THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THOMAS CRANMER, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, AND HIS ENGLISH AUDIENCE 1533-54

THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THOMAS CRANMER, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, AND HIS ENGLISH AUDIENCE 1533-54. By: Ayris, Paul, Reformation & Renaissance Review: Journal of the Society for Reformation Studies, 14622459, Jun2000, Issue 3

THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THOMAS CRANMER, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, AND HIS ENGLISH AUDIENCE 1533-54

I

The purpose of this essay is to pay tribute to the work of David Selwyn in his research on primary resources for the history of the Early English Reformation. He and I worked together in producing Thomas Cranmer: Churchman and Scholar.(n1) In this work, David undertook a real labour of love in drawing up a bibliographical survey of Thomas Cranmer's Works in both print and manuscript. David and I both worked on Thomas Cranmer's correspondence and we were able to list over one hundred letters, either by Cranmer or addressed to him, which are not in the Parker Society edition of his writings.(n2) What is offered below is a tribute to David's work in this regard and a foretaste of a new edition of Thomas Cranmer's correspondence. Using the revised numbering of the paperback edition of our work, I give below a selection of the correspondence that is missing from the authoritative edition of Cranmer's works.

In choosing the letters transcribed here, I have been guided by five maxims in my selection criteria:

The letter has never before appeared in print in an authoritative edition;
Where an older printed edition contains misreadings or misdatings, a new transcription is required; The letter exists in Cranmer's copybook of letters (BL, Harleian MS. 6148) and is unpublished; The letters, both by and to Cranmer, stem from or are destined for the archbishop's English audience; The listing in Ayris and Selwyn needs updating. The cross-section of material below, therefore, is significant in providing an indication of the wealth of detailed material in the Cranmer corpus of letters which remains to be published.

A complete guide to the editorial method adopted here is to be found in R.F. Hunnisett, Editing Records for Publication (London: British Records Association, 1977). The documents below have been arranged in chronological order and have been assigned a letter, which is given at the head of the transcript. The transcripts are also introduced by a modem heading in round brackets. The foliation of the original, the reference to the letter in Ayris and Selwyn, and information on any printed edition or calendar is given in round brackets at the end of each document. Textual footnotes appear at the foot of the page. In transcripts, the spelling of the original has been maintained in the English documents; for the two Greek words in letter K, modern orthography has been used. In each text, the use of capitals has been restricted and a modem usage adopted. All abbreviations have been extended, where this can be done with confidence, and a modern system of punctuation used. Editorial corrections in the text are indicated in square brackets in the text or in the footnotes. The identification of historical persons is taken from the Dictionary of National Biography (ed. L. Stephen and S. Lee; 72 vols; London: Smith & Elder, 1885-1913) unless otherwise stated.

II

The letters presented in transcription below illustrate in vivid detail the role of Thomas Cranmer as archbishop of Canterbury, the leading citizen of the kingdom. Shafts of penetrating light are shed on his role as ecclesiastic, administrator, churchman, statesman, liturgist and theologian. The letters below also illuminate the impact of Reformation in England on the church, the clergy and the laity.

A number of letters stem from the archbishop's role as patron to his family, friends and supporters. Letters D, G and H fall into this category. Letter G is a plea for land for his brother-in-law Edmund Cartwright. Letter D is a similar request for Henry Stockwith, a relation of the archbishop's from the East Midlands and one of Cranmer's officials. Letter H is likewise a request for land for Thomas Brooke alias Cobham, a member of Cranmer's household who married his niece Susan. Like his mediaeval forebears, Cranmer was concerned to build up a network of clients and supporters bound to him both by family bonds and by ties of obligation.(n3)

In terms of ecclesiastical patronage, a number of letters shed light on the Henrician church. Letter A provides a startling illustration of Cranmer's new role in church and state following his appointment to Canterbury under the patronage of the Boleyns.(n4) In May 1533, Cranmer was at Dunstable to pronounce Henry's marriage to Catherine null and void. Routine diocesan business was transacted even though the archbishop was away from Lambeth and his register shows that one institution to a benefice was performed at this time, that of William Boleyn to the rectory of Moulton.(n5) Letter A provides intriguing background detail to this appointment. Moulton lay in Suffolk, in one of the archbishop's deaneries of immediate jurisdiction. The rectory is valued in Cranmer's register at £13 6s 8d, with the vicarage at £4 7s 8d.(n6) In May 1533, Cranmer instituted Boleyn, a cousin of Anne Boleyn's, to the rectory. This, without doubt, was a favour from Cranmer in return for the Boleyns' patronage extended to him weeks earlier in his appointment to Canterbury. However, the text of the letter seems to capture the process of institution at an early stage. Ralph Morice, the archbishop's personal secretary, reports that Cranmer is minded that the resignation of the present incumbent John Bigges should not take effect and that the deed of resignation should be returned to him. It looks as though Henry had determined that Boleyn should have the rectory and that an earlier suit made for the promotion should lapse in favour of Anne's cousin. The archbishop's register shows that Boleyn was instituted to the rectory by his proctor, Edward Barnaby, at Dunstable on 12 May 1533. The web of patronage that bound Cranmer to the Boleyns and to the Crown duly exerted its influence to forward William Boleyn's promotion.

