FIRST
DIVORCE
QF
iiiiiiililiiiii!
BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME
FROM THE
SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND
THE GIFT OF
Hcnrg W. Sage
1891
/?. X IJ 313
M-
'AM
7—
7b 73- 2
DATE DUE
URjs
^'
p^
r
ii-''-'"^g
^ynv^Ow «>
K
*fwr£>^
'^^=f^^-ir
-^
CAYLORD
PRINTED IN U.S.A.
Cornell University Library
DA 338.H79
First divorce ol *;',1[|',^Y,,in|||'i|ii|i|||i|i|i
3 1924 027 962 327
o4
THE FIRST DIVORCE OF
HENRY VIII.
Cornell University
Library
The original of tliis book is in
tine Cornell University Library.
There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924027962327
THE FIRST DIVORCE
Henry VIII.
AS TOLD IN THE STATE PAPERS.
BY
Mrs. hope
AUTHOR OF "THE EARLY MARTYRS," "LIFE OF S. THOMAS OP CANTERBURY,"
"the CONVERSION OF THE TEUTONIC RACES," ETC.
EDITED, WITH NOTES AND INTRODUCTION
BY
FRANCIS AIDAN GASQUET, D.D., O.S.B.
LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER, & CO. L™
PATERNOSTER HOUSE, CHARING CROSS ROAD
1894
^.ti.\^'2>■x5
The rights of translation and of reproduction are reserved^
INTRODUCTION
A FEW words are required to explain the origin of
the present volume. The labour of gathering the
materials from the various published collections of
State Papers and other contemporary documents,
as well as the toil implied in putting them together
into a connected narrative, occupied the last few
years of Mrs. Hope's life. The literary works of
this talented and conscientious writer, who died on
February the I2th, 1887, are too well known to
make a lengthy introduction necessary. It is un-
fortunate that she did not live to complete this
her latest, and in many respects most important,
contribution to popular historical literature. The
delicate state of her health during a long period,
and particularly failing eyesight during the later
years of her life, compelled her gradually to restrict
the range of her studies and to compose by dicta-
tion to an amanuensis, especially in the case of the
present work. There is reason to suppose that she
had contemplated a more extensive history of the
vi INTRODUCTION.
ecclesiastical changes in England in the sixteenth
century. Of this, had she ever lived to complete
it, the episode detailed in the following pages
would have formed only a small portion. With
this intention the present study was prefaced by
a somewhat elaborate " Introduction," which, how-
ever suitable for the history designed, is now
altogether out of place. It has consequently been
omitted altogether.
The character of Mrs. Hope's previous works
makes it certain that the MS. of the present volume
had not received its final revision at her hands.
Consequently, when requested by her son, Sir
Theodore Hope, to undertake the editing of the
work, my first care was thoroughly to revise it and
to examine and verify every statement by reference
to the authority quoted. Besides this, on reflection
I have thought it well to add notes giving some
indication of the nature and dates of the documents
cited. Speaking generally, therefore, the notes
throughout the volume may be regarded as mine.
This will explain why in one or two cases the note
may appear to modify the text. In the very few
instances in which I have had no doubt whatever
that Mrs. Hope had been mistaken in her reading
of a statement, or had made too wide an inference
from a fact, I have not hesitated to make the
necessary verbal change in the text, feeling sure that
INTRODUCTION. vii
she would have done the same had she lived to pass
the sheets of the book through the press herself.
In other respects, except for necessary corrections,
and other slight matters of a purely technical kind,
this study appears as Mrs. Hope left it.
The chief merit of the work is that it tells the
plain, unvarnished story of Henry's Divorce from
Katharine, disentangled from the various other
events and courses of action, foreign and domestic,
of the period, by which the marriage question is
generally obscured. It relies entirely upon the
original documents as published in the various
calendars of State Papers and other contemporary
authorities, and the reader may see at once upon
what ground any given statement is made. It is
true that, taken as a whole, this tale of intrigues
and negotiations and delays reads more like the
recital of a feverish dream than sober history. The
crisis, always imminent, seems never to advance,
and to those unacquainted with Tudor methods, the
story may well appear incredible. In reality, how-
ever, it states fairly, and without embellishment,
the devious paths by which Henry VIII. attained
his end at last, and divorced his first wife Katherine
in order to marry Anne Boleyn.
In saying that Mrs. Hope's study is a full and
accurate account of this strange episode in our
national history, a sUght reservation must be made
viii INTRODUCTION.
in regard to Chapter XIX. Although leaving the
text as she had written it, I feel that it would be
impossible to allow the book to appear without
some correction of her view as to the action of
Convocation in the matter of the Royal Headship,
and incidentally as to the part taken by Bishop
Fisher in the discussions. The account given in
the text certainly corresponds to the loose impres-
sion which generally prevails on the subject. The
difficulty has come about from the natural tendency
of people to view critical episodes in the light of
the broad eventual result. Indeed, no task is more
difficult for the historian than to enter into the
thoughts and feelings of those who stood unwit-
tingly at the verge of a revolution which to them
was not merely sudden and unexpected, but which
must have been inconceivable. It is no easy matter
to estimate the force and weigh the intention of
particular words or actions as events progress
towards a crisis.
There is in practice another difficulty in the way
of arriving at the truth^ — a difficulty easily reme-
diable indeed, but commonly neglected — namelj', a
failure properly to probe and understand the terms
of original documents. A good illustration of
this failing is to be found in Chapter XIX. of
this present work, where the author, quite excus-
ably, and following most writers on the subject.
INTRODUCTION. ix
States that Henry agreed to accept the fine to be
paid for their prmmunire by Convocation " only on
condition that in the preamble of the bill, clauses
acknowledging him as sole Supreme Head of the
Church and clergy of England, and giving him
absolute spiritual jurisdiction and legislative power,
should be inserted" (pp. 209, 210).^
This unquestionably represents the idea current
on the matter, but even in the clauses originally
proposed by the royal agents the grant of " legislative
power " is not so much as mentioned, and the idea
of any spiritual jurisdiction in the King is involved
rather than expressed. It is necessary perhaps, in
order to understand the situation, to enter somewhat
at length into the question of the alterations which
the King wished to have made in the preamble of
the clerical composition, granted by Convocation for
t\\& prcEmunire. Henry required the document to be
revised in five places, and additions to be made to
it. The first related to the insertion of the title of
" Supreme Head ; " the second was an express ac-
knowledgment that the King had protected the
clergy from the efforts of the " New Gospellers " to
lay violent hands on their possessions, and so had
enabled them to minister to God in peace " in the
cure of the souls committed to His Majesty " (ut curce
1 There occur in the book a few other expressions depending on this
view which have also been left unaltered.
X INTRODUCTION.
animaruni ejus majestati commisscs et populo sibi
commisso debite inservire possimus) ; the third con-
tained a statement that the King had confirmed and
defended the privileges and liberties of the Church,
" which do not detract from his royal power and the
laws of the kingdom;" the fourth is a declaration
that the King had granted them a general pardon
for all transgressions of the penal laws and statutes
of the kingdom, with express mention of the prcemu-
nire, in as ample a manner as he had granted to all
his subjects ; and the fifth proposed that the whole
body of the laity should be responsible for this fine
of the clergy.
It must be understood that these so-called clauses
submitted by the King to Convocation have in them-
selves as entered in its acts no meaning whatever.
Their force is only to be recognised in a comparison
with the actual grant subsequently passed by the
clergy. From this it is clear that it was not merely
the first proposed clause which was the subject of
dispute between the Convocation and the royal
agents; although it is only in regard to the first,
that relating to the title " Supreme Head," that a
history of the changes it went through survives. It
is quite evident that the other clauses had each a
history too. The second clause, as drafted by the
King's agents, contained an evident admission that
the cure of souls was committed to his majesty, but
INTRODUCTION. xi
as passed by Convocation this was distinctly guarded
against. In its final form it read : that we may be
able to serve in the cure of the souls " of the nation
committed to his majesty" {popidi ejus majestati
commissi). The third proposed insertion about the
King's confirmation of the privileges and liberties not
repugnant to the royal power was evidently rejected,
and the fourth appears in a modified form, which,
however, does not seem to a non-legal mind to touch
the substance. Lastly, the fifth proposed insertion
as to the liability of the laity was restricted to those
persons only in whose hands the property of vacant
bishoprics and benefices should happen to be.
It is quite evident that every word of these inser-
tions as proposed and adopted had been weighed
with the greatest care that could be given them by
the most skilled jurists and theologians. The very
number of the sessions, apparently some two and
thirty, that were required to discuss the proposals,
is a sufficient evidence of the consideration given to
them. The changes in the proposed insertions made
by the clergy, moreover, throw considerable light on
the sense in which the clause relating to the King's
Supreme Headship, and the only one to which
attention is generally directed, was accepted by
the Convocation. A common impression seems to
prevail that this insertion was intended as a formal
acknowledgment of the King's ecclesiastical supre-
lii INTRODUCTION.
macy, as stated in Mrs. Hope's pages. So far,
however, from this being the case, the Acts of
Convocation make it clear that the so-called clause
has by itself no sense whatever. It reads, "of
the English Church and clergy, whose Protector and
Supreme Head he alone is." In fact, it was never
intended for any other purpose but for insertion in
the current text of the grant of Convocation, with
the design, of course, to serve ulterior purposes.
What these were is made perfectly clear by the
second proposed parenthesis, which states (also
obiter) that the care of souls was committed to his
majesty, and implies that jurisdiction over them was
granted to the clergy by the crown. So far, however,
from accepting this view of the situation, the English
clergy in Convocation expressly put it aside, re-
serving to themselves the care of souls, and simply
stating in general terms that the people were com-
mitted to charge of his majesty — a perfectly innocuous
proposition.
With the light thus thrown on the question by
the action of Convocation, we are in a position to
deal with the first clause, which has been so largely
discussed, and seems to have engrossed attention.
The desire of the King's advisers, of course, cannot
be doubtful; but the use of the word Protector, in
concert with the title of "Supreme Head," gives to
the insertion, even as proposed by Henry, a less
INTRODUCTION. xiii
absolute sense than is commonly supposed. Of its
danger in these times there can be no doubt, and it is
hardly open to question, that Convocation recognised
the danger. Still during Catholic ages, the Sovereign
was acknowleged as the Protector — the advocatus —
of the Church in his country, just as the Emperor
was regarded in Christendom as the special defender
of the Church of Rome. It was to Henry that the
English bishops and clergy of that day must look in
the last resort for protection against the introduction
of heresy, and for maintenance in their temporali-
ties, even as their predecessors had looked to his
predecessors.!
In the present case the Supreviuin Caput un-
doubtedly gave a dangerous gloss to the " Pro-
tectorate," whilst there is little question that the
craft of Cromwell relied upon the insertion of this
perfectly legal and well-recognised term to facilitate
the acceptance of the "Supreme Head."
From the form in which the bishops allowed this
parenthesis it is quite clear that they perfectly well
saw the embarrassment prepared for them, and that
they were as ready to admit the large and legitimate
powers of the sovereign, in a kingdom where the
clergy were so highly privileged, as they were re-
solved not to allow that the cure of souls, and so
by inference spiritual jurisdiction, in any way per-
i Cf. Wilkins, Concilia, iii. p. 252.
xiv INTRODUCTION.
tained to him. In view, then, of the King's attempt
to obtain indirectly from the English clergy a
recognition of his spiritual headship, and of the
care taken to avoid the admission, even when the
demand was made with the royal hand upon their
throats, the sense in which the clergy in Convocation
accepted the Supremum Caput must be taken as
expressly excluding the notion of any royal spiritual
jurisdiction.
That this was so is rendered certain from sub-
sequent history ; but in view of all that has been
written upon the subject of the Supreme Head-
ship, it is now somewhat difficult to realise that
the bishops and clergy took for granted that such
a title had reference merely to temporal matters,
and was not to be twisted in " derogation of the
Roman Pontiff or the Apostohc See."^ Yet this
undoubtedly was the case, and the very last act of
Warham's life was to draft an elaborate exposition
to be delivered in the House of Lords of the im-
possibility, from the very constitution of the Church
of Christ, of the King having spiritual jurisdiction,
and claiming that this of right pertained to the
Pope of Rome.
The clearness of later definitions and the exi-
gencies of later polemics, to say nothing of the
difficulty experienced in the past of obtaining access
^ Wilkins, Concilia, iii. p. 746 (Protest of Warham).
INTRODUCTION. xv
to real sources of information, have, indeed, all
conspired to obscure the motives and meanings of
those who were the leading spirits in the Convoca-
tion of 1531- Still, practically, however carefully
from a theological point of view Convocation may
have guarded themselves and as fully as was pos-
sible in the days when royal power was so absolute,
there can be no hesitation in allowing the force of
the comment of the imperial ambassador Chapuys
on what had been done, that such reservations
would not hold good against Henry's wilfulness.
As a diplomatist whose business it was to look
keenly to the play of forces and to gauge the ultimate
results likely to spring from any course of action,
he saw perfectly well that if the situation — that is,
the great question of the King's divorce — became
aggravated, and Henry failed to obtain the accom-
plishment of his desires, it would quickly result
in men having to make their choice between their
heads and their conscience.
As regards the clause itself, each party, the King
and the bishops, were playing a game of words. In
Henry's royal hands was all the power, but he was
not yet prepared to deal with the Church by methods
of brute force. On the whole, theoretically, the
bishops were successful in baffling him; but the
value of their victory entirely depended on the turn
of events in regard to the divorce. If that could
xvi INTRODUCTION.
have been settled to the King's satisfaction, it is
probable that the supreme spiritual jurisdiction of
the crown would have been heard of no more. But
in the contrary event, as really happened, the time
soon came when mere theological parrying, and
verbal niceties to avoid compromising admissions,
were useless.
As regards the action of Bishop Fisher in the
Convocation, the account given by Mrs. Hope is
taken from the Roman edition of Sanders' Schism.
It is an interpolation of the Roman editor, and it is in
contradiction to contemporary records, which repre-
sent the Bishop as opposing the clause containing
the title of " Supreme Head," and only at last yield-
ing a reluctant consent. Since the publication of
the admirable work on the life of Blessed John
Fisher by the BoUandist Father Van Ortroy, which
seems to have attracted very little attention in
England, there can be no doubt that the account
given in Mrs. Hope's text cannot be relied upon at
all. The attitude of the Bishop of Rochester to the
entire question of the Royal Headship was one of
opposition, and he alone of all the bishops was found,
when the final test came to be applied, to be willing
to sacrifice his life for his conscience.
With the exception of these two points, treated of
here at some length, Mrs. Hope's work is a clear and
straightforward account of the divorce of Henry VIII.
INTRODUCTION. xvii
from his first wife — an episode in English history
fraught with such great consequences to the Church
and State. My belief is, that it gives the story, as
found in the State papers, in a way that no other
book has yet done, and it may be now left to tell its
own tale.
CONTENTS
CHAP.
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
XII.
XIII.
XIV.
XV.
XVI.
XVII.
XVIII.
XIX.
XX.
KATHERINE OF ARAGON .
HENRY VIII
THE REVERSE OF THE MEDAL .
THE TURNING OF FORTUNE'S WHEEL
OPENING OF THE PLOT
EMBASSY TO FRANCE ....
FIRST EMBASSY TO THE POPE .
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE
DISAPPOINTED HOPES
IN ENGLAND ...
THE LEGATE
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS .
LAST DESPERATE EFFORT .
THE LEGATES' COURT
WOLSEY's LAST INTERVIEW
THE FALL OF WOLSEY
DELAY
THE DECISION ....
THE NEW DESPOTISM
SEPARATION FROM KATHERINE
xix
PAGE
I
23
28
40
43
52
58
62
79
84
90
99
iiS
124
149
157
183
201
209
224
CONTENTS.
CHAP,
XXI.
XXII.
XXIII.
XXIV.
XXV.
XXVI.
XXVII.
XXVIII.
XXIX.
XXX.
USURPATION OF SPIRITUAL JURISDICTION AND
LEGISLATION . 239
DECISIVE ACTION IN ROME 250
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND .... 261
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS . . . 280
THE CRISIS 294
THE SCHISM . . 300
THE EXCOMMUNICATION 319
THE APPEAL . 333
THE SCHISM . 343
THE SENTENCE . . . 354
DIVORCE
OF
KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
CHAPTER I.
KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
Katherine, the first wife of Henry VIII., was
the fourth daughter of Ferdinand, King of Aragon,
and Isabella, Queen of Castille. Her birth, which
took place on the i6th of December 1483, happened
at a critical period both in the history of the
Church and in that of her native land. More than
seven centuries previously, the Moors had con-
quered Spain and had either killed or enslaved
the Christian population. A small band of Chris-
tians alone escaped to the mountains of Asturias,
where, round an altar of Our Lady, they made a
heroic stand. In course of time other fugitives
joined them, and as their numbers increased, they
sallied forth under the banner of the Cross, and,
by supernatural deeds of valour, had gradually
reconquered foot by foot their native land. This
2 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
long crusade of seven centuries was, at the time
of Katherine's birth, drawing to a close. The
kingdom of Granada alone remained in the hands
of the Moors, and to its conquest Ferdinand and
Isabella had vowed themselves. The King led
their joint armies in person, while the Queen with
her ladies and young children followed the host,
sharing its hardships, ministering to its wants, and
encouraging those around her by her spirit and
piety. She was at Alcal4-de-Henares, on her way
from the army to spend Christmas at Toledo, when
Katherine was born unexpectedly.
Katherine's childhood was spent in the camp
before Granada, and lessons of faith, courage, and
fortitude were daily impressed upon her by the
heroism she beheld around her. On the 2nd of
January 1492, the city was taken and the Cross
planted in triumph on the Alhambra. Henceforth
Granada was Katherine's home. She had inherited
from her mother warmth of affection, simple piety,
and great strength of character. She was trained
in habits of obedience, humility, self-denial, and
charity to all around her. Her mind was carefully
cultivated. Like so many eminent women of the
time, she could speak and write Latin fluently, she
knew several modern languages, and was besides
well versed in all the learning and accomplishments
of the age.
KATHERINE OF ARAGON. 3
When Katherine was hardly more than four
years of age, Henry VII. of England asked her
in marriage for his eldest son Arthur, then only
twenty months old. Her parents consented, but
without then entering into any binding engage-
ment. Henry was proud of his beautiful boy,
and showed him with delight to the Spanish
ambassadors. First they saw him exquisitely
dressed ; then he was stripped, that they might
admire his well-made form and fair skin. Finally
they were taken to gaze on him whilst he was
asleep. The Spanish envoys were so charmed with
his beauty that they wrote to their sovereigns,
saying that "whatever praise or flattery could be
spoken or written, would in his case be only the
truth." 1
Henry was very anxious to secure by this
marriage an alliance with Spain, which would
tend greatly to strengthen his throne, and he pro-
posed that Katherine should be sent to England
to be educated. The English were at that time
looked on almost as barbarians by the more civilised
' Bergenroth, Calendar of Letters, Despatches, and State Papers
{England and Spahi), preserved in the archives at Simancas and
elsewhere, vol. i. p. 11. (De Puebla to Ferdinand and Isabella,
July 15, 1488.) De Puebla was a doctor of civil law, and was first
sent into England, together with Juan de Sepulveda, to negotiate
the marriage of Katherine and Arthur. He returned in 1494 to
England, as Spanish ambassador in ordinary.
4 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
nations of Europe/ and the Spanish ambassador,
when this proposal was mooted, wrote, that though
on the one hand the manners and customs in
England made it very undesirable that the Princess
should come there till she was grown up, yet, on
the other, her only chance of happiness in her
future life lay in her coming while she was so
young that she could neither remember nor value
the superior civilisation of Spanish society.^ But
Isabella was too good a mother to entrust her
daughter's education to any one not under her own
eye. In the course of the negotiations Henry's wife
and mother suggested that Katherine should always
speak French with her sister-in-law Margaret of
Austria, who was then in Spain, because English
ladies did not understand Latin, much less Spanish.
The ambassador of Spain also advised that she
should be accustomed to drink wine, because the
water in England was not drinkable; and even
were it so, the climate did not allow of its being
drunk.^
^ Rawdon Brown, Calendar of Venetian State Papers, vol. ii.
p. 400. (F. Cliieregato, Apostolic Nuncio in England, to Isabella
d'Este, Marchioness of Mantua, July 10, 1517.) The writer,
although implying that there are some who regard the English as
barbarians, recounts the real splendour of the English court, and
of the entertainments generally, and declares that those who so call
this nation barbarous ' ' render themselves such."
^ Bergenroth, ut sup.., p. 178. (The ambassador, Don Pedro de
Ayala, to Ferdinand, July 25, 1498.)
3 Ibid., p. 158. (De Puebla to Ferdinand, July 17, 1498.)
KATH BRINE OF A R AGON. s
On Whit Sunday, May 19, 1499, Katherine was
formally betrothed to Prince Arthur by proxy at
Bewdley, in the diocese of Hereford.^ But as the
Prince was not yet fourteen, and as the ecclesi-
astical law did not consider as binding any vow
taken before that age, they were betrothed a second
time at Ludlow Castle, in Shropshire, on the 22nd
of November 1 Sopi^
All England was now in a ferment of preparation
for Katharine's arrival, and for the magnificent
ceremony and sumptuous feasting, with which the
marriage was to be celebrated. The King, the
Queen, the King's mother, and the young Prince
Arthur were occupied by thoughts of the approach-
ing event. Henry wished Katherine to come
' Bergenroth, iii sup., p. 209. Prince Arthur was present in
person, and Dr. De Puebla represented Katherine, with full power to
act as proxy, and contract an indissoluble marriage. The marriage
treaty, made three years previously, had provided that when Arthur
had completed his twelfth year, the parents might, if they pleased,
apply for a dispensation from the Pope on account of age. This dispen-
sation was obtained, and Ferdinand communicated the fact that " the
bull dispensing with the age of the Prince and Princess " had reached
Spain to De Puebla in a letter dated July 24, 1498 (ibid., p. 168).
2 Ibid., p. 340. (Ferdinand to De Puebla, July 25, 1500.) Ferdi-
nand says that he has no '"doubt that the marriage which was con-
tracted with the dispensation of the Pope par verba tie prasenti, is
valid and binding." Still he agrees that the ceremony should be
performed again when the two meet, not that the union would " be
rendered more indissoluble thereby," but " in honour of the Sacra-
ment of marriage.'' Henry VII. did not, however, wait for the
coming of the Princess to England ; but on November 22, 1500,
caused the betrothal by proxy to be repeated (cf ibid., p. 257.
Queen Isabella to Henry VII., April 8, 1501).
6 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
over to England at once, notwithstanding the
season. But delays in the conclusion of the mar-
riage treaty, and other unexpected causes, made
it impossible for her to embark at Coruna on the
north coast of Spain, before the loth of August of
the following year, A.D. 1501. For nearly four
weeks she was tossed about by storms on the Bay
of Biscay, and was at last obliged to land at La-
rendo, near Bilbao. She re-embarked on Monday the
27th of September, but again encountered a violent
storm. Her attendants were in great alarm for
their safety, and the Princess herself was terrified
by what seemed to her. a warning from God to
keep her from the land of strangers, where sorrow
awaited her.^ Happily, however, the wind at length
proved favourable and the dismal forebodings of
the party vanished, as they sailed into Plymouth
haven on Saturday, October 2, 1501.
Daylight was waning when Katherine landed ;
still she and her numerous suite of bishops, priests,
lords, and ladies, with their retinue of servants, went
at once in solemn procession to the church of St.
Andrew to sing a Te Deum, in thanksgiving for
their safe arrival. For six weeks a sharp look out
had been kept for her, at every headland and sea-
port on the English coast as far north as Bristol,
' Polydore Vergil, Anglics Hist., lib, xxvi. (ed. Basle, 1555), p.
612.
KATH BRINE OF A R AGON. 7
on the chance of the vessel being driven out of
its course.^ The news of her arrival quickly
spread far and near. Bonfires blazed on every
hill. Nobles and gentry hurried to offer their ser-
vices, and crowds of yeomen and peasants flocked
to gaze on their future queen. So hearty was the
burst of Enghsh welcome that one of Katherine's
attendants wrote to Queen Isabella that " she could
not have been received with greater rejoicings if she
had been the Saviour of the world." ^
The same glad greeting met her everywhere on
the journey across England. But her progress
was long and weary, and it was not till the 4th of
November that Henry prepared to leave Richmond,
and Prince Arthur from Windsor to join her. Even
after that the meeting was delayed for three days
in consequence of the bad roads and the rainy
weather. When at length, on the morning of the
7th of November 1501, Henry and the young
prince approached Dogmersfield, where Katherine
had just arrived, they were met by the principal
nobles and prelates of her suite, who told them that
the Spanish sovereigns had strictly forbidden them
to allow the Princess to see or speak to either the
English king or prince before the marriage was to
^ Bergenroth, tii sup., p. 255. A' secretary of Henry VII. to
Spain.
^ Ibid., p. 262. (Letter to Queen Isabella, October 4, 1501.)
8 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
be solemnised. Henry, however, answered in an
imperious tone that when the Princess had once
entered England, their duty to their sovereigns was
ended, and that henceforth she must obey the King
of England. Then, bidding the Prince follow at
leisure, he put spurs to his horse and galloped on
to Dogmersfield.
On reaching the house where Katherine was
staying, he demanded peremptorily to see her at
once. Her dismayed attendants made various ex-
cuses, saying at last that she was resting after her
journey. To this Henry replied, " Even if she be
in bed, I will see and speak to her, for this is my
will and the sole object of my coming." Further
resistance being useless, Katherine got up from
her couch and met Henry in the third, or outer,
room of the suite she occupied. He could not but
be charmed with her beauty, grace, and modest
demeanour.! They exchanged fitting compliments,
and after a few minutes' conversation he left her
and went to his own apartment. Half an hour later
Prince Arthur arrived, and was taken by his father
to be introduced to his future bride. The stately
stiffness of Spanish etiquette was now somewhat
relaxed, and Katherine received them in the second
room of her suite. Both the young people naturally
^ Bergenroth, ul suf., p. 264. (Henry VII. to Ferdinand, Nov.
28, 1501.)
KATHERINE OF A R AGON. 9
felt shy at this their first meeting, and being obliged
to speak to each other through the bishops as in-
terpreters, they found in this an additional reason
for awkwardness. But Katherine, having been
carefully trained in court manners, made a pretty
speech, while Arthur, boy like, only asked her
some questions about dogs and birds. Henry then,
at this first interview, made them repeat the form
of betrothal which had been already gone through
twice by proxy, and then he and the Prince went
away. After supper, Katherine was allowed to
receive them in her private room, where, to the
accompaniment of her musicians, she performed
some Spanish dances with her ladies, the Prince
afterwards dancing in the English fashion with
Lady Guildford.^
The next morning the King and the Prince re-
turned respectively to Richmond and Windsor, and
Katherine went by Chertsey to Kennington. On
the 1 2th of November she rode, with a splendid
train of lords and ladies, across London Bridge and
through the city to the Bishop of London's Palace.
On the 14th, St. Erconwald's day, a marriage cere-
monial of extraordinary magnificence was gone
through at St. Paul's.^ After the ceremony. Prince
' Contemporary account printed by Hearne in his Appendix to
Leland's Collectanea, v. p. 356, seqq.
^ Bergenrolh, lU sup., p. 264.
lo DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
Arthur, standing on the steps at the great door of
the cathedral, in the sight of the vast crowd that
filled the wide space before it, formally settled on
Katherine one-third of his lands, as her dower in
the event of his death.^ A fortnight later, Arthur
wrote to Katherine's parents, that "he had never
felt so much joy in his life as when he beheld the
sweet face of his bride." ^ Henry also wrote to
them promising to be a second father to the Prin-
cess, to watch over her happiness, and never to
let her want anything that he could procure.^ A
future of peace, security, and happiness seemed to
dawn on the nation.
But this happiness was short-lived. Before Lent,
the Prince and Princess went to keep their court
at Ludlow Castle, on the borders of Wales. A
pestilence broke out, and Prince Arthur taking it
^ Rymer, Fceiiera, xii. 780. The marriage treaty had stipulated
that Katherine's "portion should be 200,000 scudos, each scudo in
value 4s. 2d. sterling." One half to be paid when the Princess came
to England, and the other half within two years after. On the
English side the dowry was to consist of a third part of the revenues
of the duchies of Wales, Cornwall, and Chester. (Cf Bergenroth,
ut sup., pp. 5 and 23.)
On the 28th of November was acknowledged the receipt of the
"100,000 scudos in 92,5924 gold ducats," which formed the first
half of Katherine's dowry. (Ibid., p. 264.)
^ Ibid., p. 265. (Arthur to Ferdinand and Isabella, Nov. 30,
1501.)
^ Ibid., p. 264. (Nov. 28, 1501.) "Though they cannot now see
the gentle face of their beloved daughter, they may be sure that she
has found a second father who will ever watch over her happiness
and never permit her to want anything he can procure her."
KA TH BRINE OF A R AGON. 1 1
died on the 2nd April 1502. It was well known
both in England and in Spain that his death had
happened before his marriage with Katherine had
been consummated.^
Seven years of continuous trouble for Kathe-
rine followed Arthur's death. Henry dishonour-
ably withheld her dowry, and her parents forbade
her either to borrow money, or to sell her plate
and jewels.^ A quarrel arose between the Spanish
sovereigns and Henry as to the hundred thousand
crowns which had been paid as the half of Kathe-
rine's marriage portion; the other half not having
been then due. Her parents, when Arthur died,
demanded its restitution according to the common
law and custom of Christendom. But Henry
would as soon have parted with his heart's blood
• On the l6th of June 1502, Ferdinand and Isabella charged
their representative to be sure and find out this fact (Bergenroth,
p. 271). On the 1 2th of the following month, the Queen wrote,
"it is already known for a certainty that . . . our daughter, remains
as she was here (for so Dona Elvira has written us)." (Ibid., p.
272.)
On 23rd August 1503, Ferdinand, writing to his ambassador at
Rome about the dispensation for the marriage of Katherine with
Henry, asserts that although the clause was put into the dispensation
for safety sake, and to prevent future cavil as to the marriage, the
truth was well known that Arthur and Katherine had never con-
summated their nuptials. (Ibid., p. 309.)
Cf. Polydore Vergil, Anglia Hist., lib. xxvii. (ed. 1555), p. 619;
N. Pocock, Records of the Reformation, ii. pp. 424, 426, 432.
■* Bergenroth, lU s%ip., p. 268. (Ferdinand to De Puebla, May 29,
1502.) " He must tell the Princess and her advisers not to borrow
money."
12 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF A R AGON.
as with so large a sum. He proposed, as a com-
promise, that Katherine should now marry his
younger son Henry, and on this account that the
money should be kept.^ When her parents asked
what were Katherine's own wishes, she wrote to
her father, that she had no desire for a second
marriage in England. But with her habitual un-
selfishness, she "begged him not to consider her
wishes, but in all things to act as suited him
best." 2 Ferdinand accepted her self-sacrifice and
entered into negotiations for her marriage with
Arthur's brother, the young Prince Henry, after-
wards King Henry VIII.
The English queen, Elizabeth of York, how-
ever, died on the nth February 1503, and King
Henry VII. forthwith proposed that he himself
should take his son's place and marry Katherine.
As the union with Arthur had not been consum-
mated, a marriage with his father was not abso-
lutely impossible. Still it would have caused great
scandal, and Isabella would not allow it to be
even mentioned to her.^ The marriage treaty with
^ Bergenroth, ut sup. , p. 267, sei^^.
^ Mariana, Historia de rebus Hispanice, lib. xxix. cap. 17 (ed.
1605), p. 545.
' Ibid., p. 295. (Isabella to Duke de Estrada, April 11, 1503.)
In this it is evident that De Puebia had written concerning the mar-
riage of Henry VII. and Katherine. Isabella strongly condemns
the notion. Pocock, Records of the Reformation, ii. p. 422 seqq.,
prints some documents from a small tract published in 1533, the
KATHERINE OF ARAGON. 13
Prince Henry was consequently hurried on, and a
betrothal by proxy took place on 25th of June 1503.^
A Papal dispensation was necessary on account
of the relationship of affinity between Prince Henry
and Katherine, created by her marriage to Prince
Arthur. Marriage with a brother's widow was
obviously not contrary to God's immutable, moral,
or Divine law, as it was then called, because God
had commanded the Jews under certain circum-
stances to contract such marriages. But the
Church for prudential social reasons discouraged
them, and allowed them to be contracted only with
a special Papal dispensation; and even this was
not granted unless there was some grave reason
for the marriage. The reasons assigned for a
dispensation to allow the marriage of Prince Henry
and Katherine were most grave. Though Spain
and England were not actually at war, yet the
dispute as to Katherine's marriage portion would
almost certainly have led to hostilities, if the pro-
posed marriage did not take place. Moreover, an
author of which must have been well acquainted with the circum-
stances. According to this authority, " it was quite certain that
Henry VII. had contemplated marrying his daughter-in-law him-
self " (p- 425)-
Bergenroth, a^ sup., Introduction, pp. xcv-vi, holds that there
can be no doubt about King Henry's wish to marry Katherine, and
that De Puebla's letter to Isabella, on the proposal, " cannot have
been composed without the consent of the King of England."
1 The marriage treaty was signed on 23rd June 1 503.
14 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
alliance between England and Spain was, for the
interests of both countries, of the highest moment.
It would on the one hand put a stop to the in-
trigues of pretenders to the English throne, who
were encouraged by the King of France and other
foreign princes, and, on the other, it would leave
the Spanish monarchs at liberty, uninterrupted by
the fear of incursions of the French on their nor-
thern frontier, to consolidate under one monarch
the kingdoms into which Spain had for centuries
been divided.
These reasons were considered so weighty that
no obstacle about granting the dispensation was
raised at Rome. Unavoidable difficulties, however,
occurred to delay the business. Pope Alexander
VI. died unexpectedly on the i8th August 1503,
and his successor, Pius III., was taken ill three
days after his election, and died twenty-three days
later. Juhus II. was not elected Pope till 1st
November. Two days after his election, when
Henry's ambassador at Rome asked for the dis-
pensation, Julius said the case was important, and
that at first sight he did not know whether he
could dispense in it. But if he could, he would
wilhngly satisfy both Henry of England and the
King and Queen of Spain.^ Very soon after he
' Pocock, Records of the Reformation, i. p. 2. (Cardinal Hadrian
de Castello to Henry VII., December 1503.)
KATHERINE OF ARAGON. 15
granted the dispensation verbally, and he signed
the formal bull on 26th December 1 503.^
In the following year the Pope sent a duplicate
of this bull of dispensation in the form of a brief,
or letter, to Isabella as a consolation to her on
her deathbed,^ and as the English lawyers were
credited with a disposition to raise scruples and
doubts on every subject, Ferdinand was careful
that in this brief the peculiar circumstances of
Katherine's marriage with Arthur should be stated
in plain terms, about which there could be no sub-
sequent dispute.3 Pope Julius, however, delayed
sending the bull to England till Henry's ambas-
sadors, who were coming to offer homage for him,
should arrive.* He wrote to the English king on
the 6th of July 1504, that he had never intended
to refuse the dispensation, and delayed sending
^ Rymer, Fadera, xiii. p. 89. Bergenroth, ut sup., p. 326.
(Ferdinand and Isabella to the Duke de Estrada in London, June 26,
1504.) " As for the dispensation — our ambassador who is in Rome
has told us of the representations he made on our part to Pope Pius,
and also to Pope Julius, who has granted it by word of mouth.'
^ Ibid., p. 349. (The Bishop of Worcester to Henry VII.,
March 17, 1505.) The original bull of dispensation is on its
way. "It has grieved his Holiness to learn that copies had been
sent from Spain to England of the bull, which, under seal of secrecy,
had been sent to Queen Isabella, only for her consolation, when on
her deathbed."
Pocock, Records, i. p. 7, prints a letter from Julius II. to Henry
VII., February 22, 1505, in which the same reason for sending the
copy to Spain is given.
' Ibid., ii. p. 427. ■• Bergenroth, ut sup., p. 326.
1 6 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
it, "only because he wished to consider the case
more maturely." ^ Thus it was November 1504
before the marriage could be solemnised.^ But
even then it was not binding, because Prince Henry
was not yet fourteen.^ It was looked on, never-
theless, as finally settled, since he was only six
months under that age.
All, however, was changed by the death of
Isabella, which took place on the 26th of November
1504.* Henceforth Katherine was at the mercy
of two cold-hearted, unscrupulous men, concerned
only with their political ambitions, who gave not
a thought to her feelings or happiness. A wild
dream of uniting the crowns of the Western and
Eastern Empires in the person of his heir, took
the place of a father's love in Ferdinand's heart ;
and at the same time Henry was engrossed with
intrigues to give stability to his throne by marriage
alliances with the leading families of Europe. In
order to be free to accept for the heir to the Eng-
lish crown any more advantageous marriage that
might offer, Henry made the Prince, when he was
' Bergenroth, «/ sup., p. 328. The letter is printed in full by
Pocock, i. p. 5.
" Ibid., p. 330. (Duke de Estrada to Queen Isabella, August
10, 1504.) King has told him of the dispensation, but the formal
bull not expected to arrive till the middle of October (cf. p. 337).
' Ibid., p. 431. The dispensation did not cover the defect of
ages.
* Ibid., p. 339.
KATHERINE OF ARAGON. 17
fourteen and entitled to act for himself, protest
privately before Fox, Bishop of Winchester, against
his engagement with Katherine, and thus formally
renounce it.^ At the same time both Ferdinand
and Katherine were kept in ignorance of this step,
and negotiations for the completion of the actual
marriage continued as if the engagement was still
in force. As to Prince Henry himself, his action
in the matter was dictated only by obedience to
his father, since he loved Katherine for her many
excellent qualities, and certainly wished to marry
her should he get leave to do so.^
During Isabella's lifetime King Henry had been
kind to Katherine personally, professing warm
fatherly affection for her, taking her about with
him from place to place to benefit her health,^
and even occasionally giving her small sums to
^ The treaty for the marriage of Henry with Katherine, which was
concluded June 20, 1503, had stipulated that it should be cele-
brated when the Prince reached the age of fourteen ; that is to say,
June 28, 1505. The day before, however, Henry VII. caused his
son to make the protest against the proposed union. A precis of
this is given in Bergenroth, ui sup. , p. 358, from the copy printed
in Collier's Eccl. Hist., ed. Barham, vol. ix. p. 66. The original
document is not to he found in Cott. MSS. Vit. B. xii., to which
Collier refers. There is no doubt as to the fact.
^ Brewer, Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign
of Henry VIII., vol. iv., No. 579:. Here at p. 2588 the evidence of
Bishop Fox, of Winchester, given in April 1527, is recorded. " He
thinks that Henry desired the marriage, and that he loved Katherine
for her excellent qualities. . . . Thinks the protest was made by
command of Henry VII." ^ Bergenroth, ut sup., 329.
B
i8 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
meet the expenses of her household.^ But on the
death of her mother she was left almost destitute.
Food was no longer supplied by the royal purveyors
for the use of her household, and only occasionally
even for her own. She was compelled to incur
debts, and finally to sell her plate and jewels in
order to get the bare necessaries of life.^ She had
no money wherewith to buy clothes, or pay her
servants, and could scarcely keep up a decent
appearance. Her Spanish attendants, among whom
were several ladies of high birth, expended their
private means in buying food, and when this was
gone, they dragged on a miserable existence in
extreme poverty, clad poorly, and were even driven
at times to ask assistance. Katherine's mind was
saddened by the thought of their sacrifices on her
behalf, and her generous nature was touched to
the quick by their tender devotion to her. They
never complained to her, but served her as cheer-
fully and respectfully as if they had been daily
receiving favours from her.^ Even in writing to
Ferdinand, whilst they pressed her claims on him,
they expressed their willingness to wait patiently
for the relief of their own destitution.*
In vain did Katherine beseech King Henry with
tears to assist her. He sternly refused, and cruelly
' Bergenroth, ut sup., p. 327. - Ibid., pp. 386, 411.
' Ibid., pp. 375, 376, 386, 402, 411, 423. Ibid., p. 414.
KATHBRINE OF ARAGON. 19
taunted her with her father's repeated failure to pay
the balance of her marriage portion at the stipu-
lated times.i In vain did she tell her father that
she was in the greatest anguish of mind and all
but destitute ; that her health had given way, and
that for six months she had been sick almost to
death ; that she was sure he would not credit what
she could tell him, or if he did, he would be
frightened at what she had passed through. In
vain did Isabella's trustee press on the Spanish
monarch his duty, not only as a father tut as a
king, towards a young unprotected princess in a
foreign land, and remind him that her poverty was
a disgrace to both him and the late Queen.^ For
a year Ferdinand kept silence. Then he wrote to
Katherine only empty words of affection and
delusive promises, coupled with strict injunctions
that she should take care of her jewels. In spite
of all, however, so entire was her filial reverence,
that the idea of his being to blame seems never to
have entered her mind. When at last he sent her
a small sum with apologies for its being so little,
she told him that his apologies were unnecessary,
as she was sure he would have sent more had it
been possible.^ When she heard of his popularity in
'■ Bergenroth, tit suf., p. 386. (itatherine to Ferdinand, April
22, 1506.)
^ Ibid., p. 397. (Juan Lopez to Ferdinand, August 28, 1506.)
•* Ibid., pp. 422, 423. (Katherine to Ferdinand, August 15, 1507.)
20 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
Spain, she declared that her joy made her unconscious
of her own sufferings,^ and when she was over-
whelmed by King Henry's fury at her father's post-
ponement of the promised payments, she entreated
him to spare her such a humiliation for the future,
because, though she was submissive, she could not
forget that she was daughter to the King of Spain.
Then fearing she had overstepped the limits of filial
duty, she added at the close of her letter, that she
had suffered a martyrdom, but that she was ready
to suffer Inore if her father ordered it.^
In 1507 a fresh trouble came upon her. Up to
this time King Henry had constantly thrown her
and his son into each other's society. The young
prince had long loved her, and she had gradually
come to return his love. But as the English king
was now turning his thoughts to another marriage
for his son, he would not let them meet, even when
they were in the same house. When Katherine
complained, he said that their marriage treaty was
not binding because her proper portion had not
been paid.^ She appealed to the Spanish ambas-
' Bergenroth, ai sup., p. 436. (Katherine to Ferdinand, October
4, 1507.)
^ Ibid., pp. 411, 412. (Katherine to Ferdinand, April 15,
1507-)
5 Ibid., pp. 112, 113. (Katherine to Ferdinand, April IJ,
1507.) The Princess says that although in the same house as
the Prince of Wales, she "had not seen him for the last four
months."
K ATM ERIN E OF A R AGON. 21
sador and her confessor ; but both, alas ! confirmed
Henry's words.^ She was even informed that her
own father had told the King of France, that he
did not believe the marriage would ever take place. ^
But her heart rejected this as a cruel untruth, and
she insisted passionately that what had been done
could not be undone. In her agony she wrote to
her father, saying that she would rather die in
England than give up the marriage.^
Thus year after year dragged on, and still, by
1509, only one half of Katherine's portion had
actually been paid. But at this moment the hopes
she had cherished and relied on were suddenly dashed
to the ground. King Henry had at last succeeded in
betrothing his youngest daughter Mary to Charles,
nephew of Katherine and heir both to the Emperor
Maximilian through his father and through his
mother to the Crown of Spain ; * and being now
independent of Ferdinand, he seriously entertained
proposals for the marriage of Henry, Prince of
Wales, to the sister of the Due d'AngouMme, after-
wards Francis I., King of France.^ Katherine's
^ Bergenroth, tit sup., p. 113.
'^ Ibid., pp. 434, 435. (Katherine to Ferdinand, October 4, 1507.)
Her informant was De Puebla, the Spanish ambassador, who pro-
fessed to have heard it from the French ambassador. King Henry
also told her the same.
3 Ibid., and p. 436. * Ibid., p. 469 (December 17, 1508).
° Ibid,, p. 467. (Edmund Wingfield to Margaret of Austria,
November (?) 1508.)
22 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
spirit at length gave way. She wrote on the 9th of
March 1 509 to her father, that she could no longer
endure her sufferings, and felt driven almost to
desperation. She had sold all that she possessed,
and knew not how to procure food for herself and
her servants. She besought him to help her imme-
diately, before any fatal catastrophe should befall
her. Above all, she implored him to take her
back at once to Spain, in order that she might
spend her few remaining days in serving God as
best befitted her unhappy lot.-"^
On the 2 1 St April 1 509, within six weeks from
the date of this letter, Henry VII. of England died.
The young King Henry VIII. hastened to make
arrangements for marrying her whom he had loved
for so many years. The question of the impedi-
ment of affinity contracted by Katherine's union
with Prince Arthur was discussed in the Council,
and held to be no bar to her union with Henry.
The young King was at once privately married to
Katherine and publicly at St. Paul's on the 3rd of
June. On the 24th of June of the same year, 1509,
the young King and Queen were crowned at West-
minster Abbey.
1 Bergenroth, ut sup., p 469. (Katherine to Ferdinand, March 9,
1509.) Cf. same to same, p. 471.
' Lord Herbert of Cherbury, Life of King Henry the Eighth (ed.
1649), p. 9. ^ Bergenroth, ut sup., ii. p. 19.
CHAPTER 11.
HENRY Vni.
Few princes have begun their rule under more
promising ciixumstances than did Henry Vlll.
He was said to be the handsomest man in Europe,
having delicately chiselled features, towering in
height above all around him, and remarkable for
great muscular strength and faultless grace. He
excelled in all manly sports and feats of arms.
In elegant accomplishments, in learning of all kinds,
and in aptitude for politics and statesmanship he
was unequalled among princes, while the profuse
magnificence of his court was unrivalled.^ His
personal attainments and spirited foreign policy
gratified the pride of his subjects. His open-handed-
ness, frank manners, bluff good humour, and the
1 Brewer, Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII., vol. iii.
p. 142. (Report of Sebastian Giustinian, the Venetian ambassador,
on his visit to England, September 10, 1519.) Giustinian left Venice
on loth January 1515, arriving in Paris on 15th March, and reaching
England so as to have an audience with the King on St. George's
Day, 1515. He describes Henry VIII. when twenty-nine years of
nge. The report of Giustinian may be found in greater detail in
Mr. Rawdon Brown's translations and extracts in the Calendar of
Venetian State Papers, ii. pp. 557, seqq.
23
24 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
easy familiarity with which he associated with his
subjects of all classes, won their affections. His
religious feelings were in perfect sympathy with
those of the nation. He heard three masses on
days when he was going to hunt, and five masses
on other days, besides constantly assisting at
vespers and compline.^ His devotion to Our
Blessed Lady led him as king to make two
pilgrimages to her shrine at Walsingham, and on
the last occasion, in 1 510, he walked barefoot the
final stage of the journey. His horror of heresy
was notorious, and his loyalty to the Pope was
an example to all Europe. He said to Sir Thomas
More that he could not do too much honour to the
See of Rome, because he had received his crown
from it.^ He reproved the Emperor Maximilian
for the sin of defying the Pope's authority, and
publishing to the world his faults.^ He was always
ready to assist the Pope with money and influence,
and amid his frequent changes of foreign policy,
he always ranged himself on the Pope's side.
He had the happiness, rare for a prince, of being
married to the woman whom he had loved, and who
' Brewer, ut sup.
''■ Roper, Life of More (ed. 1822), p. 66.
' Brewer, ut sup., i. p. 276. (Henry VIII. to Maximilian, July
1511.) " Regrets that he is so incensed against the Vicar of God,
as to seek to make his faults public. Even if it be right to call a
council without the Pope's authority, which all are bound to respect,
where could it be held in safety to his Holiness."
HENRY VIII. 25
had loved him during long years of trial. Few
could compete with Katherine in " virtue and sweet-
ness of condition," ^ in queenly dignity of bearing,
or in sweet attractiveness of manner.^ She was
her husband's companion in his amusements and
his confidante in all political plans ; identifying
herself so completely with her adopted country
that the Spanish ambassador complained "he
could never use her influence to advance Spanish
interests." 3 A few months after his marriage,
Henry chose her as the medium of communication
with her father on his most secret plans.* In 15 13,
he appointed her Regent during his absence in
Flanders, and during that time an inroad of the
Scots, under James IV., put her powers to the test.
She became the soul of the national resistance,
inspiring and superintending all arrangements for
defence, and even, with her ladies, worked the
banner under which they were to fight, and inspirit-
ing all around her, addressing the troops in heroic
^ Lord Herbert of Cherbury, «/ siip. , p. 7.
^ Brewer, ut sup., i. p. 833. (Gerard de Pleine to Margaret of
Savoy, June 30, 1514. ) I^e Pleine was negotiating the marriage
of the Princess Mary.
^ Bergenroth, ut sup., ii. p. 248. (The Spanish Ambassador in
England, to Friar Juan" de Eztuniga, Provincial of Aragon, December
6, 1514.) The writer lays the blame of this upon the Queen's
confessor, "who has told her that she ought to forget Spain and
everything Spanish, in order to gain the love of the King of England
and the English."
* Ibid., p. 25. (Ferdinand to Queen Katherine, Nov. 18, 1509.)
26 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
words, which fired them with the ardour which
issued in the great victory of Flodden.^ In 1520,
shortly before the meeting with Francis I., known
as the Field of the Cloth of Gold, Henry happened
to enter her room while she was holding a council,
and inquiring what they were discussing, her
advisers told him what she had just said, and this
manifested such power of reasoning and foresight,
that the King and his councillors esteemed her
even more highly than they had done before.^
But while she thus devoted herself to the per-
formance of her public duties, her own feelings
lay in another direction. She was a tertiary of
St. Francis, wore the habit under her royal robe,
kept the strict rule of the order, and spent all the
time at her own disposal in church, or in read-
ing the Bible or devotional books.' Her charity,
' Brewer, ut sup., i. p. 657. (Katherine to Wolsey, August 13,
1513.) " My heart is very good to it (i.e., the war with the Scots),
and I am horribly busy with inaking standards, banners, and badges."
Cf. ibid., p. 675, where Peter Martyr writes about the "splendid
oration " made to the English captains by the Queen, when, " fired
by these words, the nobles marched against the Scots, who were
then wasting the Borders, and defeated them." Mr. Brewer
(Introd., liii) says this "story of her address to the soldiers, as
detailed by Peter Martyr, may be apocryphal ; not so the evidences
of her activity, as furnished by official documents."
'^ Ibid., iii. p. 256. . (French agent in London, April 7, 1520.)
* N. Sander, Rise and Giowih of the Anglican Schism (translated
by D. Lewis), p. 7. Dr. Sander's book was first published at
Cologne in 1585, by the Rev. Edward Rishton, shortly after the
author's death.
HENRY VIII. 27
humility, and perfect self-control won the hearts
of all around her, and even her political enemies
were compelled to confess that she was as " virtuous
as words could express." ^ The love she inspired
in the people throughout the country added to
her husband's popularity.
It is scarcely possible to exaggerate the fascina-
tion which Henry exercised over his subjects during
the early years of his reign, and their enthusiastic
affection for him was scarcely dispelled by the dark
cloud that hung over its close.
' Brown, Venetian State Papers, ii. p. 561. (Giustinian's Report
of England, September 10, 1519.)
CHAPTER III.
THE REVERSE OF THE MEDAL.
There was, unhappily, another side to Henry's
character. With the mingled blood of York and
Lancaster that flowed in his veins, he had inherited
the licentiousness, bloodthirstiness, and fierce pas-
sions of his Yorkist grandfather, together with the
mean avarice, and cold, suspicious, despotic temper
of his Lancastrian father.
Even in his childhood these faults of character
^eem to have shown themselves. In the only
[ anecdote of that time that has been handed down,
j it is told how one day, as his father was beating
' i him, Alcock, Bishop of Ely, begged he might be
/ forgiven. But his father answered, " Entreat not
j .' for him, for this child will be the undoing of
- VjEngland."!
In the brilliant early years of his reign, his bursts
■' Nicholas Harpsfield, JItsi. of the Pretended Divorce, ed. Pocock
{Camden Soc.\ p. 284. Harpsfield was born about 1519. In 1550
he quitted England, because he disapproved of the religious changes
under Edward VI. Returning in Mary's reign, he became Arch-
deacon of Canterbury. After Elizabeth's accession, as prolocutor of
the lower house of Convocation, he presented a remonstrance to the
THE REVERSE OF THE MEDAL. 29
of passion passed almost unnoticed. It was indeed
singular that one so young and so joyous should
have been so reckless of human life.
On his accession to the throne a general pardon
for all offences except murder, felony, and treason,
was proclaimed. Still in deference to popular
clamour, Empson and Dudley, the ministers of his
father's rapacity, were, by a stretch of the law,
condemned for treason and committed to the Tower.
Soon after the Court set out on a royal progress ;
but its enjoyment being marred by the outcries
of the people for further vengeance, Henry sum-
marily ordered them to be beheaded. 1 Again, in
a season of great scarcity, some of his waggons
laden with treasure were attacked and pillaged.
Eighty of the robbers were captured, and every
one of them Henry pitilessly hanged.^
His cousin, Edmund de la Pole, a claimant for
the Crown, had been given up to the late King,
bishops- against the proposed changes in religion. In 1559 he re-
fused obedience to the Queen's injunctions, and his acceptance of
the Prayer-Bool<, when he was committed a prisoner to the Tower,
where he remained till his death in 1575' The last part only of the
work is historical, and is that of a man evidently well informed,
although the anecdote given in the text can hardly be more than a
story current after the event. Mr. Pocock has the highest opinion
of the general accuracy of Harpsfield's History.
^ John Bruce, Hist, of the Court of Star Chamber, in Archmologia,
XXV. p. 372. Cf. Lord Herbert of Cherbury, iit sup., p. 7.
'■^ Brewer, ut sup., i. p. 583. (Letter of Peter Martyr, May 19,
1513.) Mr. Brewer's caution as to the worth of this evidence before
noted may be recalled here.
30 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF A R AGON.
by Philip of Austria, on a promise that his life
would be spared. He had been confined in the
Tower for seven years; but in 1513, his brother
Richard, having entered the service of France, then
at war with England, Henry, filled with suspicion
and actuated by a desire of revenge, had him be-
headed without even the form of a trial.i
As years passed on, the King's passions gained
strength. On May-day, 1517, the London ap-
prentices, watermen, and a mixed mob abused
their prescriptive right of rough sport on that day
by ill-treating and pillaging some foreigners of
whose favour at court they were jealous. No blood
was shed, still, infuriated at what he took as a
personal insult, Henry despotically revived a cruel
law of Henry V., which had been repealed under
Henry VI., and hanged and quartered forty of the
rioters. Four hundred others, among whom were
many women, lads, and even children, were led with
halters round their necks to receive sentence of
death from himself. Queen Katherine, his sisters,
the Queens-Dowager of France and Scotland, Car-
dinal Wolsey and the nobles who were present,
1 Brewer, ut sup., p. 637. (Peter Martyr, July 5, 1513.) Cf.
Gairdner, Letters and Papers illustrative of the Reigns of Richard
III. and Henry VII., Preface, Iv, Ivi. Lord Herbert of Cherbury has
preserved, says Mr. Gairdner, "an ugly tradition that Henry VII,,
before he left the world, recommended his son to do that which he
had promised not to do himself."
THE REVERSE OF THE MEDAL. 31
besought him on their knees to forgive them, while
the wretched culprits themselves uttered the most
piteous cries for mercy. It was only after long
entreaty, however, that he could be induced to
relent.i
Hard lessons of adversity alone could have
trained such a character to habits of self-control.
