compatible even with a statement that he fought at the battle
of Rimenant on August 1, 1578, though, had he been present on so famous
an occasion, it would have been more like him to refer somewhere to the
circumstance. But if there is no sufficient ground for questioning the
belief in his participation in the war of the Low Countries, there is
yet less for disputing his residence in England from 1576. His signature
to a family deed, already mentioned, in April, 1578, testifies that in
1578 and in ensuing years he was for a time in Devonshire. Evidence
exists that in 1576, if not earlier, he was living in London. For 1576
itself the proof consists of some commendatory verses by 'Walter Rawely
of the Middle Temple' prefixed to the _Steele Glasse_ by Gascoigne,
published in that year. Upon the description Wood has based a distinct
assertion that Ralegh went from Oxford to the Middle Temple to improve
himself in the intricate knowledge of the municipal laws. Oldys says he
had searched the Registers of the Inn and they yielded no sign of a
Walter Rawely or Ralegh. Moreover, if Ralegh had ever been formally a
law student, it has been argued he could scarcely have solemnly declared
at his trial in 1603 that he had never read a word of law or the
statutes. On the other hand, doubts of the identity of the Rawely of the
poem with Ralegh always involved intrinsic difficulties. Ralegh would
have known Gascoigne through Humphrey Gilbert, with whom Gascoigne
served in Flanders; and there is not a trace of the existence of a
namesake acquainted with Gascoigne, or able to compose the verses. Now,
at any rate, no room for serious dispute remains. A list in two
manuscript volumes of all members of the Middle Temple from the
commencement of the sixteenth century has lately been completed by order
of the Benchers. In it, under the date 1574/5, February 27, appears an
entry 'Walter Rawley, late of Lyons Inn, Gent. Son of Walter R. of
Budleigh, Co. Devon, Esq.' The specification of parentage is useful.
Without it a hypothesis would have been possible, that the traditions
both of Oxford and of the Temple had been concurrently and equally at
fault, and that some inglorious William or Walter had been personating
the future hero alike in 1572 and in 1575. As for Ralegh's assertions in
later years that he had read no law, as large a disclaimer might have
been conscientiously made by many students at Inns of Court beside him.
But it is evident that