Letter B, like letter A from Cranmer's copybook of letters, also illustrates the realities in church and state following Cranmer's surprise appointment to Canterbury in 1533. His promotion had an immediate effect on Thomas Baschurch, who had acted as secretary to Cranmer's predecessor William Warham. Baschurch seems to have suffered a nervous breakdown and this heralded a catalogue of pathetic suicide attempts. Baschurch's wish appears to have been to put as much distance between himself and the new archbishop as possible. He originally promised to exchange the rectory at Chevening with a living in Somerset, which was held by a chaplain of Agnes Tilney, dowager duchess of Norfolk. Cranmer, however, had other ideas and seems to have persuaded Baschurch to adopt a different course of action. On 27 July 1533, the archbishop wrote to the duchess saying, rather innocently, that Baschurch had changed his mind and promised the living to someone else. This was disingenuous because Cranmer had already arranged for the living to pass to Richard Astall, a Cambridge friend and one of his chaplains. On 8 July, as letter B shows, Baschurch wrote to Cranmer in some desperation. Using the unusual vehicle of this private letter, he resigned the rectory of Chevening into the archbishop's hands, having agreed a pension with his successor Astall. Keen as Cranmer was to get rid of Baschurch, the letter itself was not enough. By law, a formal deed of resignation was required and this helps to explain why Astall was not instituted until 15 October.

This is not the whole story, however. Cranmer may well have secured the living for his friend, but even before Astall was instituted Cranmer wrote to him on 8 October in terms of barely concealed anger. The farm of the rectory's revenues had been granted to Thomas Abberforde, one of Cranmer's servants, undoubtedly at the archbishop's request. However, Astall demanded more than the going rate by asking for £20 a year from Abberforde in dues, rather than £16. In a fit of temper, Cranmer wrote to his old friend in far from friendly terms, 'Sir, I muche mervaile that you will desire thus farr to excede (in this uncertayne worlde) frome the accustumed rent therof'. The archbishop firmly asked Astall to lower the amount, as he had promised. Presumably Astall complied, for he was instituted to the rectory a week later. Baschurch had been ousted from Chevening, but Cranmer was still made to fight by his own side to get his way.(n7)

The Reformation in England was a battle between conservatives and evangelicals, the outcome of which no one could predict with certainty. In the second half of the 1530s, the Pilgrimage of Grace was a turning point in the progress of reform. Henry had come close to being toppled and parallels with the Peasants' War of 1524-25 were inevitable. Cranmer was conscious of the dangers of pushing reform too far too quickly and the lessons of the popular uprisings of 1536 were not lost on him. As archbishop, Cranmer needed to secure social cohesion based on the authority of the Prince. In October 1537, the archbishop engaged in an angry war of words with Thomas Cheney, lord warden of the Cinque Ports. One of Cranmer's charges was that Cheyney was undermining the archbishop's wish for the people to read the Bible in English, now authorized by the king. Cheney was deeply offended by the implication that he was encouraging disaffection, just as the Pilgrimage of Grace had done.(n8)

These themes, with others, can be traced in Cranmer's letter of January 1538, which appears below as letter F. In this letter, Cranmer reports his actions to Cromwell concerning a rumour that the king is dead. The main culprit was Thomas Graunte, who initially denied the charge. He then admitted that he had heard the report from a stranger in Dover. John Helde and John Huggen were also charged and Cranmer acted quickly to imprison all three men. In a separate matter, the archbishop also learned of potentially seditious words between two parish priests. Henry's son Edward was born on 12 October 1537 and christened three days later. His mother, Jane, tragically died following the birth and her funeral took place on 12 November. This sequence of events forms the background to the seditious words of John Stockton, who alleged 'bycause the quene was not crowned, that their is like to be busynes in time to come'. Stockton denied 'that he spake any such wordes of the prince or that he had any communication there either of the quene or of the prince'.