But it was Henry's misfortune to possess a minister
of rare genius, who devoted his vast abilities, his
almost incredible power of work and unfailing
fertility of resource, to gratifying his every whim
and shielding him from every disappointment and
misfortune. Thomas Wolsey was the son of a
petty gentleman of Suffolk, who fed cattle for the
butchers. He entered the royal service under
Henry VII., was soon distinguished, and on the
young King's accession rose to be his chief minis-
ter. To his towering ambition and his magnificent
ideas, nothing sfeemed too high or impossible. He
had the sagacity, however, to perceive that he
could gratify his lofty aspirations only by the
splendour reflected from his master, whose sus-
picions and arrogant temper made it impossible
' Stow, Chron., p. 506. Brewer, ut sup., ii. p. 1045. (Sagudino
to Foscari, May 19, 1517.)
Cf. ibid., Pref., ccxxi., also Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers,
ii. p. 383 (Giustinian to the Signory, May 9, 15 17), and p. 385
(Chieregato to Vigo da Campo San Pietro, May 19, 1517). Hall,
who hated Wolsey, has omitted the circumstance of the Cardinal
asking for their pardon on his knees.
32 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
to lead him by mere personal influence, and that
he could be governed by having a continual regard
to his passions. Wolsey encouraged Henry's love
of amusement by taking on himself all details of
business; but at the same time, in view of his
proud and suspicious temper, he was careful always
to set the results of his labours before him, so as
to enable him to keep a vigilant eye on the business
of the State, and thus to make him feel that all
important decisions rested with him. He fostered
his extravagance by supplying him with money
without stint. Under this minister Henry's vanity
was gratified by seeing the penniless Emperor
Maximilian fighting under his banner, and receiving
a hundred crowns a day as his pensioner. His
pride was constantly fed by delusive schemes of
ambition, which could not possibly be realised. At
one time he claimed a share of the kingdom of
Castile in right of his wife.^ At another he was
a candidate for the Empire.^ Again, he was to
conquer France and be crowned at Paris.* Or
he was to rule the Church by making Wolsey
1 Bergenroth, ui sup., ii. p. 243. (King Louis XII. of France to
the Duke of Suffolk, November 26, 1514; a reply to proposals
made in the King's name.)
^ Brewer, ut sup. , ii. p. 767. { Heads of a treaty to be signed by
the Emperor and the King of England, October 1516.) Cf. ibid.,
ii. p. 43. (Wolsey to Bishop of Worcester, March 25, iSi9i PP-
80, 8 1 ; Pace's instructions, &c.)
2 Ibid., ii. pp. 1440.
THE REVERSE OF THE MEDAL. 33
Pope.i Foreign princes flattered him to suit their
own interests,^ till at last he came to believe in sober
earnest that the fate of Europe hung on his will.'
At home every obstacle to the King's despotic
temper was carefully removed. Obsolete laws
were revived in order to make illegal acts "look
like the executing of the laws and the doing of
justice."* Judges were brought to the palace and
instructed to give sentence in the King's favour
on one pretence or other, or at least on the ground
of his prerogative.^ Neither judge nor jury dared
^ Bergenioth, ul suji,, n. p. 310. (Imperial Ambassador at Rome
to the Emperor, July 5, 1520.) Ibid., p. 589. (Same to same,
October 28, 1523.) Ibid., p. 596. (Emperor to his ambassador at
Rome, December 14, 1523.) Cf. Brewer, ut sup., iii. p. 1420. (De
Prset to the Emperor Charles V., October 6, 1523.) Ibid., p. 1505.
(Charles V. to Henry VIII., December 12, 1523.) Ibid., p. 1512.
(Same to Wolsey, December 16, 1523.)
^ Ibid., ii. p. 610. (Instructions as to the conclusion of peace
between the Emperor and the King of France. March II, 1524.)
* Brown, Venetian State Papers, ii. p. 252. (Giustinian to the Sig-
nory,July3, 1515.)
* More, Utopia, quoted in Brewer, ut sup., ii. ; Preface, p. cclxxii.
" Unquestionably the greatest blot upon the reign of Henry VIII.
was the sudden revival of obsolete statutes ; as in the punishment
of the London apprentices, and the pramunire in 1530. More's
language looks prophetical, as if he pierced into futurity, and saw
beneath the popular and fascinating exterior of Henry VIII., the
monarch who should one day use the law, not for the protection,
but the oppression of his subjects."
^ Brewer, iit sup., iv.. Introduction, p. dxxiv. "As the entire
legislative and executive power were concentrated in the Crown, not
merely in theory but in practice, the courts of law were not inde-
pendent of royal influence, whenever the King was disposed to exert
it. None, however innocent, would have found it easy to escape, of
whose guilt the sovereign was persuaded."
C
34 DIVORCE OP KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
to question any accusation advanced by the King's
Council, and thus the natural safeguards of justice
and liberty were used as instruments of royal
despotism. But Henry himself was shielded from
the popular indignation which the tyranny of his
rule could not fail to excite, for Wolsey, whether
magnanimously or discreetly, took all the blame on
himself. In this way the King was flattered by the
continuance of his early popularity, while his minister
grew to be intensely hated by the nation at large.
Wolsey, however, cared not for the hatred of
the nation so long as it did not prejudice him in
his master's favour. He treated his enemies with
scorn, and made no attempt at concealing his satis-
faction at seeing them crouch before him. He
lived in a splendour till then unknown in England.
He ruled both king and kingdom,^ and nothing
was done without his consent.^ Emperors and
kings sought his favour: ambassadors, and even
the Papal Nuncio, were made to feel that they
were speaking not to a cardinal but to one with
the power of a king, and who in many ways was
more than king.^ It was noticed that at first the
' Brown, Venelian State Papers, ii. p. 560. (Giustinian's Report,
September 10, 1519.)
'■' Ibid., p. 380. (Francesco Chieregato, Apostolic Nuncio in
England, to the Marquis of Mantua, April 18, 1517.)
' Ibid., iv. p. 205. (Marco Venier, Venetian ambassador, Report
of England, April 2, 1529.)
THE REVERSE OF THE MEDAL. 35
Cardinal used to say, " His Majesty will do so and
so." After a time he began to say, "We will do
so and so." But at last he said plainly, " I will do
so and so."^ In the intoxication of pride he even
boasted, that all the princes of Christendom, except
the Pope, whose distrust made him angry, had
empowered him to arrange their political matters
as he Hked.^
There were two natural barriers against Henry's
despotism of which a prudent minister would have
made the most to control his passions. These were
the great nobles and the Church. But Wolsey
in fact sacrificed both.
Though no monarch could have been more firmly
seated on his throne than Henry, yet he was
morbidly sensitive of the faintest suspicion of con-
spiracy, or revolt, among his nobles. By them
Wolsey was especially hated, on account of the
insolence with which he habitually treated them.
At their head was the Duke of Buckingham, the
next in succession to the throne after the King's
family. One day at Court, Wolsey insulted him.
He haughtily returned the insult; Wolsey retorted
by a vow of vengeance. It was not hard to awaken
Henry's doubts as to the loyalty of one so near
' Brown, ut sup., ii. p. 560. (Giustinian's Report, ut sup.)
* Bergenroth, ut sup., ii. p. 310. (Juan Manuel, Imperial ambas-
sador in Rome, to the Emperor, July 5, 1520.)
36 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
the throne, or to play upon the royal cupidity by
promising him Buckingham's wide domains as a
sop to his avarice. Members of the Duke's own
household were treacherously brought to accuse
him secretly of rash words spoken at moments of
irritation, though of any conspiracy or crime not
a shadow of proof could be found. The King
privately examined the witnesses in person and
pronounced him guilty.^ He was summoned
to Court in the usual terms, and unsuspectingly
obeyed. But as he went in his barge down the
river, he was arrested and conveyed to the Tower.
He was brought before a picked jury of eighteen
peers, every one of whom shared the hatred of
Wolsey, which in reality was his sole crime.^ But
not one of that craven jury had the manliness to
say a word in his defence. Each in turn pro-
' Brewer, ui sii/>., iii. ; Introduction, cxix. The examination was
conducted by the King in person, who "had already made up his
mind as to the Duke's guilt and condemnation."
Shakespeare's account of this travesty of justice is, with the excep-
tion of his making Wolsey present at the examinations, substantially
correct. Mr. Brewer remarks that the trial "presents us with a
general likeness of State prosecutions in the Tudor times." ... In
crimes against the sovereign, real or supposed, men were presumed
to be guilty until they had proved themselves to be innocent, and
that proof was involved in endless difficulties.
^ Ibid. , Introduction, pp. cviii-cxxxix, gives a full account of the
arrest and condemnation of Buckingham. He thinks that the
account of Wolsey's part in the business is untrue, and has obtained
a place in history from writers " imsuspiciously following that old
libeller and maligner, Polydore Vergil."
THE REVERSE OF THE MEDAL. yj
nounced him guilty, and the Duke of Norfolk,
bursting into tears, passed sentence of death. On
1 6th May 1521 Buckingham was beheaded.^ Henry
had nothing to fear from his servile nobles. But
henceforth no man in England could feel his own<
head safe.
The Church was stiU a strong safeguard of
liberty and justice. There can be no doubt that
Henry felt genuine reverence for the Pope as
Christ's Vicar. But in 1517, when Pope Leo X.
sent Cardinal Campeggio to England to ask his
help in a crusade against the Turks, Wolsey felt
that it would be a humiliation to give precedence
to the Pope's legate. He therefore suggested to
Henry that his royal dignity would be lowered
if a foreigner were to have precedence of his own
subject, or exercise legatine powers within his
dominions. Hitherto supernatural principles had
governed Christendom, and the Pope had been
universally regarded as the common Father of all
Christians. He could not therefore be a foreign
prince, for in every Christian land he was at home
among his own children. Now, however, Wolsey
brought forward the new materialistic principle
which runs through all Protestant and infidel ideas,
and, acting on which, sixteen years later, Henry
1 Hist, of the Court of Star Chaviber, in Archaologia, xxv. p. 374.
Cf. Lord Herbert of Cherbury, ut sup., p. iii.
38 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
threw off his obedience to the Roman Church.
Henry eagerly accepted this principle, and refused
to receive the Pope's legate, unless equal rank was
conferred on his own subject and the usual legatine
■powers were suspended. The Pope's urgent need
compelled him to yield to the dictation. Carapeggio
was still further insulted by being detained at Calais
till the Pope consented also to deprive Cardinal
Adrian of the Bishopric of Bath and Wells, which
he then- held, but which Wolsey coveted. At
Carapeggio's entry into London, neither Henry
nor Wolsey honoured him by their presence. At
Henry's reception at Greenwich, Wolsey took the
place of honour on the right hand, sitting on the
larger of two chairs, and Campeggio on the smaller,
placed a little behind that of the English cardinal.
While Wolsey made a Latin oration the King stood,
and the King in person answered him. Then Cam-
peggio's brother spoke. But during this every one
sat, and only one of Wolsey's attendants answered
him on His Majesty's behalf It was generally
noticed that "in all this little respect was shown
to the ApostoUc See." ^
Thus was Henry trained by Wolsey's policy for
his future career, and gradually every barrier to the
' Brewer, iii sup., ii. p. 1263. (Wolsey to the Bishop of Wor-
cester, April II, 1518.) Cf. pp. 1295, 1323, 1336, 1341, 1344, 1346,
1348.
THE REVERSE OF THE MEDAL. 39
gratification of his passions was broken down. One
of the pecuharities of his character was its rare
union of cunning and strength. He never forgot
what was once put into his head;^ but stored up
in his memory the lessons taught him by Wolsey.
He kept silence till " it was time to strike, and then
he struck as suddenly and remorselessly as a beast
of prey." 2 Meanwhile he was pleased to see his
minister grasping all power, both of Church and
State, into his own hand. For the minister held
everything merely at his royal will, and it needed
but a word to annihilate his agent and to transfer
all these powers to himself.
' Cavendish, Life of Cardinal Wolsey (ed. II. Morley, p. 24).
George Cavendish, the author of this life, vvas born about 1500. After
the Cardinal's death on November 28, 1530, Cavendish, then about
thirty years of age, retired to his own estate of Glemsford, in Suffolk.
There he continued to live with his wife Margery — who was a niece
of Sir Thomas More — until his death in 1562.
^ Brewer, ut sup., iv.. Introduction, p. dcxxi.
CHAPTER IV.
THE TURNING OF FORTUNE'S WHEEL.
For sixteen years Wolsey succeeded in gratify-
ing Henry's ambition, his love of pleasure, his
vanity, and his lust for power. But the large sums
which had to be squandered in thus ministering
to his master's will, were scarcely supplied by the
£ 2,000,000 of gold found in the late King's coffers,
by the rich income derived from the royal domains,
. and by the large pensions paid by the King of
France, so that Wolsey was constantly obliged to
come to Parliament for grants of money. At last
the crash came.
In 1522, the Emperor Charles V., Katherine's
nephew, persuaded Henry, by engaging to place
the crown of France on his head, to join him in a
war against Francis, and to lend him a large sum
of money. At the same time he promised Wolsey
to repay this sum shortly, and to make good the
amount of the French pensions, which, of course,
would cease to be paid. He had already played
Wolsey false about the English cardinal's election
to the Papal Chair, and now again he unscrupulously
THE TURNING OP FORTUNE'S WHEEL. 41
broke his word. He neither repaid the loan, nor
made good the French pensions; nor in 1523 did
he give the help promised to the English army in
France, under the Duke of Suffolk, which was con-
sequently compelled, when within view of Paris, to
retreat ignominiously.^ In 1525, moreover, when
the French army had been cut to pieces and the
French king made prisoner at the battle of Pavia,
he flatly refused to invade France. Notwithstanding
all this, Henry resolved to lead his army in person
to Paris. The country was so impoverished by
Wolsey's frequent demands, that two years before,
Parliament had with difficulty been persuaded to
make a grant, and now the kingdom was so utterly
exhausted that he could not obtain money, even
as a loan, from either clergy or laity. The proposed
invasion of France had therefore to be given up.^
It had been said that Wolsey "would ruin the
universe to contrive that the Emperor should not
appear superior to his own master. "^ Now, how-
ever, his schemes had in reality made the Emperor
master of Europe,* and had reduced his own master
to poverty.
His whole policy must be changed. The war
^ Brewer, ut sup., Introduction, p. iv.
° Ibid., pp. Ixvii-Ixxxv.
•'' Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iii. p. 371.
• Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iii., part i., pp. 58, 59. (Im-
perial Ambassador in Genoa to the Emperor, March 2, 1525.)
42 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
with France could not be carried on for want of
money, and the French pensions could not be
spared.^ But Henry, from long self-indulgence, had
become more difficult to manage, and it was only
gradually he could be brought to give up the hope
of the French crown which had seemed within his
grasp,^ and to conclude a peace with France. Some
strong motive was required to withdraw him from
the influence of the Emperor, to whom he was
personally attached, and to enable Wolsey to keep
his hold upon him. Such a motive was quickly found
by the Cardinal. Henry longed passionately for a
son to be his heir. Katherine had borne him three
sons, but they had all died at their birth, or soon
after. And now his only hope of a male heir lay
in divorcing her and marrying a younger wife. The
divorce of Katherine would, as a matter of course,
lead to a quarrel with her nephew the Emperor,
and leave Henry free to marry a French princess.
This last was perhaps the chief object, for Wolsey
was afterwards in the habit of boasting that the
French alliance was his motive for pressing the
divorce. Thus was formed the plot, the working
of which led in the end to the ruin of England's
faith.
' Brewer, u/ sup., iv. pp. 481, 510.
^ Gayangos, ut sup., iii., part i. p. 82. (The Commissioners to the
Regent of the Low Countries, March 9, 1525.)
CHAPTER V.
OPENING OF THE PLOT.
The earliest notice of the divorce is found in a
lettei; from Archbishop Warham to Wolsey in April
1525, in which reference is made to "this great
matter of the King's grace." ^ The divorce was
afterwards constantly called " the King's great," or
"private," or "secret matter." At this time it
would appear that Henry could not have been a
party to it, as he was still in close friendship with
the Emperor. It is uncertain when it was first
brought before him ; but most contemporary writers,
whether Catholic or Protestant, agree that it was
Wolsey who first put it into his head.^
' Brewer, ui sup., iv. p. 554. (Warham to Wolsey, April 12,
1525.)
^ Polydore Vergil, Hist. An^l., p. 685 (ed. 1555).
Tyndale, Practise of Prelates (ed. Camden Soc), p. 320.
Pole, Apologia ad Casarem, pp. 115, 116.
Brewer, ut sup., iv. , Introduction, ccxxi, expresses his disbelief in
the theory that Wolsey put the first notion of the divorce into the
King's head. "The common story, propagated by Tyndale, re-
peated by Roper, reiterated since, that Wolsey requested Longland,
the King's confessor, to put ' a scruple into his Grace's head ' as to
the legality of his marriage, is a mere calumny ... It was denied
by Longland himself; it was denied in open court by the King."
44 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
It is said that one day, in the course of conver-
sation with Henry, Wolsey expressed a doubt as to
the vaUdity of his marriage with Katherine. Henry
was so astonished that for some time he did not
speak. But at last he said, " Beware of calling in
question what has already been decided ; " and he
proceeded to praise Katherine and to point out the
ordinary arguments in defence of the marriage.
Three days after, Wolsey, accompanied by Long-
land, Bishop of Lincoln, the King's confessor, re-
opened the subject and besought Henry to let the
question be examined. After some opposition Henry
consented. Wolsey then suggested that Margaret,
sister to the King of France, and widow of the Due
d'Alengon, would be a suitable wife. But Henry re-
buffed his indecent haste, saying, " We will speak of
that hereafter. Now silence is necessary above all
things, lest the matter be noised abroad before every-
thing is ready, and leave a stain on our honour." i
Before long the subject was apparently discussed
secretly with Sanga, the Pope's most influential ad-
viser. On the 13th September 1526, Clark, Bishop
of Bath and Wells, wrote to Wolsey, " There will be
great difficulty circa istud benedictimi divoriium." ^
Some months later the prospect was brighter,^ but
' Harpsfield, History of the Pretended Divorce, pp. 175, 322 ;
Sander, The Anglican Schism (ed. Lewis), p. 16.
^ Brewer, tit sup., iv. p. 1 109.
' Ibid., p. 1433. (Wolsey to Henry VIII., June 2, 1527.)
OPENING OF THE PLOT. 45
before the subject could be mentioned to the Pope,^
Rome had been sacked by the Emperor's troops,
and his Holiness made prisoner.
Meanwhile Henry was studying Holy Scripture
and the writings of the Fathers on the subject.
The objection to the marriage advanced by Wolsey
and Longland was, that in Leviticus (xx., v. 21) a
man is forbidden to marry his brother's wife, and
as this was a part of the Divine or moral law, the
Pope could not dispense from it. But they took
no notice of the command in Deuteronomy (xxv.,
V. 5) that a man should marry the wife of a brother
who had died without children, as had certainly
been the case with Arthur. As it is impossible
that God should contradict Himself, the Church
and the Fathers have always applied the text in
Leviticus to a marriage with a brother's wife during
his lifetime. For the same reason it is evident
that the prohibition of marriage with a brother's
widow is not a part of the Divine or moral law,
which being founded on God's immutable nature,
must necessarily be immutable, and therefore that
the Pope, who never could dispense with the im-
mutable or Divine law, had power to grant a dis-
pensation to marry with a brother's widow. Henry
consulted the best theologians in England ; but for
1 Brewer, «/ su/i., p. 1538. (Same to same, September 5, 1527.)
Cf. p. I5S3- (Knight to Henry VIII., September 13, 1527.)
46 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF A R AGON.
nearly a year he could not twist his intellect and
conscience to agree with his bishops.^ At last,
early in the year 1527, a stronger influence came
into play.
Among the ladies of Katherine's household was
Anne Boleyn, daughter of Sir Thomas and Lady
Elizabeth Boleyn. Lady Elizabeth was daughter
to the late Duke of Norfolk. She did not bear a
good character, and was never noticed by Katherine.
Her elder daughter, Mary, had been Henry's
mistress, ^ and it was generally believed in England
and France that the mother herself had also been
in the same unlawful relations with the King. '
Anne, whilst still a child, was sent to France. She
returned to England early in 1522,* and soon after
had charge of certain articles in the Queen's ward-
robe.^ She was remarkable for her grace and
^ Sander, ?</ j«/., p. 16.
" Brewer, ui sup. , iv. , Introduction, p. cccxxix. In the letter of
Sir George Throgmorton to Henry himself, quoted in the note, the
charge is made and apparently tacitly allowed by the King. Cf.
Pocock, Records of the Reformation, Preface, xxxviii. "The next
point in the case, which can no longer be denied with any show
of reason, is the King's intrigue with Mary Boleyn, the elder sister
of Anne."
' Harpsfield, ut sup., p. 236.
Brewer, ut sup., p. cccxxx. "True or not, for such u report to
have existed conveys no exalted opinion of the King's purity, or of
the scrupulous honour of the Boleyns."
See also Pocock, Records, ii. pp. 468, 573.
^ Brewer, ut sup., p. ccxxxiii. Anne was at that time sixteen
years of age. * Ibid., iii. p. 15S9.
OPENING OP THE PLOT. 47
fascination rather than for her beauty, about which
people differed. She was lightly spoken of and had
many lovers — among others, Sir Thomas Wyatt,
the poet, who was a married man, and Lord Percy,
eldest son of the Earl of Northumberland. The
King, too, was one of her admirers.^ Lord Percy
wished in 1522 to marry her; 2 but Wolsey, by the
King's order, forbade him to think of her, because
the King intended to prefer her to another.^ As
the Lord Percy persisted, he was made Warden of
the Marches,* and was on the Border till September
1523,^ when he married the daughter of the Earl of
Shrewsbury.* Anne went in 1525 to the Court of
France, where she bore the same doubtful character
as in England,'' and on her return to England, early
in 1527, she encouraged Henry's addresses, but at
the same time she rejected his advances till he should
be in a position to make her his wife. She decided
the King to listen to Wolsey's suggestions as to
the unlawfulness of his marriage with Katherine.^
Wolsey, however, was not at the time aware of her
^ Brewer, ui suji,, iv., Introduction, p. ccxlvi.
^ She was supposed to have entered into an engagement to marry
him (Ellis, Historical Letters, 3rd Series, ii. p. 131.) At the time of
Anne's trial, however. Lord Percy denied this on oath.
' Cavendish, Life of Wolsey (ed. Morley), p. 54.
* Brewer, ut sup., iii. p. 1077.
5 Ibid., p. 1 1 20.
^ Ibid., p. 1383.
' Sander, The Anglican Schism, pp. 25, 26. ^ Ibid.
48 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
influence. Henry had long led an immoral life,i and
the Cardinal seems to have thought that his master
was only amusing himself with Anne, as he was in
the habit of doing with others of the Queen's ladies.^
On the 17th May 1527, the first formal step
towards getting the divorce was taken. Wolsey
summoned Henry to appear before him, in a Lega-
tine Court held in his own house, and answer to
the charge of living unlawfully in the marriage
state with his brother's widow. Katharine was
kept in ignorance of what was going on, and Henry
alone appeared before the court. After some formal
proceedings, the case was dropped, and what had
been done was buried in such secrecy, that it has
only become recently known through papers found
in the Record Office.^
The case was laid about this time before the
bishops and Sir Thomas More, who, though a lay-
man, was highly esteemed, not alone in England,
but throughout Europe, for his learning. Nothing,
however, could be gained from them. Sir Thomas
More, pleading ignorance of theology, prudently sus-
pended his judgment. Fisher, Bishop of Rochester,
' Brown, Veiutian Slate Papers, ii. 152.
Cf. Brewer, ut sup., i. p. 91 1 ; ii. p. 292 ; Pref. cxcix ; iii. p. 1539.
^ Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iii. , Introduction, p. cxiii.
' Brewer, ut sup., iv. p. 1426. (The King's divorce ; judicial
proceedings before Wolsey, May 17, 1527-) Cf. Introduction,
pp. cclvii-cclix.
OPENING OF THE PLOT. 49
wrote strongly to the King against the divorce,
and the other bishops only said, that there were
reasonable grounds for scruple, and advised the
King to lay the case before the Pope and abide by
his decision.! Henry naturally felt a difficulty about
the origin of his scruples. It was therefore planned
one day in York Place, between him and Wolsey, that
he should ascribe them to a doubt as to the Princess
Mary's legitimacy, expressed by the Bishop of Tarbes,
the French ambassador, who had come to England in
the spring of this year to negotiate her marriage with
the King of France, or with one of his sons.^ But
there is not the least trace in the French records that
the Bishop ever expressed this doubt ; ^ and had he
done so, he must have referred the subject to his Court
before he signed the marriage treaty on the 20th of
April 1 527. Nor did either Henry or Wolsey ever state
at Rome that the Bishop had expressed this doubt,
though it would have greatly helped their cause there.*
' Fiddes, Zt/e of Cardinal Wolsey, p. 184 {an. 1527.)
'' Brewer, ut sup., iv., 147 1. (Wolsey to Henry VIII., July 5,
1527.) " I then told him the whole matter of the proposed marriage
between Francis and the Princess Mary, and the objection made by
the Bishop of Tarbe."
' Ibid., Introduction, p. ccxxiii. " This was a political figment
arranged between the King and Wolsey, when it had become
necessary to take fresh action in the matter," and find some pretext
for the King's proposals. Cf. Le Grand, Histoire du Divorce, i.
pp. 49, seqq.
^ Brewer, ut sup., iv., Introduction, p. ccxxiii. Wolsey, writing
to the King (July 5, 1527), practically admits that it " was devised
with you at York Place."
D
50 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF A R AGON.
This falsehood, however, was circulated by them in
England, where it could not be contradicted.
Great precautions had been taken to keep Kathe-
rine in ignorance of Henry's intention. '^i She had,
however, been informed privately of it ; and as early
as May, the Spanish ambassador had written to
the Emperor of the project.^ In course of time the
King and Wolsey had reason to suspect that she
was aware of what was going on, and intended to
stand up resolutely for her rights. As it was very
important that she should be lulled into false security
till matters were further advanced, Henry told her,
on the 22nd of June 1527, about his scruples of
conscience, and the proposed inquiry into the mar-
riage. She burst into tears, and was too agitated
to answer. He tried to pacify her by assuring
her that the object of the inquiry was not to get a
divorce, but merely to remove the doubt as to Mary's
legitimacy expressed by the Bishop of Tarbes.* In
pursuance of Wolsey's advice to treat her always
both "g[ently] and doulcely,"* Henry again paid
^ In the same letter as printed in full in the State Papers, fullished
under the aulhority of His Majesty's Commission (1830), i. pp. 196-
200, the endeavours to keep Katherine in ignorance of the matter
are clearly evidenced.
^ Gayangos, Calendar of Spanish State Papers, iii., part 2, pp. 193,
207, 276. Cf. Brewer, ut sup., Introduction, pp. cclxxvi-cclxxx.
^ Gayangos, tit sup., p. 276. State Papers (1830), i. p. 196.
* State Papers (1830), i. p. 195. (Wolsey to Henry VIII., July i,
1527.) "I think convenient, tyl it wer knowen what shuld succede
OPENING OF THE PLOT. 51
her a visit at Hunsdon on the 22nd of July, and
acted his part so well, that those present who
were in the secret were filled with admiration.
Katherine's suspicions seemed to be quite removed,
and her usual merry expression of countenance
was restored. On the following morning when
they were going to Beaulieu, he even paid her the
unusual attention of waiting for her a long time
till she was ready, and then they rode forth in
the eyes of his subjects, as a loving, united, and
happy couple.^
of the Pope, and to what point the French king might be brought,
Your Grace shuld handle her both (gently) and doulcely."
^ Brewer, ut sup., iv. p. 1496. (Sampson to Wolsey, July 25,
1527.)
CHAPTER VI.
EMBASSY TO FRANCE.
While the preparations for procuring the divorce
were being secretly conducted in England, a terrible
disaster befell the Papal power at Rome. On
May 6, 1^27, the Emperor's army took the city
by storm. The Pope and cardinals fled to the
Castle of St. Angelo and were there made prisoners.
For seven months, the city was given up to pillage
and bloodshed, and outrages were committed ■ un-
paralleled even in its earlier captures by the bar-
barians.
The news of this catastrophe was received in
England with grief and indignation. A national
fast and penitential services were ordered, and
were observed with fitting devotion. But to Henry
and Wolsey the tidings were not unwelcome, inas-
much as a suitable opportunity was thus afforded
of placing Wolsey at the head of the Church during
the Pope's captivity, and of thus securing the Eng-
lish king's divorce. This, however, could not be
secured without the co-operation of the French king.
5=
EMBASSY TO FRANCE. S3
It was therefore publicly announced that Henry, as
Defender of the Faith, was specially bound to rescue
the Pope from captivity, and that Wolsey was going
to France to concert the necessary measures.^ But
the true object of his journey was kept secret.
Early in July 1527, Wolsey set out for France as
"ambassador extraordinary," with unlimited powers
to be used at his discretion.^ During this embassy,
he outdid himself in arrogance and presumption.
He travelled in royal state, and was received every-
where with almost regal honours. In France he
required his suite to observe to him the same
ceremonial as they would to the King himself, and
he treated the French ministers with scandalous
rudeness and arrogance, boasting "that he had all
their heads under his girdle, so that he could rule
them as he did the Council in England."*
Measures for the liberation of the Pope were
quickly concerted. But the question as to the
government of the Church during the Pope's cap-
tivity was not so easily arranged. Wolsey wished
all the cardinals, who were not prisoners in Rome,
to meet at Avignon and appoint him to exercise
the Pope's authority during his captivity. But
' Sander, TAe Anglican Schism, p. 21. Cf. Cavendish, Life of
Wolsey, p. 66.
^ State Papers (1830), i. pp. 191-193. (Henry VIII. to Wolsey,
probably signed June 18, 1527.)
^ Cavendish, Life of Wolsey, pp. 71, seqq.
54 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
neither bribes nor the pressure exerted on them
by the kings of England and France, could induce
the . cardinals to quit Italy, the Pope having for-
bidden them to do so as long as he was a prisoner.^
The only alternative course Wolsey could then
suggest was that a special treaty should be made
between the two kings, and that a letter should
be sent to the Pope begging him to delegate his
authority to the English cardinal. By this treaty
Henry and Francis bound themselves to reject any
bull signed by the Pope during his captivity, and
they agreed that whatever the bishops of either
country, assembled by the authority of their respec-
tive sovereigns, should decide concerning ecclesias-
tical affairs, with their sovereign's consent, should
be decreed and considered as binding, as if it
had been done by the Pope. Thus was Henry
taught his lesson as future Supreme Head of the
Church of England.^
The letter to the Pope was signed by Wolsey,
three French cardinals, and the cardinal legate
in France. It was accompanied by the draft of
a bull prepared for the Pope's signature, delegat-
ing during his captivity to some suitable person
(understood to be Wolsey) his authority and all
'■ State Papers (1830), i. pp. 205, 230, 231, 270. (Wolsey's letters
to Henry VIII.)
"^ Ryraer, Fcedera (ed. 1712), xiv. pp. 212, seqq.
EMBASSY TO FRANCE. 55
Papal powers, whether ordinary or extraordinary,
even to the extent of dispensing with the Divine
law^ — though it will be remembered that Wolsey's
objection to Pope Julius's dispensation turned on
this very point that the Pope could not dispense
from the Divine law. When the above letter and
draft of the desired bull were completed, Wolsey
wrote triumphantly to Henry, that if the proposed
commission was carefully studied it would be found
that nothing could be better suited to the King's
purpose, with less disclosing of the matter, for that
he (Wolsey) would have the power to appoint
judges to inquire into the divorce without inform-
ing the Pope of it, and as Katherine's appeal must
be to him, he would be able to give final sentence
without any appeal to his Holiness.^
The proud consciousness that more than Papal
powers thus awaited him, did not, however, sufBce
to satisfy Wolsey. In the intoxication of his pride
he must take these powers on himself at once.
Accordingly, after his Mass on the last morning
of his stay in France, he authorised the Chan-
1 SMe Papers (1830), i. p. 271. (Wolsey to Henry VIII., Sep-
tember 5, 1527.) On September 13 the Cardinal again wrote to the
King to the same effect. " When the purport of that commission {i.e.,
the general commission the Pope was to be urged to grant Wolsey)
is well studied, it will be found that nothing can be better suited to
your purpose, with less disclosing of the matter.'' (Brewer, ut sup.,
iv. p. 1553.)
S6 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OP ARAGON.
cellor of France, whom the Pope had promised to
make a cardinal, to assume a cardinal's title and
dress.^
But while Wolsey was thus revelling in his
fancied greatness, the ground was in reality giving
way beneath his feet. Before he left England
Anne Boleyn and her friends had succeeded in
awaking a doubt in Henry's mind as to the zeal
of his minister for the divorce,^ and now, during
his absence, it was easy enough to rouse Henry's
suspicious temper by pointing out that all Wolsey's
arrangements in France redounded more to his own
glory than to the King's benefit. Henry, therefore,
without consulting him, despatched Dr. Knight, his
chief secretary, to Rome, and persisted in his selec-
tion of Knight for this important embassy, in spite
of Wolsey's representations that certain Italians,
who were in the secret, would more easily obtain
access to the Pope.^ Moreover, he gave Knight
directions which were to be kept secret from
Wolsey, and forbade him to present to the Pope the
commission appointing Wolsey his Vicar-General,
which the Cardinal had unsuspectingly entrusted to
' Pocock, Records of the Reformation, ii. p. go. (Life of Wolsey,
by an unknown contemporary, preserved in the Vatican Library.)
Cf. Cavendish, Life of Wolsey (ed. Morley), p. 94.
" State Papers (1830), i. p. 194. (Wolsey to Henry VIII., July i,
1527.)
^ Ibid., p. 20. (Wolsey to Henry VIIL, August 24, 1527.)
EMBASSY TO PRANCE. 57
him as he passed through Paris.^ This treachery,
however, proved harmless, because the Pope re-
covered his liberty before Knight saw him, and
Wolsey's dream of being his Vicar consequently
was never realised. But it showed how completely
Henry's feelings towards his minister were changed.
At the end of September 1527, Wolsey returned
to England, triumphant at the success of his mis-
sion. He expected to be received with extraor-
dinary honours. Great then was his surprise to
find that he did not stand quite so high in the
King's favour as before. Soon after his arrival,
Henry told him that he intended to marry Anne
Boleyn. On his knees the Cardinal besought him
to give up his intention. But all his arguments
were uttered in vain. Then, seeing that remon-
strance was fruitless. Papal Legate, Cardinal, Arch-
bishop, and Priest though he was, he shamelessly
turned round to pay his court to Anne, and gave
a splendid banquet at his archiepiscopal palace to
her and her royal paramour.^
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 1552. (Knight to Henry VIII.,
September 12, 13, 1527.) Also p. 1553. (Wolsey to Henry VIII.,
September 13.)
^ Sander, The Anglican Schism, p. 30. Cf. Cavendish, Life of
Wolsey, p. 57.
CHAPTER VII.
FIRST EMBASSY TO THE POPE.
The removal of the cause to Rome, under the
influence of Anne Boleyn, opened Wolsey's eyes
to the perilous position in which unwittingly he
had placed the Church, the kingdom, and himself.
He knew on the one hand, that the objections
which he had raised to the King's marriage would
not stand the test of a fair trial at Rome, and on
the other, no one understood better than he that
Henry would never brook opposition to his will,
even from the Pope himself, and that those, in
whose hands the King now was, woidd spare no
effort to stimulate his imperious temper to the utmost.
On the 6th of December 1527, Wolsey wrote to
Casale, his confidential agent, bidding him press
strongly on the Pope, that if he were not com-
pliant, or if the thing could not be done, the King's
enmity would be fraught with the most terrible
consequences, disregard for the Papal authority must
increase from day to day in England, and Wolsey's
own life would be shortened.^
' Brewer, ui sup., iv. p. 163S. (Wolsey to Gregory Casale,
December 6, 1527.)
58
FIRST EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 59
Doctor Knight arrived in Rome at the beginning
of December. As Wolsey had foreseen, he could
not get access to the Pope.i A few days later his
Holiness escaped to Orvieto, and thither Knight also
repaired. But as there were many Spaniards in
the city, the English agent, Gregory Casale, did not
venture to take him to the Pope till after dark.^
Pope Clement VII. was a man of great and varied
attainments. He was versed in theology, philo-
sophy, science, and art, and was remarkable for ex-
traordinary acuteness and sagacity in unravelling
and penetrating to the bottom of the most intricate
questions.^ But as he was not a lawyer he refused
to pledge himself to grant Henry's requests till he
had consulted Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor.* Knight
and Casale went at once to the Cardinal, and in
obedience to their instructions, promised him "a
competent reward " if he would favour their suit.
But the Cardinal told them plainly, that the com-
mission authorising an inquiry into the marriage,
which they had brought ready for the Pope's signa-
ture, "could not pass without perpetual dishonour
to the Pope, the King, and Cardinal Wolsey." He
^ Brewer, ut sup., p. 1633. (Knight to Henry VIII., December
4, 1527.) '' Ibid., p. 1662.
•* Leopold von Ranke, History of the Popes, translated by E. Foster
in Bohn's Standard Library (1846), 1. i., c. 3, p. 75.
* The cardinal thus referred to in the documents was Lorenzo
Pucci.
6o DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
therefore altered it. Henry's proposed dispensation
fared no better. It was, in fact, a dispensation to
have two wives at once, and Knight had already
written to Henry from Paris that he had doubts
whether it were possible to get it.^ But priest and
a dignitary of the Church as he was, he had no
scruple in trying to do so. Though the commission
and the dispensation in their altered form were
useless for Henry's purpose, yet Knight wrote to
Henry that he had given Cardinal Sanctorum
Quatuor 2000 crowns.^ Three months later, how-
ever, Casale confessed that the Cardinal had refused
the bribe,^ and Wolsey also cleared him from this
charge of simony and sacrilege.*
The Pope, however, was reluctant to grant the
commission for the proposed inquiry into the
marriage, even in its altered form, because the
Emperor had sent the General of the Observants
to prevent his doing so. Clement declared that
he was living at the mercy of the Imperialists, who
' Brewer, ui sup., iv. 1552. (Knight to Henry VIII., September
13. 1527-)
^ Ibid., p. 1674. (Knight to Wolsey, January I, 152S.)
' Pocock, Records, i. p. 102. (Copy of a letter from Gardiner
and Fox to Wolsey, giving a detailed account of their interviews
with the Pope, March 31, 1528.) "It should be displeasant to his
grace to understand that the said Cardinal hath refused to take the
two thousand crowns offered by Mr. Secretary and Mr. Gregory,
which his highness thought verily he had accepted and taken."
^ Burnet, History of the Reformation in England (ed. Pocock),
iv. p. 47. (Wolsey to Gregory Casale.)
FIRST EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 6i
held his states, that the French and Florentines
wished for his destruction, that his only hope was
in the Emperor, and that if he signed the commission
this last hope would be destroyed. At length,
when Casale swore that Henry would never desert
him, he signed the document, saying, that he put
himself into Henry's hands and trusted to Wolsey's
goodness.^ Thus did the Pope free himself from
the Emperor's control at the very opening of the
suit for the divorce.
The failure of Dr. Knight's embassy sufficed to
prove how incapable were the new advisers whom
Henry had lately chosen. A second embassy, under
Wolsey's direction, must be sent to Rome at once,
and entrusted to persons of greater ability and ex-
perience than Knight. It was composed of Stephen
Gardiner, a priest in Wolsey's household, Edward
Fox, chaplain to the King, and Gregory Casale.
Wolsey recommended Gardiner to the Pope as his
other half who knew all his secrets.^ In the world
he was notorious for his insolence to equals and
inferiors, and his servility to superiors — qualities
which only fitted him the better for Wolsey's
purpose.
^ Brewer, a/ sup., iv. p. 1662. (December 31, sent in behalf of
Gregory Casale.)
2 Ibid., p. 1740. (Wolsey to Clement VII., 1528.) The date
"Rome, February 10, 1528," given to the letter in Burnet (ed.
Pocock, iv. p. 46), is taken from a modern heading.
CHAPTER VIII.
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE.
On the 20th of March 1528, Gardiner and Fox
arrived at Orvieto, where the Pope was still staying.
It was a dilapidated old town, and even the neces-
saries of life were so scarce that the King's ambas-
sadors would have been in absolute want if Gregory
Casale had not given up his own lodgings to them,
borrowed beds, and provided food at great trouble
and expense.^
On the 22nd of the month, Mid-Lent Sunday,
they had their first audience of the Pope. He was
living in a ruinous Episcopal palace, almost alone ;
for most of the cardinals and bishops had gone
to their own homes when he left Rome.^ After
passing through three rooms, unfurnished and partly
unroofed, in which stood about thirty persons,
mostly "rif-raf," the ambassadors came into the
Pope's private bedroom, the furniture of which,
"bed and all," was "not worth twenty nobles,"*
' Pocock, Records, i. p. 88. (Gardiner and Fox to Wolsey,
March 23, 1528.)
' Ibid., p. 35. (Gregory Casale to Wolsey, December 22, 1527.)
' Ibid., p. 35. (Gardiner and Fox to Wolsey, ut sup.)
62
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 63
while his throne was only " a form covered with a
piece of an old coverlet not worth twenty pence. " ^
The Pope received them with warm expressions of
affection and gratitude, to which all around him
heartily responded.^ He invited them to discuss
their case informally with him, and promised to
give, without delay, such a decision as they could
reasonably desire, and as would be consistent with
law and equity, and his own and the King's honour.^
From this promise, Pope Clement VII. never
swerved during the six long years the case was
before him. He always favoured Henry whenever
he could justly do so, so that the Emperor and
Katherine had often reason to complain of him;
but he never overstepped in the least point the
limits of law and equity.
Law and equity were not, however, what Henry
and Wolsey wanted. Hitherto the King had pleaded
a troubled conscience, but now he wrote plainly
that he wanted heirs to his throne.* He asked
Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor, in a tone almost of
command, to alter the dispensation and commission
in accordance with his marginal notes, declaring
authoritatively that his cause was just and holy.
1 Pocock, ui sup., p. 100. (Same to same, March 31, 1528.)
" Ibid., pp. 95, 97> i°S. ^ Ibid., p. 95.
'' Ibid., p. 60. (Draft of a letter from Henry to Cardinal Sanctorum
Quatuor.) Cf. p. 28.
64 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
that the Pope ought to grant his request, and the
Cardinal would be responsible if it were refused.^
Such was the tone in which from first to last
Henry conducted his cause. While going through
the form of appealing to the Pope's judgment,
he passed sentence in his own favour, and laid
his commands on Christ's Vicar. The alterations
he demanded in the dispensation and commission
were of a startling character. All allusions to the
existing marriage were to be expunged from the
dispensation, so that it would really become a
dispensation to have two wives at once, similar- to
the proposal formerly made by Dr. Knight. The
commission of inquiry was to be changed into a
decretal commission ; that is to say, into a com-
mission to publish a bull decreeing the dissolution
of the marriage, if the objections raised to it were
proved to rest on true facts. Both the objections
and the facts had already been brought forward
by Wolsey, still the English cardinal and another
legate were to be empowered to inquire, " privately,
and without judicial formalities," into the truth of
these facts, and if they were proved to be true,
which of course they must be, since they had been
advanced by Wolsey himself, the legates, or one of
them, if the other objected, would be authorised to
^ Pocock, ut sup., p. 6i. (Same.)
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 65
dissolve the marriage notwithstanding any sentence
the Pope might hereafter pronounce.^ Thus Wolsey
would, in the event of his request being granted,
be the final judge of his own statements, and
Katherine might be divorced without any possible
redress from the Pope, before she even knew that
any inquiry into her marriage was being made.
This proposed bull is characteristic of Wolsey's
policy throughout the whole of the divorce business.
His sole aim was by means of some cunning stra-
tagem to get the power of giving final judgment into
his own hands, so that he might then pronounce
sentence in Henry's favour, thus plainly indicating
that he knew there was no chance of success if
the case were put to the test of a fair inquiry.
The English ambassadors tried again to bribe
Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor, but again Gregory
Casale was obliged to report that he "could in
nowise cause the said Cardinal to take one penny
by no means." ^
The form of the commission, under which the
case was to be tried,"was the first point discussed.
Gardiner insisted on having the proposed decretal
commission. The cardinals refused to sanction
such a grant, because it was unusual, and they
advised him to be satisfied with the customary
' Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pocock), iv. p. 48.
2 Pocock, Records, i. p. 102. (Gardiner and Fox to Wolsey.)
E
66 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
general commission. Gardiner wrote to Cardinal
Wolsey a full account of the discussion from his
own point of view. He told him how the Pope
and his advisers listened to his wrong-headed argu-
ments and his insolent remarks hour after hour,
and day after day, sometimes from morning till
night, and even till after midnight,'- without utter-
ing a single angry word or grave rebuke, thbugh
he recorded language of his own, which it could
not be believed on any other evidence that a
Catholic, much less a priest, could have addressed"
to Christ's Vicar.
The discussion dragged on from the 24th March
1528, to Passion Sunday, the 29th. Gardiner's
hopes of success must by this time have sunk very
low, for he left off arguing and took to threatening.
He told the Pope plainly, that if in the manner and
form of obtaining justice, no more respect was
shown to the King's person and the weight of his
cause than to those of common people, he did not
doubt but his majesty would seek a " remedy at
home from his own subjects" (Domestico remedio
apud suos). But even after he had said this, and
much more to the same purpose, the cardinals
only looked at each other and paused for a time
in silence.^ At last his Holiness replied that the
^ Pocock, ut sup., p. 130. (Gardiner, Fox, and Gregory Casale to
Wolsey, April i, 1528.) "^ Ibid., p. no.
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 67
common course of the curia could not be a law
to bind him, and if in the law the reasons alleged
by Henry were found to be just and sufficient to
maintain a sentence of divorce, he would grant a
decretal commission without regard to any existing
custom, adding, " if the Emperor grudge thereat he
cared not." ^
The discussion was now removed from a question
of form to one of law. The Pope was a great lover
of justice, and never judged hastily. It was his
habit to listen to every one who had anything to
say or any advice to give on any subject under
discussion, and then, uninfluenced by others, to
decide for himself. He now consulted Cardinals
Sanctorum Quatuor, De Monte, Ancona, and other
prelates on this great matter. The opinion of
the Cardinal of Ancona carried great weight, not
only because he was the best lawyer in Rome,
but because he had been secretary to Pope
Julius II. when the dispensation was granted, and
he was therefore thoroughly acquainted with the
subject.
It was now to be decided whether the reasons
for which the divorce was demanded were sufficient
in law. The decision was a very important one,
not only as it affected the parties immediately
concerned and their political relations, but because
1 Pocock, 11/ sup., p. III.
68 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
any judgment given by the Pope would be binding
on Catholics forever, and thus would modify the
existing marriage law of the Church. Henry de-
manded the divorce on three grounds. First, that
marriage with a brother's wife was contrary to
the Divine law ; secondly, that the dispensation
had been obtained on the false and insufficient
pretences, that peace and friendship between Eng-
land and Spain would be promoted, whereas at
that time there was no reason to fear that peace
would be broken, and also that Henry himself
had wished and asked for it, whereas he being
only twelve years old, was too young to do so;
and thirdly, because, as soon as Henry was old
enough, he had broken off the engagement.^
All these reasons were obviously either false or
frivolous. It was false that a marriage with a
brother's wife was contrary to Divine law, because
God had actually ordered such marriages under
similar circumstances. It was also untrue that
the dispensation was asked for on false pretences,
because there was at that time no reason to fear
peace would be disturbed. On the contrary, at
that time war between England and Spain was
imminent, on account of the dispute about Kath-
erine's marriage portion and dower, and such a war
would have had a disastrous effect on the internal
> Pocock, ut sup., p. 28.
. SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 69
position of both countries. As to the objection
that Henry was too young to wish or ask for the
marriage, it was then, and still is the custom for
parents to act in the name of their child who is
a minor, and their doing so is so well understood
that it is not a false pretence. Finally, Henry's
protest made, as soon as he was fourteen, against
the marriage contract his father had entered into
in his name, while he was a minor, could not in
any way affect the Pope's dispensation, which re-
mained equally in force, whether he availed himself
of it or not. This third ground for demanding the
divorce was consequently frivolous.
Gardiner was fully aware that the law of the
Church could not possibly sanction a divorce after
nearly twenty years' marriage on such false and
frivolous grounds. His only chance of gaining his
point, therefore, was to work on the Pope person-
ally, while the consultation with the lawyers was
being carried on, and before they had arrived at a
decision.
Accordingly he went to his Holiness on the ist
April 1528, and though he had just written to
Wolsey, that the Pope's promise to grant the de-
cretal commission was only conditional, he boldly
called on him to fulfil this promise as if it had been
absolute. But his Holiness, instead of rebuking
him for this falsehood, only repeated quietly what
70 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
he had formerly said. Gardiner replied by urging
him to form an opinion for himself in accordance
with the book Henry had written in favour of the
divorce and the opinions of learned men in England.
But his Holiness gently answered, he would not
be acting as a good Pope and as an impartial judge
were he to take them for his advisers in their own
cause, and his ignorance of law, for which he was
sorry and ashamed, being notorious, the Church
would be slandered and he would be proved to be
either rash or too credulous, were he to be per-
suaded by one side in a suit without hearing the
other. Whereupon Gardiner upbraided him for
caring too much for the opinion of the world, and
with being doubly ungrateful by having lately
raised the King's hopes and now denying his jusf
petition. Still the Pope was unmoved, and at last
Gardiner took to his usual argument of bribes and
threats. But still in vain, for his Holiness only
answered humbly, that "he would do the best he
could." 1
On Friday, 3rd April 1528, the ambassadors
were summoned to the presence of the Pope to
hear his decision. They were told that the reasons
for which the divorce was demanded, were not so
manifestly just, that his Holiness could pronounce
' Pococlc, ut sup., i. pp. 120-122. (Gardiner, Fox, and Gregory
Casale to Wolsey, April i, 1528.)
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 71
a decree without hearing the other party. Nor
could he, on grounds of such doubtful justice and
equity, grant a decretal commission, which would
be a common law binding hereafter on all the
world. ^ A general commission, with a promise that
its sentence would be confirmed by the Pope, was
however offered.
In answer, Gardiner repeated his former argu-
ments, winding up with a torrent of abuse, false-
hoods, and threats, accusing the Pope and his
advisers of duplicity and keeping their doubts to
be solved in favour of the party whose arms were
successful, so that if the Emperor was victorious,
" they might with their honesties lean to him." He
was, however, obliged to confess that even these
wild insults were heard patiently.^
The next day the ambassadors, finding them-
selves alone with the Pope, " spake roundly " to him,
as they had been instructed to do, and threat-
ened that the King "would do it without him."
This threat of schism touched the Pope to the
quick, and even moved him to tears. Sighing and
wiping his eyes he said, in a matter in which the
rights of a third person were concerned he must
do nothing without advice, and he only wished he
^ Pocock, ui sup., p. 143. (Fox to Gardiner, with account of his
reception at Court upon his return to England.)
* Ibid., pp. 124-127. (Gardiner to Wolsey, ut sup.)
5^2 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
could grant the King something to his own hurt,
without touching any one else's rights.^
Gardiner now tried what he could do by fraud.
He made Gregory Casale suggest to the Pope that
he might give the decretal commission, to be kept
secret and shown only to the King and his Council,
while the public inquiry would be conducted under
the general commission. But Gardiner had ex-
plained four days before to Wolsey, that, notwith-
standing this promise, they could show it as an
authoritative expression of the Pope's will, to all
who were opposed to them in opinion, and even
to the judges as a rule for their guidance.^ The
Pope said he would think about it. This being
a question of morality and not of law he did not
need any advice, and on the following morning he
answered, "If it could be done justly, it ought
to be done publicly, but if it could not be done
justly, it would be in the highest degree disgraceful,
and a cause of disturbance to conscience, to do it
secretly." Gardiner replied, "Because it is just
it ought to be done publicly; but because fear of
the Emperor prevents its being done publicly, it
may without fear be done secretly." This imper-
tinence passed unnoticed, but the ambassadors
could get no further answer.
' Pocock, lit sup., p. 127.
' Ibid., p. 92. (Gardiner and Fox to Wolsey, March 31, 1528.)
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 73
Hopeless of getting the decretal commission,
the ambassadors now set to work to draw up a
general commission in the form that would best
serve their purpose; but when they showed their
draft to Simonetta, Dean of the Rota, he objected
to the last part. They then took it to Cardinal
Sanctorum Quatuor, who objected to the first
part, and sent them to Cardinal de Monte. He
listened in silence while they read it to him, and
then, without hearing what they had to say, sent
them away, as the cardinals and prelates wished
to consult alone about the proposal.
All that afternoon (Monday in Holy Week) and
the next day they could only go backwards and
forwards to the Pope and the cardinals to find
out if possible what was being done. They sent
for Simonetta, but he was sworn to secrecy. At
last, on Tuesday evening, the Pope showed them
the commission that had been drawn up. Gardiner
flew into a rage and accused his Holiness of double
dealing and a wish to delude them, "with as sore
words as he could devise." The Pope said he would
make any alteration they desired, if Simonetta would
say it was not contrary to justice. Simonetta was
sent for, but he refused to answer without consulting
the cardinals. Notwithstanding this answer, they
went on arguing for seven hours, till one o'clock
on Wednesday morning, " trusting," as Gardiner
74 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
wrote, "by importunity to have obtained our pur-
pose." But the Pope would not be either worried
or wearied into acting unjustly.
The next morning they went again to the Pope
before he had said mass, and argued for four long
hours. But notwithstanding their insolence the car-
dinals read over the commission in a "friendly spirit,"
and made such alterations as justice would allow.
In the evening they argued with Simonetta in the
Pope's presence, and at last got him to agree with
them on all except two words, which they thought
would enable Wolsey to pass a final sentence, even
if the other legate refused. But on these two words
Simonetta made a stand. The cardinals were sent
for ; they answered, they were at their supper and
would look into their books next day. Gardiner
broke out again into violent abuse, accusing the
cardinals of ignorance and suspicion, and laying
the blame of their conduct on the Pope, who had
eyes, but saw not. The Pope listened in silence
to this personal abuse, only sighing and wiping
his eyes ; but when Gardiner went on to threaten
the Church and the ruin of the Apostolic See, he
could stand it no longer. Throwing up his arms,
he bade them put into the commission the words
they desired. Then starting up he walked up and
down the room in great agitation, raising his arms
from time to time. Even they were awed by the
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE. 75
agony of Christ's Vicar, and looked on in silence
till at last, recovering himself, he retracted what
had been extorted in his anguish, and said he
was very sorry he could not satisfy them without
consulting others. As it was now an hour past
midnight, he dismissed them.
The next day, notwithstanding Gardiner's inso-
lence, the Pope and cardinals conversed with the
ambassadors in "a friendly and loving manner."
The disputed words were put into the document,
and no further difficulties occurred.^ The commis-
sion was signed on Monday the 13th April 1528,^
barely three weeks after their first interview with
the Pope. In handing it to the ambassadors, the
Pope bade them tell Henry and Wolsey, that the
sending of this commission was a declaration against
the Emperor, and that he committed himself to their
protection.^
Gardiner having made himself ill by reason of
crying, speaking, chafing, and writing* during the
' Pocock, Records, i. pp. 128-133. (Gardiner and Fox to
Wolsey, April i, 1528.)
