was to show their
contempt for the new order; they were secretly attached to the
ancient Faith; they betrayed their sympathies, not only by this
intolerance, but also by crossing themselves and telling their beads
in secret.
Many of the ancient customs remained. It was long before the
people, in London, could be persuaded to give up their old customs.
Sunday remained the weekly holiday: the people held on Sundays
their wakes, ales, rush-bearings, May games, bear-baitings, dancing,
piping, picnics, and gaming; they continued so to “break the
Sabbath”—which was first made part of the Christian week by the
Puritans—until well into the seventeenth century. After the
Commonwealth I think that there were very few traces of old
customs lingering in the country, and only those, such as the
hanging of garlands in the chancel when a maiden died, which
carried with them no doctrinal significance and could prove no
occasion for drunkenness and debauchery.
Before the coming of the Puritans the funerals continued with
much of the old ritual. The body was laid out in such state as the
family circumstances allowed: tapers were burned round it by night
and by day; the church bells still rang for the prayers of the people,
though they were taught that to pray for the dead was a vain thing;
the priests who visited the house of the dead repeated the Lord’s
Prayer; if on the way to the churchyard the procession passed a
cross, they stopped and knelt, and made prayers; the body was laid
in the grave wrapped in a shroud, without a coffin; it was covered by
a pall, which was decorated with crosses. Those of the ancient Faith
would persuade the clergymen, if they could, to omit the service; if
he persisted, they left the grave and walked away. Nothing was a
stronger tie to the old Religion than its burial service, and its
assurance that the dead who died in the Church were assured of
Heaven after due purgatory, and that the prayers of the living were
of avail to shorten the pains of prison.
Machyn, the City Chronicler of this period, thus describes the
simplicity of a Protestant funeral:—

“The iij day of Aprell was browth unto saint Thomas of Acurs
in Chepe from lytyll sant Barthellmuw in Lothberes masteres ...
and ther was a gret compene of pepull, ij and ij together, and
nodur prest nor clarke, the nuw prychers in ther gowne lyke
leymen, nodur syngyng nor sayhyng tyll they came to the grave,
and a-for she was pute into the grayff a collect in Englys, and
then put into the grayff, and after took some heythe, and caste
yt on the corse and red a thynge ... for the sam, and contenent
cast the heth into the grave, and contenent red the pystyll of
sant Poll to the Stesselonyans the chapter, and after thay song
pater noster in Englys, boyth prychers and odur and women of
a nuw fassyon, and after on of them whent into the pulpytt and
made a sermon.”

The following note by Machyn presents one of the last

appearances of the old Sanctuary customs:—

“The vi day of December the abbot of Westminster went a

procession with his convent; before him went all the sanctuary
men with crosse keys upon their garments, and after whent iij
for murder: one was the Lord Dacre’s sone of the Northe was
wypyd with a shett abowt him for Kyllyng of on master West,
sqwyre, dwellyng besyd ...; and anodur theyff that dyd long to
one of master comtroller ... dyd kylle Recherd Eggyllston the
comtroller’s tayller, and killed him in the Lord Acurs, the bak-syd
Charyng-crosse; and a boy that kyld a byge boye that sold
 papers and pryntyd bokes, with horlyng of a stone and yt hym
under the ere in Westmynster Hall; the boy was one of the
chylderyn that was at the sckoll ther in the abbey; the boy was
a hossear [hosier] sune a-boyff London-stone.” (Diary of Henry
Machyn, p. 121.)