' Rymer, Fcedera, xiv. p. 237. This commission was made out
in the name of Wolsey alone, with Warham or some other English
bishop for his assessor. After Campeggio accepted the office of
co-legate with the English cardinal, another commission, dated
June 8, 1528, was drawn up with his name inserted together with
Wolsey's. Otherwise the second commission was identical with that
first issued. (Cf. Pocock, Records, i. p. 167.)
3 Pocock, Records, i. p. 133. (Gardiner, ut stip.)
* Ibid., p. 135.
nb DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
late discussions, sent Fox to England with the
commission. As soon as he was sufficiently re-
covered, he himself went to Rome in order to
persuade Campeggio to accept the office of Legate
in conjunction with Wolsey. The Pope had offered
Henry the choice out of six cardinals ; ^ but Cam-
peggio was the only one whom the ambassadors
thought eligible. He was very poor, having lost
all he possessed in the sack of Rome, and more-
over he held the bishopric of Salisbury, for the
revenues of which he depended on Henry, and
it seems never to have occurred to them that a
man in such a position could fail to be subservient
to their master's will. The Pope preferred him
for the very opposite reason, knowing that he
could depend implicitly on his gentle firmness and
incorruptible integrity.
Thus was the great cause opened before the
Pope. The embassy of Gardiner and Fox may
be looked on as a complete epitome of the whole
case. Though Henry's pertinacious refusal to give
up the suit, or to accept any sentence not in his
own favour, and his perverse ingenuity in devising
pretences for delay, caused it to drag on for six
long years, yet during that time, and amid ever-
varying incidents, no new legal or practical point
' Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pocock), iv. p. 41.
(Gregory Casale, January 13, 1528.)
SECOND EMBASSY TO THE POPE. y7
was raised. Already Henry had avowed his only
motive for demanding a divorce, and the sole
grounds on which he rested his demand. Already
the Pope had distinctly declared these grounds to
be insufficient in law, and as no other grounds
were ever brought forward, since none existed, his
final sentence was already foreshadowed. The
fraudulent character of the proposals of Henry
and his agents at Orvieto, unmistakably revealed
that henceforth they intended to use legal forms
in the case only to frustrate all law and justice.
At the same time Henry's peremptorj^ assertion
that his demand was just and holy, and must not
be denied, coupled with Wolsey's grave warning
and Gardiner's insolent threats, left no doubt what
the final issue must be. The Pope's great distress
whenever that issue was hinted at, proves that
he already foresaw it, probably more clearly than
those around him did, because he saw more plainly
than they could be expected to do, that the Vicar of
Christ, who is the Eternal Judge, could not possibly
give judgment contrary to justice and equity.
It was, however, not with the future, but with
the present that the Pope had to deal. Henry
had asked for an inquiry into the validity of his
marriage to soothe a troubled conscience. The
humblest Catholic was entitled to relief in such a
case, and quite as much therefore a powerful king,
78 DIVORCE OP KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
hitherto the most devoted prop of the Church, on
whose will hung the fate of millions of the Pope's
most loyal children. The Pope had promised him
the inquiry, and though sinister motives now re-
vealed themselves, he could not withdraw from
his plighted word. He had granted him the favour
of choosing his own judge, and he had selected the
very man whom the Pope preferred to all others.
Gardiner had taunted the Pope with denying
justice to Henry through fear of the Emperor.
The accusation was repeated parrot-like by all
Henry's agents, and it has been handed down to
the present day. The Pope would have been more
than human if, after all he had suffered, he had
not feared the Emperor. Still, whilst the horrors
he had witnessed, and the terrible sounds he had
heard must still have been vividly present in his
memory, he had twice defied the Imperial will for
the sake of Henry and of ju-stice.
CHAPTER IX.
DISAPPOINTED HOPES.
Fox arrived at Greenwich at five o'clock on Sunday
afternoon, the 2nd of May 1528. The King was en-
gaged and bade him go to Anne Boleyn's apartment.
There the King soon joined him and questioned Fox
closely about all details of the commission, especially
about the Queen's right of appeal, and Fox referred
him to the words, which Gardiner had wrung from
the Pope in his agitation. But the King was not
satisfied, and bade him go that night to Wolsey.
It was half-past ten when Fox arrived at Durham
Place, where Wolsey was staying, while York Place
was being rebuilt in a magnificent style. The
Cardinal was in bed ; but Fox was at once admitted.
On glancing over the commission Wolsey was per-
plexed, fearing it was of no more value than the
former one. During the three following days he
held repeated consultations with learned lawyers,
and at last he ventured to tell the King that it would
answer their purpose as well as the decretal com-
mission would have done.^
^ Pocock, Records, i. pp. 141-146.
79
8o DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
Still, in reality, the more he studied the commission
the less he liked it. It did not limit the inquiry to
the points suggested by himself, nor did it make
any change in the law of the Church concerning
marriage, as he had hoped. On the contrary, it
bound the legates to ascertain the validity of Pope
Julius's dispensation, and of the marriage according
to the existing laws (Juris ratio) of the Church,
which he well knew could not be twisted to meet his
purpose. Moreover, the lawyers pointed out that
the words, "juris ratio" gave the Queen a right
to appeal to the Pope, notwithstanding the final
words, to vvhich Gardiner and Fox had ignorantly
attached undue value.^ It was evident that, in spite
of the hopes and assurances of the ambassadors,
this commission was not more satisfactory than the
preceding one. Wolsey did not, however, venture
to say this to the King. On the contrary, he flattered
him with declarations about the justice of his cause;
and impressed on him his own pretended conviction
that nothing contrary to the usual process of ths law
was required, so that even if the Queen did appeal
it would only more certainly advance his suit.^
He lost, however, no time in ordering Gardiner,
who was still in Italy, to consult learned men about
various points which he hoped might enable him to
^ Pocock, Records, i. pp. 152, 153. (Fox to Gardiner.)
= Ibid., p. 153.
DISAPPOINTED HOPES. 8i
evade the Pope's intention to have the cause tried
according to law and justice. He especially bade
him make the strongest efforts to get the decretal in
the form already demanded, and he directed him to
take " a most sacred oath '' (z'n animam. suam) that
he would never show it to any one except the King/
though at the same time he explained to Gardiner
how he could turn it to account by showing it to the
opponents of the divorce, in order to bring them
round to his own view.^ The King also ordered
Gardiner to represent to the Pope, how the refusal
of this request would inspire the King with doubts
as to the sincerity of his Holiness's friendship, and
withdraw him from the devotion which he had
hitherto shown him.^ A few weeks later Wolsey
wrote to the Pope himself, with the most pressing
earnestness, entreating him, if he wished to retain
the devoted service of the King and his kingdom,
to preserve the dignity of the Apostolic Chair, and
to save his (Wolsey's) life, to grant the decretal
commission, so often asked for, which he would
undertake to keep secret.*
Casale did actually succeed in wringing from the
Pope a reluctant promise that he would send it.^
But when he came to consult Cardinal Sanctorum
^ Pocock, ut sup., p. 149.
^ Ibid., p. 147. ' Ibid., p. 154.
^ Ibid., p. 166. (Wolsey to Pope Clement, May 23, 1528.)
^ Ibid., p. 172. (Gregory Casale to Wolsey, June 15, 1528.)
F
82 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
Quatuor and Simonetta, they told him that he could
not do so, as indeed was obvious, since the reasons
for the divorce stated in it were insufficient in law.
The Pope thereupon at once retracted his promise.^
His Holiness seems, however, to have been really
alarmed for Wolsey's life, and therefore out of com-
passion, and as the only means to save it, he sent
him secretly by Campeggio a decretal, which was
to be shown only to him and the King and then
burnt immediately.^ The tenor of this decretal is
not known, because there is no trace of it in the
records, whether at Rome or in England. But three
things connected with it are quite certain. First,
it could not have been the same decretal as was
drawn up in England and sent to Rome by Knight,
and again afterwards by Gardiner and Fox, but
on both occasions refused by the Pope, because
in the following February, Gregory Casale in a
letter to his cousin Vincent, who had taken part
with him in the negotiations for the decretal en-
trusted to Campeggio, wrote in reference to the
former decretal : " I told you the Pope would do all
that could be done ; but there are some things the
Pope cannot do, as for instance this decretal bull." *
^ Pocock, M^JJ*/., p. 198. (Bryan and Vannes to Wolsey, January
9. 1529-)
^ Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pocock), iv. p. 65,
(John Casale to Wolsey (?), December 17, 1528.)
' Brewer, Calendar of Letters and Papers, iv. p. 2333. (Gregory
Casale to Vincent Casale, February 16, 1529.)
DISAPPOINTED HOPES. 83
Gregory could not possibly have written thus
if Vincent had known that the Pope actually had
given this very decretal bull, and had the Pope
done so, Vincent must have known it, since he had
taken part in the negotiations about it. Secondly,
it could not have declared Henry's marriage with
Katherine null and unlawful, as Henry after his
marriage with Anne ordered all preachers to declare,^
for if Wolsey had ever seen such a bull, he might
at once have given sentence in Henry's favour,
and Henry might have married Anne, neither of
which were ever attempted. Thirdly, whatever may
have been the tenor of the decretal, it is certain
that it did not in any way affect the trial before
the legates.
^ Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pocock), vi. p. 88.
(An order for preaching.)
CHAPTER X.
IN ENGLAND.
A YEAR had now elapsed since the first steps to
obtain the divorce had been taken, and in spite of
every precaution the great secret had oozed out. It
was the common subject of conversation in taverns,
alehouses, barbers' shops, and in the private dwell-
ings of all classes.^ The whole nation with one
voice declared itself in favour of Katherine, who
was more beloved than any English queen had ever
been before.^ All who supported the divorce were
pubhcly insulted. Wakefield, the Professor of
Hebrew at Oxford and one of the King's advisers,
said that if the people knew he was writing against
the Queen they would stone him to death.^ All
the women took up Katherine's cause as their own,
for if her marriage was set aside, not one of them
could feel sure of being lawfully married. The
King's sister Mary, the Queen-Dowager of France,
' Harpsfield, The Pretended Divorce, p. 177.
^ Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 292. (Report of
England, by Lodovico Falier, November 10, 1531.)
^ Knight, Life of Erasmus, Appendix 28.
84
IN ENGLAND. 85
was so alarmed that she applied to the Pope for a
bull confirming her own marriage with the Duke
of Suffolk, who had a divorced wife still alive.
So serious was the popular discontent, that both
the Spanish and Milanese ambassadors expected
the people to rebel if Katherine was divorced and
Henry married Anne.^
Private remonstrances to the King, too, were not
wanting. Anne's father, Lord Rochford, hurried
over from France to warn him not to marry her,
on the ground of his previous connection with his
wife and elder daughter.^ Sir George Throckmorton,
one of the courtiers on familiar terms with Henry,
pressed the same objections on him.^ Sir Thomas
Wj'att, who in past years had playfully declared
himself Henry's rival for Anne's favour, now gravely
laid before him undoubted proofs of her immoral
life.*
But in spite of all remonstrances and warnings,
Henry persisted in his scandalous course. So
hardened had his heart become and so servile were
his courtly bishops and chaplains, that he continued
' Rawdon Brown, ui sup., p. 252. (Augustino Scarpinello, the
Milanese envoy to Duke of Milan, August 15, 1530.) Cf. Gayangos,
Calendar of Spanish State Papers, iii., part 2, pp. 194, 207.
2 Sander, Rise and Growth of the Anglican Schism (translated by
D. Lewis), p. 28.
' Brewer, Calendar, iv., Introduction, p. cccxxix, note.
^ Harpsfield, ut sup., p. 253. Nicholas Sander, tU sup., p. 28,
tells the same story with some variations
86 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
his usual religious observances, and even received
Holy Communion whilst leading this life.^ Not even
under the fear of immediate death did his conscience
awake. In June, 1528, the pestilence, called the
sweating sickness, broke out. A dozen years before,
ten or twelve thousand persons had been carried
oflF in twelve days. The present outbreak, though
not so fatal, still attacked some forty thousand in
London alone within a fortnight, and of these two
thousand died.^ Anne Boleyn was taken ill on the
i6th June. The Court was immediately broken up,
and the King kept moving from place to place with
the fewest possible number of attendants. But even
these few diminished. Sir William Compton, his
great favourite. Sir Francis Poyntz, esquire of the
body, and William Cary, Mary Boleyn's husband,
died, and Anne's father, her brother, Fitz-William
the treasurer and many others fell ill. In great
terror, Henry shut himself up for a time in a tower
with his physician, and took his meals alone.^ He
spent his time in acts of devotion, confessing and
receiving Holy Communion, making his will, or
prescribing to Wolsey and his other favourites how
^ Brewer, iii sup., iv. p. 1912. (Thomas Hennege to Wolsey,
June II, 1528.) "This day the King has received his Maker at
the Friars', when my lord of Lincoln administered. "
^ Ibid., p. 1924. (Du Bellay to Montmorency, June 18, 1528.)
Cf. also p. 1941. (Same to same, June 30.)
' State Papers (1830), i. p. 296. (Brian Tuke to Wolsey, June
21, 1528.)
IN ENGLAND. 87
to guard against infection and how to treat the
disease.^ During the height of his alarm, he saw
more of the Queen than he had done for some time,
but still his thoughts apparently centred in Anne
Boleyn. As soon as she was sufficiently recovered,
she went to her father's house in Kent. Henry
wrote frequently to her in gross and passionate
terms which throw a slur on her modesty and
virtue, and leave no doubt as to the nature of
their connection.^ As soon as the danger of in-
fection had subsided, he wished her to return to the
Court, but she seems to have made some difficulty
about doing so, till Henry consented to place her
in a different position to what she had hitherto
occupied. Magnificent apartments were fitted up
for her under Henry's superintendence, and she
had a separate establishment, in order to save her
the unpleasantness of meeting the Queen, whilst
the courtiers gathered round her and paid her far
more respect than for a long time they had been
accustomed to pay to the Queen.^ It was hoped
that the nation would thus become gradually used
to look upon her as their Queen.
The result, however, was the exact contrary of
^ Sia/e Papers, pp. 293-315. (Same to same, June 23, 1528.)
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. pp. 378-384.
' Ibid., p. 2177. (Du Bellay to Montmorency, December 9, 1528.)
Cf. also pp. 2021, 2207.
88 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
what had been intended. The national sense of
decency was only more and more outraged by this
shameful display of vice, and this public insult to
their much loved Queen. The popular feeling was
so plainly shown, that Henry thought it prudent
to take steps at once to conciliate and intimidate
the nation. Accordingly, on the 8th November,
he assembled his Council, the judges, the Lord
Mayor and Corporation of London, and the prin-
cipal nobles at his palace of Bridewell. He spoke
to them in the warmest terms of the Queen Kathe-
rine's virtues, nobleness, and princely qualities,
assuring them that were he to marry again, and
were a marriage with her lawful, he would take
her rather than any other woman. But, notwith-
standing her worthiness and his having a fair
daughter by her, his conscience was wonderfully
tormented, because learned men told him he had
been living all this time with her in detestable and
abominable adultery. He had, therefore, consulted
the Pope, who had appointed two legates to hear
the cause, and he was determined to abide by their
judgment. If they should decide that by the law
of God she was his lawful wife, nothing in all his
life would give him more pleasure. He added, as
a further motive for the inquiry into the legality
of his marriage, the falsehood concocted by him and
Wolsey, that the French ambassador, in negotiating
IN ENGLAND. 89
his daughter's marriage with the French king's
son, had expressed a doubt as to her legitimacy,
and he wished earnestly to secure an undisputed
successor to his throne. He could not, however,
close his speech without a manifestation of his
savage temper, and he finally declared he was
determined to carry out what was reasonable, and
meanwhile if any one spoke of his Prince in other
terms than he ought, he would let him know he
was his master. There was never a head so digni-
fied that he would not make it fly.^
This speech utterly failed to deceive any one.
People were only more and more disgusted by the
King's audacious hypocrisy in speaking so warmly
in the Queen's praise, and in pleading conscientious
scruples, which were belied by his shameful display
of vice. The nation was so uneasy, and seemed so
disposed to revolt, that the King was alarmed. A
search for arms was made, and all strangers were
ordered to leave the kingdom. But as it was
reckoned there were above 15,000 Flemings in
London alone, this order was not easily carried
out.
' Harpsfield, TAe Pretended Divorce, p. 179. Hall ap. Brewer,
Calendar, iv., Introduction, p. ccccxxiii.
CHAPTER XI.
THE LEGATE.
CampegGIO'S appointment as legate was known in
England at the beginning of May, 1528, and his
arrival was expected to take place within a few
weeks. But month after month slipped away.
The summer was gone and the autumn well ad-
vanced, and yet he did not appear. Henry's in-
creasing impatience rose almost beyond bounds.
To Campeggio the acceptance of the office had
been no common sacrifice. His former visit to
England must have taught him that his present
task would be attended with extraordinary diffi-
culties and responsibility, added to which, his great
sufferings from gout made it next to impossible for
him to perform the long journey to England. It
was only a high sense of duty to the Church and
the Pope that prevented his declining the post.
Repeated attacks of illness, and unexpected diffi-
culties about conveyance, delayed him in Italy till
June, and similar causes detained him on the
journey, so that he did not reach Paris till the
THE LEGATE. 91
middle of September, where he was received with
the pomp and ceremonial due to a Papal legate.^
Up to this time it was supposed that he was sent
to England merely to go through the form of an
inquiry and at once to grant the wished for divorce.
Great therefore was Francis's surprise, when he
told him that the first object of his mission was to
induce Henry to change his mind. But that if that
were found impossible, the result of the inquiry
into the marriage must depend on the evidence,
and that the only thing certain was that there
would be no lack of justice." 2 Francis conveyed
this unwelcome news to Clerk, Bishop of Bath,
who was waiting in Paris to accompany Campeggio
to Calais. Clerk immediately offered Campeggio
a large sum of money to defray his expenses.
But notwithstanding Clerk's repeated and pressing
■^ A letter from Viterbo, written June 13, says that Campeggio
had started by boat from Genoa to Marseilles. The ship, however,
was not ready, and the voyage was begun only on July Z2. Accord-
ing to Salviati, writing from Paris on August 21, Campeggio had
arrived at Nice, and Clerk writes to announce his arrival at Lyons
on August 26. The Cardinal arrived in Paris on September 14,
where he was received with great pomp, but not with the ceremonial
accorded to a legate according to a recent authority. (See S. Ehses,
Romische Dokumente zur Geschichte der Ehescheidung Heinrichs
VIII. von England, Paderborn, 1893, Introduction, p. xxx.)
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2047. (The Papal secretary to Cam-
peggio, September 11, 1528.) He is instructed — "Do your utmost
to restore mutual affection between the King and Queen. You are
not to pronounce any opinion without a new and express commission
hence." Cf. p. 2061. (Clerk to Wolsey, September 18, 1528.)
93 DIVORCE OP KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
entreaties, Campeggio refused to accept anything,
saying he had enough money to take him to
England, and required only horses and mules to
be provided for the journey.^ During his stay in
England the Legate maintained the same indepen-
dence, although, as the Pope was then in extreme
poverty, he was not always able to send him the
pittance he had promised him.
Campeggio left Paris on the i8th September.
He was suffering so much from gout that his feet
could not bear the pressure of stirrups nor his
hand hold a bridle, and he had to be carried in a
litter.^ In England he was well received by those
whom he met on the road; but, to impartial ob-
servers, it was evident that the popular feeling
against the divorce was so strong that the people
would have rebelled if they had dared.^ At Canter-
bury Campeggio was able to sing High Mass on
the 1st of October; but a fresh attack of gout so
completely disabled him that he could not even
bear the motion of a litter, and was detained at
the Duke of Suffolk's house, in the suburbs of
London, till Wolsey came and conveyed him
privately by water to Bath Place.
In this state of suffering the unhappy Legate
^ Brewer, ut sup., p. 2054. (Clerk to Wolsey.)
2 He arrived at Calais only on September 25 (Ehses, ut sup.)
5 Brewer, ut sup., p. 3168. (Du Bellay to De la Pommeraye,
September 24, 1528.)
THE LEGATE. 93
could justly claim some respite from business. But
Henry, irritated by past delay, had not the least
compassion for him. The very next day after his
arrival at Bath Place, Wolsey came and discussed
their common business for three or four hours.
And on several successive days, he returned to
continue the conference. But, notwithstanding all
that could be said, Campeggio reported to the
Pope : " I have had no more success in per-
suading the Cardinal than if I had spoken to a
rock."i
On the 22nd of October, though Campeggio was
still unable to walk or stand, or even to sit without
great pain, he was carried to the palace adjoining
the Black Friars' convent, to present the Pope's
letter to the King. He was received in great state
and was warmly welcomed.
The next day Henry came privately to see him,
and remained in conversation four hours. Cam-
peggio began by exhorting him to give up the
divorce, and offered him a fresh dispensation con-
firming his marriage. But Henry at once declined
it, and turned the discussion to the question,
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 21 12. (Campeggio to Sanga, October
28, 1528.) Dr. Ehses [ut sup., p. xxxi) says that Campeggio might
have accomplished the journey one or two days sooner in spite of
his illness, but that looking at what is known of his character, it
does not seem likely that the delay made any difference in the
final settlement.
94 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
whether Pope Julius's dispensation was against
the Divine law, and therefore invalid. He had
quotations from theologians and lawyers at his
fingers' ends, and strained and twisted their mean-
ing in support of his own case. Of this interview
Campeggio wrote to the Pope : " I believe if an
angel descended from heaven, he would not be able
to persuade His Majesty to the contrary." i
The following day the two cardinals went to the
Queen. They advised her in the Pope's name
not to press her cause to a trial ; but she answered
that she was resolved to die in the faith and in
obedience to God and Holy Church, and that she
wished to unburden her conscience to the Pope,
and for the present she would give no other answer.
Campeggio told her they were directed to persuade
her to enter religion, as the King's ambassadors had
given the Pope to understand she was ready to do,
and he set before her in strong contrast, on the one
hand the worldly advantages she would thereby
secure, and on the other the sorrow, loss of reputa-
tion, and poverty that might be the result of a trial,
if judgment were given against her. She closed
the interview by saying that she was a lone woman
and a stranger without friend or adviser, that she
intended to ask the King for counsellors, and that
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2101. (Campeggio to Sanga, October
17, 1528.)
THE LEGATE. 95
after they were granted she would give the cardinals
another audience.^
A few days later she came privately, with the
King's leave, to confess to Campeggio. Though she
spoke under the seal of confession, she besought
him to inform the Pope of the following resolutions,
which she would make public at the proper time.
First, she affirmed most solemnly that she had
never lived with Arthur as his wife. Secondly,
she declared that she would never take a vow of
chastity, but would live and die in the state of
matrimony to which God had called her; unless,
after a judicial decision, sentence was given against
her, when she would be as free as the King. She
added, that neither the gift of the whole world on the
one hand, nor any great punishment on the other,
even were she to be torn limb from limb, would
ever induce her to change this resolution; and if
after death she could return to life, she would rather
die again than give it up. Campeggio said all he
could to move her, but she remained firm. Thus
Campeggio was disappointed for the third time;
but truth compelled him to write to the Pope:
" I have always thought her (Queen Katherine)
a prudent lady, and now more than ever."^ It is
' Brewer, ut sup.
" Ibid., iv. p. 21 10. (Campeggio to Salviati, October 26,
1528.)
96 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
almost incredible that at this time she should have
been without any advisers. She had asked for them
more than a year before, and some foreign coun-
sellors had been assigned to her by Henry. But
as they were compelled to disclose what passed in
their private consultations with her, before long
they were sent away.^ Some English advisers
were now granted her, apparently by the Pope's
order.^ But they were so dependent on the King
that she could feel no confidence in them.
On the 27th October 1528, the two cardinals paid
her another visit, when she was attended by some
of the advisers lately appointed to her. She received
the legates with great dignity, but complained,
though without the least sign of anger, that they
had come to question her without due notice or
allowing her time to take advice. Campeggio
repeated his former arguments, and Wolsey on
his knees long besought her to follow his advice.
She replied that she would never do anything to
the condemnation of her soul, or the violation of
God's laws, and that when she had consulted with
her advisers she would give them her final answer.
Campeggio wrote upon this to the Pope : " We
shall see what they will advise and what counsel
she will accept, though as yet it does not seem
^ Brewer, ut sup., pp. 2166, 2265, 2357.
^ Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 175.
THE LEGATE. 97
likely she will bend one way or other." ^ Time
showed that he was right.
Great indeed were the disappointment and sur-
prise of Henry and Wolsey at the conduct of the
Legate. They had expected that he would prove
a pliant instrument of their will, who would give
the impress of legality to their wicked scheme.
Wolsey especially depended on him to supply all
defects in the Pope's recent commission. But the
Pope in Campeggio had sent a cardinal who was
incorruptible, who kept his judgment free, and
whilst willing to urge the Queen to sacrifice herself
for the sake of the general interests involved, was
firm in his determination not to overstep the bounds
of law and justice.
The English cardinal was confounded when
Campeggio, in accordance with the instructions he
had received from the Pope, refused even to let
him show the Council the decretal of which he was
the bearer, and would not even place it in his
hands ; but, after showing it to the King, professed
that it was his intention to burn it. Wolsey's
consternation, however, reached its height when
Campeggio told him that he was bound by his
instructions, after concluding the inquiry into the
validity of the marriage, to lay his opinion before
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2iii. (Campeggio to Sanga, October
28, 1528.)
G
98 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
the Pope and wait for further orders before passing
sentence. Turning with a scowl towards his col-
league, the Cardinal of York exclaimed in an angry
tone, "If it be so I will not negotiate with one
who has no power, and the King cannot be treated
thus."
CHAPTER XII.
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS.
Wolsey's courage and ingenuity did not fail him
in this critical emergency. He resolved, notwith-
standing the King's impatience, to put off the trial
till he could obtain from Rome such unlimited
powers as would enable him to defy both Pope
and Legate, and thus make sure of a favourable
sentence.^ Gardiner was still in Rome, and several
clever Italians were zealously helping him. In
November Francis Bryan, cousin to Anne Boleyn,
Peter Vannes, a secretary of Wolsey,^ and, a few
weeks later. Dr. Knight and Dr. Benet, were sent
thither. But Wolsey kept in his own hands a
more delicate matter on which he built great hopes
of success.
Early in October he had told Gregory Casale to
get the Pope's permission for him to show the
decretal, of which Campeggio was the bearer, to a
1 Pocock, Records, i. p. 251. (Benet and others to Wolsey, July 9,
1529.)
" Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 213. (Letters
from Rome, May 31, 1529.)
loo DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
t
few members of the King's council.^ But, when
Campeggio's unexpected conduct gave a new and
critical turn to affairs, he resolved to play a bolder
game, and he ordered Gregory to pretend that the
Pope had actually promised him leave to do so.
Gregory, being ill when these orders arrived, sent
his brother John and his cousin Vincent to the Pope
to carry them out. They complained to his Holi-
ness that Campeggio would not allow Wolsey to
show the decretal and would not even place it in
his hands, and they called , on the Pope to fulfil the
pretended promise to Wolsey that he might show it.
On hearing this flat falsehood the Pope got very
angry, and forbade John Casale to say another word
on the subject, because it was evident that Wolsey
was deceiving him. He had asked only for a bull
to be seen by no one but the King, and it had
been granted in order to save his (Wolsey's) life.
Now, however, he pretended that a promise had
been made that he might show it to others. Again
and again John Casale returned to press for the
fulfilment of the pretended promise ; but each time
the Pope became more and more angry. He pro-
tested that he was not "telling lies." He had
Wolsey's letters to prove the truth of his words.
Campeggio had written that he had shown the
^ Pocock, Records, i. p. 176. (Wolsey to Gregory Casale, October
4. 1528-)
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. loi
decretal to the King and the English cardinal,
according to Wolsey's request, after which it must
have been burned, as had been agreed upon. At
last John Casale resorted to the usual threats ot
schism and temporal ruin, upon which the Pope
exclaimed in great agitation, " I know that imminent
ruin hangs over me, and what I have done gives
me great pain. But if heresies and other evils are
about to arise, is that my fault ? It is enough that
my conscience is clear from blame, which it would
not be if I granted what you now ask."^ Finally
Vincent Casale was despatched to England to ex-
plain the hopelessness of the case, since neither by
arguments nor by threats could the Pope be induced
to allow the decretal to be given to Wolsey.^
But it was not to moral force alone that Henry
and Wolsey trusted. Physical force also was to be
resorted to if necessary. The Pope was to be
persuaded to accept a guard of from one to two
thousand men provided by the Kings of England
and France.
Dr. Knight and Dr. Benet were instructed "to
represent to the King of France that it was done
for his sake," and to tell the Pope it was " intended
' Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pocock), iv. p. 64.
Qohn Casale to Wolsey : account of a conference he had with the
Pope. December 17, 1528.)
2 Ibid., p. 72.
102 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
for his personal safety," though in reality it was " for
the benefit of the King's cause," i in order that the
Pope might fear and respect Henry as much as he
did the Emperor, and thus be more ready to grant
him his requests. But the King of France saw that
the proposed guard was only a pretext to gain
Henry's own ends at his expense,^ and he therefore
told the ambassadors that so small a guard would
be useless, as the Emperor had thirty thousand men
in Italy.^ The ambassadors were also ordered to
plot with the King of France for the removal of
the Pope to Avignon, where they did not doubt he
could be forced to grant Henry's suit.*
Meantime the Pope became dangerously ill, and a
report reached England that he was actually dead.
Henry wrote instantly to his ambassadors in Rome
ordering them to make the most strenuous efforts
for Wolsey's election to the Papal Chair. Dignities,
benefices, and money without stint were placed at
their disposal, and a guard of two or three thousand
men was offered to the friendly cardinals, who were
to be formed into a compact party in the Conclave.
He added with blasphemous hypocrisy, that if the
cardinals had God and the Holy Ghost with them
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2179. (Brian to Gardiner, December
1528.) Also p. 2178. (Wolsey to Knight, January 1529.)
^ Ibid., p. 2262. (Knight to Wolsey, January 8, 1529.)
^ Ibid., p. 2398. (Same to same, April 1529.)
* Ibid., p. 2397. (Same to same.) Cf. also p. 2399.
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. 103
they would see that Wolsey alone could save the
Church and Christendom from existing calamities.
But if through lack of grace or from private
ambition his election could not be carried, then the
English and French party was to publish a protest,
leave the Conclave and retire to some safe place,
where, ignoring any election made in Rome, they
were to make choice of Wolsey.'-
Wolsey himself wrote more cautiously to Gardiner,
modestly setting forth his own qualifications, the
advantage to Christendom and the King's great
matter that would accrue from his election, and
bidding Gardiner strain every nerve, spend money,
and make promises without stint ^ to secure this
end.
But the occasion passed away. The Pope rallied
unexpectedly. The fever left him, and he regained
strength gradually, though slowly.^
Meanwhile the English ambassadors had arrived
in Italy. The instructions given to Bryan are so
unparalleled, that they could not be credited, were
it not that a copy of them in Vannes' handwriting
^ Pocock, Records, ii. pp. 590-605. (Henry VIII. to Gardiner,
February 6, 1529.)
2 Ibid., p. 607. (Wolsey to Gardiner, February 7, 1529.) "Con-
cerning my advancement unto the dignity Papal, not doubting but
that ... ye will omit nothing that may be excogitate to serve and
conduce to that purpose."
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2281. (Paul Casale to his brother,
January 19, 1529.)
104 DIVORCE OP KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
and corrected by Wolsey himself, is still to be
seen. First, the agents were to make every effort
to procure in some form the original decretal
commission, which, it will be remembered, the Pope
had already refused to Gardiner and Fox, because
the reasons it gave for the divorce were insufficient
in law. If they failed to get this they were to ask,
either that the Pope should remove the cause to
Rome and sign a written promise that within two
or three months he would give sentence in the
King's favour ; or that out of the fulness of his
power (ex plenitudine potestatis) he would declare
the King's first marriage invalid, and authorise him
to take another wife; or that he would give him a
dispensation to have two wives at once, or permit
him to take another wife, if the Queen would enter
religion.^ They were also directed to ask whether,
if the Queen would not enter religion, unless the
King took a vow of chastity, the Pope would promise
afterwards to dispense him from this vow and allow
him to marry.^
There was another important matter also which
the English agents were to bring before the Pope.
' Pocock, Records, i. p. 189. (Heads of instructions given to
Brian and Vannes when they went to Rome, in December 1528, in
Vannes' hand ; corrected by Wolsey.)
" Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2158. (Instructions to same, November
1528, signed at beginning and end by the King.) Cf. Harpsfield,
The Pretended Divorce, pp. 187, 188.
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. 105
It happened that Wolsey, in searching for flaws
in Pope Julius' bull, thought he had found one
in the fact that Katherine's marriage with Arthur
was said to have been "perhaps" {forsitari) con-
summated. Katherine met this objection by re-
ferring to the brief sent to Queen Isabella on her
deathbed, in which Ferdinand had taken care that
such explicit 'terms should be used as would meet
all possible cavils of the English lawyers.-"- A copy
of this brief had been sent at the time from Spain
to England.2 But Henry and Wolsey now declared
that they had never heard of it. They expressed
doubts as to its existence, since no trace of it could
be found in England, though a letter from Pope
Julius to Henry VII. mentioning that this copy
had been sent, and expressing his annoyance that
it should have reached England before the bull, is
still to be seen in the Record Office.^
They insisted that the original brief must be
sent to England, with the intention probably that
some accident should befall it in passing through
France. As the Emperor, however, might object
' Pocock, Records, ii. p. 426. (Ferdinand to his agents, August
23. 1503-)
^ Ibid., i. p. 7. (Julius II. to Henry VII. explaining the cir-
cumstance under which the brief had been sent to Spain, February 2,
1506.) On March 17, the Bishop of Worcester -wrote to the King
that the Pope had been grieved to hear that copies of the brief had
been sent from Spain to England.
' Ibid.
lo6 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
to part with it, Katherine's English counsellors
were tampered with and induced to advise her to
write to the Emperor desiring him to send it by
her chaplain Abel, who was the bearer of her
letter. As Henry claimed from her the obedience
of a wife, though he denied her right to the title,
and had bound her by a solemn oath to write and
sign what he commanded but nothing else, she was
obliged to sign this letter. She, however, gave
written instructions to Abel to tell the Emperor
in her name not to send the brief, because the
'proof of the validity of her marriage depended on
it, and she had been compelled under oath to write
as she had done.i She also sent Montoya, one of
her household, to Spain with similar verbal in-
structions, and the Spanish ambassador wrote to
his master to the same effect.^ The Emperor
accordingly refused to send it, but he forwarded a
copy formally authenticated in the presence of the
English ambassadors in Spain. ^
This, however, did not satisfy Henry and Wolsey.
They ordered their ambassadors to ask the Pope
either to revoke Pope Julius' bull, on the ground
that he had exceeded his power in granting it, or
to declare this brief a forgery. The Pope was
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2265.
" Ibid., p. 2274.
' Ibid., pp. 2410, 241 1.
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. 107
greatly' moved that he should be even asked to
revoke Pope Julius' bull, since he could not do so
without undermining the very foundation of his
Chair and the Church.^
He felt so strongly on the subject that he
would not even allow any disputation on the
Pope's dispensing power to be carried on in his
presence.^
The case of the brief was scarcely less distressing
to him. The ambassadors required him to declare
it a forgery, because it seemed incredible to them
that a bull and a brief should both be dated on the
same day. But Mai, the Imperial ambassador, proved
that it was very usual, in order to prevent mistakes,
to issue a brief the same day as a bull. It was
well known in England that it was not customary
to register all such briefs,^ but notwithstanding this,
the ambassadors pretended that it must be a forgery
because it was not registered. But, though it was
not entered on the Register, Mai found mention of
it and of the cause of its being sent in a brief reciting
the briefs of Pope Julius,* and also in two other
briefs,^ one of which was that now in the Record
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2395.
2 Ibid., p. 2415. (Gardiner to Henry VIII., April 21, 1529.)
' Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iii. , part 2, p. 860. (Don Inigo
to the Emperor, December 2, 1528.)
* Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2393.
5 Ibid., p. 2372. (Mai to Charles V., March 23, 1529.)
io8 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
Office.'^ The ambassadors also objected to the
date, which was December 26, 1503. They argued
that as briefs are always dated according to the
computation by which the year begins after the
Nativity, which they chose to limit to Christmas
Day, December 26, 1503, was above ten months
before November 10 of the same year, when Julius II.
became Pope, and they consequently argued that the
brief must be a forgery. But, as every one knows,
the Feast of the Nativity is not limited to a single
day, but has an Octave,^ which extends to the
Circumcision, on which day the New Year begins,
and according to this computation, by which briefs
are dated, December 26 is about six weeks after
November 10, and not ten months before it.* The
ambassadors lastly took exception to certain trivial
irregularities of style and spelling, although they
were told no particular style was used for briefs,*
and that spelling, as was well known, was at that
time irregular and optional.
But after all their objections to the brief had been
answered, the ambassadors still insisted that the
^ Pocock, Records, i. p. 7. (Julius II. to Henry VII., February
2, 1506.)
2 For example a letter of Chapuys', the Imperial ambassador,
dated December 29, 1530, says : " The third day of Christmas the
auditor returned," &c.
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. pp. 2365, 2591.
* Ibid., p. 2366.
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. 109
Pope should declare it a forgery out of the fulness
of his power. They said, " You promised to do for
the King all that you could. You can declare this
brief a forgery, and if you do not do so, you will not
keep your promise." They added that "the King
would not have cared about it had the promise not
been made."^ In extreme perplexity, his Holiness
consulted all the most learned men in Rome. They
unanimously declared that it would be contrary to
law and would create great scandal were he to declare
the brief a forgery, without hearing the other side,
and that it would be more than strange were he to
give sentence on what was uncertain.^ But neither
reason nor argument made the least impression
on the ambassadors. They acknowledged neither
reason, argument, nor law, except their sovereign's
will, and so long as it was not obeyed they repeated
their demands over and over again, regardless of all
that had been previously urged against them.
Only one step was possible for the Pope, and this
he promised to take. He offered to write to the
Emperor and desire him to send the brief either to
England or to Rome. The ambassadors then insisted
that he should order the Emperor peremptorily to
produce the brief within a specified time, under
the threat that did he fail to do so the Pope would
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2393.
2 Ibid., p. 2416. (Sanga to Campeggio, April 21, 1529.)
no DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
proceed summarily and pronounce it a forgery. Such
an imperious tone was not used towards any Prince,
much less towards the Emperor ; ^ but because the
Pope would not write in the form the English agents
dictated, they declared they did not desire that any
communications should be made.^
The Pope, however, wrote to the Emperor in the
usual courteous style, requesting him to send the
brief to Rome by the Bishop of Vaison, whom he
had sent into Spain to fetch it.^ But the Emperor
refused to part with it till he could deliver it to the
Pope with his own hand.* This he seems to have
done when he met the Pope at Bologna in the fol-
lowing winter.^ Cardinal Sanctorum Quatuor then
examined it, pronounced it genuine, and declared
himself ready to testify to its validity.®
His Holiness complained bitterly of the inde-
corous language and even threats, with which the
English ambassadors pressed their demands — as if
he could if he pleased act contrary to God's moral
law, even were he to gain the whole world, or as
if what they threatened would not rather prove to
their own damage ! '' These threats were not acci-
dental ebullitions of temper, but were premeditated
' Brewer, Ca/sKi/a;-, p. 2418. (SaIviatitoCampeggio,April2i, 1529.)
' Ibid., p. 2416. (Sanga to Campeggio, ui sup.)
" Ibid., p. 2415. * Ibid., p. 2408.
» Ibid., pp. 2674, 2702. « Ibid., p. 2888.
' Ibid., p. 2417.
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. in
attacks about which they boasted. On the 5 th May,
Bryan wrote to Henry, that they "had opened all
to the Pope, first by fair means and then by foul.
. . . Master Stevens (Gardiner) in the presence of
the Pope so answered for your Grace that he
made the Pope ashamed for his deeds." The
Spanish ambassador, who met them in the ante-
room as they came from this interview, said " they
were very much annoyed and muttered threats."^
In consequence of their insults the Pope had a
relapse, and was so ill that his life was again in
danger.^
Campeggio in England meanwhile could only
echo the complaints of his master. He had at the
time frequent attacks of gout, which confined him to
his bed for weeks together. But Henry and Wolsey
pushed forward their designs, sent doctors and
divines to his bedside, compelled him to busy him-
self with folios of canon law, and resented his
attempts to make peace ^ and his endeavours to open
their eyes to truth and justice. And while, on the
one hand, they pressed him with their habitual im-
periousness to hurry on proceedings and to give
sentence at once, the Pope, on the other, sent him
^ Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iv., part i, p. 3,
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2449.
^ Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 176. (Gasparo
Contarini to the Signory, November 21, 1528 ; given the reports in
Rome. )
112 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
reiterated commands not to pronounce any sentence
whatever, without a new and express commission,
but to protract the matter as long as he could, " if
haply God should put into the King's heart some
holy thought, so that he might not desire from
his Holiness what could not be granted without
injustice, peril, and scandal."^
When Henry and Wolsey at length resolved to
defer proceedings and get further powers from
Rome, Campeggio's troubles were not thereby
diminished. The Pope reproached him because,
through his " inability to sustain the torrent of the
King's demands," everything was referred to Rome ;
because he did not at once destroy hopes which he
knew it was impossible for the Pope to fulfil ; or
because he had perhaps incautiously promised too
much. His Holiness commanded the Legate to
relieve him of part of his cares by putting a stop
to troublesome suits, which could not possibly be
granted, and besought him in touching terms, for
the love of God, to divert these troubles from Rome,
for since the more Henry and Wolsey expected and
demanded, the more grievous it seemed to them to
get nothing but refusal.
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2055. (Sanga to Campeggio, Sep-
tember 16, 1528.) Campeggio is to try and induce the King to give
up the idea of the divorce, and " not desire from his Holiness a
thing which cannot be granted without injustice, peril, and scandal."
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. 113
In self-defence, Campeggio complained of the way
in which Henry and Wolsey browbeat him, treating
every argument against them as vain and frivolous,
and twisting every word of his in their own favour.^
He had often told them, he said, that the Pope
could not possibly revoke his predecessor's Bull,
and explained to them why it was impossible.^ He
had tried to persuade them not to ask the Pope to
declare the brief a forgery, because when it should
come before him in the course of proceedings, he,
being familiar with such documents, would at once
detect the fraud if it existed.^ But this would not
satisfy Henry, who insisted that it should be de-
clared a forgery, whether a flaw existed in it or not.
He had indeed promised that the Pope would do
all that lay in his power, and as a consequence
Henry and Wolsey had asserted that these words
implied the Pope would exert the extraordinary
powers of which the fulness was vested in his office,
as expressed in the term " ex plenitudine potestatis."
But this he positively denied. They therefore sent
for his secretary and Francesco Campana, a con-
fidential envoy from the Pope to Campeggio, and
tried to entrap them into allowing that the Cardinal
had explicitly promised this in their presence. But
Francesco denied it, and held his ground firmly in
cross-examination. At last he closed the discussion
^ Brewer, Calendar, p. 2461. " Ibid., p. 2462. '' Ibid.
H
114 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
by reminding them that "if his Holiness did not
comply with his Majesty's desires it was because he
could not do so with justice and without prejudice
to a third party." ^
Meanwhile the Pope's firmness and justice were
equally put to the test by Katharine and the
Emperor. As she did not know that he was,
in his dealings with the ambassadors, always in-
flexible on the point of law and justice, she natu-
rally supposed he was acting entirely in Henry's
favour. She was convinced that her cause would
be lost if it were tried in England, where neither
she nor her judges were free,^ and that in Rome
alone could she have an opportunity of fairly stating
her case.^ She therefore entreated the Emperor to
remonstrate with the Pope for having taken any
steps in the matter without having heard both
parties.* The Emperor accordingly demanded that
her cause should be removed to Rome. But the
Pope refused, because he had not received any
request from Katherine herself, and he had been
given to understand by the English ambassadors
that she acquiesced in Henry's proceedings. The
Spanish ambassador urged her to send the usual
' Brewer, Calendar, p. 2464.
' Ibid., p. 2275. Cf.' Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iii., part
2, p. 926.
3 Ibid., iv. p. 2367. * Ibid., p. 2265.
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. 115
formal demand for the removal of her cause from
England ; but she was so surrounded by spies even
in her own household, that it was impossible for
her to do so,^ and it was only after the lapse of
several months that she contrived to write a private
letter to the Pope informing him of her wish and of
the state of constraint in which she was.^ How-
ever, before her letter arrived, the Pope's eyes had
been opened to her position by the English ambas-
sadors themselves, who had hinted, without entering
into particulars, that "if the King were not so good,
servants would not have been wanting to give her
poison." Hereupon the Pope ordered Mai, the
Spanish ambassador, to draw out his protest pro-
mising that he would take care that the case should
be tried at Rome, at the same time adding, " even
if the Emperor and all the rest of them should
agree to the divorce I will never authorise it."
When he received the Queen's letter, which, as
Mai said, would have broken a heart of stone, he
renewed these promises.^ But he shrank from re-
moving the suit till such time as it might be done
with less offence to Henry, or at least till the con-
clusion of a general peace should avert the extreme
danger to Christendom, which would probably result
from any outbreak of the English king's anger.
* Brewer, Calendar, p. 2316. Cf. Gayangos, ut sup., p. 981.
' Ibid., p. 2392. ' Ibid.
n6 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
Nor was it only against the English and Spanish
ambassadors that the Pope had to hold his ground.
The King of France, on the one hand, threatened,
if the divorce was not granted, to depose the Pope
and place a more worthy occupant on St. Peter's
Chair,! ^jjj tljg large French army then in Italy
added strength to his words. And, on the other
hand, the Cardinal-Archbishop of Mainz, who re-
presented the Church in Germany, told the Pope
that if the divorce were granted all Germany,
both Catholic and Lutheran, would certainly attack
him, and that nothing would so much strengthen
Luther's sect.^
But in spite of falsehood, threats, and political
pressure, the Pope held the balance of justice with
an even and firm hand. On the 2 1st of April, Bryan
wrote to Henry that he, Gardiner, Gregory Casale,
and Vannes had done all they could, but that the
Pope would grant them nothing. " Were I to write
otherwise," he added, " I should put you in hope
where none is, and whoever has told you that he
will, has not done you, I think, the best service.
There is no one more sorry to write to you this
news than I am. No men are more heavy than we
are that we cannot bring things to pass as we
would. ... I have written to my cousin Anne,
but I dare not write to her the truth, but will refer
' Brewer, Calendar, p. 2480. ^ Ibid., p. 2463.
INTRIGUES AND STRATAGEMS. 117
her to your Grace to make her privy to all the
news." 1
A fortnight later, on the 4th May, Gardiner
wrote to the King, " All jointly, and I myself apart
applying all my wit and learning to obtain at the
Pope's hand some part of the accomplishment of
your desires, finally have nothing prevailed."^
^ Brewer, Calendar, pp. 221 1, 2262.
'^ Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pococlc), vi. p. 23.
(Gardiner to Henry VIII., May 4, 1528.)
CHAPTER XIII.
LAST DESPERATE EFFORT.
WolsEY's prospects were daily becoming darker
and darker. While his most trusted agents failed
to obtain for him the least concession from the
Pope, and while the removal of the cause to Rome
was openly discussed, his position at home was
being undermined. The King was daily falling
more and more into the hands of the clique headed
by Norfolk, Anne's uncle and Wolsey's inveterate
enemy.
Under pretence of hunting or some other country
pleasure, Henry was removed from Wolsey's personal
influence and kept under that of Anne Boleyn and
her friends. She was constantly irritating the King
against the minister by suggesting that Wolsey
was raising impediments to the divorce, to which
he had from the first been opposed.^ The Dukes
of Norfolk and Suffolk insinuated that he had not
done as much as he could to promote it.^ The
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2317. (Mendoza to Charles V., London,
February 4, 1 529. )
^ Ibid., p. 2467. (Du Bellay, London, May 22, 1529.)
iiS
LAST DESPERATE EFFORT. 119
Duke of Suffolk, especially, who happened to be
in France, even dared on his return to bring a
pretended message from Francis, bidding Henry
not trust Wolsey because he had too good an
understanding with the Pope and Campeggio, and
because they were certainly against the divorce,
it was the more needful for the King to look
after his own affairs.^ The correspondence of the
Bishop of Bayonne, however, proves that this
message from the King of France was fabricated
by Suffolk.
The Boleyn party had so far made an impression
on Henry, that he looked with less favour on
Wolsey, occasionally said disagreeable things to
him,^ and allowed Anne to speak rudely to him,
and to bring back to Court Sir Thomas Cheyney,
who had been sent away in disgrace by Wolsey.^
He even told the Spanish ambassador that he
blamed the Cardinal for not having fulfilled his
promises to him; and that he had hitherto done
nothing except get Campeggio and the Pope to
frighten the Queen, with a view to inducing her to
enter religion. Anne's influence also appeared in
the readiness with which Henry now listened to
complaints about the endowment of Wolsey's college
' Brewer, Ca/eWar, p. 2491. (Suffolk toHenry VIII. June4, 1529.)
- Ibid., iv. p. 2317.
' Ibid., p. 2296, (Du Bellay to Montmorency, January 1529.)
126 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
at Oxford, and his appointment of an abbess to
Wilton Abbey. About this appointment, the King
reproved Wolsey in so imperious a tone that it
revealed to the Cardinal the insecurity of his posi-
tion.'^ Further delay in opening the Legatine Court
was evidently perilous, if not impossible. The affair
had now gone so far that if the divorce was not
obtained, the King would quarrel with Wolsey;
a quarrel which meant ruin to the Cardinal.
But before opening the court, Wolsey determined
to make one last desperate effort to retrieve his
almost hopeless position. Up to the 2 1st of May,
he wrote repeated letters to the ambassadors in
Rome, bidding them tell the Pope plainly how he
and Campeggio had made large promises to the
King, and how grieved they would be if the hopes
they had raised were disappointed. The ambas-
sadors were therefore to press the Pope to secure
the fulfilment of these promises by enlarging the
powers of the legates, so as to frustrate any ad-
vantage the other party might possess, and defeat
their consequent action.^ In fact, the Vicar of
Christ was to be openly asked to be a party to
Wolsey's acting as an unjust judge.
1 State Papers (1830), i. p. 313. (Bell to Wolsey, July 10, 1528.)
Cf. also p. 317. (Wolsey to Henry VIII.)
^ Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pocock), iv. p. 98.
(Wolsey to Gardiner, &c. ; instructions. )
LAST DESPERATE EFFORT. 121
But besides this they were to try to get a
" policitation," or promise, from the Pope that he
would not remove the cause to Rome, but would
confirm the sentence of the legates. This promise
to confirm the finding of the legates had been
given to Gardiner in March of the preceding year,
and a formal document to that effect had been
sent to England. But it was so qualified that more
freedom of action than suited Wolsey's purpose
was reserved to his Holiness.^ There was now
no hope of getting a more favourable promise in a
straightforward way. Recourse must therefore be
had to the last stretch of fraud and falsehood.
With this view, Wolsey sent the ambassadors a
copy of the existing " policitation," with notes on
the margin, showing the corrections in it which
he desired. But, while he thus proved the sound
condition of this document, he ordered his agents
to tell the Pope that the courier, who had carried
it to England, had fallen into the water during his
journey, and the packet containing it had been so
wetted that the document was defaced and illegible ;
they could not give it in this state to the King,
and they would incur his Majesty's severe dis-
pleasure, unless his Holiness of his goodness would
give them a duplicate, which they would write
' Pocock, Records, i. pp. 108, no, 124. (Gardiner and Fox to
Wolsey, March 31, 1528.)
122 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
out from memory for his signature as nearly as
possible like the original. In writing this duplicate,
however, Gardiner was directed to introduce into
it as many of the changes suggested by Wolsey,
and "other fat, pregnant, and available words
as was possible," as by " the politic handling
whereof," it would be " a great strength and cor-
roboration" of all that "should be done in the
decision of the King's cause," and prove " as bene-
ficial to the King's purpose as the commission
decretal." 1 The usual threats of the separation,
not only of England, but of " all other realms,"
from the Church were to be used to enforce the
above petitions.^
But by this time the Pope had fathomed Wolsey's
character and knew the straits to which he was
reduced, and he was not to be entrapped. On
the 31st of May, he wrote to Henry expressing his
affection and gratitude, and his earnest desire to
oblige him; but telling him plainly, that he could
not do as he wished without grave reproach.® On
the same day he wrote also to Wolsey, in a tone of
great dignity, expressing his wish to find an oppor-
tunity to show his love and gratitude to him and
the King of England, and his regret that the strict
' Burnet, ui sup., pp. 98, gg. ^ Ibid., p. iii.
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2484. (The Pope to Henry VIII.,
May 31, I52g.)
LAST DESPERATE EFFORT. 123
limits of justice, and many other reasonable causes,
prevented his doing as much as he would to gratify
them.^ Thus the Pope returned to the point from
which he had started at his first interview with
Gardiner and Fox — he would do all that was con-
sistent with law and equity, but nothing more.
The letters of Wolsey and of his agents up to
this time bear witness to the Pope's integrity and
firmness.
There now remained to the English cardinal no
resource except to hurry on proceedings in the
Legates' Court, which had already been formally
opened.
' Burnet, ?«^ra/.,iv. p. 114. (The Pope to Wolsey, May 31, 1529.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE LEGATES' COURT.
On the 29th of May 1529, the legates sent to
Henry their commission from the Pope, and asked
his pleasure as to its execution and their proceed-
ings in the case.^
On the 31st they sat in the Parliament Chamber,
adjoining the Convent of the Black Friars, when
Longland, the Bishop of Lincoln, brought back the
commission with the King's leave to proceed, and
forthwith they appointed him and the Bishop of
Bath to summon the King and Queen to appear
before them, on Friday the i8th of June, between
nine and ten o'clock in the morning.^
On the iSth of June, the King removed from
Hampton Court to Greenwich, and the Queen set
out for Baynard's Castle, where she was to stay.^
On her way, she crossed the river and paid a visit
to Campeggio. He was confined to bed with gout,
but being in great perplexity and anxiety, she came
'' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2477. (Wolsey and Campeggio to
Henry VIII., May 29, 1529.)
^ Ibid., pp. 2483, 2493. 8 Ibid., p. 2509.
124
THE LEGATES' COURT. 125
to his bedside. She wished to tell Campeggio that,
as the Emperor had forbidden the advocates, whom
she expected from Flanders, to come to England,^
she had no one to plead for her except the English
counsellors whom the King had assigned her, but
whom she mistrusted as leaning to his interest
rather than hers. She therefore came to ask
the Cardinal's help and advice. He spoke very
kindly to her, exhorting her to keep a good heart,
to rely on the King's justice, and the conscience
and learning of her English counsellors, and to
rest assured the legates would do nothing contrary
to justice and reason. She inquired whether the
trial of the case had been revoked to Rome. He
answered that up to the Igth of May the Pope
had not revoked it, because the suit had not yet
begun, and also because, having appointed two
legates to try it, he could not revoke it without
much thought and consideration. As he was one of
the judges he could not give her any legal advice,
but he exhorted her to pray that God would en-
lighten her to take some good course, hinting again
that she might enter religion. But though she was,
as he said, " very religious and extremely patient,"
she would not in the least accept this suggestion. ^
' Brewer, Calendar, p. 2476. (Margaret of Savoy to Charles V.,
May 26, 1529.)
"^ Ibid., iv. p. 2509, 2510. (Campeggio to Salviati, June 16, 1529.)