The good old institution of Sanctuary died hard. Even after it was
supposed to have been finished and put away it continued to linger.
Abbot Feckenham made a vigorous appeal for its preservation. “All
princes,” he said, “and all Lawmakers, Solon in Athens, Lycurgus in
Lacedemon, all have had loca refugii, places of succour and safe-
guard for such as have transgressed laws and deserved corporal
pains. Since, therefore, ye mean not to destroy all sanctuaries, and if
your purpose be to maintain any, or if any be worthy to be
continued, Westminster, of all others, is most worthy, and that for
four causes: the first is, the antiquity and continuance of sanctuary
there; the second, the dignity of the person by whom it was
ordained; the third, the worthiness of the place itself; the fourth, the
profit and commodity that you have received thereby.”
It is a common charge against the Dissolution of the Religious
Houses that the old custom of open tables for all comers fell into
disuse. The disuse is not without exceptions. The Houses being
suppressed, of course the hospitality disappeared; but the practice
was still kept up by some of the Bishops: Archbishop Parker, for
instance, fed every day a number of poor people who waited outside
the gates of Lambeth for the broken meats; while any one who
chose to come in, whether at dinner or at supper, was received and
entertained either at the Steward’s or the Almoner’s table. Order was
observed; no loud talking was permitted; and the discourse was
directed towards framing men’s manners to Religion. Whether the
practice of indiscriminate doles should have been kept up is another
question, and one that cannot be asked of the sixteenth century.
The state and dignity maintained by this Archbishop were almost
worthy of Cardinal Wolsey: the Queen gave him a patent for forty
retainers, but his household consisted of five times that number, all
living with him and dining at his table in Lambeth Palace.
The Church House was an ecclesiastical edifice which has now
entirely passed away. I know nothing about the Church House
except what is found in the Archæological Journal, vol. xl. p. 8.
“Not a single undoubted specimen has been spared to us, though
it is not improbable that the half-timbered building attached to the
west end of the church at Langdon, in Essex, and now called the
Priest House, is really one of these. We have evidence from all parts
of the country that they were once very common. There is, indeed,
hardly an old churchwarden’s account-book which goes back beyond
the changes of the sixteenth century that does not contain some
reference to a building of this kind. They continued in being and to
be used for church purposes long after the Reformation. The
example at All Saints, Derby, stood in the churchyard and was in
existence in 1747.”... “We must picture to ourselves then a long, low
room with an ample fireplace, or rather a big open chimney
occupying one end with a cast hearth. Here the cooking was done,
and here the water boiled for brewing the church ale. There was a
large oak table in the middle with benches around, and a lean-to
building on one side to act as a cellar. This, I think, is not an
inaccurate sketch of a building which played no unimportant part in
our rural economy and rural pleasures. All the details are wanting,
and we can only fill them in by drawing on the imagination. We
know that almost all our churches were made beautiful by religious
painting on the walls. I should not be surprised if we some day
discovered that the church-house came in for its share of art, and
that pictures, not religious in the narrow sense, but grotesque and
humorous, sometimes covered the walls. It was in the church-house
that the ales were held. They were provided for in various ways, but
usually by the farmers, each of whom was wont to give his quota of
malt. There was no malt tax in those days, and as a consequence
there was a malt-kiln in almost every village. These ales were held at
various times. There was almost always one on the Feast of the
Dedication of the Church. Whitsuntide was also a very favourite
time; but they seem to have been held at any convenient time when
money was wanted for the church.... Philip Stubbes, the author of
the Anatomie of Abuses, only knew the Church Ales in their decline.
He was, Anthony Wood informs us, a most rigid Calvinist, a bitter
enemy to Popery, so that his picture must be received with
allowances for exaggeration. His account of them is certainly not a
flattering one. He tells us that ‘The Churche Wardens ... of every
parishe, with the consent of the whole parishe, provide halfe a score
or twentie quarters of mault, wherof some they buye of the churche
stocke, and some is given them of the parishioners themselves,
everyone conferryng some-what, accordyng to his abilitie; which
mault beeyng made into very strong ale or beere is sette to sale,
either in the churche or some other place assigned to that purpose.
Then, when this ... is sette abroche, well is he that can gette
soonest to it and spend the most at it; for he that sitteth the closest
to it and spendes the moste at it, he is counted the godliest man of
all the rest, and moste in God’s favour, because it is spent uppon His
church forsoth. But who, either for want can not, or otherwise for
feare of God’s wrath will not sticke to it, he is counted none destitute
both of vertue and godlines.... In this kind of practise they continue
six weekes, a quarter of a yere, yea helfe a yeare together, swillyng
and gullyng, night and daie, till they be as dronke as rattes, and as
blockishe as beastes.... That money ... if all be true which they saie
... they repair their churches and chappels with it, they buie bookes
for service, cuppes for the celebration of the sacrements, surplesses
for Sir John, and such other necessaries.’”
 OLD ST. PAUL’S BEFORE THE DESTRUCTION OF THE STEEPLE

The burning of St. Paul’s steeple created a great sensation, and

was by some regarded as an act of God’s wrath for the recent
changes. Maitland[3] quotes an original letter describing the disaster:
—

“a.d. 1561, on Wednesday the 4th of June, as appears by a

Letter before me from Mr. Richard Jones to Sir Nicholas
Throckmorton, Ambassador from Queen Elizabeth to the Court
of France, communicated by the honourable Mr. Yorke, it rained
all the Day, and, towards Four of the Clock in the Afternoon, it
began to thunder terribly: ‘When suddenly a Thunder-bolt, with
a great Thunder following, hit within a Yard of the very top of
the Steeple, which forthwith shewed his Effect, and appeared a
little Fire, like unto the Light of a Torch, which, increasing
towards the Weather-cock, caused the same within a quarter of
an hour to fall down; whereby the Wind, which was great, and
the more vehement by reason of the opening of the Steeple and
Height thereof, caused the Flame so to augment, and burn the
Steeple, which no Man could succour, as within an Hour the
high Steeple of Paul’s, which was so long in building, and so
renowned, was utterly consumed to the very Battlements; which
being of some Breadth and Strength, as was needful to uphold
such a weight, received most part of the Timber which fell from
the Spire, and began to burn with such Vehemence, as all the
Timber was burnt, the Iron and Bells melted and fallen down
upon the stairs within a short space. This was judged to be the
end of the effect of the lightning; when forthwith the East and
West roofs of the Church, partly kindled with the timber which
fell from the Battlements, and with the heating of the Fire
whiles it remained within the Stone Steeple, were on Fire, and
ceased not to burn so extremely, as could not be provided for
by no means, till that not only those ends, but the north and
south ails, before one of the Clock after Midnight, were
consumed, and not a piece of Timber left, nor Lead unmolten,
upon any of the higher and cross Roofs and Battlements. The
side Ails, tho’ they were a little touched, by reason of their
Crowns, remained safe, Thanks be to God. And this is all that is
happened by this Misfortune, and the Church within is
untouched. Your Lordship may guess what Stir and Removing
there was in St. Paul’s Church-yard, especially towards the North
door, where divers Houses were pulled down, and much
lamentation on all sides. On the East End a Pinnacle fell down
and ruined a House, wherein there were seven Persons not
hurt, but the good man of the House a little. Many other
turmoils there were, as in like Cases it happens; which, as it
grieves me to hear, so I am loth to write the same. The French
here are not sorry for the Matter. All good and honest Men are
sorry for it, and impute it to a terrible remembrance of God’s
Anger towards us for our Offences. This is enough and too
much of so grievous a matter; and yet I thought I should
perhaps satisfy your Lordship in writing thereof thus largely.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookname.com