126 DIVORCE OF K ATM BRINE OF ARAGON.
On the day after this visit, however, her anxiety
was reheved by the arrival from Brussels of a
notary, Florian Montinus, and before him she
signed a formal appeal to the Pope, and a protest
against the jurisdiction of the legates.^
On Friday, the i8th of June, the legates opened
their court. The King answered their summons by
proxy; Dr. Sampson, Dean of the Chapel, and Dr.
Bell appearing for him. The Queen answered in
person, and presented her appeal to the Pope, and
her protest against the jurisdiction of the legates.
Upon this, they cited her to appear again on the
following Monday, June the 2 1st, to hear their
decision on her protest.^
On that day, the court sat again at the Black-
friars. As the Queen passed, the crowd that had
assembled round the door, and especially the
women, encouraged her by their cheers, and bade
her not care for what was being done against her,
and much more in the same strain. She answered
by recommending herself to their prayers.
The Pope's Commission ordered the inquiry to be
private and informal.^ But Henry caused it to be
held in open court, because this gave him an oppor-
' Pocock, Records, ii. p. 609.
^ Brewer, lit sup., pp. 2520, 2521, 2525, 2527.
' Pocock, Records, i. p. 168. (The commission for Wolsey and
Campeggio to Iry the cause of the divorce, June 8, 1528) : "sine
strepitu et figura judicii."
THE LEGATES' COURT. 127
tunity of pleading his cause before his subjects, and
thus strengthening it, as he hoped, in case he should
hereafter resolve to carry it through in his own
Parliament in spite of the Pope. The Parliament
chamber was fitted up like a court of justice. The
legates sat on a raised platform in the middle of
the court. On their right, and about three feet
above them, was the King, and on their left beside
the King, but at some little distance and somewhat
lower, sat the Queen. At the legates' feet were
placed the clerks of the court, the chief of whom
was Gardiner, and rather further off, but still within
the court, sat the Archbishop of Canterbury and
the bishops, while the doctors of law, who acted as
councillors for the King and the Queen, stood at the
opposite ends of the room. The King's councillors
were Doctors Sampson, Bell, Petre, Tregonwell, and
others. The Queen's lawyers were Doctors Abel,
Powell, Fetherston, and Ridley. Besides these, with
the King's leave, she had chosen for her Council the
Archbishop of Canterbury ; Clerk, Bishop of Bath ;
Tunstall, Bishop of London ; West, Bishop of Ely ;
Fisher, Bishop of Rochester; and Standish, Bishop
of St. Asaph.^ The spirit in which the inquiry was to
be conducted was shown from the very first. The
Queen's lawyers were required to take an oath that
1 Harpsfield, The Pretended Divorce, p. 177. Cf. Sander, The
Anglican Schism, p. 64.'
128 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
they would neither write, say, nor do anything
except in strict accordance with the Church's laws.
But the King's lawyers were left free from this
restriction, although Ridley, one of Katharine's
theologians, openly complained of this injustice.^
The legates first refused the Queen's appeal to
the Pope. They then summoned the King and
Queen by name. The King answered at once ; but
the Queen, rising from her chair, again appealed to
the Pope on the ground that she being a foreigner,
and Henry being King of England, she could not
hope for justice from judges who not only held
benefices from him, but were in his power, and she
declared on oath that it was only this well-grounded
fear that induced her to decline their sentence.^
Hereupon the King, standing up, protested that he
was actuated only by scruples of conscience, which
had troubled him since the time of his marriage.
The Queen replied, that it was not the time to say
this after having been silent so long. Henry excused
himself by the great love he had always had, and still
retained for her, and he declared that though the
Cardinal of York might have been delegated to give
sentence, yet to avoid all harsh judgments he had
prevailed on the Pope, the Sovereign Head of the
Church, to send another legate to decide the question,
^ Sander, ui sup. , p. 68.
" Sander, The Anglican Schism (translated by Lewis), p. 53.
THE LEGATES' COURT. 129
by whose judgment, whatever it might be, he called
all men to witness he would abide.
The Queen again insisted on the admission of
her protest and appeal; but the judges again re-
fused. Then rising from her seat and crossing in
front of the legates to the place where the King was
sitting, she fell on her knees and said most humbly
to him : " By all the loves that have been between
us, for the love of God, for my honour, and for that
of our daughter, and yourself, let me have justice
and right. Have pity on me, a poor lone woman
and a stranger, without a trusty friend or impartial
adviser, flying to you as to the head of justice in
this realm. Alas, how have I offended you, that
you should seek to put me away? Have I ever
attempted to do anything contrary to your will and
pleasure ? I take God and all the world to witness
that I have been to you a true, humble, and obedient
wife, ever conforming to your will and pleasure,
never showing ill- temper or discontent by word or
look, but always pleased with all things in which
you found delight, and loving all whom you loved,
for your sake alone, whether they were my friends
or my enemies. For twenty years I have been a
true wife to you, and by me you have had several
children, though it has pleased God to call them
out of this world, which is no fault of mine ; and
when you had me at the first, I take God to be my
130 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
judge that I was a very maid, and whether it be
true or no I put it to your conscience. If any just
cause or impediment can be alleged against me, I
am well contented to depart to my great shame and
dishonour, but if there be none I here most lowly
beseech you to let me receive justice at your hand."
She then proceeded to point out that she could not
expect justice from his subjects and the members
of his Council, who would not dare to oppose his
will, and finally added : " Therefore I most humbly
entreat you, as a charity, for the love of God, to
allow me to prosecute my appeal in Rome before
the common Father of all Christians." ^
Then rising, she made a low curtsey to the
King, and turned to go away; but instead of re-
turning to her seat she went straight out of the
court. When the King saw her going away, he bade
the crier order her in his name to return. Where-
upon Griffiths, her General Receiver, on whose arm
she was leaning, said, "Madam, you are called."
But she answered, " On, on, it maketh no matter."
For her lawyers had told her that if she returned
she would thereby withdraw her appeal and damage
her cause. But when she got to Baynard's Castle,
she said: "To-day for the first time I have dis-
obeyed my lord, the King. The very next time
' Pocock, Records, i. p. 219 ; ii. p. 609. Cf. Brewer, Calendar, iv.
pp. 2526, 2528.
THE LEGATES' COURT. 131
I see him I will on my knees entreat him to forgive
my fault." 1
Her modesty and the tenderness of her appeal
to her husband had melted to tears all who were
present. Even the King appeared to be touched,
and he did not dare to her face to contradict her
appeal to his conscience about her former marriage.
But seeing the impression she had made, he said :
" Forasmuch as the Queen is gone I will in her
absence declare unto you all, my lords, she hath
been to me as true, as obedient and as conform-
able a wife as I could in my fancy wish or desire.
She hath aU the virtuous qualities that a woman
of her quality, or of any lower rank, ought to
possess."^
The legates caused her to be thrice summoned
by the crier, and as she did not obey, they pro-
nounced her guilty of contumacy, and cited her
once more to appear on the following Friday, the
25th of June.*
Before the court broke up, Wolsey publicly
asked the King whether this matter had been first
1 Harpsfield, The Pretended Divorce, p. 181. Cf. Sander, The
Anglican Schism (trans. Lewis), pp. 49-55. Mr. Lewis notes that
the account given by Harpsfield agrees even verbally with that of
the King. (Burnet, History of the Reformation, ed. Pocock, iv.
p. 118. See also Cavendish, Life of Wolsey (ed. H. Morley, 1885),
pp. 1 15-120.
^ Cavendish, ut sup., p. 119.
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2528.
132 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
mooted by him, as was commonly said. The King
answered that on the contrary he had always been
rather against it, and that his own conscience had
first been pricked by the remark of the French am-
bassador on the legitimacy of his daughter, when
negotiating her marriage with a French prince.
The King added, that he had first mentioned it
in confession to the Bishop of Lincoln, and had
asked the Archbishop of Canterbury to consult
the bishops, all of whose opinions under their
hand and seal he could show. "That is true,"
answered the Archbishop ; " I have no doubt aU
my brethren here present will confirm the same."
"No, sir," replied Bishop Fisher, "you have not
got my consent." " No ! " exclaimed the King.
" Look here, is not this your hand and seal ? "
"No, forsooth," rejoined Fisher. Turning to the
Archbishop, the King said, " How say you ? Is
it not his hand and seal ? " " Yes, sir," answered
the Archbishop. " It is not," rejoined Fisher ; " you
tried, indeed, to get my hand and seal; but I told
you I would never consent to such an act, for it
was against my conscience, and my hand and seal
should never be seen attached to such a docu-
ment." " It is true you did say so to me," replied
the Archbishop; "but at the last you consented
that I should sign your name and affix a seal
which you would acknowledge as yours." " Under
THE LEGATES' COURT. 133
your correction, my lord, and by leave of this
assembly," answered Fisher, "nothing is more un-
true than your words and act." The King, irritated
at this exposure of the fraud by which his cause
was supported, exclaimed hastily, " It matters not.
We will not argue with you. You are but one
man." The court then adjourned.^
On the following Friday, June the 25th, the court
again sat. Campeggio was suffering so much from
gout that he had to be carried in a litter to Black-
friars. The King was in an adjoining room, where
the legates took his oath from time to time when
necessary. But the Queen did not appear at all.
At the sitting of the court on the following day
she was again cited, and the citation was delivered
to her in her dining-room at Greenwich.^ Again,
at the next sitting on the following Monday, the
28th of June, she was cited for the last time, and
as she did not appear she was pronounced con-
tumacious.
At the sitting on the 25th of June the legates be-
gan the inquiry into the marriage, and from this day
forth they received evidence on the King's behalf.
The opinion of the bishops, to which the King had
referred, was produced ; but it was no more than a
declaration that the King had consulted them about
' Cavendish, ut sup., pp. 121, 122.
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2531.
134 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
his scruples, and had laid before them a book he
had written, and that they thought he was uneasy,
not without good and weighty reason, and that he
ought in the first place to consult the Pope.^
The King rested his case for the divorce on three
grounds. First, that Katherine's marriage with
Prince Arthur had been consummated, and conse-
quently that her marriage with himself was con-
trary to the eternal, unchangeable, moral, or divine
law, and that Pope Julius' dispensation was in-
valid; secondly, that this dispensation had been
got on false pretences; and thirdly, that the Brief,
alleged to be in Spain, was a forgery. All these
grounds, however, were false assumptions, not
facts. There was not the least evidence that the
Brief was a forgery, and all the pretended defects
in it had already been disproved at Rome.
The Pope had also already declared to Gardiner
and Fox that Pope Julius' dispensation afforded
no legal ground for a divorce, and he subsequently
refused to revoke it. It was on the first ground
the King chiefly depended, and in proof of this
1 Brewer, Calendar, p. 2562. (July i, 1529.)
Cf. Van Ortroy, Vie du Bienheureux Martyr, Jean Fisher (a
sixteenth century life), Bruxelles, 1893, p. 203. Rymer (Padera,
ed. Holmes, vi. part I, p. 1 19) prints this document bearing the seals
and signature of the Bishops of London, Rochester, Carlisle, &c.
Fr. Van Ortroy argues from the date, 1st of July, that Cavendish
has misdated the discussion about Fisher's signature, and that it
could not have taken place in the session of June 21.
THE LEGATES' COURT. 135
contention he brought forward evidence. It was,
however, obviously unnecessary to prove that the
first marriage had been consummated, because
the dispensation contemplated this possibility. A
glance at the twenty-fifth chapter of Deuteronomy
proves that the Jews were ordered by God to
contract marriage with a brother's widow under
circumstances similar to those of Katherine and
Arthur. Such a marriage, therefore, could not pos-
sibly be contrary to God's unchangeable moral law,
and consequently Pope Julius' dispensation was
not invalid.-' Henry's real object, however, was to
introduce a new moral doctrine absolutely forbidding
such marriages ; a doctrine absolutely necessary for
his case. Even on his own grounds his suit must
have failed, because he could bring forward no
evidence whatever except presumptions and allu-
sions, which were quite insufficient to prove his
case, and were absolutely denied by Katherine.
When this subject came under discussion, the
statements of the counsel on both sides were so
contradictory, that some one said, " No one can
' At one time Katherine intended to offer evidence to prove that
the marriage had not been consummated by bringing witnesses from
Spain, but Henry's tacit assent to her appeal to his conscience in
the court ; and his declaration to the Emperor when he was in
England (Pole, De Unitate Ecclesia, fol. 77) ; and, more than all,
Henry VII. 's proposal to marry her himself (Bergenroth, Spanish
State Papers, i. p. 295), determined her wisely to rest her case on the
laws of the Church, and Pope Julius' dispensation.
136 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
know the truth." Whereupon Bishop Fisher ex-
claimed, " I know the truth." " How do you know
the truth ? " asked Wolsey. Fisher answered, " I
know that God is the truth. He says, ' Quod Deus
conjunxit homo nan separet ? ' Forasmuch then as
this marriage was made by God, it cannot be
broken by the power of man for any pretended
reason." "All faithful men know as much," replied
Wolsey, "but the King's counsel bring forward
certain presumptive evidence, that the marriage was
not good at the beginning, and that it was not made
by God. You must therefore go further than that
text. You must disprove the presumptions." " It
is a shame and dishonour to all here present,"
broke in Dr. Ridley, " that presumptions which are
detestable to all good and honest men, should be
alleged in open court." "What!" cried Wolsey;
" Sir Doctor, speak more reverently." " No, no,
my lord," rejoined Ridley, " no reverence is due to
these abominable presumptions, for an irreverent
tale cannot be reverently answered. It is unjust
of the legates to require the Queen's lawyers alone
to take an oath that they will neither write, nor
say, nor do anything in the cause except in strict
accordance with the Church's laws. If the King's
lawyers had been compelled to take the same oath,
the case would have been already closed. I am
willing to suffer any punishment you please, if on
THE LEGATES' COURT. 137
being compelled to take this oath they do not range
themselves on the Queen's side." The King's
lawyers, however, received this defiance in silence,
as if confessing the truth of Ridley's words.^
On Monday, the 28th of June, when the examina-
tion of witnesses was proceeding. Bishop Fisher
spoke to the following effect : " As the King had
said his only object was to have justice done, and had
invited them all to throw light on the subject, he
would be unfaithful to his Majesty and to God, and
would incur the damnation of his soul, if he did
not declare pubhcly the result of his studies during
two years. He therefore presented himself before
the court to affirm that the marriage could not
be dissolved by any power, human or divine, in
support of which opinion he was ready to lay
down his life. As St. John the Baptist had thought
it glorious to die in defence of marriage, and
marriage was not then so holy as it had since
become through the shedding of Christ's blood, so
he could encourage himself more confidently to
dare the same peril for the same cause." Finally,
he presented to the court the book he had written
setting forth the most forcible arguments in support
of his opinion.
The Bishop of St. Asaph spoke after him, ex-
^ Sander, The Anglican Schism (translated by Lewis), p. 68. Cf.
Cavendish, Life of Wolsey (ed. Morley), p. 123.
138 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
pressing the same opinion, though more briefly and
with less polished eloquence. Dr. Ridley also
brought forward many arguments from the canons
in favour of the marriage.
Bishop Fisher's conduct took every one by sur-
prise. There was much discussion as to what he
would do when put to the test. But all who
knew the man he was, foresaw what was likely to
happen.^ He had a great reputation for learning
and sanctity, and it was commonly said, that as
he was opposed to the divorce the nation would
not permit the Queen to be wronged in this matter,
and that the King would not be able to persist in
his intention.^
During the course of the trial the legates went
by the King's command to the Queen at Bridewell
to make a last effort to persuade her to place the
cause in the King's hands. When they asked to
speak to her, she came instantly out of her private
chamber with a skein of white thread round her
neck, and said simply and sweetly, " What is your
pleasure with me ? " Wolsey asked her to take
them into her private room, where they would tell
her why they had come, but she bade them speak
openly before her attendants, for she did not fear
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2539. (Campeggio to Salviati, June 29,
1529.) Cf. Sander, ut sap., p. 67.
^ Ibid., p. 2540. (Campeggio's secretary to , June 29, 1529.)
THE LEGATES' COURT. 139
whatever they could allege against her being heard
by all the world. Wolsey then began to speak in
Latin, but she begged him to speak in English,
though she understood Latin. Hereupon Wolsey
said they were come to know her intentions and
give her their opinion and advice. She replied,
" My lords, I thank you for your good-will, but I
cannot answer you suddenly. For I was sitting
at work among my maidens, thinking little of any
such matter, and longer deliberation and a wiser
head than mine are needed to answer such noble
and wise men as you. But being a poor simple
woman, without wit or understanding, and destitute
of friends and counsel in a foreign land, I will gladly
hear what advice you would give me." She then
led them into her private chamber, where they re-
mained a long time in conversation with her. What
passed can never be known; but it was evident
to all that their mission had failed.^
Whilst events were thus moving to a crisis in
England, a great struggle was going on in Rome.
On the one hand, the Emperor's ambassadors were
incessantly urging the Pope to fulfil without delay
his promise to revoke the cause to Rome.^ On the
other, the English ambassadors, having discovered
that they had not the least chance of preventing
' Cavendish, Life of Wolsey (ed. Morley), p. 12.
'^ Brewer, Calendar., iv. p. 2393.
140 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
the final removal of the cause, were directing all
their ingenuity to delay this step till the legates
should have pronounced sentence in the King's
favour, when, as the Pope believed, Henry intended
to marry Anne Boleyn at once, without waiting
for papal confirmation.^ When it was suspected
at Rome that the cause was about to begin in Eng-
land, the agents flatly denied the rumour. When
Salviati told them that he knew by letters from
Campeggio, and by word of mouth from Francesco
Campana, who had just arrived from England, that
the cause was being hurried on, they pledged their
word that nothing had yet been done, for Dr. Benet,
who had left England at the same time as Campana,
knew for certain that nothing was done, or would
be done, till all the King's requests had been granted
at Rome. And when Salviati expressed surprise
at their denial, they spoke slightingly of Campana,
and accused Campeggio of saying and doing every-
thing to win favour with both the King and the
Emperor. They were taken by surprise when the
Pope discovered that the King intended to marry
without waiting for his confirmation of the legates'
sentence. But nothing daunted, "they took an
oath a hundred times " that sentence would not
be given in England. They warned the Pope of
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2536. (Benet and others to Wolsey,
June 28, 1529.)
THE LEGATES' COURT. 141
the risk of acting rashly on the word of such a
man as Campeggio, and insidiously suggested that
the prudent course would be to send a courier to
England to ascertain the truth, and to take no step
till his return, when his Holiness would have the
same power of action as he then had.^ At the
same time they took every possible precaution to
prevent free communication between the Pope and
Campeggio. Letters were intercepted and held back,
or at least delayed, both in Rome and England,
and falsehoods were suggested, so as to hoodwink
Campeggio, and prevent his protracting the trial,
in the hope of its removal.^ And as a final
masterpiece of craft, when the removal was about to
be decreed, they proposed that the document should
not be published in Rome or Flanders, or given
to the Emperor, but sent to the Queen, they having
previously warned Wolsey to intercept it, when the
bearer should reach any English harbour.*
But in spite of this scheming, the Pope learned
the truth. He did not, however, deviate in the least
from the course he had prescribed for himself.
He made no secret of his affection for Henry, and
his wish to please him.* He lamented with tears
' Brewer, i/t sup., pp. 2534-2536. (Benet to Wolsey, June 28,
1529). And pp. 2565-2567. (Same to same, July 9, 1529.)
2 Ibid., pp. 2499, 2537, 2567, 2568.
' Ibid., p. 2583. (Same to same, July 16, 1529.) Cf. p. 2608.
* Ibid., p. 2569. (Sylvester Darius to Wolsey, July 9, 1529.)
142 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
the ruin that would fall on himself, on Wolsey, on
the Church and the whole of Christendom, through
the loss of England and possibly of France.^ But
he said that the solemn responsibilities of his office
compelled him to act as a common father and just
judge, and as the Queen had declared on oath that
justice could not be obtained in England, he could
not refuse to hear the cause without offending his
own conscience, causing scandal throughout Chris-
tendom, and dishonouring the Apostolic See.^ All
he could do was to delay the removal, and this
he did in defiance of the Emperor, so long as he
had reason to believe no injustice was being done
to the Queen. Even Henry's own ambassador,
Dr. Benet, confessed that the Pope had done all he
could possibly do to please Henry, and expressed
his deep regret that his master had been misin-
formed, and led to suppose that his Holiness had
been influenced by a wish to please the Emperor.^
But when, on the lOth of July 1529, the news,
arrived that the Queen's appeal had been rejected,
that she had been pronounced contumacious, and
that the cause was being hurried on, the Pope saw
that he must not delay longer. On the 13th the
removal of the suit to Rome was decided on. The
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2566. (Benet, &c., to Wolsey, July 9,
1529.)
' Ibid., pp. 2565, 2569. » Ibid., pp. 2565, 27 11.
THE LEGATES' COURT. 143
Pope, however, wished it to be decreed in Con-
sistory, and this occasioned a further delay of three
days. But as he was too ill on the appointed day
to hold the Consistory, the decree was passed in
a Congregation, when strong remarks were made
by the cardinals on the disgraceful character of
the cause. On the 23rd of July the bull removing
the cause was published at Rome, and on the 4th
of August six copies of it were sent to the Emperor,
of which two were to be published in Bruges and
Dunkirk or Tournay, and the rest to be sent to
the Queen, or to whomsoever in England it might
be thought best.^
So much time, however, had been lost in carrying
out these forms, that had it not been for Cam-
peggio's firmness, the transfer of the cause to Rome
would have come too late. As early as the 25 th
of June he had complained of the difficulty of his
position, in consequence of the King's lawyers
insisting on interpreting the evidence, to suit their
own case — to say nothing of the sentence against
the King, which he foresaw he would be obliged
in justice to give.^ Four days later, he wrote that
the proceedings were hurried on with inconceivable
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2609. (Mai to Charles V., August 4,
1529.) Cf. Sander, The Anglican Schism, p. 72. The decree was
printed by Le Grand, Histoire du Divorce, iii. p. 446.
^ Ibid., p. 2531. (Campeggio to Salviati, June 25, 1529.)
144 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
anxiety, and as the Queen did not appear, the
King's lawyers had a clear field to do as they liked,
and used every art to procure a sentence in their
own favour.^ And, as time went on, the pro-
ceedings were hurried forward with more and more
haste — " with great strides always faster than a trot,''
— and although writings, evidence, and processes
had to be examined, not a moment's breathing time
was allowed to the legates, who were expected to
give sentence on the 22nd of July.^ Notwithstanding
all this, Campeggio assured Salviati that " he would
not fail in his duty and office." And while "he
would not act rashly nor willingly offend any one,
in giving sentence he would keep only God and
the honour of the Holy See in view."^
Accordingly, when the critical moment arrived
and the King was pressing to have a sentence in
his own favour recorded at once, Campeggio spoke
out boldly. He said that "he had been a lawyer
and one of the twelve judges of the Rota for many
years, and he had never known such hurry, even
in matters of little moment, much less in a cause
of such importance as this, which involved the
rupture of a lawful engagement, the hurried dis-
solution of a marriage held valid for twenty years,
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2539. (Campeggio to Salviati, July
29, 1529.)
2 Ibid., p. 2585.
2 Ibid., p. 2582. (Campeggio to Salviati, July 13, 1529.)
THE LEGATES' COURT. 145
the bastardising of a noble and royal issue, the
provocation of a powerful monarch, the sowing of
discord amongst Christians, and the contempt of
the Papal power of dispensation. It was the uni-
versal custom, after the trial of a case, to leave
the judges thirty clear days to weigh the evidence
and arguments, before they were called upon to
give sentence. But in this case, scarcely as many
days had passed since the public pleadings had
been begun, and he was resolved, fpr his part, not
to proceed in haste, but slowly and safely, as befitted
so grave a question.^
Great was the astonishment of all who heard
the Legate's words, for such were not wont to be
spoken in that royal presence. Great, too, was the
consternation of Wolsey and his friends. He had
pretended that he himself was empowered to pro-
nounce sentence alone. But the Queen's appeal,
and the violation of the Church's laws in the
conduct of the trial, had made this pretension an
empty boast, for he would gladly have used this
power had he possessed it, rather than suspend
the cause.^
Hot and eager disputations ensued. In their
course, Campeggio said that his opinion was in
1 Sander, ut sup., p. 69.
2 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2585. (The Bishop of Bayonne, from
London, July 22, 1529.)
K
146 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
favour of the marriage, and if Wolsey agreed with
him, he was willing to pronounce sentence; but if
he did not agree, sentence would not be pronounced.
Neither by fair means nor by foul could they move
him from this resolution.^
Thus day after day slipped away, till at length
Campeggio let it be understood that the Roman
custom required the court to be closed from the end
of the month of July till the 4th of October. Wolsey
accepted this new turn of affairs with his usual cool
intrepidity; but Henry could not brook this un-
accustomed opposition to his will. Hoping to carry
his purpose with a strong hand, he ordered the Dukes
of Norfolk and Suffolk and other nobles of his Council
to appear before the legates, and insist urgently on
the sentence being given. Wolsey was silent. But
Campeggio declared that he was bound to be true
to God and the Roman Church, in which it was the
custom to close the courts from the end of July to
the 4th of October, and anything done during that
time would have no legal force. The Dukes again
insisted that sentence should be pronounced on
either that or the following day, which were within
the month of July. Again Campeggio replied he
could not do this ; that he had not come so far to
please any man, or to act for fear or favour, but to
^ Sander, ui sup., p. 2645. (De Prset to Charles V., September 3,
1529.)
THE LEGATES' COURT. 147
see justice done according to his conscience. He
was an old man, both sick and infirm, looking daily
for death. What then would it avail him to im-
peril his soul for any man's favour? Thereupon
he forthwith declared the court adjourned according
to the Roman custom.
Then Suffolk, striking the table with great violence,
exclaimed twice in fury, " By the Holy Mass, no
cardinal or legate ever brought good to England." ^
Wolsey answered calmly, " Sir, of all men in this
realm you have least cause to disparage cardinals.
For if I, a simple cardinal, had not been, you would
have had, at this time, no head on your shoulders
wherein to have a tongue to speak thus of us. . . .
Wherefore, my Lord, hold your peace, and frame
your tongue like a man of honour and wisdom not
to speak reproachfully of your friends. For you
know what friendship you have received at my hands,
which I never yet revealed to any man alive, neither
to my glory nor to your dishonour." The Duke
answered not a word but departed, following the
King, who at his first word had left the gallery in
which he had sat throughout the trial.^
' Gayangos, Calendar of Spanish State Papers, iv., part I, p. 236.
(Chapuys to the Emperor, September 21, 1529.)
^ Cavendish, Life of Wolsey, pp. 129, 130. Cf. Sander, ut sup.,
p. 71. In his reply to Suffolk, Wolsey seems to have referred not
only to his intercession for the Duke when he had incurred the
King's anger by privately marrying his sister, the Queen-Dowager
148 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
The suit was thus closed in England. Soon after
the Queen received the letters from the Pope, with-
drawing the powers of the legates and citing her
and the King, under the penalty of excommunication
and of a fine of 10,000 ducats, to plead their cause
by proxy before the Court of the Rota at Rome.
of France, but more especially to his having saved the Duke's life
in 1523, when Henry was so exasperated with him for his igno-
minious retreat in France and his return to England without leave,
that had it not been for Wolsey he would certainly have had him
beheaded.
CHAPTER XV.
WOLSEY'S LAST INTERVIEW.
As soon as Wolsey saw that sentence would not be
given in England, he wrote to the English ambas-
sadors in Rome, and ordered them to take care
that the Bull removing the cause thither contained
nothing against the King personally, which would
only irritate him. These orders arrived too late.
When the ambassadors received them the Bull was
already published. It now became necessary to
persuade the Queen not to adopt any measures,
which the King would certainly consider an inter-
ference with his prerogative, and it was hoped the
Queen might even consent to drop the suit.^
The Pope made no difficulty about removing the
censure and the pecuniary penalty, and the Queen
was easily induced not to publish the Bull or the act
of citation; 2 but she insisted on the suit being
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2591. (Wolsey to Benet, Casale, and
Vannes.) "Campeggio writes with me to urge the Pope, if it must
be granted, to qualify it ; for if the King be cited to appear in person
or by proxy, and his prerogative be interfered with, none of his
subjects will tolerate it ; or if he appears in Italy it will be at the
head of a formidable army." Cf. also pp. 2622-2625.
^ Ibid., p. 2669. (Campeggio to Salviati, October 7, 1529.)
ISO DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
carried on at Rome. As Sir Thomas More was a
great favourite with tlie King, she chose him to carry
a message from her to his Majesty to inform him
that she had received letters from the Pope with-
drawing the powers of the legates, and summoning
him and her to plead by proxy before the court of
the Rota, and to ask what was his pleasure.^ Con-
cealing his vexation, the King answered that he had
known all this for some time, and that he did not
wish the summons to be served on himself. He
added, however, that the legates might be informed
their powers were withdrawn. He also expressed
his pleasure that the cause was to be tried in a place
common to both parties, and he would do his utmost
to have it settled there.^
These words had a deeper meaning than they
conveyed to their hearers. The English ambas-
sadors were urging the Pope to remove the suit
from the court of the Rota into his own hands, and
to sign a written promise that in three months he
would pronounce sentence in the King's favour, and
give him leave to contract a second marriage. The
draft of this promise, drawn up by Gregory Casale,
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2650. (Stephen Gardiner to Wolsey,
September 12, 1529). " I repaired to the King The first part . . .
showing how you had induced the Queen's counsel to be content with
exhibiting the brief, instead of the letter citatorial, was very agree-
able to him."
* Sander, The Anglican Schism, p. 72.
WOLSBY'S LAST INTERVIEW. 151-
is now to be seen in the Record Office.^ Henry
himself also wrote to the Pope to press this request ;
but before his letter arrived, the Pope had written
to him regretting that he could not comply with
his wishes.^
The English ambassadors also demanded that
the cause should be suspended till Christmas,
and that the power of suspending it in future
should rest with the Pope. The Spanish am-
bassadors were willing to have it suspended for
a month, but no longer,^ and they objected to
the Pope having the power of suspending it in
future.
This discussion brought to light the policy on
which the Pope had resolved to act. As Henry
had not brought before the legates any grounds for
the divorce, except those which Gardiner and Fox
had stated at Orvieto, and which the Pope had
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2629. (August 29, 1529.)
2 Ibid., p. 2667. (October 6, 1529.)
3 Ibid., p. 2628. (De Praet and Mai to Charles V.) "Told
the Pope yesterday that if he wished to suspend judgment for a
month, to see if the King was really inclined to justice, we were
content." They add later, "The truth is, it would be by no
means safe for the Pope to take upon himself the decision : for he
might die, or times might change, or, if there were nothing else, it
would encourage the English every day to ask for new decretals :
for great concessions are made to them even to this day, whether
it be owing merely to the Pope's good feith, or to the bribery of
some one of the ministers, for it is said they are very free in spending
in respect of this cause."
152 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
already declared insufficient, it was evident that
none in reality existed. Under these circumstances,
the suit before the Rota would be a mere form.
The Pope could only repeat his previous judgment
with greater solemnity, and thus, within a few
weeks, sentence against Henry would be given.
It was impossible for the Pope to shut his eyes
to the fact that Henry's revolt from the Church
would be the immediate consequence of this de-
cision, and a schism in England, and possibly in
France, would certainly follow. Would the Pope
then be justified in causing such a disaster ? He
concluded to delay decisive action, trusting that
time and unforeseen accidents might cool Henry's
passions, and soften his obstinacy. The Emperor
seems to have shared the Pope's feelings, for he
overruled the objections made by his own am-
bassadors. The cause was therefore suspended
till Christmas,^ and soon after till Easter. Later
still it was put off, at Henry's request, till the
following September, on his promising that mean-
while he would not take any step in opposition to
his Holiness.^
■* Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2668. (Clement VII., October 7, 1529,
to Henry VIII.) " Has suspended his cause."
^ Ibid., p. 2629. On August 29, 1529, the Pope, by brief, sus-
pends the hearing of the cause till Christmas. See ibid., pp. 2641,
2840. On April 10, 1530, the King, in a letter to Clement VII.,
alludes to the latter's decision to put off the case "till September
and later." Cf. ibid., p. 2899.
WOLSBY'S LAST INTERVIEW. i53
It now remained only for Campeggio to take
leave of the King and depart. Ever since the clos-
ing of the court, Henry had refused to hold any
personal communication with Wolsey. He knew,
however, that no one else would serve him with so
much zeal and ability, and he therefore continued
to make demands on his services through Gardiner,
who had become the royal secretary on the 28th
of July, and retained relations with his old master.
When Wolsey now asked for a personal interview
Henry was " somewhat troubled," and made diffi-
culties about granting it.'^ He was at last induced
to do so, only on condition that the legates were
not to have their crosses carried before them,
and their retinue was to be limited to ten or twelve
persons, instead of their usual long cavalcade."
About the 20th of September the legates went to
Grafton in Northamptonshire, so that Campeggio
might take his leave of the King. Before their
arrival, reports were circulated that Henry would
not speak to Wolsey, and bets were made upon it.
On their arrival, Campeggio was conducted to his
apartments with due honours. But Wolsey was
told that no lodging had been appointed for him,
and he was indebted to the courtesy of Sir Henry
^ Brewer, Calendar, p. 2650. (Gardiner to Wolsey, September 12,
1529.)
^ Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iv., part I, p. 235. (Chapuys
to the Emperor, September 21, 1529.)
154 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
Norris for the use of his room to change his
riding-dress.
Before long Sir Henry Norris summoned him to
the Presence Chamber. There the Lords of the
Council and many other courtiers were assembled,
eagerly watching to see how the King would re-
ceive the English cardinal. Wolsey took off his cap
" most gently " to every one of them, and they did
the same to him. Immediately after his arrival the
King came in, and stood under the royal canopy.
Both cardinals knelt, and he gave them his hand to
kiss, after which he raised Wolsey by both arms
with as friendly a countenance as ever.
He talked for a long time with Campeggio, chiefly
about the divorce. He was much disappointed, as
was natural, and was especially displeased at the
citation, complaining that nothing had been given
him except words. But on every other subject he
seemed to be perfectly sound. He assured Cam-
peggio that he would never fail to act as a most
Christian king and defender of the faith, " and that
though all the world should prove false, he himself
would never fail in doing service as a good Christian
king," ^ and against any attacks on its liberty, which
might be made by his own Parliament. He spoke
with such earnestness that he apparently deceived
Campeggio as to his intentions for the future. He
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2669.
WOLSBY'S LAST INTERVIEW. I5S
was greatly pleased with a letter from the Pope,
which Campeggio presented to him, in which his
Holiness exhorted him to treat the Queen kindly. On
which he remarked, " See, though he can command
he only exhorts." Finally he dismissed Campeggio
most kindly. He then led Wolsey aside to a great
window, where he bade him " be covered," and
talked to him long and earnestly. In the course of
conversation he drew a letter from his breast and
said, " How can that be ? Is not that your hand ? "
After a time he bade him go to dinner with the
Lords of the Council, and after dinner he would
come and talk to him more about that matter.
The King then himself went to dinner in the
chamber where Anne Boleyn lived more like a
Queen than a simple maiden. She was as angry
with him as she dared to be, and spoke very bitterly
against Wolsey ; but he answered, " He is not to
blame, as I know better than you, or any one else."
Immediately after dinner he returned to the Presence
Chamber, and calling Wolsey to the great window,
talked confidentially to him, and after a time took
him to his private apartment, where he remained
in consultation with him till night. On parting
he bade him come early next morning to finish the
conversation.
Wolsey slept that night at Mr. Empson's at
Euston, three miles from Grafton, and many of his
IS6 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
friends came to sup with him. The next morning
he rose early and went at once to the Court, but he
found the King on the point of starting for Hartwell
Park, where Anne, wishing to prevent any further
communication with Wolsey, had arranged that he
should dine. The King bade him attend the meeting
of the Council, and then go away with Campeggio.'^
He was therefore obliged to take his leave and
depart. Henry and his great minister never met
again.
^ Cavendish, Life of Wolsey, pp. 132-138.'
CHAPTER XVI.
THE FALL OF WOLSEY.
Up to this time Henry had borne his disappoint-
ment with befitting dignity. He could not, however,
let Campeggio depart without indulging his spleen
by grossly insulting both him and the Pope.
Campeggio was detained in London by illness
till the 5 th of October, and could not cross the
Channel till the 26th. ^ On his arrival at Calais,
the custom-house officers, by the King's orders,
asked for his keys to examine his luggage, on the
pretence that he was carrying to Rome enormous
quantities of gold and silver for Wolsey, who would
shortly follow. Campeggio refused to give his keys,
claiming the privilege always granted to legates and
ambassadors. They therefore broke open the locks ;
but found in the boxes much less money than the
King, according to custom, had given him on his
departure. Whereupon he taunted them with being
very silly for supposing that he, who had been proof
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. pp. 2669. (Campeggio to Salviati,
October 7, 1529.)
158 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
against gifts offered by the King, could be corrupted
by the Cardinal.^ He wrote to the King complain-
ing of this outrage on his legatine office and the
Pope's dignity; but Henry answered him with
brutal insolence, denying that any wrong had been
done to his legatine office, which had expired when
the Pope forbade him to exercise its powers, and
wondering that he should not be afraid to assume
the title of legate in England, where he was bound
by the most solemn obligations to respect the royal
dignity and prerogatives.^
But it was on Wolsey that Henry vented the
full measure of his wrath. Up to the first week
of October,^ Wolsey continued to attend meetings
of the Council at which the King was not present.
On the first day of Michaelmas term 1529, he
went to Westminster Hall and sat as Chancellor
for the last time. On the same day, two bills
were filed against him in the King's Bench, for
having, in the fifteenth year of the reign, trans-
gressed the Statute of Provisors by acting as the
Pope's legate, and having thereby incurred the
penalty of prcemunire, which deprived him of all
' Pocock, Records, ii. p. 69. (Chapuys to the Emperor, October
25, 1529.) Also Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2683.
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2677- (Henry VIII. to Campeggio,
October 22, 1529.)
* Gayangos, Calendar of Spanish State Papers, p. 276. (Chapuys
to the Emperor, October 8, 1529.)
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. 159
his possessions and of his personal liberty at the
King's pleasure. 1
The next few days he stayed at home expecting
a visit from the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk.
They came on the isth of October, and brought
a verbal message from the King demanding the
Great Seal, and ordering him to go to a house he
had at Esher ; but as they had no written authority
he refused to part with the seal, and showed them
letters from the King ordering him to keep it for
life. The Dukes were therefore obliged to return to
Windsor. They came back the next day, October the
1 8th, with letters from the King, and these Wolsey
received most respectfully and prepared to obey.^
Before he left York Place he signed a deed making
over to the King all his temporal possessions ; ^ but
a promise was given him that none of his spiritual
promotions should be taken away, as, indeed, was
only in accordance with the law.* He had occupied
himself the last few days in taking inventories of
his gold and silver plate, jewels, and rich stuffs,
which were of almost countless value, and having
' Brewer, Caletidar, iv. p. 2686. (October 30, 1529.)
"^ Ibid.,p.2678. (WolseytotheKing, October 22, 1529.) Acknow-
ledges that he has incurred the penalties of frcEmunire, &c. He
delivered up the Great Seal October 17 (ibid., p. 2681). Cf. ibid.,
the letter of Chapuys to Charles V.
» Ibid., p. 2678. (October 22, 1529.)
" Ibid., pp. 2714, 2762, 2763.
i6o DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
them laid out on tables to await the King's com-
ing to take possession of them. He now bade
Sir William Gascoigne deliver them safely to his
Majesty, saying, " I would have all the world know
that I have nothing, neither riches, honour, nor
dignity, that has not come to me from him. It is
therefore my duty to give them all up to him as
his very own with my whole heart."
On going down to his barge, he found the river
covered with boats filled with courtiers, citizens,
and persons of all ranks whose hatred he had won
by his zeal in the King's service, and who now
assembled, hoping to see him conveyed to the
Tower. Great then was their disappointment when
the barge was rowed up the river.
At Putney he left his boat and mounted his mule.
Before he got through the town. Sir Henry Norris
rode down the hill to meet him, bringing him a
message from the King, bidding him be of good
cheer, for he was as much in his favour as ever,
and he had dealt unkindly to him only to please
some who were not his friends. Sir Henry also
gave him from his Majesty a gold ring set with
a precious stone, which Wolsey at once recognised
as a private token between him and the King
whenever his Majesty desired any special service
of love to him. Wolsey was so overjoyed at this
unexpected message that he leaped from his mule.
THE FALL OF WOLSBY i6i
and kneeling down on both knees and pulling oiT
his cap, poured out aloud his thanks to God and
his sovereign lord and master. When his servants
had, with difficulty, got him to mount again on his
mule, he and Sir Henry rode up the hill through
the town to Putney Heath, where the latter took
his leave. On parting Wolsey gave Sir Henry a
gold cross containing a piece of the true Cross.
This the Cardinal had prized, and always wore
round his neck, but it was now all that he had to
give, and he bade him, whenever he looked at it,
commend him to the King. After he had passed
on a short distance he turned, and calling back Sir
Henry made over to him, as a token of his love and
duty to the King, his fool. Patch, who, he said, " was
worth a thousand pounds for a nobleman's pleasure."
But when the poor fool found he was being taken
away from his master, he cried out aloud and re-
sisted so violently that six of the Cardinal's tall
yeomen had to be sent to convey him to court.
The house at Esher, a palace belonging to his See
of Winchester, was large but unfurnished, and for
many weeks Wolsey and his suite had no house-
hold furniture except what was lent him by his
neighbours, the Bishop of Carlisle and Sir Thomas
Arundell. But bodily discomforts were to the Car-
dinal as nothing compared to his mental distress.
A few days after he had reached Esher, the
l62 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
French ambassador paid him a visit, and described
him as being in a pitiable state. His countenance
was dejected and his features shrunk. He had lost
heart and courage, and could scarcely tell his sad
tale coherently. He said that he did not wish for
the legateship, nor for office, nor influence; that
he was ready to give up everything even to his
shirt, and to go and live in a hermitage, if only the
King would not keep him under his displeasure.
He besought the French king and his mother to
intercede for him, at the same time warning them
that the least hint that they did so at his request,
would be immediate death to him.^
On the 22nd of October, the judges came to
examine him in connection with the prcemunire.
In answer to their inquiries, he said : " The King
knows whether I have broken his laws or not in
the exercise of my legatine powers, for which I
have in my coffers my license under his hand and
seal. Notwithstanding, I will not stand up against
him in his own cause, but will plead guilty and throw
myself wholly on his mercy, trusting to his godly
disposition and charitable conscience. ... I have
never disobeyed him or opposed his will, but have
always taken pleasure in carrying out his commands
rather than those of God, which I ought rather to
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2675. (Du Bellay, October 17, 1529.)
Cf. also p. 2678.
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. 163
have obeyed, of which negligence I now greatly
repent me."^ He afterwards told Cavendish that
he followed this course because he was certain the
King would work his destruction rather than re-
store him his goods or yield a single point, and it
was better not to risk his life and liberty, but to
throw himself on the mercy of the King, who, he
felt sure, would have a remorse of conscience if
he did so.^
He now led a very devout life, saying Mass daily,
praising God for having given him this opportunity
of repenting of his sins, and declaring to every one
that he had never enjoyed greater peace of mind,
and were the King to restore him to his former
position he would return to it most unwillingly.^
On the 24th of October, Henry, accompanied by
Anne Boleyn and her mother, went to inspect
Wolsey's personal property.* The King was sur-
prised and overjoyed at the sight of the gold and
silver plate, jewels, and rich stuffs, which were of
extraordinary value. But they did not satisfy
Anne's rapacity. The palace of York Place itself
had lately been enlarged and decorated in a mag-
nificent style by Wolsey, and she insisted on
' Cavendish, Life of Wolsey, pp. 158-160.
2 Ibid., p. 199.
' Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iv., part I, p. 370. (Chapuys
to the Emperor, December 13, 1529.)
* Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2683.
1 64 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
having it for her private residence. The judges
were accordingly required to declare that the King
had a right to take it, and that Wolsey might re-
sign it to him, and Shelley, one of their number,
was sent to get Wolsey's signature to the deed of
transfer. In spite of the hopelessness of the case
and his own helpless position, Wolsey boldly de-
fended the rights of the Church, contending that
the King ought to have respect to conscience rather
than to the letter of the common law. When at
last he could no longer oppose the King's will, he
said : " Inasmuch as you, Fathers of the law, say
I may lawfully do it, I lay it on your conscience,
so as to free mine. But I pray you to tell the King
from me, that I most humbly beseech his Highness
to call to his remembrance, that there is both heaven
and hell." 1
On the 23rd of October Wolsey was judicially
declared a rebel and traitor, all his property was
forfeited, and his person was placed at the King's
mercy. About the same time a bill of indictment
for treason, intrigues with foreign powers, and other
grave crimes was drawn up by his bitterest enemies,
to be brought before Parliament.^ The articles in
this bill were declared by the fallen minister to
be in great part untrue, while those that were true
' Cavendish, Life of Wolsey (ed. Morley), p. 16S.
^- Brewer, Cale7idar, iv. p. 2712. (Articles against Wolsey.)
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. 165
involved neither malice nor treason on his part against
the King or the realm.^ Still he felt that the least
of them might cost him his head, for he knew the
King's fierce and sanguinary temper and the malice
of his enemies, at the head of whom was Anne,
the "nightcrow," as he called her, who was ever
pouring calumnies against him into the King's ear.
It is true, that Henry sent him, on All Souls'
night, by Sir John Russell, " a great gold ring with
a Turkis," and a message that he "loved him as
well as ever," that his "mind was full of his re-
membrance," and that he "was not a little dis-
pleased at his troubles." But Sir John was ordered
to go to Esher secretly after every one was in bed,
and though it was a pouring wet night, and he was
drenched through with the rain, he would not wait
till morning, because he said he must be back at
Greenwich before day, and he would on no account
it were known he had been with the Cardinal that
night. Such messages, though they might give
momentary consolation, only proved the hopeless-
ness of the case, for they revealed the utter heart-
lessness of a tyrant, who was not ashamed to pro-
fess love and sympathy for his victim at the very
moment when he was inflicting mental tortures on
him, in order to spare himself a slight uneasiness
on the smooth current of his pleasures.
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2715.
i66 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
In the depth of his affliction, Wolsey had but
one consolation. This was the attachment of the
members of his household, who had followed him
to Esher. But as he had not the means of main-
taining them, he assembled them on All Saints'
day, and thanking them for their faithful service,
while the tears ran down his cheeks and theirs,
he bade them take a month's holiday with their
friends. Some, however, refused to leave him,
among whom was his gentleman usher. Cavendish,
and his confidential secretary, Cromwell.
Thomas Cromwell was the son of a blacksmith
at Putney. He began his career in the service
of merchants at Antwerp and Venice. He after-
wards came to London, studied law, and was
employed by Wolsey in the work of transferring
to his new colleges in Ipswich and Oxford, the
lands of certain monasteries which the Cardinal
had got leave from the Pope to suppress. He
discharged this trust with such ability and fidelity,
that Wolsey esteemed him highly. But he treated
the monks with such harshness, that he incurred
popular hatred, and loud clamours for his punish-
ment were now heard on every side. He was
greatly troubled by this outcry, and in desperation
he got leave from Wolsey on this All Saints' day
to go to court, "to make or mar," as he said, the
fortunes of himself and his master.
THE FALL OF WOLSBY. 167
Cromwell was utterly and unblushingly unprin-
cipled. He openly declared that virtue and vice
were mere names, fit to amuse men in colleges,
but not to be thought of by men at court; that
the great business of a politician was to penetrate
the secret desires of his sovereign, and to devise
expedients for gratifying them without appearing
to violate religion or morality.^
By acting on these principles, he now quickly
ingratiated himself with Henry. He had the acute-
ness to perceive that the latter had no personal
ill-feeling against Wolsey, and that though he
allowed the bill against him to be brought into
Parliament, he did not wish him to be attainted,
because this would deprive him of the power of
pardoning him.^ Cromwell, therefore, secured a
seat in Parliament, and whenever anything was
said against his old master he stood up in his
defence. And when on the 1st of December the bill
was brought forward,^ he opposed it with such
eloquence and sound reasoning that it was thrown
out. He also took care to bring himself constantly
before the King in connection with Wolsey's
lands. And above all, when he wanted a favour
' Pole, Apologia ad Casarem, p. 133.
2 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2780. (Chapuys to Charles V,, February
6, 1530-)
' Ibid., p. 2712. (Articles against Wolsey.)
i68 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
for the Cardinal he applied directly to the King
himself, who would gladly grant it, and at the
same time would praise his fidelity to his fallen
master.
There was a general belief that Wolsey's disgrace
was only temporary, and that whenever the King
should need his advice he would be restored to
his former favour. Foreign princes and ambas-
sadors, and all who came into personal contact
with the Cardinal, therefore treated him with the
same courtesy as before. Some even ventured to
speak to the King on his behalf,^ but Anne and her
friends were rendered only the more exasperated
against him, and plotted together how they could
drive him into some act of petulance, which would
make the King angry, or how by constant insults,
and annoyances they might at least worry him
to death. He bore their petty malice,- however,
with exemplary patience. Still his health gave way
under the prolonged persecution, and at Christmas
he fell dangerously ill. The King sent his own
physician. Dr. Buttes, to see him, who reported
that he was in imminent danger, and that the only
hope of saving his life was for the King to send
him a consoling message. In great alarm, Henry
sent him a ring, which Wolsey had formerly given
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. pp. 2685, 2781.
" Ibid., pp. 2762, 2793.
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. 169
him, and made Anne send him the gold tablet
which hung from her girdle, and the most able
physicians of the day were ordered to attend him.
The spirit of the Cardinal revived by the marks
of his master's favour, and he at once began to
rally. In a few days he was out of danger, and
his health continued to improve daily.
From this time Henry treated him more kindly.
At Candlemas, 1520, he sent him several cartloads
of plate, hangings, chapel furniture, and provisions.
About the same time he granted him a formal
pardon, and leave to retain his archbishopric and
about ;^3000 a year of the revenues of the bishopric
of Winchester.^ About the same time, Cromwell
obtained leave for him to go to the Lodge in
Richmond Park, as the damp air of Esher was not
good for him.
A short season of peace and calm now dawned on
the unhappy Cardinal, and he turned it to the best
account in reviewing his past life. At the beginning
of Lent he had leave to remove to a house adjoining
the Convent of the Carthusian monks at Sheen.
Here he remained till Passion Sunday, occupied
with the care of his soul. He joined the monks
in all their offices in the choir, and spent many
hours daily with them in their cells. Under their
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2781. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
February 6, 1530.)
I70 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
guidance he purified his conscience, and formed
holy resolutions to devote himself to the duties of
his high spiritual office. They also trained him,
during these weeks, in habits of recollection and
prayer, and taught him the need of penance for the
sins of his past life.
His enemies, however, could not let him rest long
in peace. In order to remove him to a distance
from the court, they persuaded the King to order
him to go to his archbishopric of York. And when
want of money compelled him to delay his journey,
the Duke of Norfolk said to Cromwell : " Tell him
he must go quickly, or I will tear him with my teeth."
He began his journey early in Passion week.
From Palm Sunday till the Thursday in Easter week
he stayed at Peterborough Abbey, joining the monks
in all the rites of that holy season; walking with
them in procession, washing the feet of fifty-nine
men on Holy Thursday, and giving the customary
indulgences on Easter Sunday. On the Wednesday
in Low week he rode to Southwell, three or four
miles from Newark, where he had a house, and here
he remained till Whitsuntide.
The fruit of his sufferings and of his retreat with
the Carthusians now appeared in the humility and
sweetness of his bearing. According to the custom
of the time his house was open to both rich and poor,
and he gained the love and esteem of all by his
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. 171
gentle familiarity towards them. He treated his
poor tenants, and all who were in distress, with
great compassion, winning their confidence by his
sympathy, and relieving their wants with boundless
charity. Above all he sought to make up quarrels
among neighbours and relatives, often giving feasts
to bring enemies together, and sparing neither trouble
nor expense to promote general peace and friendly
feelings. On holidays he would ride five or six miles,
now to one church, now to another, where he or one
of his chaplains would say Mass. He would bring
his dinner with him, so as not to be a charge to his
flock, and would invite many of the parishioners to
dine with him. He would then ask whether there
was any dispute or ill feeling in the parish, and if
there was he would send for the parties and reconcile
them. Thus, he, who before he came to the North
had been the most hated of all men, after he had
been there a while had won the affection of all.
But even at this distance from court the malice of
his enemies pursued him, misrepresenting his every
act. When he was having holes in the walls and
roofs of his houses mended to make them weather-
tight, he was said to be engaged in erecting magnifi-
cent buildings.^ The charity and hospitality, which
were a duty incumbent on his spiritual office, were
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2895 (June 10, and p. 294. August i,
1530-)
172 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF A R AGON.
reported to be a return to his former pomp ; and the
popular love which was won by his virtues, was
misrepresented as wickedly designed to corrupt the
loyalty of the King's subjects.^ Explanations were
frequently required as to some act of injustice falsely
imputed to him when he was Chancellor ; ^ or money
pretended to be owing by him, was claimed.® Pay-
ments out of the revenues of his archbishopric would
also be demanded of him, and his remonstrances
would be silenced by the threat, that there was a
legal flaw in his pardon, and unless these payments
were forthcoming it would be declared void, and he
would be removed from his See.* Such demands
were the more distressing because he was himself
in great poverty, and neither from the King nor the
Duke of Norfolk, nor Anne Boleyn, before whom
even he humiliated himself so far as to ask for her
intercession, could he obtain the least relief.^ These
troubles, however, did not press on him as they had
formerly done, because he found ample consolation
in the practice of penance and his spiritual duties.
Moreover, Cromwell, Gardiner, and his other friends
spoke in his favour whenever they could prudently
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2960 (Cromwell to Wolsey, August
18, 1530); also p. 3013 (Thomas Arundell to the same, October
17) ; also p. 3035 (Chapuys to Charles V., November 27).
''■ Ibid., p. 2906. (Wolsey to Henry VIII., June 21, 1530.)
* Ibid., p. 2967. (Wolsey to Norfolk, August 25, 1530.)
* Ibid., p. 2716. (Cromwell to Wolsey, December 1529.)
" Ibid., p. 2715.
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. 173
do so, and there was no doubt as to his Majesty's
good will.
In the course of the summer he removed to
Scroby, and thence about Michaelmas to Cawood
Castle, seven miles from York. On his way to
Cawood, he stopped at St. Oswald's Abbey. Here
he stood from eight o'clock in the morning till noon,
from two till four in the afternoon, giving Confir-
mation to children, when from excessive weariness
he was compelled to desist. The next morning,
before leaving the Abbey, he Confirmed a hundred
more, and at a stone cross, near Ferrybridge, where
two hundred were waiting for him, he dismounted
from his mule and Confirmed them all.
Both at Scroby and at Cawood he followed the
same mode of life as at Southwell, winning the
love and reverence of both rich and poor by his
charity and hospitality. The Dean and clergy of
York welcomed him, for hitherto, as they said,
" they had like fatherless children been comfort-
less." He responded heartily to their welcome,
assuring them that he had come, not to be with
them for a time, but to spend his life with them
as their "Very father and mutual brother." As
he could not enter the choir till he had been for-
mally installed, he made arrangements with them
for his installation on Monday, the 7th November.
They wished to lay down cloth for him to walk
174 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
on from St. James's Chapel outside the city to the
minster; but he declined this honour, because, he
said, he was going only in obedience to the rules
of their Church, and not from any feeling of triumph
or vainglory.
He arranged to sleep at the Dean's house on
Sunday night, to give a great dinner on Monday
to all who would come, to dine with the Mayor
on Tuesday, and to return to Cawood the same
evening. All the gentry and religious houses in
the neighbourhood, in token of their love and
respect, sent, unknown to him, vast quantities of
fat beeves, sheep, wild fowl, venison, and other
dainties of the season, to furnish for his dinner at
York, an extraordinarily sumptuous feast.
These preparations for a joyful holiday were
abruptly cut short. On Friday the 4th of November,
as the Cardinal and his household were at dinner,
the Earl of Northumberland and Sir Walter Walshe,
a gentleman of the King's Privy Chamber, unex-
pectedly arrived. It was understood that they
brought a message from court. Such messages
being frequent, excited little attention. But some-
thing unusual seemed to be betokened, by an
evident constraint in the demeanour of the present
messengers, and especially in that of the Earl of
Northumberland, who, as Lord Percy, had been in
Wolsey's household, and was thus held to be very
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. I75
closely jDound to him. They gave, however, no
hint as to the purport of their mission till the Earl
was alone with Wolsey in his bedchamber; no
one else except Cavendish, who kept the door as
gentleman usher, being present. Then, as they
stood at a window talking, the Earl laid his hand
on Wolsey's arm, and trembling, said in a low
faint voice, " My Lord, I arrest you for high
treason."
Wolsey started and turned pale. Soon, how-
ever, recovering himself, he asked for the Earl's
commission. But the King, it appeared, had for-
bidden them to show it. Upon this, Wolsey re-
fused to give himself up to the Earl, but submitted
himself to Sir Walter, who, as a member of the
King's Privy Chamber, had thereby a sufficient
warrant for arresting the highest peer in the land.
At the same time he called God to witness that
he had never committed any offence against the
King in either word or deed. The Earl and Sir
Walter treated him with the greatest possible cour-
tesy, and he responded by ordering all his followers
to obey them in everything.
The immediate cause of Wolsey's arrest was
very simple. It happened one day that the King,
complaining of something done in the Council, ex-
claimed that the Cardinal had managed matters better
than any of them, and repeating this twice went
176 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
away in a rage. Anne Boleyn and her friends
were frightened. She wept incessantly, mourning
over her lost time and honour, and threatening to
leave the King. Henry tried in vain to soothe
her, but nothing would satisfy her except the
Cardinal's arrest. At this juncture Augustine, the
Cardinal's confidential physician, happened to come
to London. The Duke of Norfolk took him into
his house, treated him very liberally, and quickly got
him to say whatever was wished. He pretended
to confess that the Cardinal had been stirring
up the Pope against the King, and intriguing
with the King of France for his support.^ It had
been supposed that the King, on hearing these
grave charges, would fly into one of his usual fits
of rage, and order Wolsey to be beheaded. Anne
and her friends were, therefore, not a little alarmed
when he merely ordered the Earl of Northumber-
land and Sir Walter Walshe to bring him up to
London to stand his trial, and meanwhile to treat
him with the greatest possible courtesy and con-
sideration. It seemed as if they had outwitted
themselves, and had opened to the Cardinal the
^ Brewer, iv. p. 3035. Chapuys, writing (November 27, 1530)
to Charles V., says that " according to the confession of the Car-
dinal's physician, the Cardinal had solicited the Pope to excommuni-
cate the King if he did not banish the lady [Anne Boleyn] from the
court, and treat the Queen with due respect. He hoped by this to
raise the country, and obtain the management," &c.
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. 177
way to the King's presence again and to his former
favour.
The unaccountable and persevering contradictions
in Henry's treatment of his long-trusted minister,
when viewed in connection with the deep, calculating
cunning of his character, leave scarcely a doubt in
the mind that a further motive than the mere grati-
fication of avarice and the reckless selfishness of a
voluptuary, prompted this strange mixture of much
cruelty and much affection. This motive would
seem to have been, to teach Wolsey by personal
experience his own helplessness and the full extent
of his sovereign's power, and thereby to mould him
into even a more pliant instrument than hitherto,
for carrying out ideas which had long been floating
through Henry's brain, and to which Wolsey would
naturally be opposed. These vague dreams of the
royal mind had at this crisis taken a definite form.
About a fortnight before Wolsey's arrest, on the 21st
of October 1530, Cromwell wrote to him that when
Parliament met in January the prelates would not ap-
pear in the " praemunire," as was expected, because
there was " another way devised in place thereof, as
he would hereafter know."^ Doubtless Wolsey's
removal to court at this juncture was connected with
this "other way," which Henry well knew none
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 3019. The letter is dated October 21
IS30-
M
178 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
could carry out so well and with so little dishonour
to his sovereign, as his great minister.
On Sunday, the 6th of November 1530, Wolsey
left Cawood. He insisted on bidding farewell to his
servants, who had been clamouring to see him. As
they knelt weeping round him, he thanked them in
touching words for their zeal and fidelity in his
service. Outside the gate three thousand country
people awaited him. They followed him weeping
and lamenting his departure, calling down blessings
on his head and curses on his enemies. As he
passed on his way some of this crowd fell off, but
others took their places, thus keeping up this mourn-
ful procession of loving hearts throughout his journey
by Pontefract Priory and Doncaster to Sheffield
Park. Even though he went from Pomfret to Don-
caster by night, in order to avoid the throng, the
people would not let him leave them without a last
greeting, but ran along before or after him all the
way, carrying lights in their hands. '
On Tuesday the 8th he reached Sheffield Park,
where he was most honourably entertained by the Earl
of Shrewsbury. The Earl did all he could to cheer
him, assuring him that he received daily letters from
the King ordering him to treat him as one whom he
loved and favoured, and trying to induce him to join
in a stag-hunt in the Park. But in vain. The Cardinal
refused all earthly pleasures, and spent his time in
THE FALL OF WOLSBY. 179
prayer. The only favour he asked of the Earl was
that he should petition the King to let him answer
his accusers in his royal presence, though he greatly
feared they would despatch him secretly before he
should reach his master.
In consequence of this request the King sent Sir
William Kingston, and a guard of twenty-four of
Wolsey's old servants, now in the King's service,
to bring him into his presence. They arrived at
Sheffield Park on Tuesday the 22nd of November.
Though Sir William was an old friend of Wolsey's,
yet the latter was alarmed at seeing him because he
was Constable of the Tower. Sir William and Lord
Shrewsbury tried to cheer him, pointing out how
kindly the King had acted in sending his old ser-
vants to protect him against the enemies he feared.
But Wolsey answered disconsolately, " I know more
than you can imagine or know. Experience of old
hath taught me."
On the previous day he had been attacked whilst
at dinner with violent pain, and soon after dysentery
came on. He was consequently too ill to travel on
Wednesday, and Lord Shrewsbury's physician told
Cavendish he would not live more than four or five
days. On Thursday, however, he was better again,
and rode to a house of Lord Shrewsbury's at Hard-
wicke-upon-Lime, in Nottinghamshire. His guard
wept when they saw their old master in such a pitiable
i8o DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
State. He shook hands with each of them, and
talked to one or another as he rode along. The next
day he was worse, but still rode on to Nottingham,
and the day after, Saturday the 26th, to Leicester
Abbey, though during the day he was so ill that he
was often on the point of falling from his mule. It
was night when he reached the Abbey, and the Abbot
and canons came out with torches to receive him.
As he entered the precincts he said, " Father Abbot,
I am come to lay my bones among you." He was
so weak that his mule was brought to the foot of the
stairs which led to his bedroom. Sir William helped
him up the stairs, and he afterwards said that he
had never in all his life carried so heavy a burden.
From this time the Cardinal became rapidly worse,
so that on Monday morning Cavendish, who had
sat up with him all night, thought he was drawing
fast to his end. Seeing Cavendish's shadow on the
wall he asked who was there, and a minute after
what o'clock it was. Cavendish answered that it
was eight o'clock. He replied, " Eight o'clock !
That cannot be. Eight o'clock ! Eight o'clock !
That cannot be, for by eight o'clock you will lose
your master."
After dinner a messenger from the King arrived to
inquire about ;£'l500 which appeared in his books,
but which could not now be found. He expressed
great sorrow that the King should suspect him of
THE FALL OF WOLSEY. i8i
deceit and embezzlement, for he had always looked
on all he possessed as the King's property, and in
taking it now his Majesty had only anticipated his
intention of leaving it to him after his death. He
explained that he had borrowed this money from
persons whom he named to bury him and to reward
his faithful followers, trusting that the King would
pay it back to those who had lent it. It was now in
the hands of an honest man who would not keep
one penny from the King, and next day he would
tell Sir William his name, but he begged him mean-
while to be patient with him. Sir William kindly
forbore to press him. After his death Cavendish
told the King the name of the priest who had charge
of the money.
During the night he was so evidently sinking
that Cavendish called up his chaplain, and with
him the Cardinal then spent an hour in Confession.
At seven o'clock in the morning Sir William came
to see him, and tried to cheer him by assuring him
he had no cause for any misgivings, by which he
made himself worse. But he answered, "Well,
well. Master Kingston, I see how the matter is
framed against me. But if I had served God as
diligently as I have served the King, He would
not have given me over in my grey hairs. This
is the just reward for my worldly diligence, and
the pains I have taken in serving the King to
i82 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
gratify his will and passions, not regarding my
duty to God." '
While he was thus speaking with Kingston sight
and speech began to fail. The Abbot was sent for
in haste, and gave him the last rites of the Church.
His guard, too, was called in to hear his last words
and witness his death. As the clock struck eight
he expired, and all who stood by recalled his words
the previous day foretelling the hour of his death.
In laying him out a hair shirt next his skin was
found, and his chaplain bore witness that he was
in the habit of scourging himself with disciplines.
All that day, November the 29th, he lay in state in
his room in an open cofiSn vested as an archbishop.
Four or five hours after sunset he was borne by
torchlight to the Lady Chapel in the Abbey Church,
where the canons and poor men watched by him
through the night. At five in the morning Mass
was said, and before six he was buried with all
due ceremony. The depth and sincerity of his
repentance had won for him the signal favour of
being taken away from the temptation that awaited
him, when his life or death would doubtless have
hung on his consenting to lead the attack on the
Church, which Henry was about to open.
CHAPTER XVII.
DELA Y.
With the closing of the Legatine Court and the
fall of Wolsey the great cause entered on a new
phase. Campeggio's recent opinion on the Queen's
side, and the Pope's persistent refusal to over-ride
justice and traditional law in Henry's favour, left
no room for doubt as to what would be the result
of the suit at Rome. The idea of submitting to
authority seems not even for a moment to have
crossed Henry's brain. Still he was not prepared,
especially without the help of the master genius on
whom he had leant for twenty years, to separate
from the Church, and thereby to outrage the feel-
ings of his subjects, to cut himself off from com-
munion with all the great powers of Europe, and
to place himself on a level with the German heretics,
whom he so heartily despised. Under these cir-
cumstances he, too, could only seek delay, which,
as has already been told, was easily granted him
by the Pope.
Meanwhile he did not leave his intentions for the
183
l84 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
future in doubt. He told the Queen plainly that
he prized the Church of Canterbury as much as
people across the sea did that of Rome,^ and that
if the Pope would not declare their marriage null,
in conformity with the opinions of the Universities
he was about to get, he would denounce him as a
heretic and marry whom he pleased.^ No secret
was made of an intended reform of the clergy, as it
was called, which would place all Church property
in his hands. To this it was hoped his subjects
would easily consent, partly owing to the unpopu-
larity and exactions of the ecclesiastical courts,
and partly because they were to be told that no
more of their money would henceforth go to Rome.^
The Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk, and the Earl
of Wiltshire informed the nuncio, that though
hitherto the nation had shown incredible obedience
to the Pope, not because they were bound to do so,
but quite voluntarily, yet now they cared neither
for the Pope nor even for St. Peter were he to come
to life again, and that the King was absolute in
England both as Emperor and Pope.*
In his relations with Anne, also, Henry defied
both the Church's authority and the feelings of his
' Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iv., part I, p. 386. (Chapuys
to Charles V., December 31, 1529.)
'^ Ibid., p. 351. (Chapuys to Charles V., December 6, 1529.)
* Ibid., p. 366. (From the same to the same.)
4 Ibid., p. 734.
DELAY. 185
subjects. He frequently took her up to London
with him for a short visit, while the Queen was
left behind at Richmond, or elsewhere.^ On one
occasion Anne rode from Windsor behind him on
a pillion, and some men who gave expression to the
general feeling of disgust were committed to prison.
And, as if to leave no doubt about his intentions, he
gave a banquet at which she took precedence of his
sister, the Queen-Dowager of France, and the two
Duchesses of Norfolk, so that people said, nothing
was now wanting except the priest to give the
marriage ring and blessing.
In the Parliament which met in November 1529,
the first direct blow was struck at the Church's
authority. Wolsey, as an archbishop and a prince
of the Church, was amenable only to the Pope, and
as a priest, the law of England subjected him only
to ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Notwithstanding this,
a bill of indictment against him was brought into
Parliament, and though it fell through, a decided
step had been made towards placing the Church
under the State.
Bills, too, were brought into the Commons en-
croaching upon ecclesiastical matters, on pretence of
reforming clerical abuses, such as the management
of ecclesiastical courts, fees for probates, mortuaries,
plurality of benefices, farming Church lands, non-
' Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iv., part I, p. 446.
i86 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
residence, and the like. These had been hitherto
looked on as "things which might in no case be
touched " by laymen, " nor yet talked of by no
man, except he would be made a heretic, or lose all
that he had."^ The bills were probably suggested
by the Council, but in any case they could not have
been introduced without the King's consent.
In the course of the discussion on them in the
House of Lords, an opportunity offered for mortify-
ing Bishop Fisher, and this was eagerly seized
upon by the King, who hated him for his adherence
to the Queen. Bishop Fisher said, "You see, my
Lords, daily what bills come hither from the
Commons' House, and all to the destruction of the
Church. For God's sake see what a realm the
kingdom of Bohemia was, and when the Church
went down then fell the glory of the kingdom.
Now with the Commons is nothing but ' Down with
the Church.' And all this meseemeth is for lack of
faith only." Hereupon the Commons sent their
speaker, Sir Thomas Audeley, and thirty mem-
bers to complain to the King, that the Bishop of
Rochester had said, "They were no better than
infidels, and no Christians— as ill as Turks and
Saracens." The King summoned the Archbishop
of Canterbury, Fisher, and six other bishops, and
told them the complaint of the Commons. But
' Hall atud Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2693.
DELAY. 187
Fisher excused himself, saying, he " meant only the
doings of the Bohemians were for lack of faith,
and not the doings of the House of Commons."
This apology the King sent down to the House
of Commons by Sir William Fitzwilliam, the
Treasurer.^
Before this Parliament adjourned it proved how
closely the liberties of the Church and those of the
laity are linked together. Its predecessor seven
years before had refused a grant, and the King
had been consequently obliged to borrow from his
subjects large sums secured on bonds, which passed
from hand to hand, as bank notes now do, with the
same confidence as their equivalent in gold. The
King was now as usual in want of money ; but the
Parliament being indisposed to vote fresh supplies,
made amends by dealing liberally with other men's
money, and released the King from the obligation
of repaying the above loans. In the Lords, little
remark was made on the bill. In the Commons
it was obstinately contested, and was passed only
by means of the votes of the large number of
members who held ofSces under the King or
his ministers. But by the nation it was loudly
condemned.
It happened that in November 1529 the Pope
and the Emperor met at Bologne. For four months
' Hall apud Brewer, ui sup., p. 2690, note.
i88 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
they lived under the same roof, and a door com-
municating between their apartments allowed them
to have the most intimate and confidential com-
munications.i Henry seized this opportunity to
send a special embassy to the Emperor to induce
him to consent to the divorce. In the preceding
year the Pope had feared that the Emperor might
agree to a similar proposal in order to detach
Henry from his alliance with France,^ and he had
thought it prudent to tell the Spanish ambassador,
that even were they to consent to the divorce, he
would never authorise it.^ But this seems to have
been no obstacle to Henry, who no doubt believed
that conjointly they could force the Pope to bend
to their will. His instructions to his ambassadors
show how completely he was dominated by this idea.
After stating the arguments laid before the legates,
the royal agents were to tell the Emperor that the
King, resting his cause on the express words of
God, that his marriage was contrary to the Divine
commands, and considering that the Scripture says,
" Ubi Spiritus Domini, ibi libertas," had resolved no
longer to transgress his Master's law for the sake
of a servant, or through the fear of man, but to
' Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. pp. 234-236. (Con-
tarini to the Signory, November 5, 1529.)
''■ Ibid., p. 181. (Same to same, December 29, 1528.)
' Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iii., part 2, p. 974. (Report
of Mai's proceedings in Rome, April 1529.)
DELAY. 189
conform himself to the words of Our Saviour, " Fear
not," &C.1
The English ambassadors were graciously re-
ceived, and the negotiations on general subjects
were easily concluded. But when the Earl of
Wiltshire, Anne Boleyn's father, who was at the
head of the special embassy to treat about the
divorce, began to speak, the Emperor exclaimed
indignantly, "Stop, sir, you are a party to the
cause." The Earl was not a little confounded by
this rebuke, but quickly recovering himself he
answered : " I speak not as a father, but as a
subject and a servant at my master's bidding."
He then stated the case from Henry's point of
view, and proposed that it should be laid before
an assembly of prelates and doctors, asking the
Emperor to promise that he would accept their
opinion if it were favourable to the King, but at
the same time refusing to bind Henry by a similar
promise should the decision be against the divorce.
The Emperor, however, would not hear of the
cause being tried except before the Pope's tribunal,
and declared that he would support the Pope's
decision whatever it might be. The Earl even
ventured to offer the Emperor 300,000 crowns,
the restitution of Katherine's dowry, and a suitable
' Brewer, Caletidar, iv. pp. 2726-2729. (Instructions for the
embassy to Charles V., December 1529.)
igo DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
maintenance for her, if he would consent to the
divorce. But the Emperor answered haughtily that
he was not a merchant to sell his aunt's honour.
Finally, the Earl intimated that his master had
done enough in informing the Emperor of his
scruples and remorse of conscience, and though
he would have been glad of his acquiescence, his
displeasure would not prevent his carrying out his
intentions.^
Henry's next attempt was to get an opinion from
the Universities, and from various learned men, in
opposition to the Pope. This proved a signal
failure, even in his own kingdom, and he had to
resort to violence and bribes to hide his defeat.
In February 1530, when Gardiner and Fox at
Cambridge requested the opinion of the University
on the question whether marriage with a deceased
brother's wife was forbidden by divine and natural
law, an answer was twice given against the King's
contention. Their proposal to refer the matter to
a packed committee was also twice negatived, and
it was only by inducing some of their opponents
to absent themselves that the resolution required
was carried when put fof the third time to the
vote. But even then only an opinion, conditional
on the first marriage having been consummated,
which in the case could not be proved, was obtained.
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. pp. 2824-2826.
DELAY. 191
Henry was displeased because no effort was made
to get an answer to his other question, "Has the
Pope power to dispense with such a marriage ? "
but the Vice-Chancellor declared a negative answer
could not possibly have been obtained. 1
At Oxford, the opposition was even stronger
and more obstinate. Archbishop Warham had re-
course to threats and promises, and even declared
that the University of Paris had decided in the
King's favour, which was false. The King, too,
wrote a letter full of strong reproaches, and these
from him were the same as threats. But all was
for a long time in vain. At last, by excluding a
great majority of the Masters of Arts, Fox succeeded
in getting the question referred to a packed com-
mittee. Even then, only thirty-three signatures
could be got to the same conditional answer as
at Cambridge. And their opponents insisted that,
as it had not been passed in convocation, it should
not be registered nor sealed, and the seal could
only be got clandestinely.^ A report of the bribes
and threats that had been used at the Universities
reached the Pope, and he ordered his nuncios
to inquire into the facts.
Henry thought to retrieve by the fourteen Univer-
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2807. (Gardiner to Henry VIII.,
P'ebruary 1530.) Cf. also p. 2816. (Cambridge, March 9, 1530.)
^ Ibid., pp. 2832, 2834, 3186. Cf. Wood, History and Antiquities
of Oxford, p. 256.
192 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
sities of France this defeat at home. Great then
was his disappointment, when the most influential
of them, that of Paris, passed a decree against the
divorce by a large majority,^ and when King Francis
refused to interfere, not wishing to provoke the
Emperor till he should have paid the ransom of
two million crowns for his sons, who were then his
hostages in Spain. Upon this, Henry eagerly lent
him four hundred thousand crowns, postponed
indefinitely the payment of his own pension of five
hundred thousand crowns, and made over to him a
celebrated jewel, known as the Lily of Diamonds,
which the Emperor Maximilian had pawned to
Henry VII. for 50,000 crowns.^ In return, Francis
gave the wished-for support. But neither by threats
nor violence could he get from the University of
Paris a favourable decree, and an informal opinion,
without the seal of the University, was substituted
for it. But even with this spurious decree Henry
was so overjoyed that he had it published by a crier
in the streets of London.^ From the Universities of
Orleans and Toulouse, the theologians of Bourges,
and the civilians of Angers, similar opinions were
obtained, but the theologians of Angers pronounced
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2757. (Du Bellay to Montmorency,
January 27, 1530.) Cf. p. 2780. (Chapuys to Charles V., February
6, 1530-)
^ Ibid., p. 2798. (Henry to Charles V., February 19, 1530.)
' Ibid., p. 2971. (Nino to Charles V., August 26, 1530.)
DELAY. 193
in favour of Katherine's marriage,^ as did also,
unasked, the University of Poitiers.^ The other
Universities were either not consulted, or their
answers were suppressed as being in favour of the
marriage.^
In the Italian Universities and cities, Henry
ordered that bribes should be liberally given.* He
was obeyed, but with very questionable results. An
opinion signed by one Carmelite friar, and approved
by four others, was palmed off as the favourable
judgment of the University of Bologna.^ Another,
signed by some theologians of Ferrara, was fought
for by the opposing parties, and at length, being
carried off by Henry's friends, was sent to England
as the undoubted opinion of the University of Fer-
rara, though the civilians and canonists, even when
offered a bribe of a hundred and fifty crowns, re-
fused to give any judgment unless requested by both
the King and the Queen. All the doctors of Padua
were well paid, and a hundred crowns were given
for the seal of the University. Croke sent at one
time a hundred and ten favourable opinions to
England, but he said they were as nothing to
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2860.
'^ Ibid., p. 2971.
' Le Grand, Histoire du Divorce, iii. pp. 428-507, gives the
various letters.
* Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2851.
5 Rymer, Fadera, xiv. pp. 393, 395, 396.
N
194 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
what he might have had, had he had more
money.^
In Germany, Henry utterly failed. Not only
did the Catholic Universities hold aloof, but the
Lutherans of both Germany and Italy condemned
the divorce,^ though Luther and Melanchthon would
have allowed him to take a second wife after the
custom of the patriarchs.*
Henry had originally intended to lay the opinions
of the Universities before the Pope as the voice of
united Christendom in favour of the divorce.* But
as the Pope had protested that Universities and in-
dividuals, however learned, could not prescribe the
law to him, nor define the extent of his authority,
and had remarked severely on the way in which
these opinions had been got,^ the English king did
not persist in this intention, but adopted another
plan of a more defiant character.
' Pocock, Records, i. pp. 294-314, 319-332, 400-427. See
Croke's letter in Burnet, History of the Reformation, iv. p, 135.
Cardinal Pole {De Ecclesia Unit. Defens., iii. c. 3) bewails this
expenditure of large sums by Henry to brand himself with shame.
Cf. Sanders (ed. Lewis), p. 81.
^ Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pocock), iv. p. 145.
" Lutheri, Mpistolie (ed. 1717)' P- 290, apud Lingard (3rd edi-
tion), vi. p. 226. Melanchthon was of the same opinion. {Epist. ad
Camerar., 90.)
* Le Grand, Histoire du Divorce, iii. p. 443. (De Vaux to the
Grand Master; London, February 15, 1530.)
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2888. (The Bishop of Worcester to
Stokesley, June 4, 1530.)
DELAY. 195
On the 1 2th of June 1530 certain high officials,
who were known to be favourable to the divorce,
were summoned to court, and it was proposed to
them that an address from the two Houses of
Parliament in the name of the nation should be
sent to his Holiness, praying him, in conformity
with the opinion of the most famous Universi-
ties and learned men in Christendom, to declare
that King Henry's marriage with Katherine had
been illegal and invalid, and intimating that if the
Pope refused to do so the EngUsh king and his
subjects would seek some other means of redress.
But, notwithstanding the one-sided character of the
assembly, the proposal was rejected. One nobleman
even threw himself on his knees and most earnestly
besought Henry not to attempt to contract another
marriage, as the nation would certainly rebel. A
petition, however, to the above purport was drawn
up in the most insolent terms, and commissioners
were sent to each of the members of both Houses
of Parliament, to obtain the required signatures,
it being evident that, when each person was taken
singly, few would venture to stand alone against
the King's will.^ Even then the signatures were
comparatively few, for though the petition was
signed by the two archbishops and forty-two nobles,
^ Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iv., part I, p. 616. (Chapuys
to Charles V., June 29, 1530.)
196 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
only four of the bishops and a small number of
abbots and commoners, most of the latter being the
King's servants, signed it. The names of the most
distinguished men in the kingdom, such as More
and Fisher, and the majority of the bishops, clergy,
and gentry were absent. This petition, got up
thus clandestinely and signed under compulsion,
was sent by the King to the Pope as expressing
the feelings of the nation in Parliament. It was
signed on July 13, 1530.^
In September the Pope returned an answer in
dignified but fatherly terms, pointing out that he'
had favoured the King so much that he had exposed
himself to the charge of partiality from the opposite
side, that the delays in carrying on the suit were
caused by the King alone, and that the opinions
of the Universities and learned men to which the}'
referred had not been laid before him, while the
few opinions he had happened to see were not
fortified by any reasons and authority which might
help to form his judgment on the cause in question.
He added that their threat to take the matter into
their own hands was unworthy of them, and that he
did not believe it was sanctioned by the King.^
Though Henry delayed the suit at Rome, he con-
' Pocock, Records, i. p. 429. The Parliament's letter to the Pope.
' Ibid., p. 434. Pope Clement to the Parliament, September 27,
I530-)
DBLA Y. 197
tinned to make demands on the Pope, so one-sided
and preposterous, that they could not possibly be
granted. At one time he insisted that the Pope
should dissolve the marriage without any legal pro-
cess,^ or at least promise not to proceed against him
if he contracted another marriage.^ At other times
he proposed that the case should be judged by the
Archbishop of Canterbury and the English bishops ;
or at least that it should be tried in England; or
before five judges, of whom two were to be chosen
by him, two by the Queen, and the fifth was to
be the' King of France; or, in some other way,
which Would secure a sentence in his favour.^ He
ordered his ambassadors to appeal to a General
Council, but they did not venture to do so, because
Popes Pius II. and Julius II. had forbidden such
appeals under pain of excommunication.* Later on,
he ordered them to plead the peculiar privilege of
England that no one should be compelled to go to
law out of the kingdom.^ But they thought it more
prudent not to do so, because the doctors whom they
consulted, doubted its existence.^ In October, how- .^
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 3002. (Mai to Charles V., October 2,
1530-)
" Ibid., p. 3009. (Same to same, October 10, 1530.)
* Ibid., pp. 2981, 3012, 3021, 3022.
■• Ibid., p. 3190. (The ambassadors in Rome to Henry VIII.,
September 1530.)
' Ibid., p. 3004. (Henry to Benet, &c., October 7, 1530.)
" Ibid., p. 3190.
198 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF A R AGON.
ever, Dr. Benet mentioned it to the Pope. Where-
upon his Holiness answered, that if he would allege
this in court, he should have as much as the law
allowed. A few days later Benet returned to the
subject, and pressed the King's argument, that his
claim could not be called in question any more than
the Bishop of Rome's claim to have jurisdiction over
other churches. To this the Pope replied, he could
prove his jurisdiction better than the King could his
custom. 1
Another demand was brought before the Pope in
an irregular way. It will be remembered that in
November 1528 Brian and Vannes were instructed
to ask leave for the King to have two wives.^ The
question does not seem to have been raised at that
time. But in 1530 the subject appears to have
been discussed in Rome, probably in consequence of
the suggestion of the German divines. The Pope,
therefore, thought it prudent to anticipate by his
refusal a demand which he could not possibly grant,
and he mentioned the proposal to Gregory Casale
and Dr. Benet separately.^ Neither of them was
aware that the proposal had originated with Henry
^ Pocock, ^««?-ai, i. p. 448, jcyy. (Benet to Henry VIII., October
27. 1530-)
^ Ibid., p. 189. (Instructions to Brian and Vannes, December
1528.)
^ Ibid., p. 428. (Gregory Casale to Henry VIII., September iS,
1530.) Cf. p. 458.
DELAY. 199
and Wolsey, and they were at a loss how to answer.
Casale thought it came from the Imperialists and
declined to write to the King, though he at once did
so privately. Benet thought the Pope suggested it in
order either to excite the King's hopes and make him
defer the cause, or if the King accepted the proposal,
to be able to prove to him that if he could dispense
in this case he could do so with more reason in the
other. But it never crossed his mind that his Holi-
ness seriously entertained such an idea. He asked
the Pope whether he thought he could dispense in
such a case. The Pope answered that he did not
think he could, though a certain divine thought he
might. But a few days later he told Benet he had
consulted his Council, and they declared plainly he
could not do such a thing.
All Henry's demands were supported by the
French ambassador. Cardinal Grammont, Bishop of
Tarbes, who threatened that his master would join
Henry in throwing off the authority of the Church.^
But the Pope always repeated that he would do
nothing contrary to law, whether for Henry, the
French King, or the Emperor, especially as this
question concerned a sacrament of the Church ; ^
that he would not remove the cause from Rome
without the Queen's consent, and that whatsoever
^ Pocock, Records, i. p. 449.
^ Ibid., p. 454. (Benet to Henry VIII., October 27, 1530.)
200 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
either party might do against him, he would commit
himself to God, who would be his helper.^ Or if
sore pressed he would answer, that if the world
fell to ruins he would rather it did so because he
did his duty than because he failed to do it.^ So
immovable was he that Benet was obliged to write
to the King, that nothing could be got from him by
persuasion, that threats did not make him afraid,
and that he himself was convinced that while, on
the one side, the Pope would do nothing except by
a regular suit according to law, on the other, he
would do for his Majesty everything that was pos-
sible according to law.^ This was what the Pope
had always professed his intention to do, and it is
a striking testimony to his integrity and firmness,
that Henry's own ambassador should have arrived
at the conviction that such would certainly be his
Holiness's course of action.
^ Pocock, ui sup., p. 454. (Benet to Henry VIII., October 27,
1530)
' Ibid., p. 457. (Same.)
' Ibid., p. 458. (Same.)
CHAPTER XVIII.
THE DECISION.
Month after month slipped away, and though
Henry had not the courage to take a decisive step,
he was evidently drifting closer and closer to the
catastrophe. When September came, the suit was
opened in the Rota. But Henry had not sent a
proctor to answer for him, and the ambassadors
begged for further delay. The Bishop of Tarbes
advised the Pope to prorogue the suit for at least
six months or a year, because, as it arose out of
a love affair of the King which might pass away,
while the Queen's cause was one of justice which
would always continue, delay would be in her
favour.^ But the Pope's forbearance seemed to be
exhausted. Henry's late attempt to force the opinion
of the Universities on him, and the insolent tone of
the so-called address from the two Houses of Parlia-
ment, almost forbade any hope of Henry's return
to a better mind. His Holiness was therefore per-
suaded with difficulty to grant even a delay of only
1 Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 3009. (Mai to Charles V., October 10,
'S30-)
202 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF A R AGON.
three weeks. Both the Bishop and Benet wrote to
Henry warning him that though the Pope did all
he could to favour him, yet he would soon be com-
pelled to issue a bull forbidding all archbishops,
bishops, and tribunals of any kind to give judgment
in the cause.^
It was now noticed at court that Henry became
very sad and thoughtful. He told his confidants
that he had been grossly deceived. He had asked
for the divorce only because he had been persuaded
the Pope would make no difficulty about it, and
could he have anticipated the opposition he had met
with, he would never have sought it. Even now
he would abandon it for ever.^ When this reso-
lution was whispered in court, his best friends re-
joiced, and the Boleyn party was filled with dismay.
An unexpected ally, however, came to their aid.
Cromwell had the acuteness to perceive that Henry's
resolution sprang not from repentance for the past,
but from the weariness and impatience of an im-
perious temper confronted by an insurmountable
obstacle. He saw in this state of Henry's mind
the opportunity for making his own fortune, and
he boldly seized it.
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 3022. (Benet to Henry VIII., October
27. 1530.)
^ Pole, Apologia ad Carolum V., p. 127. apud Lingard, History
(3rd ed.), vi. p. 231. Pole had this account from one to whom the
King disclosed his sentiments. Mihi referebat qui audivit.
THE DECISION. 203
As soon as possible he obtained an audience of
the King, and after apologising for meddling in his
sovereign's affairs, opened the purpose of his visit.
He said that his love and fidelity obliged him to
try to relieve the evident depression of his master's
spirits, by showing him how, without any loss of
honour, but rather with an increase of both honour
and power, he could do what he wished in the
present matter, and indeed, in all others. He then
went on to explain that ignorant or self-interested
persons had hitherto held him, and his predecessors,
in subjection, by pretending that there were in the
natural law immutable rules of right and wrong, by
which princes as well as their subjects were bound.
It was, however, evident that such immutable laws
had no existence in nature, since the standard of
virtue differed in different nations and at different
times; and therefore, it was obviously the prero-
gative of a sovereign, who had no superior except
God, to bind his subjects at his own will, by laws
which obviously need not bind himself In the
present matter, however, the King would have no
need to depart from the ordinary standard of virtue,
held by all men in all places, because his own wish
was in accordance with God's law and the opinion
of all the Universities and learned men, which con-
demned his marriage with his brother's wife. If the
consent of the Roman Pontiff to this teaching could
204 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF A RAG ON.
be obtained, it would, of course, remove all opposition
on the part of the Emperor. But should the Pope
persist in his obstinacy, and refuse his sanction,
there was no reason why the King should not em-
brace the present opportunity to free himself and
his kingdom from the yoke which the Pope pre-
tended to lay on the necks of kings. The German
princes had thrown off this yoke, and had thereby
gained strength. Why then should the King hesi-
tate to follow their- example ? A kingdom with two
heads was like a monster. It was a fiction invented
by priests to free themselves from the royal juris-
diction. Let him, therefore, reclaim the rights of
which they had so cunningly robbed him, and which
he could not give up to a foreign prince without
injury to his kingdom. '(Let him declare himself
not only Head of the Church, but sole Head in
his kingdom. And then, not only would his royal
authority be extended and strengthened, but all
ecclesiastical power, all the bishoprics, the monas-
teries, and the whole patrimony of the Church
would be at his disposal, and he would far surpass
all his predecessors in wealth and power. Former
English kings had been too much occupied with
foreign foes to turn their attention to the enemies at
home who were robbing them of half their kingdom.
But God had given to Henry peace abroad, evidently
in order to afford him the opportunity of recovering
THE DECISION. 205
his rights at home, thereby opening to him the way
for the gratification not only of his love, but of all
his other wishes, with an increase of power and
wealth. The consent of his Council could be easily
obtained by a clever minister. And when the title
of sole Head of the Church had been given him,
with the consent of his subjects, what punishment
would be too severe for those who should, either by
word or writing, resist his claim to the title, and rob
him, so to say, of half his kingdom, by depreciating
his authority in favour of that of a foreign prince
and pontiff?
Cromwell's counsels were hke music in Henry's
ears. The three-fold promise of indulgence for his
three master passions, sensuality, avarice and love
of power, lighted a flame in the depth of his heart,
and before the bold simplicity of the plan submitted
to him, Henry's scruples vanished. There was no
hesitation in accepting the bait which his servant
so cunningly offered him. Thanking Cromwell, and
embracing him, he at once made him his chief
adviser and minister, and ranked him amongst his
intimate friends.^ For the next ten years Cromwell
took the place that Wolsey had formerly held, and
every measure of state was compassed by his aid.
It needs but a glance from the administration of the
' Pole, Apologia ad Carohim V., pp. 118-125. Pole states that
his informant was Cromwell himself.
2o6 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OP ARAGON.
great cardinal to that of his successor to see how
low Henry had fallen. Wolsey had raised the King
and the kingdom from comparative feebleness to a
position of power and honour among European
States, but with the ascendency of Cromwell began
that decadence into the tyranny, shame and misery,
which are the characteristics of the second half of
Henry's reign.
Immediately after this interview with the King,
Cromwell wrote to Wolsey the letter already men-
tioned, in which he told him, that the prelates would
not appear in the prcemunire, for there was " another
way devised in place thereof, as he would further
know." 1
In August 1530, Henry had written to the Pope
in very strong terms, accusing him of acting " in-
constantly and deceivably," and " lending himself
to the temerity and ignorance of his counsellors."
He apologised for the plainness of his language,
declaring that he did not intend to impugn his
authority but rather to confirm it.^ But now, in
December, he again wrote to him a letter in which
breathed the new spirit that animated him. Violent
and presumptuous as had been his former letters,
they were respectful in comparison with this
^ Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 3019. (Cromwell to Wolsey, October
21, 1530.)
'>■ Ibid., p. 3 1 88. Henry VIII. to Clement VII., September 1 530. )
THE DECISION. 207
missive. It was not a petition, but an imperious
command to the Pope to abstain from interfering
with the King's rights if he wished his own to be
respected, and an open declaration, that as he, the
King, sought only what was his own according to
the laws of the Church and of England, he would
not suffer the contrary, and as he himself abhorred
contention, he would not brook denial.^
Thus closed the year 1530. With it ended that
liberty which had always been the inheritance of
Englishmen, and which had been moulded under
the fostering care of the Church into a free con-
stitution. In its place was established a cruel
despotism, under which the nation groaned for
above one hundred and fifty years, and which was
at last thrown off only through civil war and
revolution.
The object of Henry's contention with the Pope
was now totally changed. Hitherto he had sought
only a divorce from the wife whom he had ceased
to love, and liberty to marry any one who seemed
likely to give him a male heir. Though the Pope
could not gratify his desires, yet Katherine's death
might give him all that he wanted and restore him
to his former position as the most devoted son of the
Church. But henceforth the divorce question now
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 3056. (Henry VIII. to Clement VII.,
December 6, 1530.)
2o8 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
gave place to the project of establishing his own
independence of the Pope as sole Head of the
Church within his own dominions, and nothing
short of the Pope's abdication of his supremacy,
and the rights of St. Peter's Chair, could now have
satisfied Henry.
CHAPTER XIX.
THE NEW DESPOTISM.
The new despotism was fitly inaugurated by the
foundation of a Church based on the personal rule
of an absolute monarch.
Wolsey's conviction at law, for having infringed
the Statute of Provisors, had involved in his f>res-
munire all, whether clergy or laity, who had in any
way acknowledged his office as legate.^ All the
bishops had consequently been indicted.^ When
the Convocation of Canterbury met in January
1531, its first business was to obtain pardon from
the King. As the clergy had acted with the King's
leave, and they believed the charge against Wolsey
to have been merely personal, they offered only
160,000 ducats for their pardon. But the King
refused to accept less than 400,000 ducats, and
even this sum only on condition that in the pre-
amble of the bill, clauses acknowledging him as sole
Supreme Head of the Church and Clergy of Eng-
land, and giving him absolute spiritual jurisdiction
' Brewer, Calendar, iv. p. 2704.
"^ Ibid., p. 2915. (Controlment Roll Trin., 1530.)
209 O
2IO DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
and legislative power, should be inserted. For
three days the clergy strjjggled against a demand
which cut them off from Catholic unity.^ But the
only concession they could obtain was the insertion
of the words, " after God " ; the King at the same
time intimating that he would permit no further
discussion. It was, however, secretly conveyed to
Bishop Fisher, that the words "as far as the law
of Christ allows," would be permitted, and as they
would remove all scruples of conscience, the simple
peace-loving bishop was easily caught in the snare.
His opinion had such weight with his fellow-bishops
that no further difficulty was made, and on the nth
February, the title, " Supreme Head so far as the
law of Christ allows," was given to Henry by the
unanimous tacit consent of all the bishops. The
further concession of spiritual jurisdiction and legis-
lative Power was evaded by a slight verbal altera-
tion and some complimentary phrases. On the 22nd
March the bill formally passed Convocation.
On the 4th of May the Convocation of York
granted the King ;£■ 18,840 in the same terms as
that of Canterbury had done. But Tunstall, Bishop
of Durham, entered a protest against the title,
"Supreme Head," saying that it ought only to
be "in temporals after Christ," for if it was meant
that the King was head in spirituals as well as
' On all this question see the Preface.
THE NEW DESPOTISM. 211
temporals, that was contrary to the doctrine of the
Catholic Church, whereas if it meant that the King
was head in temporals only, why was it not ex-
plicitly so declared ? ^
Henry was angry at Tunstall's protest, and the
more so because hitherto the bishop had been one
of his greatest friends. But he exercised, however,
unusual self-control, and wrote in answer that he
could not be offended with him because he had
interlaced his opinion with such words of submis-
sion. He retorted on Tunstall the advice given
to himself in this great matter to conform his con-
science to the conscience and opinion of the greater
number, and suggested he should do the same
in the present case, and follow the opinion of the
Convocation of Canterbury, in which were so many
notable great clerks. He added, that he was willing
to examine the grounds on which the case rested, and
in answering the Bishop's objection he explained in
detail what were -the respective limits of the spiritual
and temporal authority. He allowed that the clergy
alone had power over spiritual things. But these
he limited to the ministration of the sacraments,
preaching, and the grace which God imparts
through these means. Everything else, such as
the persons, goods, and acts of the clergy, super-
vision of their lives and of the exercise of their
■' Wilklns, Concilia, iii. p. 745.
212 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
spiritual functions, authority to teach and minister
the sacraments, election to bishoprics and abbeys,
and ecclesiastical legislation belonged to their human
life, and consequently were temporal things, and
subject to his temporal power.^
The fact that Fisher was the proposer of the
form in which the title of Supreme Head was
granted, is a sufficient guarantee that the clergy
were perfectly loyal to the Pope. But in order to
prevent any misunderstanding, which seems already
to have arisen, the bishops explained in Parliament,
before the Act was formally passed, the meaning
they attached to the title.^ And in the following
May, the Convocations of both provinces sent Henry
a declaration in strong and explicit terms, that they
did not intend thereby to detract in any way from
the authority of the Apostolic See.^ Warham also
entered a formal protest on February 24, 1531,
' Wilkins, Concilia, iii. p. 762.
- Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 61. (Chapuys to Charles V., March 8,
1531.) "The clergy are more conscious every day of the great
error they committed in acknowledging the King as sovereign of the
Church, and they are urgent in Parliament to retract it."
On the death of the Rev. J. S. Brewer, the work of superintend-
ing the publication of the State papers of the reign of Henry VIII.
was taken up by the present editor, Mr. James Gairdner.
' Ibid., p. 114. (Chapuys to Charles V., May 22, 1531.) "Four
days ago, the clergy of York and Durham sent to the King a strong
protestation against the supremacy which he pretends to have over
them. The province of Canterbury has done the same, of which
I send you a copy." Cf p. 764 for the declaration.
THE NEW DESPOTISM. 213
against all enactments made in this Parliament in
derogation of the Pope's authority, or the prero-
gatives of his province.^
It was, however, evident that the limitation, " so
far as the law of Christ allows,'' was practically
valueless, for no one would be so bold as to con-
test its meaning with his lord, much less such a
lord as Henry.^ So far, apparently, Henry's only
object was to intimidate the Pope. When the
Nuncio, for example, spoke to him about the new
Papacy created in England, he answered that "it
was nothing, and was not intended to infringe on
the authority of the Pope, provided his Holiness
would pay due regard to him. But otherwise he
knew what to do." ^
Hitherto Henry, in spite of his arrogance and
threats, had professed obedience to the Pope's
authority. Henceforth he met each step taken by
his Holiness in a spirit of defiance. On the Sth
of January 1531, the Pope published inhibitions
decreed in the Consistory of December, forbidding
Henry's marriage, and the giving of any sentence
of divorce by any ecclesiastical or secular dignitary
or tribunal, while the cause was pending before
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 386.
^ Ibid., p. 47. (Chapuys to Charles V., February 14, 1531.)
" No one will be so bold as to contest with his lord the importance
of the reservation."
^ Ibid., p. 51. (Same to same, February 21, 1531.)
214 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
him. He was led to do this by seeing a book
printed in England, stating the opinions of the
Universities and doctors that a marriage with a
brother's widow was forbidden " de jure divino,"
and that the Pope might in no way dispense
from it.^
Henry ordered his agents at Rome to urge the
recall of these inhibitions. But they replied that
the Pope would not hear of it ; that they had never
seen him so angry before, for he said, it was not
for doctors or Universities to judge a cause which
was before himself.^ Whereupon Henry, as in
defiance, ordered all the opinions to be read in the
Houses of Lords and Commons, and the Commons
were exhorted to return to their own houses and
acquaint their neighbours with the justice of the
King's cause.3 But the Lords declined to give
any opinion, and the Commons showed their dis-
pleasure and regret by absolute silence, so that
instead of justifying his intentions with the people,
it was thought they were less satisfied than ever.
Hitherto Henry had been pleased to have the
hearing of the cause put off" from time to time.
But now he had made up his mind to take a more
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. II. (Clement VII. to Henry VIII.,
January S, 1531.)
'^ Ibid., p. 30. (Benet to Henry VIII., January 30, 1531.)
' Ibid., p. 84. (Chapuys to Charles V., April 2, 1531.)
THE NEW DESPOTISM. 215
independent line and refuse to plead at Rome,
whether in person or by proxy. He continued,
however, to seek delay, because on the one hand
he still hoped to get a favourable sentence which
would smooth matters with the Emperor, and on
the other he feared that on his refusal to plead,
he might either be declared contumacious, or pro-
ceedings in the Rota might at once be set on foot,
and in either case sentence would be given against
him. He therefore ordered his ambassadors in
Rome to seize every opportunity and make the
most of every pretext to delay matters, but to do
so in their own names and not in his.^ He also
directed them to avoid any acknowledgment, tacit
or express, direct or indirect, of the Pope's authority
and jurisdiction which might bind him and hinder
his future action in England. With this object
he refused to give them any formal authority to
act on his behalf, and forbade them to use the
proxj' they already had.^ Further, they were to
avoid making any request or positive assertion,
lest hereafter their words might be used against
him, and if at any time they were obliged to do so,
they were to pretend they had no directions, and
were only expressing their own private opinion.^
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 97, 146, 269, 372.
2 Ibid., p. 97. (Henry VIII. to Benet, April 23, 1531.)
' State Papers (ed. 1849), p. 269. (Same to same, December 6,
1531.) Cf. pp. 273, 313.
2l6 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
These orders, the ambassadors carried out most
skilfully.
When the process in the Rota was reopened in
January 1531, Dr. Came appeared as Henry's Ex-
cusator, pleading, not in his master's name but in
his own, as an Englishman, that Henry could not
be required to appear either in person or by proxy.
The judges refused to admit him to plead without
some authority from Henry. '^ This gave an opening
for lengthened discussions and repeated references
to Henry, for instructions, which were cleverly
managed so as never to be quite definite or con-
clusive. In April, Henry ordered Benet to get
the process put oif till Michaelmas.^ Then when
the court was reopened after Michaelmas the am-
bassadors, instead of presenting a regular authority
to act, delivered only a letter from Henry. This,
moreover, was so insolent and so wanting in com-
mon courtesy, that it was not accepted.^ Kathe-
rine's proctors urged that sentence should be
pronounced immediately, and the Pope could only
put them off by going into the country, and by
excuses on the score of his health. He sent Benet
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 68. (Mai to Archbishop of Santiago,
Rome, March 21, 1531.)
" Ibid., p. 97. (Henry VIII. to Benet, April 23, 1531.)
' Ibid., p. 230. (Ortiz to Charles V., October 24, 1531.) Cf.
also p. 240. (Same to the Empress, November 7, 1531.) The
letter is printed in full in State Papers (ed. 1849), pp. 305, segq.
THE NEW DESPOTISM. 217
over to England in great haste to tell Henry from
him that he could not delay giving the sentence
much longer. But Henry answered, that he did
not care for the Pope's sentence. Whereupon
Benet assured him that if it were once given, it
would do him irreparable injury.
The nuncio, too, warned Henry that the Pope
having delayed the sentence for three years, could
not defer it much longer, and if he would not send
a mandate to his ambassadors, his Holiness would
be obliged to give sentence against him as a person
who had nothing to allege on his own behalf. Henry
answered that the Pope had no power to judge kings.
To this the nuncio replied that as Vicar of Christ he
had power to judge in such cases as this. Henry
rejoined that he cared not for any such sentence.
The nuncio represented that the Pope would excom-
municate him and call in the help of the secular
power. But Henry still persisted in saying that he
cared nothing for all this.^
For the moment Henry's chief care was to make
his new headship of the Church a practical reality,
and to accustom his subjects to see him exercising
the spiritual jurisdiction he had now claimed.
Hitherto cases of heresy had been judged ex-
clusively by the clergy. But in March 1531 a
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 352. (Paper by Dr. Ortiz, January 25,
1532-)
2i8 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
heretic, who had been taken before the Archbishop
of Canterbury for preaching Lutheran doctrines,
refused to answer to him, and demanded secular
judges. The Duke of Norfolk, with the Earls of
Oxford and Wiltshire, were accordingly sent to be
present at his trial, but as they also detected heresy
he appealed to the King as the archbishop's sove-
reign. He was therefore taken before the King, in
whose presence he was accused by several bishops.
But the King having noticed that one of the articles
of heresy with which he was charged was, that the
Pope was not head of the Christian Church, declared
that this was not a heresy but an undoubted truth.
After hearing what further he had to say for him-
self the King set him at liberty, on condition that
he was to preach again and retract certain points
which the King did not consider orthodox. ^
Appeals to the King in religious matters now
became common, and Henry prided himself on his
zeal in repressing heresy by his royal exhortations
and arguments, and by the punishments he inflicted.
Augustine de Augustinis, Wolsey's Italian physician,
told the Emperor in May 1531 that shortly before
he left England the King had spent the whole day
from 9 A.M. to 7 P.M. in examining a heretic.^ But
' Gairdner, Calemiar, v. p. 69. (Chapuys to Charles V., March 22,
1531-)
- Ibid., p. 132.
THE NEW DESPOTISM. 219
notwithstanding this zeal for orthodoxy, any opinion
in support of the royal divorce condoned a large
admixture of heresy. Thus Robert Barnes, an
Austin friar, who had thrown off his habit and
gone abroad, where he had associated with Luther
and other heretics, having expressed an opinion in
favour of the divorce, was earnestly solicited by
the King to return to England, where, though he
wore a secular habit, he lived unmolested for many
years.^ At last, however, when the divorce question
had been settled, he suffered at the stake. The
Pope, of course, complained of this usurpation of
a spiritual office. But his complaints were not
heeded.2
Gradually Henry went on to direct the adminis-
tration of the sacraments. In the following year
Latimer, afterwards Protestant bishop of Worcester,
having been excommunicated by Convocation twice
within a few weeks, appealed to the King. Henry
examined him, found him guilty of heresy, and
ordered him to confess his guilt, and promise amend-
ment, and on his obeying, he specially directed the
archbishop to absolve him.*
Henry also took on himself to instruct preachers
as to the doctrine they were to teach. It happened
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 273.
2 Ibid., p. 494. (Benet to Henry VIII., June 15, 1531.)
' Wilkins, Concilia, iii. pp. 747, 748.
220 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
one day in April 1531 a preacher in his presence
referred to the story of Constantine refusing to
judge a dispute between two bishops, because it
did not belong to a secular prince to judge spiritual
persons. Upon this, Henry opened the window
of his oratory, and ordered the preacher in a loud
voice not to tell such falsehoods. The speaker
answered respectfully, he did not think he was
telling falsehoods in relating what he could prove
from several histories. The King, however, losing
all patience, turned his back, and angrily left the
church.^ A general order having been issued for
preachers to support the divorce, one who ventured
to disobey was arrested and brought before the
Council. But on being examined, he answered
boldly that he was moved to do so by the truth,
the service of God, and the honour of the King.^
On the other hand, a preacher was allowed to
declare with impunity that the Pope was a heretic*
Even the religious orders were not exempted
from Henry's new jurisdiction. It was usual for
those orders whose superior lived abroad, to be
visited from time to time by an abbot, deputed
by their General Chapters. In July 1531 the
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. loi. (Chapuys to Charles V., April
29, 1531-)
- Ibid., p. 413. (Same to same, March 20, 1532.)
•• Ibid., p. 466. (Same to same. May 13, 1532.)
THE NEW DESPOTISM. 221
Abbot of Chailly came at the request of the English
Abbots and the Chapter-General of the Cistercian
Order, to visit their houses in England. But in
spite of the solicitations of the English monks,
supported by many excellent reasons, Henry per-
emptorily refused to allow anybody except himself
to meddle in the affairs of the kingdom, in which,
he said, he was King and Emperor as well as
Pope.i
The usurpation of spiritual functions was greatly
and significantly aggravated by the violation of the
personal dignity of the clergy to which Henry
proceeded. As the clergy were forbidden by the
laws of the Church to shed blood, any person in
Holy Orders who had committed a crime by which
he had incurred the penalty of death, was given
over to the secular power for execution. But if
the criminal was a priest, it was customary, out
of reverence to his priestly office, to degrade him
previously. With the view, however, of lowering
the reverence with which the clergy were regarded,
Henry took on himself to put priests to death,
without any such degradation, and apparently with-
out over scrupulousness as to the justice of his
sentences. In June 1531 he caused a priest to
be hanged without degradation on the charge of
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 168. (Chapuys to Charles V., July 31,
IS3I-)
222 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
clipping coin.^ In the July of the following year, a
young priest of honest and virtuous life was hanged
undegraded, on a similar charge, in spite of the
protest of his bishop and the intercession of Lord
Wiltshire. But at the very same time a French
innkeeper was pardoned for a similar offence.^
Books embodying Wyclif's opinions on Church
government, attacking the Pope's authority, or giving
the opinions of Universities and doctors in condem-
nation of various Popes, were circulated by the
King's orders in England and abroad.^
One of these books fell into the hand of Tunstall,
Bishop of Durham, apparently in the latter part
of this year.* He concluded that a separation of
the Church of England from the see of Rome was
contemplated, and he wrote to the King, earnestly
entreating him to consider the consequences of
schism. In answer, the King thanked him for
his warning, for he thought no man under such
great obligations to him as Tunstall could intend
evil against him. He then went on to defend his
position by arguments which overthrew all notion
^ Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 284. (Edward
Wotton to Reginald Pole, London, July 31, 1531.)
"^ Ibid., p. 342. (Letter from London to the Signory, July 10,
1532.) Cf. Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 514. (Chapuys to Granville,
July II, 1532.)
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 83, 134, 177, 189.
* The letter is not dated.
THE NEW DESPOTISM. 223
of a visible, infallible, and everlasting Church, or
even of a united Christendom. He denied not only
the supremacy of the Pope, but also the subordina-
tion of any one church to another, and even the
authority of general councils. Like WycUf, he
acknowledged no authority except that of Scripture,
as interpreted by particular churches, and conse-
quently, of course, by particular individuals. Like
Wyclif, too, he made obedience depend, not on the
authority given by God through the grace of His
sacraments, but on the spiritual state of individual
rulers. Hence he argued that it was not schism
to separate from obedience to Rome, considering
what it was, and how opposite were the lives of
Christ and of the Popes. The Pope, he declared,
had already separated from the most part of Chris-
tendom, but he himself would never separate from
the universal body of Christian men — a body, the
existence and limits of which, according to his
principles, it would be impossible to prove or define.^
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 387. (Henry VIII. to Tunstall (?).)
CHAPTER XX.
SEPARATION FROM KATHERINE.
As Henry was not yet prepared to come to an open
rupture with the Pope and the Emperor, he refrained
from making any change in his treatment of Kathe-
rine. She therefore kept her place at court up to
the middle of July 1531, and followed Henry in
his movements from one palace to another. They
dined together on festivals as was customary, and
he treated her in public with perfect courtesy
and respect, while her unfailing sweet smile and
unfailing patience were commented on as quite
supernatural.^
She was obliged, however, to submit to the pre-
sence of Anne, and was subject to constant petty
annoyances from her.^ The young Duchess of
Norfolk, who often sent her presents and secretly
conveyed letters to her, the young Marchioness of
Dorset, and other ladies, in whose society she found
comfort and consolation, were sent away from court
' Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. pp. 245, 246, 287, 37 1
^ Bts^er, Calendar, iv. pp. 3023, 3878.
224
SEPARATION FROM KATHERINE. 225
at Anne's request.'^ A stop was also put to the
visits of the gentlemen who were in the habit of
calling and telling the Queen what was going on,
while at the same time women, who acted as spies
and reported everything she said or did, were
placed about her.^ But Katherine, with her usual
dignity, passed over these insults unnoticed.
Henry, however, was not equally patient, and
daily his imperious temper fretted more and more
against the irksome restraints that these relations
implied.
At the same time Anne lost no opportunity of
irritating him, sometimes giving way to her temper
in abusive language, and at others loading him with
reproaches for her lost time and honour. Thus,
his position became almost unendurable, and at last
he resolved to take some decided step to release
himself.
In the beginning of April 1531, when Katherine
was with him at Greenwich, and the Princess Mary
had been left behind at Richmond, he happened
to be in an unusually good humour, praised the
Emperor highly, expressed great affection for Mary,
who had a slight attack of illness, and reproached
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. no. (Chapuys to Charles V., May
14, 1531.) Cf. Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iv., part I, pp.
600, 818.
" Gayangos, ut sup., p. 710. (Chapuys to Charles V., September
S. '53°-)
P
226 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
Katherine for not always keeping a physician with
her. Anne, who hated Mary even more than she
did Katherine, because the King was fond of her,
was very angry at his praising her, and conse-
quently the next day when Katherine, encouraged
by his former kindness, asked him to grant Mary's
request to pay them a visit, he rebuffed her rudely
and told her that " she might go and see the
Princess if she wished, and also stop there." But
Katherine only answered quietly, that "she would
not leave him for her daughter or any one else in
the world." i
At this moment Henry was in some trouble and
perplexity, because he had found out that Francis
was secretly negotiating a marriage between his
second son and the Pope's niece, and feared that
he would thus be deserted by his great ally.
Accordingly, in the beginning of June, when the
nuncio called on him by the Pope's order to ask
him to join in a crusade against the Turks, he gladly
seized the opportunity to pour out his complaints
against his Holiness. After bidding the Pope ask
help of those whom he had obliged, for he must
never expect it from him whose requests he had
never granted, he went on to declare that he would
never on any account consent to his cause being
judged by his Holiness. Then his temper rising
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 85, loi, no. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
SEPARATION FROM KATHBRINE. 227
as he spoke, he went so far as to say that the Pope
could only excommunicate him, for which he did
not care three straws. He added that when the
Pope had done what he liked at Rome, he would
do what he liked in England, and that, if the Pope
did him any injustice, he would be revenged, and,
with the help of the King of France, would march
to Rome. But at last checking himself, he added
that " the Pope himself was not a bad fellow, but
he did nothing except at the Emperor's will," and
as the nuncio seemed "a respectable man and in-
clined to be civil," he would give him a book, which
would make him clearly understand the justice of
his cause.i This book was no doubt one of those
which contained the opinions of the Universities
setting aside the Pope's authority, but without
alleging any reasons for so doing. 2
After the nuncio had departed the King remained
a long time in consultation with his Council, and it
was there agreed that the Queen was to be pressed
to allow the cause to be tried elsewhere than at
Rome. In the evening she was secretly informed of
the proposed application to her. She waited all next
day in expectation of a visit from the Council ; but
it was not till evening, when she was about to go
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 134. (Chapuys to Charles V., June 6,
1531-)
" Ibid., p. 177. (Campeggio to Salviati, August 8, 1531.)
228 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
to bed, that the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk, with
about thirty other nobles, accompanied by the
Bishops of London and Lincoln, and Drs. Lee,
Sampson, and Gardiner arrived. When they had
been ushered into her presence, the Duke of Norfolk
opened the conference by saying that they came
by order of the King, to complain that she had
caused great scandal, by having him cited by a
public crier to appear personally at Rome, and to
represent to her that the right way to bring this
business to a loving end, would be to have it
decided in some place, and by judges above sus-
picion, chosen by common consent. In the name
of his fellow peers he therefore entreated her to
consider, that otherwise she would be the cause
of the greatest trouble ever heard of in England,
and the ruin of themselves, their children, and their
whole posterity. He reminded her that she had
been better and more honourably treated than any
other Queen of England, and both her fatjier and
the Emperor were under great obligations to the
King. Finally, he recalled to her mind that the
King had lately been declared by the Parliament
and clergy of England to be entirely sovereign and
chief in his kingdom, over both the temporality and
spirituality.
The Duke had spoken so respectfully, that
Katherine could not do otherwise than respond.
SEPARATION FROM KATHERINE. 229
She expressed her sorrow for any wrong that had
been done to the King, especially if she was in
fault, though she could not believe her proctors
could have taken any unjust advantage of him.
She admitted her good treatment, for which she
was most grateful to the King, and acknowledged
his good offices to her father and the Emperor.
But as the King had had recourse to the Pope,
who held the place and power of God on earth,
she could not consent to choose any other judge.
It was no use to speak to her about it, for she
would never consent, not for any favour that she
expected from his Holiness, because he had always
shown himself most partial to the King, his favours
to whom she set forth, and she alone had cause
for complaint and regret. As to the title of Supreme
Head, the King was her sovereign, and she would
therefore serve and obey him. He was also sove-
reign in his realm as regards temporal jurisdiction.
But as to the spiritual, it was not pleasing to God
either that he should claim this power, or that she
should consent to it, for the Pope was the only
true sovereign and vicar of God, who had power to
judge of spiritual things, of which marriage was one.
Here Dr. Lee interrupted her, and in coarse and
insulting language, most distressing to a modest
woman, denounced her marriage. The Bishop of
Lincoln and Drs. Sampson and Gardiner followed
230 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
in the same strain. But she answered each of
them with such spirit and aptitude, fitting her un-
premeditated answers so perfectly to their several
reproaches and insults, that she silenced them, and
the Bishop of London, though urged to address her,
had not the courage to do so.
When the discussion was finished she said that
she was astonished that so many great personages,
who might well appal the world, should have come
thus to take her by surprise, when she was alone,
and without advisers. The Duke replied that she
had the best counsel in England, including the
Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of Durham
and Rochester, and others. She rejoined, they
were fine counsellors, for when she asked the
Archbishop for advice he said he could not meddle,
because "the anger of the Prince is death." The
Bishop of Durham said he dared not do so because
he was the King's subject and vassal. The Bishop
of Rochester told her to keep up her courage. The
rest made similar answers, so that she was obUged,
as they all knew, to send with the King's licence
for doctors from Flanders to draw up her appeal,
for at that time the King did not object to the cause
being tried in Rome. Hereupon Lord Wiltshire
replied, that the licence for this appeal did not
extend to citing the King personally. But she
answered, she had not procured the citation, and
SEPARATION FROM KATHBRINB. 231
if in pursuing the appeal the law required it, they
must not lay the blame on her. Finally the Duke
of Norfolk and Lord Wiltshire begged her to under-
stand that they were not the promoters of these
affairs, and they said only what they heard from
the doctors and lawyers. The most part of those
present, as Chapuys reported, had they been allowed
to speak their thoughts, would have taken the Queen's
side. Some said, they had worked hard, and coun-
selled long and devised fine plans, but they were
confounded and their plans turned topsy-turvy by a
mere woman. Sir Henry Guildford, the Controller,
said it would be the best deed in the world to tie all
the doctors who had invented this cause in a cart
and send them to Rome to maintain their opinion, or
meet with the confusion they deserved. The others
had already shown their satisfaction at the Queen's
answers by nudging each other when she touched
any strong point ; among these was to be found even
Gardiner, who had at first been so zealous to get the
divorce, but was now suspected by Anne of having
changed his opinion. It was said that the nobles
would have used stronger language to the Queen, if
Lord Talbot had not repeatedly reminded them, they
were almost all the nobility of England, and they
ought to act as became their rank, and not to think
or say any villainy or perversion of justice for any
person or prince in the world.
232 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
After leaving the Queen the nobles went to the
King, who was anxiously waiting to hear the result
of their visit. When they told him they had failed,
he said he was afraid it would be so, considering
the courage and strong feeling of the Queen, add-
ing very thoughtfully, it would now be necessary to
provide other remedies. After the Duke of Norfolk
had given his report of the proceedings to his own
taste, the Duke of Suffolk summed up the matter in
a few words, saying that "the Queen was ready
to obey the King in all things, but there were two
she must first obey." The King, thinking she meant
the Pope and the Emperor, asked quickly who these
two were. Suffolk answered, they were God and
her conscience, which she would not disobey for him
or any one else.''
When the particulars of Katherine's conference
with the nobles were reported at Rome her conduct
was highly appreciated by the Pope and cardinals.
They said it was evident the Holy Ghost had spoken
by her mouth, for she had answered as St. Catherine
had done in old times when the doctors came to
dispute with her, and that in justice to her virtue,
and for the glory of God, her answers ought to be
published.^
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 134-138. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
June 6, 1531.)
^ Ibid., p. 162. (Dr. Ortiz to Charles V., Rome, July 19, 1531.)
SEPARATION PROM KATHERINE. 233
The failure of this conference with Katherine
brought her relations with Henry to a crisis. The
next few months revealed what were the other
remedies to which he had referred on hearing the
report of the nobles whom he had sent to her.
Towards the end of June he went with Anne to
Windsor, and Katherine, as usual, followed them.^
On the 14th of July he went to Woodstock to hunt,
and Anne accompanied him, but Katherine was
forbidden to follow him, and ordered to remain at
Windsor.^ It was customary for the King and
Queen to visit each other at least every third day.
But as this was impossible under present circum-
stances, Katherine waited ten days, till the 25 th
of July, when she sent to inquire for him and
express her sorrow that she was not to follow him,
and had not even been allowed the consolation
of taking leave. In this, however, as in all his
other commands, she would be obedient and patient.
He answered by an angry message, saying that
he had no need to bid her adieu or give her that
consolation or any other, and still less that she
should visit him and inquire for him, because he
was angry with her for having brought him to shame
by having him cited to Rome, and refusing, like an
obstinate woman as she was, the reasonable request
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 144.
' Ibid., p. 161. (Chapuys to Charles V., July 17, 1531.)
234 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
of his Council and nobles, and henceforth she must
not send messengers to inquire for him. She wrote
to him expressing her sorrow that he should be
angry with her, and explaining that all she had done
had been done by his leave and for the honour of
both. He waited three days without noticing the
letter, and then answered roughly and upbraided her
for publishing the case to all the world. This letter
had no address, as if he meant to change her style,
and had not yet determined what title to give her.^
Her separation was the more distressing to Katherine
because it gave the King a better opportunity for
gaining the gentry in those districts through which
he passed, and inducing them to take his side in
Parliament.
Anne, on the other hand, was triumphant. She
said openly that she would be married within three
or four months. She engaged an armourer and
other officers for her household, and thus set about
preparing, by degrees, for her royal station. It was
generally feared that as the bishops had not dared
to stand out against making the King " Head of the
Church," they would not have courage to refuse to
give sentence on the marriage question according to
the King's wishes.^
In the middle of August, Katherine was ordered
to leave Windsor because the King was coming
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 167. ' Ibid., pp. 50, 161.
SEPARATION FROM KATHERINE. 235
there to hunt, and to go to the More, a house in
Hertfordshire belonging to the Abbey of St. Al-
bans, and to send the Princess Mary to Richmond.
Hitherto she had in great measure forgotten her
grief for the absence of the King in the enjoyment
of her daughter's society. But this separation from
her child was almost more than she could bear. She
knew that it was intended in order to make her con-
sent to the cause being tried in England. But great
as was her suflfering she stood firm in her resolves.
She objected, however, to go to the More as being
unhealthy, and one of the worst houses in England,
and she proposed several other places which would
be preferable, but the King refused to let her go
to any of them. She said she would write to the
King, that if this treatment continued she would be
happier as a prisoner in the Tower, for then she
would not suffer more than she did now, while her
misfortunes being notorious, every one would pray
God to give her patience and inspire the King to
treat her better.^
In the middle of October, Dr. Lee, now Arch-
bishop elect of York, Lord Sussex, Sir Wilham
Fitz- William, and Dr. Sampson, went by the King's
order to the Queen to beg her once more to let the
cause be decided by the English bishops. They used
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 204. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
September 10, 1531.)
236 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF A R AGON.
the same arguments as before, and she answered
them with the greatest sweetness and frankness,
but adhered to her former decision. After a length-
ened discussion they fell on their knees, and most
earnestly besought her to grant their petition.
Whereupon she also fell on her knees and prayed
them for the honour of God and His passion, and to
clear the King's conscience and her own, to remove
such a scandalous example from Christendom, and
persuade the King to return to her, as he knew she
was his wife, or if he had any scruple about doing
so, to let it be set at rest for ever at Rome. Most of
her attendants were present during this interview,
and though the King's envoys spoke in a low tone,
she wished every one to hear and understand what
was said, and there were few of them who did not
shed tears. Finally, the envoys said that the
King would give her the choice either to remain
where she was, or retire to a small house of his,
or to an Abbey. She answered that it was not
for her to choose, and wherever the King com-
manded her, were it even to the fire, she would
go.^ On the 27th October 1531 she went to the
More, where the King had ordered her to re-
side.'^ The Princess Mary had some time before
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 226. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
October 16, 1531.)
'^ Ibid., p. 238. (Same to same, November 4, 1531.)
SEPARATION FROM KATHERINE. 237
gone to Richmond, and Katherine never saw her
again.
On the 13th November, the King and Queen
dined with the Sergeants-at-law at Ely House.
But as they dined in two separate rooms, it is
probable that they did not meet. At all events,
from this time she never again met Henry.
On the following New Year's Day (1532), how-
ever, she made a last effort to touch his heart. It
was customary for the King and Queen to inter-
change New Year's gifts, and she therefore sent
him a gold cup through a gentleman of his chamber,
and being forbidden to write or send messages to
him, it was accompanied by only a few humble
and courteous words. But though he praised its
beauty, he refused it. Nor did he send as usual
New Year's gifts to her and her ladies, and he for-
bade the Lords of the Council and other courtiers
to do so. From Anne, on the other hand, he ac-
cepted richly ornamented darts of Biscayan fashion,
and in return he gave her hangings for a room of
cloth of gold and silver, and crimson satin with
rich embroidery. She now occupied the apart-
ment that had formerly been the Queen's, and
was attended by almost as many ladies as if she
were Queen.^ Henceforth, for above four years,
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 335. (Chapuys to Charles V., January 4,
15320
238 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
Katherine led a solitary life, publicly disgraced and
insulted, and cut off from her beloved, sole surviving
child and the husband whom she loved more than
herself, and whose image she could not tear from
her heart. In spite of the outrages she endured
from him, she continued to cherish her love for
him, deluding herself with the belief, that " he was
so good, that if she could but see and speak to
him, all that had happened would be as nothing,
and he would treat her better than ever." ^
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 479. (Chapuys to Charles V. , May (?),
1532-)
CHAPTER XXI.
USURPATION OF SPIRITUAL yURISDICTION
AND LEGISLATION.
The year 1532 opened at a critical juncture in the
King's great cause. When the Rota had decided
towards the close of the preceding year that the
Excusator could not be heard unless he brought
powers from Henry to act in his name, and the
Pope had warned Henry through the nuncio and
Benet that he would not be able much longer to
defer the sentence, Henry's ingenuity in devising
pretences for delay was called into play. He now
ordered Carne to demand a public disputation in
the Consistory on the decision of the Rota. The
Queen's proctors opposed this loss of time, but
the Pope and cardinals, foreseeing that in the end
sentence would have to be given against Henry,
wished to satisfy him as far as possible, so as
not to give him any just ground for complaint and
for refusing the trial at Rome.i The disputation
was therefore allowed, and it was appointed to
be held after Christmas. Carne then raised diffi-
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 262, 355, 357.
239
240 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
culties about the time being too short to get good
lawyers, who would require from four to six months
at least to study the case.^ But his objections were
overruled, and the disputation was fixed for the
beginning of February.
This critical juncture seemed to Henry the most
fitting moment for further legislative enactments,
which might serve to intimidate the Pope and pos-
sibly make him more pliant to his will.
Parliament met on January i6, 1532. Tun-
stall, being in disgrace for his recent letter to the
King, was not summoned. Nor was Fisher, whose
opinions and uncompromising character were well
known. He however came up to town, with the
intention of speaking his mind about the divorce.
On hearing of his arrival, the King sent to say that
he was glad of it and wished to speak to him ; but
Fisher, fearing that he might be forbidden to speak
in the Parliament, presented himself to the King
just as he was going to Mass, and though he was
well received, he left the church before Mass was
finished, so as to avoid all conversation.^
The first measure brought before Parliament was a
bill forbidding archbishops and bishops to make the
usual payments, called annates or first-fruits, to the
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 271. (Came to Benet, December 17,
1531.) Cf. p. 355. (Mai to Charles V., January 25, 1532.)
" Ibid., p. 351. (Chapuys to Charles V., January 22, 1532.)
SPIRITUAL JURISDICTION. 241
Pope for their bulls on their presentation to vacant
sees. It provided that if the Pope should refuse
to issue the bulls without the usual payments, the
bishop elect should be consecrated by the archbishop,
and the archbishop elect by two bishops appointed
by the King, and after such consecration the new
prelates were to enjoy all the rights of their sees.
And should the Pope issue any censure, it was not
to be published or obeyed, and the rites of the
Church were to be administered as usual. The bill
was introduced in the House of Lords. The bishops
wished to know the Pope's will, but not being allowed
to consult him they all voted against it. All the lay
Lords, except the Earl of Arundel, however, voted for
it, and thus it passed the Upper House, and went
down to the Commons, from whom it met with no
opposition. But as Henry's object was only to in-
timidate the Pope while the disputation was being
carried on, a clause was added allowing the bishops
for the present to pay for their bulls fees not
exceeding five per cent, of their yearly incomes,
and leaving it open to the King to declare hereafter
whether this bill should be annulled or become
law.-*^
In order, moreover, to make a stronger impression
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 392, 413. State Papers (ed. 1S49),
vii. pp. 349, 360. Burnet, History of the Reformation (ed. Pocock),
i. p. 198 ; iv. p. 162.
Q
242 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF A R AGON.
on the Pope, Henry told the nuncio that this bill
was brought in without his consent, and was really
the act of the people, who hated the Pope deeply,
and that if his Holiness would do something for him
he would thank him well, but otherwise he would do
nothing to disarm the popular hostihty.i The King
also ordered his ambassadors at Rome to tell the
Pope and cardinals that the bill was entirely the
act of Parliament, whose free deliberations he could
not control, but it depended on their treatment of
him whether it was acted on or no.^ The Duke of
Norfolk also wrote to Benet, that no Parliament in
his day had shown such ill-feeling to the Church as
the present one.^
In March it was proposed in Parliament that the
authority exercised by the archbishops over the
bishops should be transferred to the King. In the
course of the discussion the Earl of Wiltshire offered
to maintain with his body and goods, that neither
Pope nor prelate had a right to exercise jurisdiction
or make any law within the realm.* Nothing, how-
*ever, was done, and the discussion seems to have
been started only to prepare the way for a more
sweeping measure. In the introduction of this
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 392. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
February 28, 1532.)
2 Ibid., p. 415. (Henry VIII. to Benet, March 21, 1532.)
' Ibid., p. 392.
* Ibid., p. 404. (Chapuys to Charles V., March 6, 1532.)
SPIRITUAL JURISDICTION. 243
Henry displayed an extraordinary degree of cunning
and skill.
He was as usual in want of money. In the
preceding year, when he extracted the large sum
of money from the clergy on the grounds of their
prcemunire, he hoped to draw a similar sum from
the laity. But the Commons insisted that they had
not incurred a forfeiture, and that they ought to be
pardoned without any payment. The King refused
for some days to listen to them. Whereupon they
told the Council that the King had burdened his
kingdom with more exactions than any three or four
of his predecessors, they bade him remember that
his strength lay in the affections of his people, and
that other princes who had ill treated their subjects
had in consequence had much trouble. On hearing
what they said, Henry, who always dreaded unpopu-
larity with his subjects, at once granted their par-
don.^ In February of the year 1532 he had asked
them for the third part of the feudal property of all
deceased persons. But the demand called forth such
unwelcome remarks that he at once gave it up.^
Again in April he asked for an aid to fortify the
Scottish border. Upon this two members, with the
concurrence of almost all present in the House, said,
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 83. (Chapuys to Charles V., April 2,
IS3I-)
* Ibid., p. 380. (Same to same, February 14, 1532.)
244 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
that the fortification was needless, as the Scotch
could do nothing without foreign aid, and the best
fortification was to maintain justice in the kingdom
and peace with the Emperor, and that with this view
they should petition the King to take back his wife,
as the discord which the divorce cause was provok-
ing would ruin the kingdom. When the King heard
what was passing he sent for the principal members
and made a long speech in defence of the divorce,
telling them at the same time it was a matter in
which they ought not to interfere. Then craftily he
intimated he was ready to support them against the
Church, and to mitigate the rigours of the inquisi-
tion, which, he said, was more severe than that in
Spain. Having thus put them into good humour,
he easily obtained a fifteenth for the fortifications.
But they still refused to grant him the third of all
feudal inheritances.^
In fulfilment of his promise to the Commons,
Henry caused a petition, as if from them to him,
to be drawn up. Four drafts of this petition, cor-
rected for the most part by Cromwell, are still
to be seen in the Record Office. The substance
of the document was, that owing to the diffu-
sion of heretical books brought from abroad, and
want of lenity in some of the bishops in pro-
secutions in their courts, disunion, resulting in
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 461.
SPIRITUAL JURISDICTION. 245
violence on the one part, and want of patience
on the other, had arisen between the clergy and the
laity. Complaint was made that the clergy passed
laws inconsistent with the laws of the realm, that
poor men were cited out of their dioceses, often
without any accusers except their judges, that
fees in spiritual courts were excessive, and delays
about probates and other processes intolerable,
besides other minor grievances.''- This petition was
introduced into the House of Commons, probably
by Speaker Audley, who had corrected some of
the drafts. It was adopted by the members with-
out a suspicion of its origin, and was sent up to
the King. On receiving it, Henry answered that
he did not wish bishops to have power to lay
hands on persons accused of heresy, for it was
not their duty to meddle with bodies, as they were
only doctors of the soul.^ He sent it up to Con-
vocation, and commanded the clergy to promise
they would never hereafter enact or execute any
law without his consent, and as many of the exist-
ing spiritual constitutions were prejudicial to his
prerogative, and burdensome to his subjects, they
were directed to submit them all to sixteen of the
clergy and sixteen members of the two Houses
of Parliament chosen by him, and whatever they
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v., Preface, p. xix.
" Ibid., p. 467. (Chapu}^ to Charles V., May 13, 1532.)
246 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
should condemn would be annulled, and the rest
would continue in force only after receiving his
approval.
The clergy answered in a moderate and digni-
fied tone. They protested that there had been no
want of charity towards their children, as they
had prosecuted only heretics and evil-disposed per-
sons, as in duty bound, and they agreed with the
Commons in ascribing any want of unity to the
new opinions brought from abroad. As their laws,
and also those made by the most religious princes
and the nation, had been framed according to
Scripture and the decisions of the Church, which
were the true tests of all law and justice, it was
impossible that the two codes of law could differ.
They defended their jurisdiction and legislative
power from Holy Scripture, the Councils, and even
the King's own book against Luther, and insisted
that it was impossible for them to give up the
charge committed to them by God. They offered,
however, in consideration of the King's great wis-
dom, learning, and virtue, to promise never to pass
any law without his consent, and to expunge all
the existing laws displeasing to him. Gardiner
wrote a private letter enforcing these arguments,
and showing that were they to give up their powers
the gift would be fraught with no less danger to
the receiver than to the giver. Sir Thomas More
SPIRITUAL JURISDICTION. 247
also spoke strongly in the House of Lords in
support of the clergy. But the King would not
accept any compromise. It was not to any of
their existing laws, but to their power of making
laws at all without his authority, that he objected.
He further intimated that he did not wish any of
his subjects to swear fealty to the Pope or any
one but himself. The prelates answered, that their
oath to the Pope was legal, and not derogatory to
the royal authority. But the King was obstinate,
and would not listen to reason, and after a struggle
of several weeks the clergy gave way, and, on the
l6th of May 1532, formally presented to him the
submission which he demanded.^
The King was much irritated by the opposition
he had met with, especially from Gardiner, who
had also refused to preach in favour of the measure.
The bishop consequently absented himself from
court; but before many days had passed the King
was obliged to press him to return, because a
despatch had to be sent to Rome, and no one else
could write it so well as he.^
It was a significant proof of the feeling of good
and wise men, that on the very day the clergy
made their submission to the King, Sir Thomas
1 Wilkins, Concilia, iii. pp. 748, 755. Gairdner, Calendar, v.
pp. 467-479. Cf. Ibid., Preface, p. xix.
2 Ibid., p. 479. (Chapuys to Charles V., May 31, 1532.)
248 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
More, the first layman in England, resigned the
Chancellorship.! He had all along been dissatisfied
^with the King's policy, but he now foresaw what
was coming, and he retired in the hope that in the
bosom of his family at Chelsea the storm might
pass over his head. Though he incurred the
King's grave displeasure for his recent support of
the clergy, yet he knew his great worth, and most
reluctantly accepted his resignation.
A few days before the submission was tendered
the King sent for the Commons, and told them
that he foimd on inquiry that the prelates, whom
he had looked on as wholly his subjects, were only
half his subjects, for at their consecration they
took an oath to the Pope quite contrary to the
oath they had sworn to the crown, whence it
seemed they were the Pope's subjects rather than
his. He bade them take care that he was no
longer deprived of his rights. The two oaths
sworn by the clergy to the King and the Pope
were therefore read in the House of Commons.
But before any further action could be taken the
plague broke out in London, and Parliament was
prorogued.^
Thus every arrangement was now made for rivet-
ing the bonds of royal power on the ecclesiastical
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 489. Cf. Ibid., Preface, p. xxiii.
^ Ibid., Preface, p. xviii.
SPIRITUAL JURISDICTION. 249
body, and so at length enslaving the Church to
the kingly will. By his late skilful management
Henry had not only obtained money from the
Commons, who on this subject alone were generally
inexorable; but by exciting fresh enmity between
them and the clergy, he had disarmed the formid-
able opposition, which conjointly they would have
offered to the separation of England from Rome.
CHAPTER XXII.
DECISIVE ACTION IN ROME.
Meanwhile important steps had been taken at
Rome. Katherine's sufferings had always excited
great sympathy there, especially from the Pope,
who felt towards her as if he were her father.^
When it became known that she had been removed
twenty miles from court, it was generally acknow-
ledged that some notice must be taken of so open
an act of disobedience to the Holy See, and the
Spanish ambassador asked for a brief excommuni-
cating Henry, unless within a certain time he sent
Anne away and restored Katherine to her position
as his wife. But before taking so strong a step
the Pope wished for further information from the
nuncio.^ The nuncio accordingly went to Henry
and remonstrated about his treatment of the Queen.
Henry replied, that he had always treated her well
and loyally, and had not diminished her retinue or
income. She was his wife and was bound to obey
him. He had ordered her not to press the trial of
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 262. (Cardinal of Osma to Charles
v., December 4, 1531.) 2 Ibid., p. 169.
DECISIVE ACTION IN ROME. 251
the divorce suit at Rome. As she still persevered in
doing so, he had given her the choice of four places
in which to live apart from him. In this neither the
Pope nor the Emperor had any business to interfere,
for it was as lawful for him as for other husbands
to command his wife to live apart for a time.^ "^
As there was now no doubt about Henry's in-
tentions, the Pope ordered the brief threatening
him with excommunication to be drawn up and
submitted to the Cardinal of Ancona, whose opinion
had special weight. The Cardinal had always sup-
ported Katherine's cause with great courage and
consistency, and he now agreed that the brief ought
to be issued, though he feared that disobedience,
schism, and heresy would be the result, and then
no remedy would be left except war, which would
greatly hinder the necessary resistance of Christen-
dom to the Turks.^ These considerations and the
solicitations of the Cardinal de Tournon, one of the
French ambassadors, induced him to advise the Pope
to send to Henry in the first place a letter of admoni-
tion.^ The Pope therefore wrote as follows : —
" Most dear Son in Christ, — Health and the
Apostolic Blessing. We have been told, but our
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 335, 351. (Chapuys toCharles V. )
•' Ibid., p. 281.
' Ibid., p. 403. (Ortiz to the Empress, March 3, 1532.) Cf.
Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 397.
252 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OP ARAGON.
affection for you and care for your honour and
salvation would fain make us believe it is false,
that you, who ever since the beginning of the suit
about the validity of your marriage have always
treated our illustrious daughter Katherine as your
queen and wife, have recently sent her away from
your court and place of abode, and have taken in
her stead a certain Anne, with whom you are
living publicly as your wife. If this be true, we
do not doubt that even were we silent you must
see how unworthy of a religious prince, such as
you have always been, and how contrary to your
nature and habits, is this contempt shown to our
judgment-seat, this scandal in the Church, and this
disturbance of public peace by deciding for yourself
your own cause, which is now pending before us.
" Hitherto, no king has more zealously defended
the Church and the Faith by his arms and writ-
ings, or more firmly upheld and gloriously fought
for the public good and tranquillity, or been more
constantly the peacemaker between Christian
princes than you. We therefore feel the more
wonder and grief that you should act so incon-
sistently with the glory and custom of your whole
life.
"Your high rank, your former benefits conferred
on us, and our consequent affection for you, make
us wish to speak as a loving and anxious father
DECISIVE ACTION IN ROME. 253
before we assume the office of a judge. Speaking
therefore as a father, we earnestly entreat you to
consider how Catholics will grieve and heretics
rejoice when they hear, that without our permis-
sion, but on the contrary in spite of our prohibi-
tion, you have banished your queen, the daughter
of kings and aunt of the Emperor and King of
the Romans, who has lived with you as your wife
above twenty years, and by whom you have had
children, and have put another in her place. They
must necessarily believe that he who had formerly
been the best of princes, now makes light of the
Church and the public peace, which we are con-
vinced is so far from your will and intention, that
if any of your subjects had acted thus, you would
have punished him severely. And even, if you
know yourself to be innocent, as indeed we always
believe, you ought not to give cause for scandal
nor to set a bad example, especially in this calami-
tous time full of heresies and other disturbances;
for the deeds of princes, and above all of one
so illustrious as you, stand forth as an example
for the imitation of all men. Nor by offering this
insult and injury to the Emperor and the King
of the Romans, the nephews of Katherine, ought
you to imperil the general peace, by which alone
Christendom is saved from the imminent dangers
impending from the Turks.
254 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
"Wherefore, by that affection which we have
always felt, and if you will allow it, we still feel
for you, with all love and earnestness we exhort,
and with fatherly charity we warn you, if those
things which sully your former piety and glory be
true, to correct them and recall Queen Katherine
lovingly, and restore her to the honour as a queen,
and the affection as a wife, which she ought to
have from you, and to send away Anne, till our
sentence between you has been given. Which,
though it is due to us from you, and is greatly to
your future honour, we shall receive as a favour
from your Serenity. For as we greatly desire to
preserve your former goodwill to us and this Holy
See, the more should we grieve to have recourse
to the remedy of law, the necessity for which,
not your injury to ourselves, which we would
willingly forgive, but the honour of the Omnipo-
tent God, the pubhc good, and lastly the salvation
of your soul impose, however unwillingly, on us,
as our nuncio will explain more fully to your
Serenity.
"Given at Rome, before St. Peter, under the
ring of the Fisherman, 25th day of January 1532,
in the I2th year of our pontificate."^
This letter of admonition was sent to the Queen.
But as she did not think it prudent to make use
' Pocock, Records of the Reformation, ii. p. 166.
DECISIVE ACTION IN ROME. 255
of it at once, probably because Parliament was
sitting, and she feared, as she always did at such
times, that the King might bring the divorce
question before it, it was not delivered till the
13th of May.i
When the nuncio went to court to present it,
he had great difficulty in obtaining an audience,
for the King evidently feared he might be the
bearer of a brief of excommunication. He was
told to speak to the Duke of Norfolk; but he
refused to do so. At last, after waiting above an
hour, he was admitted. On seeing him, the King
said he did not know what the Pope could order
him to do. The nuncio explained the tenor of
the brief, and then gave it to the King. Henry
seemed astonished and troubled, and said he was
surprised the Pope should persevere in this fancy
of wishing him to recall the Queen, for if she was
his wife, as his Holiness said, it was not the Pope's
business to meddle in the way he punished her
for her daily rude behaviour to him. The nuncio
said the Pope could not refuse justice, especially
as the case concerned the Emperor and the King
of the Romans. But Henry only repeated several
times that the punishment of his wife was his
own affair and not that of any one else. He had
studied the Divine and Canon law on the subject
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 455, 475. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
256 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON
and had consulted many learned men, and he did
not know that the Pope could order him to do any-
thing. Finally, he said he would read the Pope's
letter at his leisure and answer it.^
The only answer given was one of open defiance.
As if braving the Pope's admonitions, the Queen
was removed to Bugden, which was even further
off from the court than where she had been. She
was annoyed at this removal, not only because the
house was very inferior to that at the More, but
because it belonged to Longland, Bishop of Lin-
coln, who was believed to be one of those who first
suggested the divorce.^ It needed now but a word
to change her rank and style.
This admonitory letter was not the only important
matter carried out at Rome. A decisive step was
also taken towards the conclusion of the cause. On
the 1 6th February 1533, the disputation before the
Consistory was opened. Carne began by bringing
forward twenty- five points, each of which was to be
argued for a day, and at the close of each day a
summary of the day's proceedings was to be drawn
up and presented to the opposite party and sent on
to the Pope. Thus the disputation would have
occupied twenty-five Consistories. The Queen's
proctors maintained that it would be enough to
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 475, 495.
^ Ibid., p. 476. (Chapuys to Charles V., May 22, 1532.)
DECISIVE ACTION IN ROME. 257
discuss the single point as to whether the excusator
was to be admitted or not, and the majority of the
cardinals supported them. The Pope, however,
decided in Carne's favour, with the exception that
three points were to be discussed at each Consis-
tory.^ But even under this arrangement the dis-
putation occupied many months. It was understood
that Carne had a mandate from Henry, but he put
off presenting it to gain time. At length, on the
1 2th June, he presented a letter from Henry which
he wished to use as a commission. It was in tone
scarcely more respectful than the preceding one,
but the question of its reception had to be dis-
cussed, and it thus answered Henry's present pur-
pose of causing delay. Finally, after the disputation
was concluded, Carne sought many private inter-
views with both the Pope and the cardinals, by
which he managed to drag on the matter till the
end of June.
Meanwhile the English ambassadors continued to
press on the Pope various proposals for removing
the trial to other places and other judges, which
were always favourable to Henry. It was under-
stood also that the Pope was to give a written
promise to pronounce sentence according to the de-
cision of the judge, or the majority of them if more
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 83.
2s8 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
than one were appointed.^ They pertinaciously sup-
ported Carne's claim to be heard, declaring that
"even if an angel should come from heaven and
show Henry it was not canonical he would not
believe him."^ All their arguments, too, were sup-
ported by threats and bribes, and by the repetition
over and over again of the same reasonings and
plans, with the deliberate intention of driving the
Pope at last, by sheer weariness, to grant their
request.*
In reporting these proceedings to Henry, they
were careful to place them in the light most pleas-
ing to him. If the Pope rejected their requests, he
was said to do so only under the Emperor's influ-
ence. If, on the contrary, he showed interest in
some suggestion of theirs, or in the opinion of some
learned man in Henry's favour, and still more, if
he professed his resolution to do all he could for
Henry or to do him justice, his words were reported
so as to make Henry think he had pledged himself
more or less positively in his favour. A similar
course was pursued with the cardinals, lawyers,
theologians, and all who were supposed to have any
influence in the matter, their doings and sayings
' State Papers (ed. 1849), vii. pp. 310-313. (Henry VIII. to
Benet, July 10, 1531.)
' Ibid., p. 300. (Benet to Henry VIII.)
3 Ibid., pp. 310, 311. (Henry to Benet, ut sup.)
DECISIVE ACTION IN ROME. 259
being twisted and exaggerated so as always to keep
up Henry's hopes of a favourable issue.
But notwithstanding all the efforts of both Came
and the ambassadors, the decision of the Consistory
was unfavourable. Even the cardinals of the French
party voted against them.^ On the 9th of July, they
were informed it had been decided to suspend the
cause till the beginning of November. Meanwhile
the Pope and cardinals would write to Henry ex-
horting him to send, before the expiration of that
time, a proctor to represent him in the principal
cause, which would then at once be proceeded with,
and whatever justice and equity required on their
part would be administered as favourably as possible
for him. Carne's claim to appear as excusator was
neither admitted nor refused, though it was tacitly
rejected by the demand for a proctor.^ Henry's
ambassadors expressed great disappointment. But
they were told they had been more favourably treated
than their adversaries, many of whom had pressed
in vain to have sentence pronounced at once for the
Queen. Great pains were taken to explain that a
proctor would, in fact, be the same as the excusator,
and that some upright man would be delegated to
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 517. (Sir Gregory Casale to Henry
VIII., July 1532.)
^ Pocock, Records of the Reformation, ii. p. 280. Of. Gairdner,
Calendar, v. pp. 513, 515.
26o DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
take evidence t'n partibus. As the decision must
rest with the Pope, even if permission were given to
try the cause elsewhere, Henry need not fear that,
were the Emperor himself present, justice would not
,- be done him.^ But justice was hardly what Henry
y wished for.
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 516, 517.
CHAPTER XXIII.
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND.
The Pope's admonitory letter, and the recent
decision of the Consistory, made it evident that
sentence would not be much longer deferred.
Henry's preparations to meet it were well nigh
completed, and there was only one subject which
still gave him anxiety. He was always keenly
sensitive to popular feeling, and speculations as to
how his subjects looked on his policy must often
have presented themselves to his mind. About the
answer to this question there could be no doubt.
In 1531, when the opinions of the Universities
in condemnation of successive Popes were read
in Parliament, the Lords had received them coldly,
and the Commons had listened in sullen silence.^
In February 1532, the Duke of , Norfolk made an
attempt to gain the Lords by appealing to their
loyalty, on which they and the whole nation had
prided themselves since the close of the civil war.
Assembling them for the purpose, he explained
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 84. (Chapuys to Charles V., April 2,
IS3I-)
262 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
to them how the King had been ill-treated by the
Pope in violation of the privileges of the realm,
and how, since many doctors held that marriage
belonged to the temporal and not to the spiritual
jurisdiction, the King's cause ought to be judged
before the King. Finally, he asked whether they
would not give their persons and goods to preserve
the royal rights. Lord Darcy, who was the first
to answer, said his person and goods were at
the King's disposal. But he had always heard
and read that marriage was a spiritual matter,
and belonged to the ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The
King and his Council, however, knew best what to
do. Most of those who were present expressed
similar opinions, and the Duke gained nothing
by his attempt to force their hand.^
The principal peers and their wives constantly
expressed sympathy with the Queen. The Duchess
of Norfolk always spoke so openly in her favour,
that in May 1531 she was sent away from court.
About the same time, the Duke of Norfolk, in
conversation with the Marquis of Dorset, said
that Queen Katherine's courage and equanimity
were almost supernatural. The Marquis answered
that her conscience must be well assured of the
justice of her cause. To which the Duke replied
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 381. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
February 14, 1532.)
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND. 263
that "it was the devil and nobody else who was
the inventor of this accursed dispute."^ In July
the Marquis was banished from court because
he was devoted to the Queen, and was charged
with the duty of superintending the musters in the
counties of the extreme West.* In September he
was arrested, and one of his principal servants
was sent to the Tower for trying to seduce his
boon companions and saying to them, they saw
how things were going, and his master must be
King.* There seems, however, to have been no
ground for suspecting the Marquis of treason. But
his servant's words show the popular feeling in the
matter.
The Earl of Shrewsbury, as well as his great
friend, Sir Thomas More, were strong supporters
of the Queen. The Earl, in virtue of his office at
court, had charge of the Queen's crown, and it was
generally said that since neither he nor any of his
house had ever incurred reproach, he would take care,
both for his own honour and his affection for her,
not to let it be put on the head of any one else.*
In April 1531 Sir Henry Guildford, the Con-
troller, Sir WiHiam Fitzwilliam, the Treasurer,
and the Duke of Suffolk spoke strongly and plainly
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 1 10. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
' Ibid., p. 161. ^ Ibid., p. 205.
* Ibid., p. 60. (Same to same.)
264 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
to the King in the Queen's favour.^ The Duke and
his wife Mary, Queen-Dowager of France, seized
every opportunity to display their enmity to Anne.
At first Mary had taken Katherine's part through
fear that her own marriage might be declared in-
valid, and now she was further irritated by being
obliged to give precedence to Anne in public.^
The Duke on his part made charges against
Anne's honour, to which she retorted by accusing
him of infamous crimes.^ Disputes between them
ran so high, that in April 1532 there was a fight
between the followers of the Dukes of Norfolk and
Suffolk, in consequence of some opprobrious lan-
guage used by the Duchess Mary to Anne, and
some of Suffolk's followers were killed.*
Sir Henry Guildford spoke so openly against
Anne that she threatened to deprive him of his
office when she became Queen. He replied, that
when that time came she would not have the
trouble, as he would give up the office himself
He then went to the King, and telling him what had
passed, gave up his staff of office, but the King
twice refused to receive it, declaring he ought not
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 100.
'' Gayangos, Spanish State Papers, iv., part I, p. 366. (Chapuys
to Charles V., December 13, 1529.)
' Ibid., p. 535. Cf. Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 161.
* Rawdon Brawn, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 332. (Letter from
London to the Signory, April 28, 1532.)
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND. 265
to trouble himself with what women said. He,
however, was so filled with disgust that he retired
for a time to his own house, though he retained
office till his death in the following year.^
Even the King's own agents had changed their
opinion. Benet, it will be remembered, had come
to England at the end of 1531, to warn the King
of the hopeless state of his affairs in Rome. Be-
fore he returned, he sent a message to the Queen,
begging her pardon for acting against her. He
had been, he said, and still was compelled so to
do, though she had no better servant than himself,
nor any one who prayed God more heartily for the
preservation of her royal estate, which he was
certain she would retain in spite of all the King
and his agents could do.^ Before he left Rome,
he had told the Pope that he was sorry that the
King was throwing the whole world into confusion
for a fancy, and he thought the Queen suited him
so well that if she were not already his wife, he
ought to marry her now.^
Gardiner, too, notwithstanding his former scanda-
lous treatment of the Pope, had changed his mind
about the great question. He now did all he could
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 138. (Chapuys to Charles V., June 6,
iS3«-)
- Ibid., p. 335. (Same to same, January 4, 1532.)
' Ibid., p. 393. (Mai to Cliarles V., February 29, 1532.)
266 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
to persuade the King to give up Anne and drop
the suit, which he could still do without loss of
honour.^ There was, moreover, a general im-
pression, in which Benet, Norfolk, and Gardiner
shared, that Henry did not love Anne as much
as formerly, and that he secretly wished to give
her up and retreat from the affair if he could do
so honourably. There certainly were grounds for
such a supposition, both in his frequent complaints
about her temper, and in his readiness to defer
the actual marriage. Her demeanour was daily
becoming more and more arrogant, not only to
the courtiers, but even to the King himself She
constantly spoke to Henry in a tone of authority,
and used language to him of which he several
times complained to the Duke of Norfolk, saying
that she was not like the Queen, who had never
in her life used ill words to him. Quarrels between
them at times rose so high, that the Duke was in
great tribulation, believing she would be the ruin
of all their family.^
Henry well knew that he could not rely on the
bishops to act in direct opposition to the Pope.
Fisher made no secret of his view as to the divorce,
and took advantage of every occasion to speak
against it. Tunstall, too, was so openly opposed
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 393. Cf. also pp. 479, 561.
^ Ibid., pp. loi, no. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND. 267
to the King's entire policy that Henry suspected
that he might be in treasonable correspondence
with the Emperor, and in May 1532 he ordered
the Earls of Westmoreland and Cumberland and
Sir Thomas Clifford to secretly search his houses
in the diocese of Durham in his absence.^ But
nothing treasonable was found in them.
There was however one, the loss of whose support
was a special grief to Henry. This was his cousin
Reginald Pole, son of the Countess of Salisbury,
the daughter of George, Duke of Clarence, brother
of Edward IV., and grand-daughter, through her
mother, of the Earl of Warwick, the celebrated
king-maker. She was lady-in-waiting to Katherine
during her marriage with Arthur, and had charge
of the Princess Mary from the time of her birth.
Reginald had thus grown up in the royal house-
hold, and the King became warmly attached to him
and took on himself the charge of his education.
He was sent first to the University of Padua, and
afterwards to that of Paris, where, by his high breed-
ing, scholarship, and consistent integrity, he kept
up the character of his nation, and laid the founda-
tion of a reputation which, in after years, caused
it to be said of him, copying St. Gregory's witti-
cism, that he was "Non Anglicus sed angelicus."^
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 459, 460.
^ Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, v. , Preface, pp. xi, xii.
268 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
Being in Paris in 1531, he was ordered by the
King to assist in obtaining the opinions of the
Universities in favour of the divorce. But as
his conscience recoiled from this charge he got
leave, on the pretence of his inexperience, to resign
it and return to England. Soon after, the Duke
of Norfolk told him that the King was about to
give him the archbishopric of York, which had
been vacant since Wolsey's death, but he would
first require of him some declaration of his opinion
on the great question. He told the Duke plainly,
that he disapproved of it, but by the Duke's advice
he asked a month to study. During this time his
brothers and other relatives spared no efforts to
bring him round to the opinion which would lead
to the gratification of their family ambition. After
a long struggle with himself, he fancied he had
discovered a line of argument by which he hoped to
satisfy Henry without wounding his own conscience.
He was received most graciously by Henry in the
gallery of York Palace. But as he was about to
explain the new view he had taken, and the argu-
ments in support of it, he suddenly forgot every
word of what he was about to say. Startled by
this unexpected loss of memory, he felt himself
bound to disclose his real opinions. Henry heard
him with a burst of fury, and interrupting him with
a volley of reproaches, turned on his heel and left
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND. 269
him in tears. His brothers then gathered round
Pole, complaining that by his obstinacy he had
ruined not only himself but them. Moved by their
complaints, he wrote to the King a letter expressing
his great sorrow that he was obliged to differ in
opinion from his benefactor. Repeating, with great
modesty, the arguments which obliged liim to do
so, he declared that his only motive was to save
the honour of the King.^ The letter was so much
to the point, that Cranmer, in a communication to
the Earl of Wiltshire, said that Pole wrote "with
such wit" that he might well be one of the King's
Council, and with such eloquence that, were his
letter known to the people, he believed they could
not be persuaded to the contrary opinion.^
The Duke of Norfolk now told Pole's brother,
Lord Montacute, that the King bore him such ill-
will for this letter, that it would certainly cause his
ruin. Pole answered that this was impossible if
he had read a// that he had written, because he had
opened his heart so sincerely and affectionately to
him, and he requested his brother to take an oppor-
tunity of explaining the circumstances to the King.
This Lord Montacute accordingly did. After remain-
ing silent for a long time, Henry answered, that he
' Pole, De Ecclesia Unitate Defeii., f. 78.
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 766. (Cranmer to the Earl of Wilt-
shire, June 13, 1531.)
270 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
had read the whole letter, and though he regretted
Pole's opinion, he could not be angry with him,
because of the sincerity and love to himself with
which it was expressed.^ In the hope that he might
yet be induced to change his opinion, Henry kept
him in England. But in January 1532, when the bill
abolishing annates was about to be brought before
Parliament, Pole, having told the King that if he
remained in England he must attend Parliament
and speak according to his conscience, on both this
and the divorce,^ he gave him leave to go abroad,
and continued his allowance to him.
The feeling throughout the nation was the same
as that of the nobles. It was feared that the Pope
would declare the King a schismatic, and deprive
him of the kingdom of England or at least of his
claim to that of France, and thus put an end to the
French pensions, on which the payment of his debts
to his subjects depended.^
It was generally said that the King was governed
by a common prostitute, who would cause both
the spirituality and temporality to be beggared.*
Whenever Anne appeared in public she was
assailed with the most abusive epithets. On One
' Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, v. p. 244. (Pole to
Somerset, 1549.)
" Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 351.
» Ibid., p. 50. * Ibid., p. 425.
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND. 271
occasion, when she was supping at a place on the
river, unaccompanied by Henry, a mob of women
assembled in boats with the intention of killing her.
But having been warned of their approach, she
escaped by hastily crossing the stream.^
In July 1532 the King set out with Anne on a
hunting expedition to the North. But wherever he
passed the people insulted Anne, and urged him to
take back the Queen. At Yarmouth, so formidable
a mob of women assembled with the connivance of
their husbands, and made such a riot, that she was
frightened, and persuaded Henry to turn back.^
In March 1532 the clergy throughout the
country were ordered to preach in favour of the
divorce. The experiment was first made in the
diocese of Salisbury, but the people, and especially
the women, were so infuriated that the preacher
would have been torn to pieces if the magistrates
had not come to his rescue.^ In the following May,
^ Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 304. (Advices
received by French ambassador in Venice, November 24, 1531.)
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 526. (Chapuys to Charles V., July 29,
1532.) Cf. p. 530, No. 45, and Preface, p. xxv. "What, indeed,"
writes Mr. Gairdner, "could be thought of the favourite who accom-
panied the King from place to place after he had finally parted from
his wife, when he had not yet obtained a divorce? It was simply
impossible that she should, now at least, be credited with that
' purity of life,' that ' maidenly pudicity,' which Wolsey had in-
sisted on, some years before, as grounds for obtaining the Pope's
sanction to her marriage with the King."
' Ibid., p. 413. (Chapuys to Charles V., March 20, 1532.)
272 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
at a sermon in St. Paul's on the same subject, a
woman stood up and told the preacher he lied, and
that the King's example would be the destruction
of the laws of matrimony. She was arrested, as
were also some of the clergy who had preached
in favour of the Queen a few days before. ' But
in spite of arrests and punishments, sermons in
favour of the Queen continued, some of the delin-
quents being arrested even in the houses of the
bishops.
The popular feeling found its way into the
King's palace, and it was thought necessary to
make serious inquiries into trifles which would
otherwise have seemed unimportant. One of the
court fools was taught a particular trick of falling
off his horse backwards, when he would remark
that the King would have a fall shortly. This
saying was noised abroad, and added to the general
feeling that a great misfortune was coming on the
land. The Prior of the Crutched Friars took notice
of it, and exhorted his brethren to stand firm and
true to their religion in the days of trial that were
at hand, for he had been told that the King was
determined to put down certain religious houses,
in which case he would be, not Defensor, but
Destructor Fidei.^
' Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. p. 335.
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 531. Cf. Preface, p. xxv.
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND. 273
The first step towards the dissolution of reli-
gious houses had indeed already been taken. On
Sir Thomas More's resignation of the Chancel-
lorship, the Great Seal was given to Sir Thomas
Audley, who was unable, through poverty, to
keep up the office. The King therefore gave him
the estates, convent, church, and rents of the
Canons Regular of Christ Church, London. It
was supposed that the canons were sufficiently
provided for by being dispersed in other houses of
the order. But the prior wrote several piteous
letters to Cromwell, praying that after having given
up his bedding, clothes, and the furniture of his
cell, he might not be kept in prison for the debts
of the house.^ Lichefeld, one of the canons, also
wrote to Cromwell, contrasting, in touching terms,
the former peaceful and happy condition of their
house, entirely devoted to religion, with his pre-
sent distress, as an outcast and despised of men.
For, being one of the last of the community, he
was refused admittance into the other houses to
which he applied, and after his religious train-
ing he could not maintain himself in any other
way.^
Popular feeling in favour of the Queen was
fostered by the Franciscan friars, who were con-
stantly travelhng about the country, preaching,
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 721, 722. - Ibid., p. 724.
S
274 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
hearing confessions, and encouraging devotion.
They were much attached to the Queen, not only
on account of her great virtue, but because she
was a tertiary of their order. She wore their
habit under her royal robe, kept the fasts and rule
of the order, and when the court was at Greenwich,
joined the friars in saying the Office not only
by day but at night. Their zeal on behalf of the
Queen had long irritated Henry. In 1532, how-
ever, he wrote to their general requesting him, for
the sake of peace and good feeling between him
and the Observants, to depose the English Provin-
cial, Friar Peto, and send a certain Friar John,
whom he knew and liked, to be his Commissary
and Provincial in England. The general answered
that he could not send Friar John because the
Queen of Hungary would not part with him, and
that he had not the power to depose or appoint
provincials, who were always elected by their
brethren. But he would send Friar John de la
Haye to England as his commissary. ^
It happened that on Easter Sunday of this year
Father Peto was preaching on the twenty-second
chapter of the third book of Kings, before Henry
at Greenwich. As he narrated the history of Ahab,
he applied to the King the prophet's threat, "where
the dogs licked the blood of Naboth there shall they
' Gairdner, Calettdar, v. pp. 342, 619.
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND. 275
lick thine, even thine." He tried to persuade him
to separate from Anne, and added, " I am that
Micheas whom thou wilt hate because I must tell
thee truly that this marriage is unlawful. I know
that I shall eat the bread of affliction and drink the
water of sorrow, yet because our Lord hath put it
into my mouth I must speak it. There are many
other preachers, yea too many, who preach and
persuade thee otherwise, feeding thy folly and frail
affections for the sake of their own worldly promo-
tion, and thus betraying thy soul, thy honour, and
thy posterity to obtain rich benefices and ecclesi-
astical dignities. These, I say, are the four hun-
dred prophets who in the spirit of lying seek to
deceive thee. But take good heed lest, being
seduced, thou find Ahab's punishment, and have
thy blood licked up by the dogs. It is one of the
greatest miseries of princes to be daily abused by
flatterers."
The King bore the reprimand quietly, but after
the sermon he sent for Peto and reproved him for
what he had said. Peto, however, far from being
abashed, answered boldly that his Majesty was en-
dangering his crown, for every one, great and small,
was murmuring against the divorce and his intended
marriage. The King then gave him leave to go to
Toulouse to attend a Chapter of the order, but .
Peto's secret motive for wishing to go was to get
276 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
a book he had written in defence of the Queen's
marriage printed.
During his absence, Dr. Curwen, one of the King's
chaplains, preached before the King at Greenwich.
In his sermon he spoke violently against Friar Peto,
calling him dog, slanderer, base beggarly friar,
rebel, and traitor, and saying no subject ought to
speak so audaciously to princes, and much more to
the same effect, and in praise of the King's marriage,
whereby his seed he foretold would be for ever
established on the throne. Finally he raised his
voice and cried out: "I speak to thee, Peto, who
makest thyself Micheas that thou mayest speak evil
of kings, but art not now to be found, being fled
for fear and shame at being unable to answer my
arguments." Whereupon Friar Elstowe, warden of
Greenwich, cried aloud from the rood loft, " Good
sir, thou knowest that Friar Peto is now gone to a
Chapter at Toulouse, and not fled from fear of thee,
and he will soon return. Meanwhile I am here as
another Micheas, and I will lay down my life to
prove all that he has taught out of the Holy Scrip-
tures. To this combat I challenge thee before God
and all impartial judges, even thee, Curwen, who
art one of the four hundred prophets into whom
the spirit of lying is entered, more for thine own
vain glory and hope of promotion than for the dis-
charge of thy clogged conscience and the King's
POPULAR FEELING IN ENGLAND. 277
salvation." Thus Elstowe waxed hot and spoke
very earnestly, and they could not stop him till
the King himself bade him hold his peace.^
Soon after Peto returned, and the bishops by
the King's command told him that he ought to
degrade Elstowe. But he positively refused to do
so. Consequently, on the i Jth April, he and Elstowe
were summoned before the King and his Council.
While they were waiting for the opening of the
Council, Peto, after keeping silence for a long time,
said, as if in colloquy with himself to rouse his
courage : " Speak, brother. I dare not. Wherefore
art thou afraid ? I fear the King. Indeed ! And
art not thou rather filled with horror and terror at
the thought of God the Omnipotent King of kings ?
Whether it is right to fear a man rather than God,
judge thou thyself, O king." Thus he continued
till the Council assembled.
Undaunted by the reprimands of the Council,
■ Peto defended his sermon. Cromwell, now made
Earl of Essex, said that he and Elstowe deserved
to be put into a sack and thrown into the Thames.
Whereupon Elstowe, smiling, answered, " My Lord,
frighten with such threats your court epicures, men
who have lost their courage in their palates, and
softened their minds with pomp and pleasure. Such
people, who are tied by their senses to the world,
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 441.
278 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
are likely to yield to your menaces, but they make
no impression on us. We count it an honour to
suffer for our duty, and thank God for keeping us
firm under trial. As for your Thames, the road to
heaven is as near by water as by land, and it is
indifferent to us which way we go thither." After
they had been severely reproved by the Council,
they were committed to prison. Their courage,
however, was not shaken, and they declared to the
Spanish ambassador they would die rather than
recant.^
The King now wrote to Rome to obtain a commis-
sion for them to be tried by the Provincial of the
Augustinian Hermits, who was quite subservient to
his will. But as this commission would have been
an insult to the whole order, the Pope refused to
give it.^
Their imprisonment, however, did not crush the
spirit of the order. Father Curson, who was ap-
pointed Vicar of the Convent at Greenwich during
Elstowe's absence, took every opportunity of defend-
ing him, and was careful that he should be supplied
with every necessary in the Convent of Bedford, in
which he was confined. He also encouraged Father
Robinson, a friar of Richmond, to preach at St.
Paul's Cross on the divorce and justify the Queen's
marriage. In consequence of their zeal and activity
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 441. " Ibid., p. 462.
POPULAR PEELING IN ENGLAND. 279
the King applied to John de la Haye, the com-
missary, to deprive them of their offices. But the
commissary wrote that he had not the authority to
do so. He took the opportunity, however, to beg
that Peto and Elstowe might be set at liberty. 1
They now went to Antwerp, where they were
under the Emperor's protection. But even here
they were closely watched by Stephen Vaughan, a
spy of Cromwell. He sent home reports accusing
them and their brethren in England of circulating
treasonable works and conspiring against the King's
life, and he recommended Henry to look well about
him, thus keeping up his irritation against their
order. He also found in Peto's possession, copies
of Sir Thomas More's book against Tyndale and
Frith, and a book in favour of the Queen written by
Fisher, and lent by him to the Spaniards, who, un-
known to him, made a copy which was printed at
Antwerp, and was to be circulated in England. It
appeared to be Cromwell's object to implicate Fisher
and More in the pretended treasonable practices of
the Observants."
1 Gairdner, Calendar, pp. 112, 509, 531, 581.
2 State Papers (1849), vii. pp. 489-492. For the history of Friars
Peto and Elstowe, and of the King's treatment of the Observant
friars, see Gasquet, Henry VIII. and the English Monasteries, i.
chapter v.
CHAPTER XXIV.
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS.
It was evident in July 1532 that the crisis was at
hand. Henry must therefore at once decide how
he would meet it. He had been admonished, under
pain of excommunication, to send away Anne and
take back the Queen. I e had been peremptorily
cited to appear by proxy in November before the
Pope's tribunal, failing which, sentence would be
given against him in his absence. If he obeyed
either the admonition or the citation his newly won
ecclesiastical supremacy and jurisdiction, the civil
despotism to be hereafter founded on them, and
the golden vision of all the Church's wealth which
floated before him, would vanish. It need scarcely
be said that he determined to defy both excom-
munication and Papal sentence, and resolved, as the
only means of attaining his end, upon the breach
with Rome.
When told on July 9th of the Pope's contemplated
action against him, he flew into a rage and said
publicly, the Pope had no power over him, and that
280
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS. 281
he would not allow him to treat him as he had
hitherto done. He at once ordered preparations to
be made for his marriage with Anne, and announced
his determination to celebrate it in the most solemn
manner.! A few weeks afterwards, when the
nuncio presented to him the Pope's letter written in
Consistory, he again flew into a passion as usual,
and said that " if the Pope irritated him he would
open the eyes of other princes, who were not so
learned as he was, and did not know that the real
power of the Pope was very small compared to that
which he had tyrannically usurped," backing up his
words with his customary threats.^
But even in his most violent bursts of passion his
habitual prudence never deserted him. Excom-
munication he well knew would be the consequence
of the step he was about to take. He doubted not
that, as in times past, his subjects would be absolved
from their allegiance to him, and some Catholic
prince would be appointed to carry out the Pope's
sentence and take possession of his kingdom.
Against this danger he must be forearmed. The
Emperor was so fully occupied with the Lutherans
of Germany, and his heroic defence of Christendom
against the Turks, that it would not be possible for
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 526. (Chapuys to Charles V., July 29,
1532')
' Ibid., p. 562. (Same to same, September 5, 1532.)
282 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OP ARAGON.
him to espouse the Pope's cause. Francis, the
French king, however, he knew was not to be
depended on when his own interest was in question.
As he was, moreover, at this moment negotiating a
very advantageous marriage for his second son with
the Pope's niece, it was by no means impossible,
that notwithstanding his constant warm professions
of friendship, he might be tempted to take up arms,
against him. To guard against this contingency he
proposed that an interview between himself and
Francis, which had long been talked of, should take
place in October at Calais.^
Yet another difficulty had to be removed. Ever
since the Pope's prohibition to the English clergy to
celebrate a second marriage between the King and
Anne or any other woman, Warham had positively
refused to disobey his Holiness. Dr. Edward Lee,
who had been made Archbishop of York instead of
Pole, on the understanding that he would celebrate
the marriage, changed his mind after his consecration
and now refused to do so.^ Longland, Bishop of
Lincoln, tried to persuade Warham to celebrate it,
but the latter answered, that the King had come
in person to persuade him to comply, but on no
consideration whatever would he disobey the Pope.*
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 521. (Dii Bellay to Montmorency,
July 21, 1532.)
2 Ibid., vi. p. 83. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
' Ibid., V. p. 21. (Same to same, January 13, 1532.)
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS. 283
The Duke of Norfolk and the Earl of Wiltshire used
every effort to bribe him or entangle him in some
way or other into compliance. But he had been
warned of their intention, and, being, on his guard,
they failed.! In despair of gaining their point by
fair means, the adoption of violence was discussed,
and Cromwell said plainly that Warham "ought
to be hanged up so high that he could bless the
world with his heels." ^
Henry, however, was not yet prepared for this
extremity. He preferred another course, character-
istic of his notions of law and justice. The doomed
archbishop seems to have been accused of having
incurred a prcsmunire fifteen years before by con-
secrating Henry Standish, Bishop of St. Asaph,
before he had presented his bulls to the King, and
done homage for the temporalities. Warham drew
up a very able speech to be delivered before the
Lords in his defence. He denied that archbishops
had ever been bound to defer consecration till the
bishop elect had exhibited his bulls to the King.
This very point, indeed, was one of the articles
which Henry H. had tried in vain to extort from St.
Thomas, and which Henry II. himself had after-
wards given up. Warham declared he would rather
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 381. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
February 14, 1532.)
2 Harpsfield, The Pretended Divorce, p. 178.
284 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
be hewn in pieces than allow this article, which
St. Thomas had rejected, to be a prcBmunire. Nor
would he give sureties for his personal appearance,
as neither St. Thomas nor any other Archbishop
of Canterbury had ever been compelled to do so.
He also reminded the Lords of what had befallen
those who drew their swords on St. Thomas, and
declared that whoever laid hands on a bishop and
imprisoned him, was accursed and could be absolved
only by the Pope, except in articulo mortis, and
that the diocese in which a bishop was imprisoned
and the two dioceses next adjoining were under
an interdict.^
Warham, however, was never called on to deliver
this defence. Its preparation was his last act. He
was eighty years of age, and on 24th August 1532
he expired. His place was quickly filled by a man
of another mind.
Thomas Cranmer was tlie son of a Nottingham-
shire gentleman. He was a fellow of Jesus College,
Cambridge, but vacated his fellowship by marrying.
This, however, did not disqualify him from being
a lecturer, which office he held in Buckingham
College, now called Magdalen College. His wife
dying within a year of his marriage, he was able,
according to the custom in such cases, to retain
his fellowship.
1 Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 541. (Draft of the speech.)
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS. 285
Some years after this, he happened to meet at
Wahham, Gardiner, who was in attendance on
the King, and was returning with him from the
progress during which Henry had had his last
meeting with Wolsey. Their conversation natur-
ally turned on the divorce, and Cranmer said that
the King, instead of carrying on a long and fruit-
less negotiation at Rome, ought to consult the
Universities and most learned men of Christendom.
If they approved of his marriage with Katherine,
his conscience would be free. But if they con-
demned it, the Pope could scarcely resist the united
voice of Christendom. Should he, however, do
so, the King ought to act upon the opinion of the
Universities in spite of the Pope's displeasure.
When this advice was brought to the King's notice
he at once sent for Cranmer, who from this time
stood high in his favour.^ He became chaplain
to Anne's father, the Earl of Wiltshire, and accom-
panied him on his embassy to the Pope at Bologna.
^ The haste of the King is remarkable. Usually he was not in
any hurry to fill up vacant sees ; but within >• month of Warham's
death Cranmer had been sent for "in post that I should come
over," as the archbishop subsequently said at his examination before
Broke (Cranmer's Works, ed. Parker Society, ii. p. 216). That
there was probably some bargain seems to have been the common
belief, to which Broke at this examination gave expression (ibid., p.
217). Sander (The Anglican Schism, ed. Lewis, p. 87) says that the
archbishopric was first offered to Reginald Pole, on condition that
he would " further the divorce with all his might." Pole, however,
refused.
286 DIVORCE OP KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
He was also employed to get the opinions of the
Universities. At the time of Warham's death he
was ambassador at the Emperor's court. In the
course of his journeys he had contracted, not-
withstanding his priestly vows, a so-called marriage
with the niece of his friend the Lutheran pastor
of Nuremberg, Osiander.i But he was chiefly re-
markable for the versatility with which he became
the tool of all who were in power, and was now
designated, at a bound, to fill the highest dignity
of the English Church, and to become, after the
King, the greatest person in England.
Many months, however, must elapse before
Cranmer could receive his bulls from Rome, and
be consecrated, and meanwhile the proceedings
before the Pope might have been concluded. Henry
therefore conceived the idea of being married to
Anne at Calais before Francis, thinking by this
means to silence the public voice, both of his
own subjects and of Europe. A hint was given
' The fact of Cranmer's marriage presents two difficulties. The
law of the Church and also of England not only forbade clergy to
marry ; but disqualified any man who, however lawfully, had been
twice married from being ordained priest or consecrated bishop.
Cranmer, in submitting to consecration, must have known the risks
he ran in thus deliberately violating the law. Nor can it be sup-
posed that Henry was ignorant of the fact that the archbishop had
thus put himself in danger of the law. It seems not improbable,
therefore, that Cranmer, having put himself into the King's power,
Henry determined to use him to further his ends. Cf. Stevenson,
Cranmer and Anne Boley7i, pp. 12-15.
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS. 287
to the French ambassador that an invitation from
Francis for Anne to accompany Henry to Calais
would be very acceptable, and that the Queen of
Navarre, and some ladies of the court, might
accompany Francis to Boulogne. The invitation
from Francis accordingly came.^
In anticipation of this visit Anne was created,
on the 1st September, Marchioness of Pembroke,
with an annuity of ;^iooo, and lands of the
same value, which were settled on her and her
male heirs, whether legitimate or illegitimate. This
peculiar clause evidently seems to point to the pos-
sibility, even at this late date, of Henry's never
marrying her, or of his hereafter finding it con-
venient to disown the marriage.^ Preparations for
the visit to Calais were made on a magnificent
scale. Henry was fully engrossed in them, and
talked of nothing else. Not content with giving
Anne his own jewels, he sent the Duke of Norfolk
to bon-ow the Queen's. Katherine answered that
she could not send her jewels or anything else to
him, as the King had forbidden her to part with
them; it was, moreover, against her conscience
to give her jewels to adorn a person who was
the scandal of Christendom, and a disgrace to the
King. But if the King sent expressly to ask for
' Gairdner, Calendar, v. pp. 521, 571.
' Lingard, History of England, 3rd ed., vi. p. 250.
288 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
them, she would obey him in this as in other things.
The King took her at her word, and sent for them
by a gentleman of his chamber, who had letters
also to her chancellor and her chamberlain. i They
were given to him at once, and were never returned
to the Queen. ^
Anne made no secret of the fact that she ex-
pected to be married at Calais. People, however,
were unwilling to believe that the King would
really marry a person of her damaged character,
and a report was spread that the King had made
the settlement of lands on Anne because he was
going to send her away, and to marry the Princess
Magdalen, daughter of Francis, at Calais.^ The
expedition was most unpopular among all classes.
The Council, and especially the Duke of Suffolk,
spoke so plainly to the King that he insulted the
Duke several times. The nobles who were obliged
to accompany Henry did so most unwillingly, and
the people talked of it savagely.*
The King sailed from Dover to Calais on nth
October 1532. On Monday 21st, the two mon-
archs met at Sandyngfelde, between Calais and
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 591. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
October i, 1532.)
" Ibid., vi. pp. 66, 180.
5 Ibid., V. p. 545. (Chapuys to Charles V., August 26, 1532.) C£
p. 616.
« Ibid., pp. 546, 563.
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS. 289
Boulogne, and went together to Boulogne, where
Henry was the guest of the French king till the
following Friday. On that day they both came to
Calais, and Francis was Henry's guest till Tuesday
the 29th. All the arrangements were splendid, and
the interview seemed to have passed off successfully.^
But Henry's hopes were disappointed on the main
business on which he had set his heart.
The Queen of Navarre and the ladies of the
French court had too much self-respect to meet
Anne, and the slight was the more pointed be-
cause the Queen had formerly known her. She
had, however, the consolation of being attended by
twenty maids of honour, of being dressed like a
queen, and of being accompanied by the King to
Mass as if she really was his wife.^ But only on
the last evening of Francis' visit to Calais did she
take any real part in the festivities. After supper, at
the head of a number of English ladies, all of them
masked, she danced into the hall where the kings
were sitting. Francis joined the dance, choosing
her for his partner, and after a time they took
off their masks and the dancing continued for an
hour longer. The following morning Francis sent
her by the Provost of Paris a diamond worth
15,000 or 16,000 crowns.
' Gairdner, Calendar^ p. 623.
^ Rawdon Brown, Venetian State Papers, iv. pp. 361, 365.
T
290 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
The French king, however, would not allow the
marriage to take place in his presence. For though
he was willing to dance and amuse himself with
Anne, he was not prepared to insult the Emperor
and his own wife by putting her in their aunt's
place as queen, or to outrage the Cathohc spirit of
his own subjects by defying the Pope.^
He also refused to join Henry in throwing off
the authority of the Pope. But he spared no effort
to reconcile Henry with his Holiness. He had
already asked the hand of the Pope's niece for his
second son, in order to prevent her marrying the
King of Scotland, or any Italian prince who was
in alliance with the Emperor, though he pretended
he would rather burn his son than give him to
one of such low birth, were it not to advance
Henry's cause.^ It was now agreed between him
and Henry that the negotiation for the marriage
should be proceeded with in earnest, and that his
Holiness should be invited to come to France to con-
clude it. Henry, on his part, promised that he would
either join them in person or send the first noble-
man of his kingdom to represent him, and meanwhile,
that he would not take any further step which might
widen the breach between him and the Pope.*
' Gairdner, Calendar, v., Preface, p. xxviii.
" State Papers (ed. 1849), vii. p. 276.
■* Gairdner, ui sup., vi. p. 569, 6,39.
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS. 291
Henry intended to return home so as to be at
Canterbury on November the 8th ; but the weather
was stormy, and he was detained at Calais till the
14th, on which day he crossed to Dover. The
news of his arrival reached London on the follow-
ing day. As great anxiety had been felt for his
safety, and many prayers had been offered for
him,^ a " Te Deum " was sung at St. Paul's on
the 1 6th, in presence of the Council and the Lord
Mayor. The King stayed a few days in Dover
and the neighbourhood, under pretence of a con-
sultation about the construction of the harbours;
but really, as was said at the time, to have an
excuse for extorting money for the expenses of his
late journey. As the plague was now in London,
he loitered on the way thither, and reached Eltham
only on the 24th, and Greenwich on the 26th of
November.
Meanwhile the Pope had sent Gregory Casale
to England to request Henry to send a proxy to
his ambassadors, and to leave Anne, and restore
the Queen to her position. He had heard that
the Parliament would meet in October and was
likely to pass bills throwing off his authority. He
therefore wrote to the King admonishing him not
to take such a step, and also to the prelates, order-
ing them to refuse their consent.^
^ Gairdner, ni sup., v. p. 652. " Ibid., pp. 561, 573.
292 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
Notwithstanding this, when the vacation expired,
and the cause was reopened in the Rota, no proxy
from Henry had arrived. His ambassadors made
various excuses to waste time, but the Pope
insisted that the cause must go on.^ He confirmed
by a papal decree the decision of the Consistory
against the admission of the excusator. But he
refused to give sentence on the principal cause, in
default of Henry's appearance in person or by
proxy, because, knowing that schism would in-
fallibly be the result of this final and irrevocable
step, he wished before he took it, to make a last
effort to touch Henry's conscience, by pubhshing
the formal admonitory Brief, with conditional ex-
communication, of which he had given him warning
in his private admonition some months earlier.
Moreover, as Henry had decreed severe penalties
against all who should bring such a document into
England, this Brief would have to be published in
the Emperor's dominions, and therefore the Pope
must previously communicate his intention to that
prince.
In this Brief the Pope began by expressing his
grief at the change in one who till within the last
two years had been an obedient son to him and
the Holy See, and his own unalterable affection for
^ Gairdner, Calendar, v. p. 646. (Dr. Ortiz to the Empress,
November lo, 1532.)
PREPARATIONS FOR THE CRISIS. 293
him. Then, after recounting the proceedings of the
last four years and repeating his own letter of the
preceding January, he admonished him, on pain of
excommunication, to take back Katherine and send
Anne away within one month from the presenta-
tion of this Brief And finally, he forbade him to
divorce himself from Katherine by his own authority
and marry Anne or any other woman, and declared
that any such form of marriage would be invalid.
This Brief was dated at Rome on November the
iSth, 1532, but after the Pope had met the Emperor
at Bologna,^ a second date, December the 23rd, was
affixed to it.^ Even then it was not to be made
public till the nuncio had informed Henry.^ This
the nuncio did about the middle of January 1533/
after which it was published at Dunkirk on the
2 1st, and at Bruges on the 23rd.^
Thus the preparations for the crisis were com-
pleted on both sides.
1 Gairdner, «/ sup.
2 Ibid., p. 649. (Clement VII. lo Henr> VIII.)
' Ibid., 657. (Dr. Ortiz to the Empress, November 21, 1532.)
* Ibid., vi. p. 35. (Chapuys to Charles V., January 27, 1533.)
" Pocock, Records of the Reformation, ii. p. 384.
CHAPTER XXV.
THE CRISIS.
The Pope's last attempt to touch Henry's con-
science proved abortive. Scarcely had the Brief
been published than an unforeseen event hurried
on the crisis. Anne held out hopes of an heir to
the throne, and further delay was in Henry's opinion
impossible.^ He consequently told Rowland Lee,
one of his chaplains, that he had got a license from
the Pope to marry another wife, but to avoid dis-
turbance he wished the ceremony to take place
very secretly, and he ordered him to meet him in
a certain room of York Place very early in the
morning of January the 2Sth, 1533.
On arriving, Lee found the King and Anne,
Mr. Norris and Mr. Heneage, grooms of the Privy
Chamber, and Anne's train-bearer, Mrs. Savage,
assembled, and everything prepared for Mass and
the solemnisation of the marriage. Having great
scruples about his responsibility, Lee said to the
King, "Sire, I trust you have the Pope's license
' Archaologia, xviii. p. 81. (Letter of Archbishop Cranmer.)
294
THE CRISIS. 295
that you may marry, and that I may join you
together in marriage." The King answered, "What
else ? " Lee then turned to the altar, and vested.
But not yet . satisfied, he turned again in great
trouble to the King and said, " This matter touches
us all very nigh, and therefore it is expedient that
the license be read before us all, or else we all run
into excommunication, and I deeper than any one
else, for marrying your Grace without any banns
being asked, and while no divorce of the other
marriage has yet been promulgated." The King,
" looking upon him very amiably," answered,
"Why, Master Rowland, think you me a man of
so small faith and credit, you that do well know
my life past and even now have heard my con-
fession, or think you me a man of so small fore-
sight and consideration that unless all things were
safe and sure I would enterprise this matter ? I
have truly a license, but it is reposed in another
surer place where no man resorteth but myself,
which if it were seen would discharge us all. But
if I should, now that it waxes towards day, fetch
it and be seen so early abroad, there would arise
a rumour and talk thereof other than were con-
venient. Go forth in God's name and do that
which appertaineth to you. I will take all other
danger upon myself." Hereupon Lee said Mass
and solemnised the marriage ceremony.^
' Harpsfield, T/ie Pretended Divorce, pp. 234, 235. Le Grand,
296 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
The secret was so well kept that even Cranmer
was not aware of it till a fortnight later.^ But
Chapuys penetrated the mystery, and wrote on
February the 23rd that it had taken place on the
" Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul," i.e., January
the 25th, 1533.2 In March Lord Rochford was sent
to inform Francis of the event.^ But it was still to
be kept a secret till the Pope should have granted
Cranmer's Bulls as Archbishop of Canterbury,
which involved the papal legatine power.
The concurrent contemporary evidence of Cha-
puys and of Cranmer, who says the marriage was
solemnised " about St. Paul's Day," excludes all
doubts as to its date. But as Elizabeth was born
within eight months, the date of the marriage was
purposely falsified and said to be November the 14th.*
Meanwhile, in order to keep on good terms with
Histoire du Divorce, ii. p. 1 10, gives much the same account from a
Latin MS. of the history of the divorce presented to Philip and
Mary. In this no date is given. Sanders (ed. Lewis, p. 93) has a
similar account, but like Hall (p. 794) assigns the secret marriage to
November the 14th. It is shown later that this date is certainly
wrong.
' Arckieologia, xviii. p". 81.
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 83.
^ Ibid., p. 103. (Instructions for Lord Rochford.)
* Burnet, History of the /Reformation (ed. Pocock), iii. p. 156.
Some later writers have thus been led to adopt this incorrect
date. But on November 14 Henry and Anne were crossing from
Calais to Dover, and it was impossible that a secret marriage could
then have taken place. By a curious coincidence the false date,
November 14, was really the wedding day of Katharine and Prince
Arthur.
THE CRISIS. 297
the Pope till Cranmer's Bulls were granted, Gregory
Casale was ordered to renew the old proposal that
the cause should be tried in some neutral place by
neutral judges, though in the course of the negotia-
tions it came out that only places and persons
under Francis' power would be considered neutral.^
Also, in order to overawe the bishops, who were
expected by Henry to oppose him in Parliament,
and to remove the popular impression that he was
about to be excommunicated, the King caught at
every excuse to summon the nuncio to court, where
he received him with great show of honour, and
managed so as to be seen with him in public, even
taking him twice to Parliament, where he sat him
on his right hand.^ A report also was spread that
Henry had come to a secret understanding with
the Pope,^ and that his Holiness and the Emperor
had consented to his marriage with Anne.* But in
private conversations with Chapuys the King could
not always control himself sufficiently to keep up
this farce. In the heat of argument he would
openly declare his determination to throw off the
feudal allegiance which England owed to the Pope,
and to reunite to the crown the property which
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 36, 40. It is evident that the real
object was to gain time. Cf. pp. 49, 64.
2 Ibid., pp. 62, 63, 73.
' Ibid., p. 35. (Chapuys to Charles V., January 27, p. 1533.)
■■ Ibid., p. 74.
298 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
the Church held of it, and which his predecessors
had had no right to alienate to his prejudice.^
Steps, too, were taken to prepare the nation for
the coming event. Anne frequently said "she felt
it as sure as death that the King would marry
her shortly." Her father told the Earl of Rutland
that his Majesty would not be so dilatory as he had
hitherto been, but would complete the marriage by
authority of Parliament. When the Earl replied
that the affair was spiritual and could not be
decided in Parliament, the other attacked him with
such abusive language, " as if he had uttered some
great blasphemy,'' that the Earl was compelled to
promise that he would do whatever the King
wished. He sent word, however, immediately to
Chapuys of what was intended, in the hope of his
finding some remedy, for he feared that no one in
Parliament would dare to contradict the King.^
On St. Mathias' Day, the 24th February, the King
dined with Anne in her chamber, which was richly
ornamented with tapestry and " the most beautiful
sideboard of gold that ever was seen." She sat
on his right hand and the old Duchess of Norfolk
on his left, while the Duke of Suffolk and the rest
of the peers and peeresses were at a transverse
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 109. (Chapuys to Charles V., March
15. IS33-)
" Ibid., p. 74. (Same to same.)
THE CRISIS. 299
table below. During dinner the King was in great
spirits and talked so fast as to be scarcely intel-
ligible. He was heard, however, to say to the
Duchess of Norfolk, " Has not the Marchioness got
a grand 'dote' and a rich marriage, as all that we
see and the rest of the plate belong to her ? " ^
Early in March a priest preached before the King
and Anne, that the King had long lived in adultery
with the Queen, and that all his good subjects
ought to pray God to forgive him and enlighten
him to take another wife without regarding the
censures of the Pope, who ought not to be obeyed
in this matter because he ordered what was con-
trary to God's law and reason. He added, that
it would be no wonder if, like Saul and David, the
King took a wife of humble condition in considera-
tion of her personal merits.^
1 Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 97. (March 8, 1533.)
"^ Ibid., p. 107. (Chapuys to Charles V., March 15, 1533.)
CHAPTER XXVI.
THE SCHISM.
The usual payments in the Papal Court for an-
nates and fees, on granting Bulls to an archbishop
of Canterbury, amounted to ;£'sooo. But Henry
ordered his ambassador to notify that if these
charges were not greatly reduced, the King would
at once give his consent to the bill forbidding the
payment of annates lately passed in Parliament,
and deprive the Papal Court of them for ever. By
this expedient he obtained the Bulls for the new
archbishop for ^looo, which sum he advanced to
Cranmer as a loan.^
As soon as Henry knew for certain that the
Bulls had been granted, he took the first definitive
step towards the separation of his kingdom from
Catholic unity. In the middle of March a bill
was brought into Parliament declaring that the
Pope had no authority in England, that appeals
were not to be made to Rome under pain oi prm-
munire, that all testamentary, matrimonial, and other
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 40, 56, Si.
300
THE SCHISM. 301
spiritual suits were to be judged within the realm
with appeal to the bishops and the archbishop of
Canterbury, and that under the penalty of one
year's imprisonment, and a fine at the King's
pleasure, the clergy were to continue to minister
the sacraments and service of the Church in spite
of any censure or interdict pronounced by the
Pope.^ The bill met with no opposition in the
House of Lords. But the Commons refused to
consent to anything against the authority of the
Pope, alleging among other reasons that Christian
princes would look on them as schismatics and
interrupt their trade in wool, which was the one
thing that supported the nation, and that the
consequence would be a rebellion even worse
than a civil war. But after strong resistance they
were compelled to yield, and even to add the
further proviso that if any one brought a Bull of
excommunication into the kingdom he should be
dealt with as a traitor and put to death without
further trial. It was understood that this last
clause was aimed at the Queen. So strong was
the feeling against the rupture with the Pope, that
some of the members offered the King ;^ 200,000
if he would refer the marriage cause to a General
Council instead of concluding it at home.^
' Pocock, Records, ii. p. 460.
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. no, 128, 149.
302 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
On the arrival of Cranmer's Bulls in England, he
was consecrated on the 30th of March, which that
year (1533) fell on Passion Sunday. Most persons
would have felt a difficulty about the consecration,
because the archbishop elect would be required
to swear obedience to the Pope, whereas the con-
dition of Cranmer's appointment was, that he should
throw off the Pope's authority. But Cranmer had
no scruples on the subject. Immediately before
the ceremony began, he called four witnesses into
the Chapter House of Westminster, and in their
presence declared before a notary, that he did not
intend to bind himself by the oath of obedience to
the Pope to do anything which should appear to
him contrary to the law of God, the King's pre-
rogative, or the statutes of the realm. From the
s^Chapter House he proceeded to the steps of the
"High Altar, accompanied by the above witnesses,
and when, in the course of consecration, he knelt
down to take the usual oath of obedience to the
Pope, he repeated the foregoing protest, and im-
mediately after took the oath. Finally, after his
consecration, as though to make up by its fre-
quency for its absence of publicity, just before
receiving the pallium he repeated for the third time
the protest before his witnesses, and immediately
after again swore obedience to the Pope.
After his consecration he took the oath to the
THE SCHISM. 303
King for the temporalities of his see, but varying
it so as to acknowledging himself "to take and
hold the said archbishopric immediately and only "
of Henry " and of none other." ^
Everything was now secured for dissolving the
marriage with Katherine, and there was no further''
delay in carrying out the King's intention. Con-
vocation had met on March 26, 1533, and though
Cranmer was not then able to take his place, he
divided the members into two classes, theologians
and canonists, and submitted to them respectively
the following questions. To the theologians was
proposed the question, " Whether marriage with a
deceased brother's wife was contrary to natural and
divine law, so that the Pope could not dispense
from it ? " The canonists were asked, " Whether
the proofs that Katherine's marriage to Prince
Arthur had been consummated, were sufficient ? "
These questions were discussed for several days.
But the King was so urgent for their immediate
decision that no one dared to speak against them
except the bishop of Rochester. On Saturday
the 5th of April, the votes on both questions were
taken in Cranmer's presence. The bishops of
Rochester and Llandafif, and seventeen other theo-
logians, voted that the marriage in question was
not against natural and divine law, and that the
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 127.
304 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
Pope could dispense ; and the bishop of Bath and
five canonists voted that the proofs that Katherine's
marriage had been consummated were insufficient.
But these twenty-five independent voters were
powerless against the overwhelming majority of
two hundred and fifty-three theologians and forty
canonists who bowed before the King's will.-' In
the following May, notwithstanding the strongest
opposition from Tunstall, bishop of Durham, similar
decisions were obtained from the Convocation of
York, only two theologians and two canonists voting
against the King.^
On Palm Sunday, the day after the Convocation
of Canterbury had arrived at its decision, the bishop
of Rochester was arrested and committed to the
charge of Gardiner, bishop of Winchester. The
King gave out in Parliament that this was because
he had insinuated that Lord Rochford had taken
a large sum of money to France, to bribe the Pope
to ratify the King's proposed marriage, or at least
to overlook it. But it was well known that the
true reason was his defence of the Queen in Con-
vocation.2 He was kept under an-est till the 13th
of June, when he was set at liberty at Cromwell's
intercession. Tunstall, too, would have been im-
^ Pocock, Records, ii, p. 747.
^ Wilkins, Concilia, iii. p. 765.
" Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 150, (Chapuys to Charles V., April
10, I533-)
THE SCHISM. 305
prisoned, had not his services on the border been
too vakiable to be dispensed with.^
On Wednesday, the gth of April, the Duke of
Norfolk and the Marquis of Dorset were sent to tell
the Queen that she need not trouble herself any
more about the suit, and must not return to the
King, because two months before he had married
Anne in the presence of several witnesses, and that
henceforth she must not take the title of Queen, but
that of Princess-Dowager. After their departure,
Lord Mountjoy, her chamberlain, who had been
ordered about a week before to keep a watch on
her, told her that after one month from Easter,
the King would no longer pay her expenses or the
wages of her servants, and that she must retire to
one of the houses settled on her by Prince Arthur,
and live on a small income which would not suffice
for her household for three months. She answered
that as long as she lived she would call herself
Queen. And that if the King objected to the ex-
pense of her allowance, she would be contented with
what she had, and with her confessor, physician,
apothecary, and two women, would go wherever he
wished. If food for herself and servants failed her,
she would go and beg for the love of God.^
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 296. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
June 16, 1533.)
^ Ibid., pp. 150, 167. (Same to same.)
U
3o6 DIVORCE OP KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
On Holy Saturday, April the I2th, Anne, dressed
in a robe of cloth of gold, and loaded with jewels,
went to Mass with the King in royal state. She
was attended by sixty young ladies, and the Duke
of Norfolk's daughter carried her train. She was
received in church with even more ceremonial than
was generally used to the Queen, and took the
Queen's place, and prayers were offered up for her
as Queen Anne. The King insisted that all the
persons about Court should pay their respects to
her as the new queen, and he carefully watched
their countenances as they did so.-'-
People who were independent of the Court, how-
ever, openly showed their displeasure at the mar-
riage. On Easter Sunday, Dr. Brown, prior of the
Augustinians, having recommended the congrega-
tion in his sermon to pray for Queen Anne, almost
every one instantly left the church, murmuring
and looking displeased, without waiting for the
rest of the sermon. The King was greatly angered,
and sent word to the Lord Mayor to arrange that
nothing of the kind happened again, and 'that no
one was so bold as to murmur at his marriage.
The Mayor assembled the trade guilds, and com-
manded them on pain of the King's displeasure not
to murmur at the royal marriage, and to prevent their
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 167. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
April 16, 1533.)
THE SCHISM. 307
apprentices, and, what was more difficult, their wives,
from doing so. But such prohibitions only irritated
the people and made them speak more bitterly in
private. 1 There was also a general feeling of alarm
among the merchants trading with Flanders, and
crowds of people went every day to inquire of
Chapuy's servants and neighbours, whether the
ambassador had been recalled, or whether the
Emperor had consented to the new marriage.^
On the 23rd of April, the King again sent Katherine
a message to inform her of his marriage and forbid
her to take the title of Queen. In order to break
her spirit, he also forbade the Princess Mary either
to write to her or send her any message. And though
the Princess begged him to send some one to look
at her letters, and see that she only told her mother
how she was, her request was refused. The Queen
was at first distressed on hearing that the marriage
with Anne was made public ; but she soon recovered
herself, and concealed her feelings. Suddenly after
dinner, however, she went away, and without saying
a word to any one, wrote a letter to the King, and
when the royal messengers asked for an answer,
she referred them to her letter without saying another
word. Its contents are not known, but on reading
it the King praised her prudence.^
^ Gairdner, Calendar, p. 179. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
' Ibid., p. 167. (Same to same.) ^ Ibid., p. 179.
3o8 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
The next step was for Henry to annul his
marriage with Katherine, for till this was done she
was legally his wife and Queen. Cranmer, there-
fore, went through the form of writing to Henry to
suggest that the divorce case should be heard in his
archiepiscopal court. Old habits of thought, how-
ever, still clung unconsciously to him. He had
been accustomed to think that an archbishop pos-
sessed independent authority, and he had not yet
quite forgotten that an archbishop had only the
power to inquire into the validity of a marriage, and
that the final sentence rested with the Pope. But
wishing to accommodate himself to the new order of
things, he wrote humbly to ask the King's pleasure
before he proceeded, as it was his kingly office and
duty now to direct and order this spiritual cause.
But humble as was this letter, Henry seems to have
been dissatisfied with it, and Cranmer was obliged
to write a second time in a still more humble strain.
He had asked to know the " King's pleasure," but
he was now required to ask his " licence," without
which it was implied he could not exercise his
spiritual office. He had proposed to " direct and
order " the cause, but by the King's licence he was
empowered and commanded to proceed to its ex-
amination, final determination, and judgment. Lest
it should be supposed that this definition of his
altered position applied only to himself individually,
THE SCHISM. 309
he was required to say that such was not /tis office
and duty, as he had said before, but that of the
archbishop of Canterbury. Finally, he had formerly
asked pardon for his boldness " on his knees," but
now he wrote " prostrate at the feet of his Majesty." ^
Henry's answer to this humble petition threw further
light on the relative positions of King and arch-
bishop. The King declared that he recognised no
superior on earth but only God, and was not subject
to the laws of any earthly creature, and that Cranmer
being, by God's calling and his, the principal mini-
ster of his (Henry's) spiritual jurisdiction, he gave
him licence to proceed to the examination and final
determination of his cause.^
On Thursday the 8th of May, 1533, Cranmer went
to Dunstable to hold a court for the trial of the cause,
and Katherine, who was staying at Ampthill, a few
miles distant, was cited to appear before him on the
following Saturday. Care was taken, however, to
prevent her knowing that sentence was about to be
given, lest in spite of the late statute she should
appeal to the Pope and cause delay.^ She did not in
reality intend to appeal, as she would have thereby
acknowledged the archbishop's authority. She was
1 State Papers (ed. 1816), i. pp. 390, 391.
2 Ibid., p. 393.
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 219. (Cranmer to Cromwell,
May 17, 1533.)
3IO DIVORCE OP KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
also aware that the King would have been only too
glad if she had infringed the late statute, and thus
give him an opportunity of compelling the peers to
condemn her under its provisions. For these
reasons she preferred to rest on the Pope's prohibi-
tion of all proceedings in England, and to ignore
the court.''
On Saturday, the loth of May 1533, when the
court was opened, Katherine was cited. As she did
not answer the summons, she was declared con-
tumacious, and was cited to appear on the following
Monday, the 12th. On Monday she again failed to
answer the second citation, and was therefore pro-
nounced " verily and manifestly contumacious." She
was then cited for the third time to appear on the
following Saturday, the 17th, after which the court
proceeded in her absence to hear evidence on the
King's behalf. On Saturday she once more failed,
of course, to appear, and on the following Friday,
the 23rd, being the Friday after Ascension, sentence
was given declaring the marriage between her and
Henry null and invalid. The King himself dictated
the form of the sentence. Cranmer now went
through the further form of writing a letter to
Henry, as had previously been agreed between them,
exhorting him with due solemnity to submit to the
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 207. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
May 10, 1533.)
THE SCHISM. 311
law of God and separate from the Queen, and thus
to avoid the censures of the Church, with which he
threatened him unless he did so.-'
A further sentence had to be given by the court
to confirm the marriage with Anne. As the pro-
ceedings were in secret, it is not known what
evidence was brought forward to prove the fact, nor
under what circumstances the marriage was stated
to have talcen place. But on Wednesday, May
the 28th, the sentence was dehvered at Lambeth
before a few select witnesses, the principal of whom
was Cromwell, declaring that Henry's marriage with
Anne was valid. ^
On the following day, Thursday the 29th, Anne
came from Greenwich in the Queen's barge, and
wearing the jewels which she obtained a few
months before from Queen Katherine. She was
attended with the same ceremony that it was the
custom to show to queens, and on her arrival at
the Tower, the King received her in great state.
Crowds assembled to gaze at the spectacle, but all
looked as grave as if it had been a funeral.^
On the following Saturday she was conducted
to Westminster, accompanied by a magnificent^^
procession of the principal nobility and London^
' Wilkins, Concilia, iii. p. 759. Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 230, seqq.
" Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 330.
•' Ibid., p. 244.
312 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
merchants, and on Sunday she was crowned in
Westminster Abbey. After the coronation she
presided at a banquet in Westminster Hall. The
whole ceremony was carried out with extraordinary
splendour, and in order to bring her personally
before the nation with specially distinctive honour,
the King absented himself and only looked on at
what was done without being himself seen. Among
the great nobility the Duchess of Norfolk alone
refused to be present at the ceremony. Her ab-
sence was the more marked because, not only was
the Duke Anne's uncle, but she herself, being a
daughter of the late Duke of Buckingham, was
closely related to the King. But her friendship
with Queen Katherine and her bold advocacy of
her cause were so notorious that no one was
surprised.
The absence of all enthusiasm in the bystanders
was most marked. The men refused to uncover,
and no one, not even the women and children,
could be persuaded to kneel and cry, " God save
the King," " God save the Queen," as was custom-
ary on such occasions. The assembled crowd only
laughed and ridiculed the show. One of Anne's
attendants told the Lord Mayor to order the people
to cheer as usual. But the Lord Mayor answered,
" He could not command people's hearts, and even
the King could not do so." The French ambas-
THE SCHISM. 313
sador and his suite, being looked on as Anne's
friends, were insulted by the people and called
" French dogs " and other opprobrious names.i
The whole pageant was cold and heartless, and
both the common people and the upper classes
showed that they were gravely distressed. Jousts
were held the next day, but as no one attended
except those who were ordered to do so, they too
were voted shameful and beggarly.^ For several
months past the nation had been dreading a sen-
tence of excommunication against Henry, and this
ostentatious display of disobedience to the Pope
naturally added to the general alarm.
Henry felt that so long as Katherine retained the
title of Queen a doubt was thrown on his marriage
with Anne. At the end of June his Council, by
his order, sent for Chapuys and told him that as
Henry had by the " declaration of tlie Church " taken
a lawful wife, and had her crowned as queen, and
as there could not properly be two queens, he in-
tended Katherine henceforth to give up that title,
and he would reduce her allowance accordingly.
But considering her virtue and her high parentage,
he would treat her honourably as Chapuys would
advise. Chapuys answered courteously but boldly
that the Council knew well enough that what the
' Gairdner, Calendar, vL pp. 264, 266.
^ Ibid., pp. 263, 29s, 453.
314 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF A R AGON.
King and the archbishop of Canterbury had done
could not prejudice the Queen's right, which
depended on the sentence of the Pope, who was
the sole competent judge. As to his advice, he
suggested that as the King acknowledged she had
once been a lawful queen, and that the princess
was born in lawful wedlock, and she had done
nothing to forfeit such a name, she should retain
the title, just as the Duchess of Suffolk was
commonly called Queen of France, and Henry
King of France, without the King of France being
offended. As to her treatment, his advice was
superfluous, for no one could know better than
the King how a royal person ought to be treated.^
Henry, however, had made up his mind on the
subject. He had gone through the form of consult-
ing Chapuys only out of courtesy to the Emperor.
Five days later Lord Mountjoy, Katherine's cham-
berlain, and several other gentlemen of her house-
hold, were again sent to her at Ampthill, to tell her in
the King's name that she must henceforth bear the
title of Dowager-Princess of Wales, and that her
income would be diminished accordingly.
On Thursday, July the 3rd, they were admitted to
an audience. They found her lying on a pallet, as she
had pricked her foot with a pin, and could not stand.
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 319. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
June 28, 1533.)
THE SCHISM. 315
She was also suffering greatly from a cough. She
was surrounded by all her servants, that they might
hear all that passed. When Lord Mountjoy and his
companions addressed her by the title of Princess-
Dowager she interrupted them, saying that she was
not Princess-Dowager but the Queen, and the King's
lawful wife, and all her children were legitimate,
which she would persist in claiming to be true so
long as she lived. In answer to their declaration
that the King's recent marriage was supported by
the opinions of the Universities, the Lords spiritual
and temporal, and the Commons of the realm, she
said that the opinions of the Universities had been
obtained by bribes, and that she had the opinions of
many more in her favour, and though the King might
do what he chose in his realm, her cause did not
depend on any authority within the realm but on
the Pope, who was God's Vicar and Judge on earth.
They accused her of obstinacy and vainglory. But
she declared that she acted only for conscience'
sake, as otherwise she would lose her soul. They
reproached her with disobedience to the King. But
she said she would rather disobey him than God, and
damn her soul. They tried to influence her by pro-
mises of good treatment if she obeyed, and by the
suggestion of the discomforts and dangers she would
otherwise incur. But to all such considerations she
was deaf, and she was equally unmoved by the
3i6 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OP ARAGON.
threats of the danger to which she exposed her
daughter and her servants, replying that neither for
her daughter, her servants, worldly possessions, ad-
vantage or displeasure, would she yield on this point
and endanger her soul. She protested she would
never accept service from anybody, nor answer any
one who addressed her as Princess-Dowager, and
she called on all present to bear witness that she
would never relinquish the title of Queen till sen-
tence was given against her by the Pope according
to God's laws.'^
The next day Lord Mountjoy and his companions
waited on her to show her the report they had drawn
up of the interview on the preceding day. On
looking over it, she crossed out the title Princess-
Dowager wherever it occurred. She repeated much
the same arguments as before, and pointed out how
the King had only asked to have the matter tried
in an indifferent place and by indifferent persons.
But now by some subtle means it had been tried in
his own kingdom, which was a place most partial,
seeing he had taken upon himself the whole govern-
ment as the supreme head of the Church with more
authority than the Pope himself, and by a judge who
was a man of his own making, and she believed that
hell itself would have been a more indifferent place,
for she felt sure the devils themselves must tremble
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 339, 355.
THE SCHISM. 317
to see the truth so oppressed as it was in this case.
Finally, Lord Mountjoy told her it was the King's
pleasure she should remove, and what places were
appointed for her to go to. She answered she was
ready to go wherever the King ordered, provided it
was not to a house which would be prejudicial to
her cause — that is to say, some house which had
been settled on her by Prince Arthur as Princess-
Dowager, and where her residence might be taken
to imply that she had accepted that title. ^
As soon as Henry understood that the Queen
would not submit to his orders, he caused a pro-
clamation to be printed and published through the
city by sound of trumpets, forbidding all persons
under pain of prcemunire to give her the title of
Queen, or any other title than that of Princess-
Dowager of Wales ; but adding, it was the King's
pleasure that under the latter title she should be
well used, obeyed, and treated according to her
honour and parentage.^
The members of her household, who had taken
his message to her, were summoned to Court.
Cromwell thanked them on the King's behalf for
the good service they had done, and desired them
to wait awhile for further orders in the matter.
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 341. (The Report of Lord Mount-
joy and others.)
- Ibid., p. 356. (Chapuys to Charles V., July 11, 1533.)
3i8 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
But even Cromwell could not refrain from saying
to them, " it was impossible " to make a more vir-
tuous and prudent answer than the Queen had
done, and it was very unfortunate that she should
not have had male issue, for she had surpassed in
glory and reputation nearly all the princes treated
of in histories.!
Shortly afterwards Henry ordered the unfortu-
nate Katherine to go to the house of the bishop
of Lincoln at Bugden, to which she had formerly
objected. It was twenty miles from Ampthill, and
as she passed along, all the neighbourhood assem-
bled to see her and pay her honour. Though they
had been forbidden to call her Queen, they shouted
out this title at the top of their voices, wishing joy,
repose, and prosperity to her and confusion to her
enemies. They begged her with tears to set them
to work and employ them in her service, protesting
they were ready to die for love of her.^
' Gairdner, ut sup.
^ Ibid., p. 396. (Chapuys to Charles V„ July 30, 1533.)
CHAPTER XXVII.
THE EXCOMMUNICATION.
While Henry was thus taking step after step to
widen the breach between himself and the Pope,
Francis was doing his utmost to draw them to-
gether. In accordance with his promises at Calais,
he had sent the bishop of Tarbes and Cardinal
Tournon to Bologna. They were instructed to
help on Henry's affair by separating the Pope from
the Emperor and negotiating a marriage between
the Pope's niece, Catherine de' Medici, and the Duke
of Orleans, Francis' second son. They succeeded
so well that the French king had great hopes of
bringing Henry's matter to a happy conclusion at
an interview between himself and the Pope, which
was arranged to take place at Nice in the following
May.
Great then was his indignation when Lord Roch-
ford informed him, in March, of Henry's secret
marriage. He was the more annoyed because
Henry not only pretended that he had taken this
step in consequence of Francis' advice at Calais,
319
320 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
but urged him to join with England in throwing off
obedience to the Holy See on the ground that he
and all other kings and princes were insulted by
Henry's citation to plead before the tribunal of
the Pope — " an earthly creature whom God had
made his subject," and " over whom he had given
him the superiority." Henry also pressed Francis
to write a very violent letter, of which he sent him
a copy, peremptorily demanding that his Holiness
should give sentence in Henry's favoury and threat-
ening, if he would not do so, to break off the
negotiations for his son's marriage.^ Francis re-
fused either to write this letter, or to break off the
negotiations for the marriage, which he could not
have done without dishonour, or to put off his
interview with the Pope, the principal object of
which, he insisted, was to serve Henry. But as
he knew that were he to quarrel with the English
king the latter would at once throw himself into
the arms of the Emperor, he softened his refusal
by assurances that he would prefer Henry's interest
to everything else. He therefore ordered his am-
bassadors to represent to his Holiness how all
Christian princes were insulted by his conduct to
Henry, to entreat him once more not to take any
step against the latter till after their meeting, and
to remind him that Francis was so closely united
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi, p. 107. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
THE EXCOMMUNICATION. 321
with Henry that he would consider any displea-
sure done to the King of England as if done to
himself.^
The French and English ambassadors had no diffi-
culty in persuading the Pope to defer the publication
of the excommunication and interdict. Henry's zeal
for the suppression of heresy afforded hope that
he would not take any violent step against the
Holy See, and so long as there was the faintest
hope of his repentance the Pope felt himself bound
to bear with him. Moreover, his Holiness feared
that his spiritual authority would be exposed to
contempt were he to publish a sentence against
Henry at a moment when the Emperor was fully
occupied with the Turks. For either he would
not be able to enforce it, or, were he to attempt
to do so, the alliance between Francis and Henry
would throw the whole of Christendom into war,
and thus open the way for a successful invasion
by the Turks. He therefore readily promised, so
far as justice and equity allowed, not to take any
step against Henry till after his interview with
the French king, and Francis renewed on Henry's
behalf the promises to the same effect which the
latter had already made.^ The Pope, however,
1 Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 114, 115. (Francis I. to the French
Cardinals, March 20, 1533.)
- Ibid., p. 333. (Instructions for an ambassador in France.)
X
322 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
refused to suspend proceedings in the divorce cause,
beyond promising that nothing decisive should mean-
while be done.i
Early in May 1533 the Pope had letters from the
nuncio in England mentioning that on Easter Eve
Henry had publicly introduced Anne Boleyn as his
queen, and had carried a bill through Parliament
declaring that all spiritual causes were henceforth to
be decided in the kingdom. The Pope was indig-
nant. He complained that, while he was required
not to take any step, Henry was taking fresh action
every day. The Spanish ambassador urged him to
give sentence at once, as he must now see that
moderation was useless. He answered that before
he did so he must know whether the Emperor would
enforce his sentence. But the ambassador could
only put him off with general assurances, for his
master had given him to understand that he did not
intend to sacrifice his secular interests in defence
of the Church on what he pretended to consider
only a private matter.^
The French ambassadors, on the other hand,
renewed their entreaties to his Holiness to do
nothing till after this interview with Francis. Car-
dinal Tournon explained in Consistory, that when
his Holiness and the King of France met, the latter
' Sia/e Papers (ed. 1849), vii. pp. 456, 458, 464.
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 203, 253-255.
THE EXCOMMUNICATION. 323
would beg him not to proceed against the King of
England, and the Pope would answer, that, as
Henry had done such a base and disrespectful act,
he must excommunicate and deprive him of his king-
dom. Francis would then send this answer on to
Henry and tell him that as he was excommunicated
he could not keep his oath of friendship to him
against the Church, and he believed Henry would
then consent to appear before the Pope, if his Holi-
ness fixed some place free from danger and suspicion,
and would meanwhile separate from Anne and bring
Katherine back to the palace. The Spanish ambas-
sador objected to the uncertainty involved in this
scheme. In fact, it was so evidently illusory, that
a man of the Pope's acute intellect could scarcely
have failed to estimate it at its true value. But the
Emperor was satisfied with it. Accordingly he con-
sented to defer proceedings till after the meeting
with Francis. This interview had been put off from
May till July the iSth; but Nice being unhealthy at
that season, it was again deferred till August or
September, and eventually it took place in October
1533, at Marseilles.^
The day after the Pope had obtained this promise,
the news of Cranmer's proceedings at Dunstable
reached Rome. The Pope's tone was now quite
altered. He received Benet, the English ambassador,
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 238, 276, 518.
324 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
very coldly, complained bitterly of Henry's proceed-
ings in contempt of himself and the authority of the
Holy See, and declared that to " tolerate them was
too much against his duty to God and the world." ^
Francis afterwards said to Gardiner, that had the
Pope now been silent he would thereby have con-
fessed himself no Pope, and Henry must not expect
any favour from his Holiness till Cranmer's sentence
was annulled.^
The Pope at once issued a Brief reciting the
former one, of January the 2nd, 1531, which for-
bade all persons to give sentence in the case while
it was pending before himself, and declaring that
Cranmer and all others who had co-operated with
him at Dunstable had incurred the excommunica-
tion therein threatened.^ On the nth of July he
gave sentence against Henry, declaring his so-called
divorce from Katherine and his pretended union with
Anne null and void, and pronouncing, that he had
incurred the greater excommunication, but suspend-
ing the declaration of it till the end of September.*
This sentence was not issued in writing till the 5 th
of August.^ The period of grace was afterwards
1 Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 293. (Behet to Henry VIII., June 14,
IS33-)
2 Ibid., p. 571. (Gardiner to Henry VIII.)
" Pocock, Records, ii. p. 505.
* Gairdner, Caleiidar, vi. p.' 357.
° Ibid., p. 409.
THE EXCOMMUNICATION. 325
extended till October, when the meeting with Francis
was deferred till that time.^
Henry's uniform language and conduct for the
last six years left no room for reasonable doubt as
to the spirit in which he would meet the Pope's
action against him. As late as the preceding
February he had ordered his ambassador to tell
his Holiness that he knew what a Pope should
and might do, and would treat him accordingly,
and to warn him to act with caution, considering
the great danger he was in. He was also to re-
mind him that he was " St. Peter's successor, a
fisher, who when he draweth his net too fast and
too hard, then he breaketh it, and pulling it softly
taketh fish good plenty. Princes are great fishes,
and must be handled with policy, and the King was
not to be vexed with the excessive pre-eminence
of the Pope's authority."^ When such had been
Henry's defiant temper before his revolt from the
Church, it was not to be expected that he should
draw back after he had taken the decisive step,
while he was actually beginning to taste the sweets
of ecclesiastical supremacy and despotic sovereignty,
and was looking forward, exultingly, to the birth
of the male heir whom astrologers and physicians
confidently promised him.^
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 532.
' Ibid., p. 86. (Henry VIII. to Benet.) ^ ibid., p. 451.
326 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
In anticipation of the Pope's action against him,
he privately made an appeal from his authority to
a General Council, before the Archbishop of York,
on the 29th of June.i On the 9th of July he gave
his assent to the bill depriving the Pope of annates,
which had been passed by Parliament the preceding
year, and was only awaiting his consent to come
into operation.^ He seized the revenues of the
bishoprics of Salisbury and Worcester, which he
had formerly assigned to Campeggio and Ghinucci,
as a reward for their services in Rome.^
In accordance with his promise at Calais to assist
either in person or by proxy at the meeting between
Francis and the Pope, he sent the Duke of Norfolk
to France on the 28th of May.* But the Duke was
ordered to dissuade Francis from the interview on
the ground that he was insulted by the Pope's
frequent delays, and that it- was beneath his dignity
to be at the beck and call of the Pope and the
cardinals, especially as there seemed no urgent
cause for the meeting beyond benefit to the Pope
and the Emperor. As for himself, Henry declared
he knew the justice of his cause, and as he had
the consent of his nobles and commons, he cared
not for anything the Pope might do against him.*
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 320.
"" Ibid., p. 3SI. 3 Ibid., p. 451.
* Ibid., p. 243. ° Ibid., p. 290.
THE EXCOMMUNICATION. 327
He even went so far as to make very advantageous
offers to Francis if he would throw off his obedience
to the Pope and set up an independent patriarchate
in his own dominions. So great was the violence
of his language that the Duke felt himself bound
to apologise for his passionate conduct, protesting
that he himself had advised him, but in vain, to
continue the payment of annates to the Pope.
When the Duke left England the meeting was
expected to take place in July, but on meeting
Francis at Villeneuve in Auvergne, he found it
was deferred till August. It was therefore arranged
that he and his companions should go to Lyons,
whence they were to go later to join Francis at
Avignon and accompany him to Nice. But while
they were at Lyons a courier arrived from Rome
on his way to England and informed them of
the Bull of excommunication that had been issued
by the Pope. The Duke was so astonished that
he nearly fainted. Du Bellay, formerly Bishop of
Bayonne and then Bishop of Paris, urged him and
his companions strongly to go on to the meet-
ing, where the sentence, which he supposed had
been given for contumacy, could be easily cancelled.
But they said that after their master had received
such an affront from the Pope, it would not be
honourable for them to appear before the Pope as
suppliants, and that their lives would be in danger
328 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
if they did so. They consented, however, to go
on to MontpeHer to take leave of Francis, while
Rochford went back to England to ask Henry's
orders.^ Henry, on receiving the news, had at
once instructed his ambassadors to leave both
France and Rome, and Rochford brought back
only the most grievous complaints from Henry,
and renewed entreaties to Francis io join him in
his revolt from the Holy See. The Duke, there-
fore, hurried back to England post haste, lest in
his absence the enemies of the Church, who sur-
rounded Henry, should persuade him to take some
irrevocable step which he and others of the principal
nobles were most anxious to prevent. The King,
however, gave leave to Sir Francis Brian and Sir
John Wallop to go to the meeting, provided they
never presented themselves to the Pope,^ and later
he was persuaded to send Gardiner thither as his
ordinary ambassador. ^
Traditional loyalty to Christ's Vicar, and the
national devotion of well-nigh thirty generations to
St. Peter's Chair, could not be thrown off at will.
Henry was therefore for a time depressed when
he found himself actually excommunicated and
cut off from the Catholic Church. But his legal
advisers consoled him by insisting on the great
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 636.
" Ibid., p. 414. ' Ibid., pp. 452, 636.
THE EXCOMMUNICATION. 329
wrong that had been done him, and pointing out
that the annulling of the second marriage did not
confirm the first, and that his appeal to a general
Council protected him from the Pope's censures.
The Duke of Norfolk also, probably in order to
remove the suspicions which were supposed to
have had a share in his recall,^ wrote to him from
France that he ought not to " care a button " about
the sentence, and suggested that his safest course
would be to summon back from abroad his subjects,
with their goods, and rely on the sword for de-
fending his rights.^ Henry was struck with this
advice, and frequently referred to it in conversation.
But he took no steps to carry it out, because his
thoughts were at this moment engrossed with the
joyful expectation of the birth of the long-desired
male heir.
He had accepted the words of the astrologers
and physicians with implicit faith, as if they had
been a revelation from heaven. He took from his
treasures a costly state bed which had been given
for the ransom of the Due d'Alengon,^ and pre-
sented it to Anne.* At her request, he asked
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 423. (Cifuentes to Charles V.,
August 14, 1533.)
2 Ibid., p. 436. (Chapuys to Charles V., August 23, 1533.)
' The Due d'Alen9on was taken prisoner by the Duke of Bedford
at Verneuil in 1427.
» Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 453. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
September 3, 1533.)
330 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
Katherine for a richly embroidered cloth she had
brought from Spain to. wrap her children in at
baptism, as Anne would be glad to use it very
soon. But Katherine answered, that it would
not please God were she so ill-advised as to
grant any favour in so horrible and abominable
a case.i Great preparations were made for public
rejoicings and jousts, to atone for the popular
coolness and shortcomings after Anne's coronation.^
The King of France was aslced and consented to
be godfather, and the boy's name was to be either
Edward or Henry.^
Great then was the King's disappointment when
on Sunday, September 7, 1533, Anne gave birth
to a daughter. But the people were greatly re-
joiced that it was not a son, for they insisted that
the title of the Princess Mary, who was universally
loved, remained untouched. Henry tried, however,
to conceal his vexation by heaping honours on the
new-born daughter whose birth was in truth so
unwelcome. Her baptism was celebrated with ex-
traordinary splendour on September the lOth, in the
Observants' Church at Greenwich. Cranmer was
godfather, and the old Duchess of Norfolk and
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 397. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
^ Ibid., p. 453. (Same to the same.)
* Ibid., p. 475. (Francis I. to the Bailly of Troyes, September 17,
'5330
THE EXCOMMUNICATION. 331
the old Marchioness of Dorset were godmothers.
After the baptism, the princess was confirmed by
the archbishop, the IVIarchioness of Exeter being
godmother. It was said that she was to be called
Mary; but Henry forbade this irretrievable insult
to his elder daughter, of whom he was very fond,
and she was called Elizabeth after his mother.^
The King's attention having been called to the
obstinacy of several of the Queen's servants, who
persisted in giving her that title in obedience to
her orders, he wrote on the 6th of October to Lord
Mountjoy, her chamberlain, desiring him to repeat
his commands to them to call her henceforth
Princess-Dowager of Wales, and to send in the
names of those who proved themselves disobedient
subjects. The members of her Council and the
officers of her household made no difficulty about
obeying. But her chaplains, her ladies, and her
private servants positively refused to do so, because
they had been sworn to her as queen, and they
said they could not see how the King could dis-
charge their consciences. They were strengthened
in this resolution by a letter from her proctor at
Rome, declaring that the Pope had given sentence
in her favour. Lord Mountjoy, too, seems to have
shared their scruples, although he had not the
courage to say so. He made every excuse for
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 464, 465.
332 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
them, and refused to accuse them to the King.
His present office was so distressing to him that
he begged to be allowed to resign it, and serve his
Majesty in any other position, however dangerous.^
But in spite of his efforts to throw off his dis-
appointment, Henry felt it deeply. Shortly before
her confinement Anne had been very angry because
he had given her cause for jealousy by his atten-
tions to a lady of the court. Whereupon he told
her that she must shut her eyes and endure as
well as her betters had done, remembering that it
was in his power to humble her more than he had
exalted her, and for two or three days he would
not speak to her.^ With most men angry words
are the mere ebullition of passion, forgotten as soon
as uttered. But Henry neither forgot nor forgave.
After the birth of Elizabeth his passionate words
took a more definite form. He told some of his
intimate friends that if the King of France failed
him, he would make peace with the Emperor by
taking back Katherine and keeping Anne as his
mistress, and it was supposed he had suggested,
or even concluded such an agreement with the
Emperor.3
1 Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 512. (Mountjoy to Cromwell,
October 10, 1533.)
' Ibid., p. 453. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
■" Ibid., pp. SS9, 637.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
THE APPEAL.
The Pope arrived at Marseilles on the nth of
October 1533, and landed the next day in great
state, accompanied by twelve or thirteen cardinals
and thirty-two bishops. On the 13th, Francis had
an audience with him in a public Consistory, and
kissed his foot, whilst the Queen and the Dauphin
did the same on the two following days.^
Francis refused to discuss his own private busi-
ness till the Pope should give him a promise that
he would do all he could ex plenitudine potes-
tatis to satisfy Henry. It is difficult to conceive
what scheme Francis had devised by which his
Holiness could possibly grant Henry's requests
even within the almost boundless limits of his
power. The Pope, however, gave the promise,
though most reluctantly. But, when the English
ambassadors were called in to conclude the negoti-
ation, it was found that they had no authority from
Henry to act on his behalf. Francis was naturally
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 518, 520.
333
334 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
greatly annoyed. But controlling himself, he en-
treated the Pope to suspend the negotiation till the
return of a courier, whom he was about to despatch
to England, to get the necessary powers.
Meanwhile, as the time of grace allowed to
Henry before he incurred excommunication was
soon to expire, Francis besought his Holiness to
lengthen it by five or six months, on the plea that
he and Henry were to meet in March, and should
the present negotiation come to nothing, he hoped
then to bring him to reason. The Pope accordingly,
on All Saints' Eve, held a congregation of cardi-
nals in his own room, and communicated to them
Francis' request. He felt, indeed, that this pro-
longation would be injurious to Queen Katherine,
but as Francis had urged the request very strongly,
and as he was that king's guest, he proposed to
prolong the term for one month, during which
time the courier from England would have time to
arrive. The Spanish cardinals opposed any delay,
even for one month. But it was finally agreed to,
the Pope promising at the same time not to grant a
further respite.^
Before the end of the month, and indeed be-
fore the courier returned from England, the great
cause was brought to an abrupt close by Henry
himself
^ Gairdner, Calendar, pp. 559, 560, 570.
THE APPEAL. 335
On one of the first days of November, Bonner,
who had formerly been associated with Carne at
Rome, arrived post haste from England. He was
the bearer of Henry's appeal to a General Council,
and he was ordered, through Gardiner, to present
it, if possible, to the Pope in person. As an
audience would certainly have been refused him
had the object of his mission been known, he went
on the 7th of November to the palace where the
Pope was staying, and in spite of the denials of
his attendants, forced his way into the Pope's
presence. When he entered the room his Holiness
was standing between Cardinal Medicis and the Car-
dinal of Lorraine, vested to go to the Consistory.
Being very quick-sighted he at once noticed Bonner,
who forthwith asked the Datary to tell his Holiness
that he wished to speak to him. The Pope, sup-
posing it was some private matter, dismissed the
cardinals and called Bonner to a window. After
paying his respects in the usual form, Bonner told
him that he had been commanded to present
Henry's appeal, but as the Pope had formerly
been kind to him he apologised on the ground of
his allegiance to his sovereign. The Pope shrugged
his shoulders and said he was going to the Consis-
tory, and could not wait to hear him then, but bade
him return in the afternoon.
Bonner accordingly went in the afternoon, accom-
336 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
panied by Penyston, who had brought him the
King's order to present the appeal, and whom he
wished to have as a witness of what passed. He
was kept waiting an hour and a half, while audience
was given to several other persons with previous
appointments. At length the Pope being at liberty
turned to Bonner ; but finding that he had brought
a witness, he sent for Simonetta, Capisucchi, and
the Datary. Then, "leaning in the window towards
the west side," he turned to Bonner. After a few
desultory remarks he spoke of the way in which the
King of England treated him. In reply Bonner
complained that, after all the kindness the King
had shown his Holiness in times past, he had
revoked the cause contrary to his promise, had re-
fused to let it be examined in any place but Rome,
and turning on the Pope the very condescend-
ence to the King's own policy of delay, reproached
him with keeping the suit so long in his own
hands without passing judgment, and finally reject-
ing his excusator and giving sentence against him.
The Pope answered that he would not have revoked
the cause had not the Queen sworn she could not
get justice in England, and his promise to the King
was conditional, and as to the delay, it was owing
to the King, who would not send a proxy. Bonner
then handed to the Pope the King's appeal to a
General Council, and his Holiness desired the
THE APPEAL. 337
Datary to read it. As the reading proceeded, the
Pope made observations expressing his displea-
sure and dissent. But when mention was made
of the " Holy General Council, which was shortly
to be held lawfully and in a fitting place, with
the consent of Christian princes and all others
whom it may concern," without any reference to
the Pope,i he became very angry, and said, " Why,
when I sent my nuncio last year to speak to him
about this General Council, did the King give no
answer to him, but referred him to the French
king, at which time he could perceive I was very
well disposed and spoke much for it ? The thing
so standing, now to speak of a General Council !
O good Lord ! But well ! his commission and all
other writings of his cannot but be welcome to me."
Bonner thought that he used these last words to
hide his anger and to make him think he did not
care, but from the way he was constantly folding
and unfolding his handkerchief, which it was said
he never did unless he was very angry, Bonner
was convinced he felt it deeply. At last he told
the Datary to read on, and at various clauses he
again expressed great anger, sometimes ironically.
When the Datary had finished he asked Bonner
what more he had. Whereupon Bonner repeated
his protest, and presented Henry's "provocation,"
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 507.
338 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
which the Datary was ordered to read. Scarcely a
single clause passed without rebuke. At one time
his Holiness remarked that the King professed
great respect for the Church, but had none for him.
And when mention was made of a " public judg-
ment," he started and said, "The public judgment
of the Church was never had." But Simonetta
said he supposed it referred to that archbishop
who had made that good process while the cause
was pending before his Holiness in Consistory.
Whereupon the Pope said, " Ah ! a worshipful
process and judgment ! "
The King of France was now announced, and the
Pope hastened to meet him at the door. The King
bowed very low, took off his cap, and continued
uncovered for some time. He and the Pope re-
mained in private conversation for three-quarters
of an hour, sometimes laughing merrily. After
Francis' departure, the Datary read the rest of the
" provocation," the Pope interrupting him several
times with his comments. Afterwards, Bonner
handed in two other appeals, made by the King
before the Bishop of Winchester. Finally, the
Pope said it was a matter of so much weight
that he must consult the cardinals in Consistory.
Bonner wished to have the documents again to
present to the cardinals. This his Holiness refused,
but, on Bonner's insisting, said he should have an
THE APPEAL. 339
answer to his petition as well as to the appeal
after he had consulted the cardinals. Bonner then
went away, his audience having lasted more than
three hours.
Three days later, on Monday the loth, the Pope
gave Bonner the promised answer. He said that he
had always wished to do the King justice, but that
as to his appeal to a General Council it had been
forbidden by a . Constitution of Pope Pius, and he
therefore rejected it as frivolous. He would do his
best as in times past to promote the General Council,
though formerly the King had not answered him,
but had referred him to the French king. He added
that the King of England had no authority to call
a General Council, for that belonged to himself. " He
refused to return Bonner's documents, saying that
he would keep them safely, and that Bonner could
have as many copies as he pleased from the Bishop
of Winchester and those before whom the appeals
were made."^
Francis was angry at the insult which had thus
been offered to the Pope whilst in France as his
guest, fearing also that he might think the English
agents had acted with his consent, whereas they
were there not to treat with the Pope, but to do as
he commanded them. He spoke very strongly to
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vL pp. 566-568. (Bonner to Henry VIII.
November 13, 1533.)
340 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
Gardiner, saying how ashamed he was when the
Pope told him what sort of an appeal was being
presented to him. He complained bitterly of Henry,
who wished him to act on his behalf, but who, when
he and his council had devised what to do, in reality
did the very contrary. " As fast as I study to win
the Pope," he said, " ye study to lose him, as appears
in the intimation now made, which is to the worst
purpose that could be devised. . . . You require a
General Council, and that the Emperor desires, and
I go about to bring the Pope from the Emperor and
you to drive him to him. How can my brother call
a Council alone ? Ye have clearly marred all.''
And wringing his hands, he wished he had never
meddled in that matter.^
The Pope now urged Francis to abandon Henry,
who was an enemy to the Church and had behaved
so badly to himself. Francis answered that he
found it necessary to keep Henry as a friend, so
that others might not have him, else he would play
him a trick that would bring him to terms. Had he
known the message that the ambassadors were
bringing to the Pope, he would have advised them
by no means to deliver it, as the King was thus
destroying his own cause. He had already told
him plainly that he would not help him against the
Pope. He was surprised that King Henry had a
1 Gairdner, Calem/ar, vi. p. 572. (Gardiner to Henry VIII. )
THE APPEAL. 341
reputation for wisdom, for really he was acting as
a madman, and was benefiting the Queen's cause by
his conduct.!
Francis had already promised the Pope, through
Cardinal Tournon, that he would tell Henry he
could not keep his oath of friendship to him against
the Church.2 But now, notwithstanding his disgust
at Henry's conduct, he sent him word that he would
do anything if it concerned only life, and not faith
or honour, for a friend who was imprinted in his
heart like Henry, and would be ready to aid him if
war was declared against him in consequence of the
marriage, or the Papal censures.^ Before the Pope's
departure he earnestly besought his Holiness not to
break finally with Henry. At last the Pope, seeing
what danger there was of losing that kingdom
entirely, and the little chance he had of recovering
it by force, agreed that Francis should send, as if of
his own accord, to complain to Henry of the outrage
done to the Pope, and make such friendly remon-
strances as he thought might bring the English king
to reason. Meanwhile he promised on his part that
he would not issue the greater excommunication till
an answer from England should arrive.*
On the 1 2th of November, the day after he had
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 562. (Cifuentes to Charles V.)
' Ibid., p. 244. s ibid.^ pp. ^69, 571.
* Ibid., p. 638.' (Du Bellay on England and the Pope.)
342 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
given his answer to Bonner, the Pope left Marseilles
for Rome.^ Francis at once hastened to send off
an ambassador to England, as had been agreed on.
He chose for this office Du Bellay, Bishop of Paris,
brother to Cardinal Grammont, the Bishop of Tarbes.
Du Bellay, when Bishop of Bayonne, had some
years before been ambassador in England, and as
he had been on very friendly terms with Henry and
Anne, no better mediator could have been chosen.
Before he could start, however, the Bailly of Troyes,
who was returning from an English embassy, arrived,
and reported that affairs in England were despe-
rate, and that a final and irrevocable declaration
of Parliament against the Pope was daily expected.
Francis, therefore, perceiving the urgency of the
case, persuaded Sir Francis Brain to set off post
at once and stop proceedings till the arrival of the
Bishop of Paris, who, as he gave him to understand,
was bringing a satisfactory message.^
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 569. ° Ibid., p. 638.
CHAPTER XXIX.
THE SCHISM.
The drama of the divorce was now well-nigh played
out. Only the final steps remained to be taken by
each party. The Bull of excommunication, declaring
the sentence pronounced by the Pope on July the
nth, 1533, was published at Dunkirk on November
the 19th, and at Bruges on the 2ist.^ It was de-
livered to Henry early in December by Cromwell,
who had received it from Lord Lisle, Lord-Deputy of
Calais.^ Pride and passion had by this time so com-
pletely gained the mastery over the English king,
that its only effect was to exasperate him further, and
make him throw to the winds any lingering scruples
against a final rupture with the Holy See. His
only thought was how best to guard against the war
which he apprehended would be its consequence.
Calais was revictualled. Dover castle was repaired.
Ships were ordered to be fitted out and armed.
But as they would not be ready to put to sea for
twelve or thirteen months, and as in any case they
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 578. ' Ibid., p. 614.
343
344 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
would not be a match for the Emperor's powerful
navy, all exposed places on the coast were rapidly
fortified. Gunners were hired, artillery was cast,
and munitions of war were seen to and provided.^
The fortifications on the Scotch border were
strengthened, and spies were sent into that country
to discover whether the King was contemplating a
league with any foreign prince. A trusty person
was also despatched to Ireland to conciliate the
rebels and gain their support.
In order to avert any danger from the English
popular indignation, which was known to be deep
and wide-spread, Henry caused a violent declaration
to be prepared in council for general circulation. In
it the people were informed that the Bishop of Rome
had no more authority in England than any other
foreign bishop, and that the King had appealed to
the next General Council from the " Usurper of
God's laws, who calls himself Pope." ^
The Bishop of London was ordered not to allow
any one unwilling to maintain this to preach at St.
Paul's Cross, and all the other bishops, the heads of
religious houses, and General Superiors of the four
orders of friars, were charged to cause their subjects
to preach to the same effect. The Observants, in
particular, were forbidden to occupy any pulpit
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 600, 609, 611.
^ State Papers (ed. 1849), vii. p. 529.
THE SCHISM. 345
without undertaking to set forth the new teaching
against the Pope.i
Such was the state of affairs in England when the
news arrived that the Bishop of Paris was coming
with a satisfactory message from the French king.
Fearing that, if reasonable counsels were now allowed
to prevail, their own position would be gravely com-
promised, those most interested, far from making an
attempt to calm the King's passion, only strove to
urge him into more desperate courses. Thus en-
couraged, Henry resolved to take an irrevocable step
before the envoy from Francis should arrive.
The bishops were summoned to court, and ordered
to procure from Convocation an act abolishing the
Pope's authority in England. Not one of therii,
however, would consent to this violation of the oath
of obedience taken at his consecration, and Arch-
bishop Cranmer, already committed to the policy,
alone promised to do what the King required in the
matter.^ Parliament might perhaps have been in-
duced to pass the desired measure had not Henry
determined, on the advice of Sir Francis Brian, to
wait till the arrival of the Bishop of Paris.^ The
King would not, however, delay the publication of
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 600, 601.
'^ Ibid., p. 612. (Chapuys to Charles V., December 9, 1533.) In
the same letter Chapuys states "that the Council are no longer to
call the Pope anything but Bishop of Rome."
3 Ibid., p. 638. (Du Bellay on England and the Pope.)
346 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
a work in justification of his marriage with Anne,
and against the authority of the " Bishop of Rome,
by some called the Pope." ^
The envoy from Francis arrived in London on
Wednesday, 17th December 1533. He had been
instructed to use every effort to bring about a recon-
ciliation between the English king and the Pope, but
to let it be known, should this be found to be impos-
sible, that the French king would side with Henry
if war was declared against him on account of his
marriage with Anne, and the Papal sentence of ex-
communication. It had been arranged between the
Pope and Francis that a proposal should be made to
Henry for the removal of the case to Cambray or
some other neutral place. But Henry peremptorily
rejected the proposal.^ The only concession he
could be induced to make was, that if before Easter
the Pope annulled the sentence against him with-
out further process, he would not throw off his
obedience to the Holy See, but if within that time
the Pope did not do so, he would openly revolt
from his obedience.' On parting, Henry showed
in a characteristic way how completely the bishop's
mission had failed, for he gave him only half the
' Gairdner, Calendar, vii. p. i. (Articles devised by the King's
Council, in justification of the marriage with Anne. )
' Ibid., p. 118. (Dr. Ortiz to Charles V., March 4, 1534.)
' Ibid., p. 634. (Castillon to Francis I., March 16, 1534.)
THE SCHISM. 347
present that had been intended for him.i Well
might the bishop say, on his return to Paris, that
he had not been able to do anything in England.^
Scarcely had the bishop left the country when
books in justification of Henry's marriage and
appeal to a Council, or against the authority of
the Pope and the Church, began to be published.
These works were distinguished by their deficiency
in talent, argument, and rea,soning, the place of
which was supplied by insulting and abusive lan-
guage and the advocacy of extreme violence.*
Henry's intention, in publishing them, was to
justify himself with his subjects and gain their
favour. But they had really the opposite effect,
for all knew that they were prompted by malice
and a desire for revenge. They only added to the
general irritation felt at the scandalous triumph
of Anne, and the King's ill-treatment of Queen
Katherine and her daughter. Some even said
openly they were only watching for a favourable
opportunity to make a move on their behalf.*
Henry now sent ambassadors to the Dukes of
Bavaria, and into Saxony and Prussia, to the King
of Poland, the Landgrave of Hesse, and to all the
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vii. p. 7.
2 Ibid., p. 134. (Ciiuentes to Charles V., March 10, 1534.)
'' Ibid., p. 128. (Chapuys to Charles V., March 17, 1534.)
* Ibid., pp. 7, 8, 62.
348 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
other princes and towns that had a leaning to
Lutheranism, expressing sympathy with their zeal
for the extirpation of religious errors, and asking
them to unite with the English king in reducing the
Pope's power within due bounds. But while he
thus forgot his position as one of the great powers
of Europe by begging for the support of his in-
feriors, he feared with good reason that they might
accuse him of having created a scandal in Chris-
tendom by not observing the usual forms of justice.
He therefore condescended still further to repeat
at full length, with the coarsest details, the history
of all his supposed personal wrongs and his acts
in self-defence, winding up this strange tale with
the assertion that he had married a lady of "ap-
proved and excellent virtues." He further des-
canted on Anne's purity of hfe, "her soberness,
her chasteness, her meekness, her wisdom, her
descent of right noble and high parentage, with
other infinite good qualities as cannot but be most
acceptable unto Almighty God and deserve His
high grace and favour." ^
Henry hoped for assistance also from the Vene-
tians and some Italian princes, who were thought
to be only waiting to see the turn affairs would
take. It was also at the time expected that the
Turks were about to make a descent on Sicily,
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 456.
THE SCHISM. 349
in which case the Emperor's troops being wanted
to resist them, the Pope would be left entirely in
the power of his allies, while he himself would be
left in peace.i To carry out this bold plan, it was
essential to have the King of France at the head
of the league. On him Henry reckoned confi-
dently. He was therefore much disconcerted when
Francis told Gardiner, that the King of England
might be sure of his favour and assistance in all
that did not touch his honour and conscience.
This however it would do, were he to act against
the authority of the Holy See, which he was ob-
liged to defend by the command of God, and the
promises he had made to the Pope.^
It was, however, in Parliament that the great
blow was to be struck. Immediately after his mar-
riage to Anne, Henry had confirmed by letters
patent the Act of 1532, which aboHshed the pay-
ment of annates, or first-fruits, to the Pope, and
provided for the exercise of ecclesiastical juris-
diction by the King. An Act passed in 1533, forbid-
ding appeals to Rome, had virtually put an end to
the Pope's authority in England. But still further
measures were required to define how final appeal
was henceforth to be made to the King, and how
ecclesiastical jurisdiction under the royal supremacy
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 607.
2 Ibid., pp. 7, 10, 21, 52, 56, 69.
350 DIVORCE OF JCATHERINE OF ARAGON.
was to be exercised. Parliament met on 1 5th January
1534. On the same day bills were brought into the
House of Commons to give the force of statutes of
the realm to the above measures, and to authorise
the King to appoint thirty-two persons to examine
the existing canons and ecclesiastical constitutions.^
Every expedient was adopted to gain the chief
members. The Bishop of Norwich, who was blind
and nearly ninety years of age, was arrested and
condemned by a lay judge to a prcBmunire, because
two years before he had condemned Bilney as a
heretic without waiting for the King's order, which
had, however, arrived before the execution. The
real reason, however, was that Bilney was a friend
of Cranmer's, and that the bishop was reputed to
be enormously rich. A month later, when his
supposed wealth was not to be found and his
innocence was proved, he was set at liberty after
making the King a present of thirty thousand
crowns.^
False reports, too, were spread with a view of
influencing public opinion. Cromwell gave out that
the Pope had said at Marseilles, that if the King had
only sent a proxy the sentence on the divorce would
have been in his favour; and that there was good
reason to hope that His Holiness even now, from
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi..p. 25 ; Wilkins, Concilia, iii. p. 770.
2 Ibid., pp. 70, 1.28. (Chapuys to Charles V.)
THE SCHISM. 351
fear and at the request of the King of France, would
grant his demands.^ Henry declared that a book
had been written in Spain against his Holiness,
and that the Emperor wished to make a new Pope.^
Cromwell said that the King of France had also
discovered the Pope's wickedness, and would do
much against him. He advised a friend of his to
remove quickly any property he had in Rome, for
the King and his allies would destroy the city.^
In the early part of February the bills against the
Church were passed in the Commons, and sent up
to the Lords. Here opposition to the measures
was expected to be much greater than in the
Commons. Many who had not opposed the divorce
were greatly irritated at all that was being done
against the Pope. Men of judgment, whether at
the Court or elsewhere, were dismayed. Sir John
Gage, the Vice-Chamberlain and one of the Coun-
cil, resigned his office and went to a Carthusian
monastery, professing his intention, if his wife con-
sented, to join the order. The Bishop of Lincoln
often said that he would rather be the poorest man
in the world than ever have been the King's Con-
fessor and Councillor. The King countermanded
the attendance of the Archbishop of York, of the
> Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 45. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
January 28, 1534.)
» Ibid., p. 70. ' Ibid. Cf. p. 128.
352, DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
Bishops of Durham and Rochester, of Lord Darcy,
and of many others who he thought would oppose
him, and he depended on intrigues, promises, and
threats to carry his point with the rest. Unhappily
he could reckon confidently on the nobles by working
on their avarice and fears. On the one hand pro-
mises of benefices hereafter to be given to laymen,
and of the prospective spoils of the monasteries,
were lavishly made. On the other, the fate of
Buckingham, condemned unanimously by eighteen
peers, who were convinced of his innocence and
shared in the offence for which he was arraigned,
plainly taught each individual noble that he must
singly confront the King's anger and despotic
power, and must be prepared either to obey or to
die. The Duke of Norfolk was one of the first to
set the example of submission. He had told the
French ambassador that neither he nor his friends
would consent to renounce the Pope's authority.
The King heard of this and sent for him to Court,
where for a time he was in great difficulties. He
seems to have made his peace by writing to inform
the Grand-Master Montmorency, that he and the
other nobles and the common people had been con-
vinced by unanswerable arguments that the Pope
had no more authority outside the diocese of Rome
than any other bishop.^
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 8, 42, 47, 128.
THE SCHISM. 353
Henry, however, was not in a hurry to carry the
measures against the Pope through Parhament. He
delayed doiilg so till he should hear from the Bishop
of Paris, whom Francis had sent to Rome to press
on his Holiness the arrangement, to which he had
got Henry's consent when he was in England. ^
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 45, 69.
CHAPTER XXXIII.
THE SENTENCE.
The Pope, on his return to Rome, at once began
to take steps for the conclusion of Henry's great
affair. Two lines of action were open to him.
He might either excommunicate Henry, deprive
him of his kingdom and release his subjects from
their allegiance, for contempt of the authority of
the Holy See, for suing for a divorce in the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury's Court, and marrying Anne
whilst his cause was pending before the Papal
tribunal; or he might simply pronounce sentence
on the validity of Henry's marriag^ with Katherine,
which had been submitted to him six years before.
He would have preferred the former course if he
could have been assured that the Emperor would
execute the sentence.^ But the Spanish ambas-
sadors, as usual, could not be induced to give any
decided pledge of their master's intention.^ In
point of fact, the Emperor did not wish this extreme
1 Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 17. (Cifuentes to Charles V.,
January 12, 1534.)
"- Ibid., and pp. 37, 130, 134.
3S4
THE SENTENCE. 355
measure to be adopted, not only because he dreaded
the discontent of his Flemish subjects if their trade
with England was interrupted, but also because at
this moment he was unable to interfere.
It happened that it was at the time of consider-
able importance that he should if possible detach
Henry from alliance with France ; and Katherine's
frequent messages to him not on any account to
make war for her cause, as she would rather die
than be the cause of bloodshed,^ gave him a plausible
excuse for his avowed reluctance to undertake the
execution of the Papal sentence. He even expressed
his wiUingness to consent to the suspension of the
sentence either during Henry's life, till a future
council, or for any other period.^
The Pope, of course, penetrated the true meaning
of the Emperor's reluctance, and consequently, in
spite of the hopes vaguely expressed by the Spanish
agents that an alliance between the Emperor and
the King of France against England might be
brought about, he was convinced that in any ex-
tremity the Emperor would probably take Henry's
part, and in the end leave Francis and himself in
the lurch.^ Under these circumstances he had no
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 7. (Chapuys to Charles V., January 3,
IS34-)
2 Ibid., pp. 89, 90. (The Emperor's Policy, February 25, 1534.)
3 Ibid., p. 382. (Cifuentes to Charles V., July 21, 1534.)
356 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
choice but to give sentence on the original cause
as to the vahdity of Katherine's marriage. The
Spanish ambassadors now wished to hurry on the
sentence without going through the usual forms,
but it was decided in Consistory that this could
not be granted.! Some delay, however, was un-
avoidable, because Capisucchi, Dean of the Rota,
who had hitherto conducted the case, was now at
Avignon, where he was likely to be detained through
the winter. Simonetta was therefore appointed to
draw up a formal report to be laid before the Con-
sistory, and though time was thus unavoidably lost,
he worked hard to have the report ready by the
first or second week in Lent,^ which this year (1534)
began on the 1 8th of February.
The Pope was not sorry for the delay, because
he was hoping daily to hear that the Bishop of '
Paris had succeeded in softening Henry during his
late visit to England. The bishop was detained on
the road by illness, and did not arrive in Rome till
the beginning of February. He at once reported
to the Pope what had passed between himself and
the King, at the same time expressing his own con-
viction that Henry would never return to Katherine,
and would throw off his obedience to the Church.
He said that Henry was negotiating with the Ger-
man princes to turn Lutheran and place himself at
' Gairdner, Calendar, vi. p. 17. " Ibid., pp. 18, 37, 74.
THE SENTENCE. 357
the head of their sect, and that unless the Pope
decided the case quickly in Henry's favour, not
only England, but other countries would be lost to
the Church. He tried to spread a report that the
Pope's censures had been treated with disrespect
by the Flemings, and that the Briefs had been torn
down from the doors where they had been fixed,
and had been trampled in the mud. But the
Spanish ambassadors disproved this by a letter
from the Queen Regent, and by the arrest of some
Englishmen in Flanders, who were believed to have
committed the above outrage at night.
On the 6th of February the bishop repeated be-
fore the Consistory what he had said about the
desperate state of affairs in England, and strongly
urged the Pope and cardinals to find some honour-
able means of averting the danger which threatened
the Church. The Pope answered that he had only
delayed justice in hopes of finding some such way,
and that if the King of France had thought of any
plan, he should at once place it before them. As
for himself he knew of none, and he could not delay
justice any longer.^ The bishop had intended to
alarm the Consistory and lead them to conciliate
Henry. But his words had the contrary effect on
the cardinals, most of whom, on hearing of Henry's
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vi. pp. 73-76. (Cifuentes and Dr. Ortiz
to Charles V.) Cf. p. 629.
3S8 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
violent conduct, w6re eager to proceed at once to
strong measures against him. The Spanish ambas-
sador also urged the Pope to act without delay, as
it would be easier to do so while Henry stood alone
without his subjects, whereas delay would only
increase the King's authority with other countries,
which would see that no steps were taken against
him. He besought the Pope not to believe what the
Bishop of Paris said, and represented that though
Francis had promised not to hinder the cause' of
justice, he had done so indirectly, by sending the
bishop with the object, not of devising any settle-
ment, but of hindering it. The Pope, however, in a
truly judicial spirit, declared that he must listen to
every one, and that nothing was lost by it, as the
cardinals were determined to give a sentence in the
principal cause. He stood firm amidst the contend-
ing opinions of both parties, and would not consent
to be hurried into extreme measures before the
cause was regularly brought to a conclusion in the
Consistory.
The Bishop of Paris, meanwhile, lost no time in
pressing his secret negotiation with the Pope. He
foresaw that if Henry broke off from the Church,
his master, to whom Henry's alliance was indis-
pensable, could scarcely remain friends with both
England and the Pope. His only object, therefore,
was to obtain delay, which he thought he could
THE SENTENCE 359
induce the Pope to grant. The scheme he devised
was a masterpiece of duplicity well worthy of being
the concluding act in transactions which, throughout
their whole course, had been characterised by false-
hood and fraud. It is not known what arguments
he used with the Pope, but doubtless he gave hopes
of Henry's repentance, which he must have known
to be false, and by this means he persuaded his
Holiness to consent to send a Cardinal with two as-
sessors to Cambrai to take cognisance of the matter,
but without power to give a definitive sentence. On
what terms the Cardinal was to be sent is not
known, but there is no doubt that the Pope did not
in any way compromise the dignity of the Church,
because the bishop told Chatillon, the French ambas-
sador in England, that his conditions were " a little
hard." Something about reparation, too, seems to
have been included in them, for the bishop under-
took to "correct all that."
Having thus cajoled the Pope, as he hoped, he
turned to" play a similar game with Henry. On
February the 22nd he wrote to Chatillon ordering
him not to communicate to Henry the memorandum
of what the Pope had granted him, which was "a little
hard." Nor was Henry to be allowed to stick at
words of "reparation or the like," which the bishop
would correct. Chatillon was only to tell him that
his Holiness was willing to send the Cardinal and
36o DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
assessors to Cambrai to take cognisance of the
matter, short of the definitive sentence, and Henry
was to be induced to answer, that out of regard
for Francis he was wiUing to see what these
delegates would say, and would send some one
to Cambrai to examine their powers, whereupon
he could do as he thought fit. Chitillon was to
point out to him that these delegates could not do
him harm, because in the first place they would
not have power to give a sentence, and in the
second, he would not have sent a proxy, but only
an excusator. While they were on their way from
Rome to Cambrai, care would be taken to secure in
the Consistory a sentence such as Henry and the
bishop desired, which would leave the validity of
Pope Julius' dispensation still doubtful.^ It would
be afterwards easy to enlarge their powers so as
to enable them to give the definitive sentence.
The bishop wished to know what judges Henry
would prefer, and whether he was to propose that
one of them should be named by Henry, another
by the Queen or the Emperor, and a third by
Francis ; or some other expedient, without com-
mitting himself to accept anything. He need only
send the excusator, and leave the bishop to do
the rest. The bishop further proposed that Henry
should secure his interests in Parliament by com-
' Gairdner, Calenda?; vii. p. 633.
THE SENTENCE. 361
municating to the members what he meant to do,
take their opinions, signed and sealed if necessary,
and then, before arriving at any decision, prorogue
the Parliament till Easter. He would thus remain
at liberty to act or not as he chose, and while he
could lose nothing, he could not fail to gain.^
Two days later the bishop wrote to Francis that
since his last despatch he had succeeded in per-
suading the Pope to grant the suspension of the
censures while the judges proceeded in the matter,
if the foregoing plan was adopted. This, he said,
ought to be added to the proposals already sent
to Henry, and Francis might safely promise to get
him out of all his difficulties, in spite of all the
world, if matters were conducted in the way he
proposed.^
Chatillon received the two foregoing letters on Mon-
day, March the 2nd. He at once communicated the
hope held out by the bishop to Henry, who seemed
well disposed to adopt the bishop's proposal. The
following day Chatillon was summoned to lay the
matter before the Council. Most of those who were
present were greatly opposed to the Pope, and did
all they could to prevent Henry's consenting to the
arrangement, saying that he had no cause to put
1 Gairdner, Calendar, vii. pp. 630, 631. (Du Bellay to Castillon,
February 22, 1534.)
2 Ibid., p. 632.
362 DIVORCE OF KATH BRINE OF ARAGON.
himself in such subjection. Henry, too, had cooled
down from what he had said the day before, and all
Chatillon's arguments were useless in bringing the
negotiation to a successful issue. After the Council
broke up, however, Henry took Chitillon to a garden
and gave his personal consent to the proposal, but
told him to keep it secret, apparently, as Chitillon
thought, because he did not like people to believe he
had granted the request so suddenly. He was will-
ing to send an excusator, though pretending not to
send him expressly, for fear of being bound to the
Pope's jurisdiction and seeming to renounce that of
Canterbury, under which his marriage with Anne
had been made. But he declared plainly that he
would not hereafter allow such large sums as hitherto
to be sent to Rome. He was also willing to prorogue
the Parliament till after Easter, and to delay the
publication of his separation from the Holy See, if,
in the meantime, the Pope -would grant his demands
— i.e., annul the excommunication and confirm his
marriage with Anne. In consenting to these points,
he thought he had made great concessions out of
friendship to the King of France, and it was impos-
sible to get better terms from him. So desperate did
Castillon consider the state of affairs that he wrote
to Francis, that he saw no help unless his Holiness
would "use mercy more than justice, and thereby
restore a king and country, which was on the
THE SENTENCE. 363
point of being lost and becoming his perpetual
enemy." 1
The bishop, however, took a brighter view of mat-
ters. He knew that his Holiness was as anxious
as himself to find Henry's marriage good. He
witnessed his great sufferings as each post from
England brought news of fresh outrages, of fresh
insults to himself personally, and of preparations for
fresh acts of violence to the Church. He noticed
that his Holiness was getting quite out of heart,
because the more he set himself to do right the more
he was defamed and satirised.^ Hence he argued that
the Holy Father was giving way, and he had not the
least fear of not bringing the matter to a good con-
clusion. It never crossed his mind that the Vicar of
Christ could see things in a spiritual light, or in any
other aspect than the political one which engrossed
himself. He had not noted that all through the
long-drawn course of this affair the thought of schism
had been the Pope's tender point, the least hint of
which had always quite unnerved him. He could not
therefore appreciate the Holy Father's agony now
that schism was close at hand, and duty compelled
him to take a step which inevitably would cause it.
The bishop had yet another ground on which,
even if everything went wrong in England, he
1 Gairdner, Calendar, vii. pp. 632, 634.
" Ibid., pp. 631, 633. (Du Bellay to Castillon.)
364 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINE OF ARAGON.
rested confidently to secure a triumph in Rome.
Presents and promises had been judiciously dis-
tributed among the cardinals. Words of courtesy
had been interpreted as pledges of support in the
Consistory. Votes had been counted, and Raince,
the French agent in Rome, sent the Grand Master
a list of those on whom they could rely.^ Exulting
in the great obligation under which his master would
place the King of England by the success his am-
bassadors would achieve, " contrary to every one's
belief and in spite of the whole world," he urged
the necessity for keeping their secret and spreading
the report that they despaired of -their case.
Meanwhile the cause before the Pope's tribunal
was taking its course. His Holiness had not been
deceived, as the Bishop of Paris had flattered
himself. He had granted the bishop's requests
because he could not finally close the door against
any one who might yet possibly be induced to
return to obedience. But he really no longer
cherished any hope of Henry's repentance. A
higher duty even than that of preventing a rent in
the Church's seamless garment, now imperatively
demanded his care. He must hand down to
succeeding ages the deposit of faith and morals
whole and incorrupt, which had been committed to
his charge. Doubts had been thrown on the vital
' Gairdner, Calendar, vii. p. 86.
THE SENTENCE. 365
laws of marriage and on the power of the Pope.
On these fundamental points no shade of uncer-
tainty must longer be allowed to rest. Turning
away his thoughts from political considerations,
and putting aside his own agonised feelings at
the approach of schism, as well as his natural
reluctance to cut off from the spiritual vine as a
dead branch, one to whom he had long been closely
united by ties of affection and gratitude, he calmly
and firmly devoted himself to his painful task of
giving sentence on the validity of Katherine's
marriage and of Pope Julius' dispensation.
On February the 27th, which was Friday in the
first week of Lent, Simonetta laid before the Consis-
tory a clear and brief report of all the proceedings
before the Rota.^ On the following Wednesday,
March the 4th, the first point was discussed. Dr.
Ortiz, Katherine's agent, had feared that perchance
doubts about the process might be raised and the
cause again delayed.^ But at his solicitation the
subject now taken in hand was the only one really
worth discussing, namely whether marriage with
a brother's widow had ever been forbidden by
natural or divine law. The preceding year it had
been decided in Consistory that such a marriage
was not prohibited by divine law. Some of the
' Gairdner, Calendar, vii. p. 117.
2 Ibid. (Dr. Ortiz to Charles V.)
366 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
cardinals objected to the question being now re-
opened, saying that it was an insult to the formal
decision of the Consistory, while others raised
certain doubts on the subject.^ On the following
Monday, March the 9th, the Pope desired the
Queen's lawyers to satisfy the cardinals on these
points, and he ordered all the cardinals to come
prepared to give sentence on Monday, March the
23rd, which was Monday in Passion Week.
Still doubts were entertained whether the Pope
would give a final sentence. Formerly the sentence
had been deferred on the pretext that the King of
England might return to obedience, and now it
was said there was no need of a sentence, because
it could do no good. The Bishop of Paris and his
brother, the Sieur de Langey, made much of the pre-
tended votes of the Universities in Henry's favour,
and strained every nerve to persuade the Pope to
delay the sentence. The difficulties were so great that
the Spanish ambassador had no hope of success.
On Monday, March the 23rd, twenty-two cardinals
met in secret Consistory. The discussion lasted
for above six hours. Campeggio said that as the
marriage had been forbidden, not by natural or
divine law, but by the law of the Church, from
which the Church, represented by the Pope, could
1 Gairdner, Calendar, vii. pp. 118, 153.
2 Ibid., and p. 134. ^ Ibid., p. 153.
THB SENTENCE. 367
dispense as every one agreed, he had always
been certain that Katherine was in the right. Car-
dinals Sanctiquattro, Farnese, Cajetan, and several
others exerted themselves for Katherine, even all
the cardinals, who were supposed to be in the
French interest, not excepting the Cardinal Tri-
vulzio, declared openly in her favour, and finally
the Pope, with the unanimous consent of all the
cardinals who were present, gave sentence that
Katherine's marriage with Henry was valid, and
the issue thereof legitimate. Henry was ordered
to take back Katherine as his wife, and to pay the
costs of the suit.^
Great was the dismay of the Bishop of Paris
and his friends. They insisted that the Pope had
been taken by surprise at the unanimous vote of
the cardinals, and that he and all of them were
now ashamed of themselves. They persuaded
themselves that his Holiness was bent on undoing
what he had been led to do inadvertently in a
moment of excitement, and had spent the following
night in consultation how to remedy the effects of
his own act. But the only concession the bishop
could obtain was that the sentence should not be
published till after Easter. His sole consolation
was the thought that the world would hereafter
confess that his master had endeavoured to prevent
' Gairdner, Calendar, vii. pp. 150, 153, 635.
368 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF A R AGON.
one ot the greatest troubles that had happened
for a long time to the Church, and perhaps to
all Christendom.^
But even now the bishop tried to cover his
failure by a falsehood. Five days after the sen-
tence was given, happening to meet Cifuentes, the
Spanish ambassador, he told him that it had been
given most inopportunely, as within four hours
after a courier brought a letter from Henry say-
ing he would renounce his sin and submit to the
Church on condition the case was tried at Cambrai.
Cifuentes replied that he believed what the bishop
said had been written, but that it was only in-
tended to delay the sentence. If the King wished
to return to his obedience he could have done so
much better when the Pope was at Marseilles,
and he marvelled that the bishop could effect by
a letter, what he could not do by his presence
when in England, in a case in which the Pope
could not accept any conditional submission. The
bishop answered that then the King did 'not un-
derstand the case, but that now the Holy Spirit had
enlightened him. Cifuentes retorted sharply, if it
was the Holy Spirit that moved him, he could do it
better now, since the sentence had been given.'*
' Gairdner, Calendar, vii. p. 151. (Bishops of Paris and MScon
to Francis I.)
^ Ibid., p. 180. (Cifuentes to Charles V., April 2, 1534.)
THE SENTENCE. 369
On March the 25th, two days after the sentence
had been given, Henry, who had not been in haste to
carry out the arrangement with the Bishop of Paris,
sent off Dr. Came and Dr. Revett to Rome to act
as his excusators if required. But a report was
spread that they were going for their own affairs,
and not for those of the King.^
On the same day the bills against the Pope and
the authority of the Holy See were passed by a
majority of the nobles and clergy, in consequence
of the threats and intrigues of the King, and to the
great regret of all good men. But Henry, in accord-
ance with the Bishop of Paris's suggestion, gave his
consent to them only conditionally, in case between
that time and Midsummer he might wish to annul
them in whole or in part.^
Before a week had elapsed, on the 3rd April,
which was Easter Eve, the Sieur de la Pommeraye
arrived from France in the greatest possible haste,
and without speaking to the French ambassador or
any one else, went immediately to the Court, where
he remained three or four hours. Great curiosity
was excited by this unusual haste.' But the report
soon spread that he had brought the news of the
sentence at Rome.* Henry affected to receive it
1 Gairdner, Calendar, -ni. p. 155. (Chapuys to Charles V.,
March 25, 1534.)
2 Ibid., pp. 155, 182. »,Ibid., p. 182. * Ibid., pp. 191, 192.
2 A
370 DIVORCE OF KATHERINE OF ARAGON.
with perfect indifference, and to be in great spirits.
It was, however, evident his mind was not at rest,
for he aiid Anne did not dine in public, as was cus-
tomary at Easter. On Easter Monday he ordered
that the statutes, to which his consent had been
suspended till Midsummer, should be immediately
published. He also commanded the preachers ap-
pointed for Easter to say the worst they possibly
could against the Pope, and he was perfectly obeyed.
He hastened the repairs of his ships ; he also sent
Rochford and Fitzwilliam to France to arrange for
an interview with the King at Whitsuntide, and
Fitzwilliam gave out that ere long great things
would be seen. It was generally reported that
Henry Was thinking of how to bring about war
with the Emperor at once, even at the expense of
all he had, fearing that otherwise the game might
be played on his own board by the Emperor's in-
vasion of England.! it j^^g already been seen that
there was no ground for these fears.
Carne and Revett arrived on the 6th of April at
Bologna, where they met the Bishop of Paris on his
journey homeward. They were not a littte amazed
to hear from him that their master's cause was
finished, and that sentence had been given against
him fifteen days before. They asked how this came
to pass, as he had written that the Pope would be
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vii. pp. 182, 191.
THE SENTENCE. 371
glad to grant the King's demands, not only in the.
principal cause, but also as to the appointment of
an excusator. Whereupon he answered that the
Imperialists had strengthened themselves so much
that they forced the Pope to give sentence. On this
they wisely remarked that they thought the Pope
could have done otherwise, if he had wished. The
bishop further told them the Imperialists were suing
for the execution of the sentence, which he would
warrant not to pass, and he advised them not to
meddle in hindering the sentence, for if the King
wrote to him he would make the Pope stop it. They
feared, however, that if the Imperialists could ob-
tain the sentence while the bishop was present, fhey
might succeed in his absence in getting it executed.
They asked for instructions as to whether they
should go on to Rome or come back, remarking that
if the Pope was as well disposed as the Bishop of
Paris reported, he might admit them to prove the
nullity of the sentence.^
On the 14th of April, Carne made a formal protest
in the name of the King of England, against the
illegality of the Pope's proceedings in the sentence
lately promulgated by him, touching the King's
marriage to Katherine. This he would have pro-
nounced in the presence of the Pope himself, if he
' Gairdner, Calendar, vii. p. 184. (Carne and Revett to Henry
Vin., April;, 1534.)
372 DIVORCE OF KATHERINB OF ARAGON.
could have obtained audience, but this being im-
possible, he pronounced it in the presence of Sir
Andrew de Casale, Dr. Revett, and others, i
On the 25th of April, Carne and Revett sent
Henry " a copy of an appeal by Carne as excusator,
from the Bishop of Rome ill informed and in fear
of the Imperialists, to the Bishop of Rome better
informed and in more liberty.'' They said they had
had an instrument made privily, so that the King
might take advantage of it while yet nothing had
been done in his name, and they suggested that it
could not prejudice the King, if a copy were sent to
the Bishop of Rome.^
Thus closed the great Divorce cause. Nearly
seven years had elapsed since the first judicial pro-
ceedings were opened in Wolsey's court, and above
six since the case was laid before the Pope. But
during those long years, in spite of ever-varying
incidents both political and personal, of wearisome
negotiations, of tortuous intrigues, falsehood, and
fraud, the avowed intentions of both Henry and the
Pope underwent no change.
Before the case was submitted to the Pope, Wolsey
warned Gregory de Casale what would be the result
if Henry's demands were not granted. Henry's first
letters to the Pope and Cardinal Sanctiquattro per-
emptorily confirmed this warning, while the coarse,
^ Gairdner, Calendar, vii. p. 196. ^ Ibid , p. 216.
THE SENTENCE. 373
insolent threats of Gardiner and Fox at the same
time took away all hopes and doubts that might yet
have lingered in the Pope's mind. On the other
hand, his Holiness at the very opening of the nego-
tiations with Gardiner and Fox declared openly, as
the principle of his future conduct, that he would
give such a decision as they could reasonably desire,
as would be consistent with law and equity, and his
own and the King's honour, and from this promise
to favour Henry whenever he could justly do so he
never departed, while at the same time he never
overstepped the limits of law and equity. Thus too
his first decision a few days later, that on grounds
of such doubtful justice and equity as those for
which the divorce was demanded, he could not grant
a common law binding hereafter on all the world,
was but an epitome of his formal sentence in Con-
sistory six years later.
The copious correspondence of Henry's agents
shows that though the King was given the fullest
opportunity of strengthening his case by further
evidence on less dubious grounds, not a particle
of sugh evidence was ever brought forward. It
also proves that the delays in the court of justice
were granted solely in deference to Henry's wishes,
and were in no way attributable to any irresolution
or fear of the Emperor on the Pope's part. In
fact, Henry's agents found it convenient to excuse
374 DIVORCE OF KATHBRINB OF ARAGON.
their own failures, by charging the Pope with
irresolution whenever he gently and firmly refused
to come to a resolution in accordance with their
wishes. As to his dread of the Emperor, he really
had no cause for fear. Charles had learned the
lesson which is written on every page of the
Church's history, that her power, being spiritual,
eludes the grasp of physical force, and he was
not likely to repeat the mistake committed by his
generals, of offering to her head insults and violence
which could only strengthen the arms of his own
enemies. Thus, Clement's personal position was
now much stronger than it had been at the be-
ginning of his reign. The fruit of his sufferings
strikingly appears in the strong contrast between
the conduct of the Spanish generals of his day,
and the reverence of the Duke of Alva thirty years
later, when Rome and the Pope, Paul IV., were
once more at the mercy of the Spaniards. There
can also be no doubt that Clement's gentleness,
firmness, and patience amid such unprecedented
sufferings, contributed to advance greatly the atti-
tude of independence of all temporal powers, which
the Church was now assuming, and which she has
since maintained, and still maintains at the present
day.
The Pope has been blamed, especially by Catho-
lics, for not preventing the English Schism by more
THE SENTENCE. 375
prompt action against Henry. But any impartial
reader who follows the history of the whole trans-
action, step by step, can scarcely fail to see that,
in common justice and prudence no less than as
Christ's Vicar, he could not have acted otherwise
than as he did. Common justice forbade him to
take any strong step till the inquiry before the
legates' court, which Henry demanded, was closed.
After it was closed, and Campeggio's informal judg-
ment left no doubt as to what the final sentence
must be, the only hope of averting the Schism
was some unlikely change of fancy on Henry's
part, or some providential interposition, such as
the death of Anne, or of Katherine, or even of
Henry himself.
THE END.
PKINTED BY BALLANTYNE, HANSON AND CO.
EDINBURGH AND LONDON.
m
f|
iilillilllillllliilllllllllillllir:^'
I
mm
,, |||jl|||jjll|.|llillilllil!tlt,il!ll
iiil! I
ill-
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11