Such actions could not go unpunished and Cranmer led an examination of the ring leaders. Not all the examinations appear to survive; the archbishop talks of one of his clients, Sir Edward Ringsley, as also leading an examination. Of the miscreants, one was punished at Canterbury and another, or possibly two, at Sandwich. Stockton was dealt with separately at Ashford. Cranmer was careful to keep Cromwell informed throughout, as his letters testify.(n9)

The suppression of the friaries and the monasteries is a distinguishing mark of the political Reformation of the 1530s.(n10) It is usually held that the archbishop was a spectator in these developments, a view partly supported by letter H below. The Tudor government was especially concerned about the friars and their influence on the population at large. It was the visitation of the friars in the early 1530s that persuaded the government to undertake a general visitation of the church to enforce obedience to the king's supremacy.(n11) In 1538, the orders of friars now faced suppression. Cranmer wrote to the vicegerent approving of his 'godly proceding', and he urged Cromwell to extend his activities to Canterbury 'to thentente that the irreligious religion ther may be extincted'.

Despite the innocent tone of the letter, Cranmer and his administration had been closely involved in ensuring that the infrastructure of the visitation was in place. Thomas Cranmer's register shows that on 6 February 1538 Richard Ingworth, suffragan bishop of Dover, received a commission to visit the houses of the friars throughout England. In anticipation of the visitation, many houses had begun to alienate goods and a second commission in May was issued to plug this gap. Ingworth was empowered to confiscate the common seals of the friars he had already visited, and of those he would visit in future, to sequester their property and to draw up inventories in duplicate. The king ordered all mayors, sheriffs, bailiffs and secular officials to help. However, to implement the commissions, Ingworths had to have them copied and it was the archbishop's administrative machine that performed this crucial task. On 12 July 1538, beneath the image of the crucifix on the north door of St Paul's cathedral in London, Ingworth appeared before John Cockes, the archbishop's official principal, presented the two royal commissions and requested that copies be made. Cockes agreed and asked Anthony Hussey, the archbishop's principal registrar, to publish them in the form of public instruments. The archbishop's administrative officials were crucial to the course of the visitation.(n12) There seems no doubt but that Cranmer fully agreed with. their actions.

Of all the letters reproduced below, perhaps the most important is letter K which concerns the use of the 1552 Book of Common Prayer. The 1552 text represents a thorough revision of the first edition of 1549 and was necessary when Stephen Gardiner's Explication and Assertion of 1551 demonstrated that the doctrine of the real presence could be found in Cranmer's work. The rite of 1552 dramatically altered the shape of the liturgy in the communion rite. No trace of the mediaeval canon of the mass survived. The emphasis in the 1552 service is on the reception of the bread and wine by the faithful. This represents a radical development on the doctrine and practice of the 1549 rite.(n13)

The Duke of Northumberland was an enemy of Cranmer, being influenced by the radicalism of John Knox, whom he brought south from Newcastle and Berwick. Knox's views were similar to those of John Laski and, when he arrived in London, Knox picked a quarrel with Cranmer over the issue of kneeling at the communion. Knox denounced this practice in a sermon before the king and the Privy Council. The Council were impressed by Knox's views, and his zeal, and ordered the printer Grafton to stop work until Cranmer explained himself.(n14)

The text of Cranmer's letter is given in full below. It is a masterpiece of controlled anger and biting sarcasm at the expense of those who wished him to change, his programme of reform. In his letter, the archbishop explained that he had secured a copy of the Prayer Book which was being used by the printers to print from, and he promised to ensure that the printer's errors from the first edition would be corrected. He then tackled head-on the charge that some were offended at kneeling at the communion. Instead of discussing the matter with Peter Martyr and Nicholas Ridley, as the Council had requested, Cranmer hit the ball straight back into his opponents' court. This matter, he said, had already been discussed before the Book was approved by parliament. He urged the Council not to listen to people who wished to make trouble, clearly a dig at Knox, when things are in good order.

Cranmer then turned to specific theological concerns, as though he were disputing a point with an undergraduate at Cambridge. His opponents objected that kneeling was not commanded in Scripture and that what is not commanded in Scripture is unlawful. Cranmer then produced his trump card by identifying this as the doctrine of the Anabaptists, representing a subversion of all order. If this assertion is true, asked Cranmer, why bother to have any prescribed form of service at all?

This was a devastating argument and Cranmer drove his attack home by pushing his opponents' arguments to a form of conclusion. The latter maintained that Scripture did not expressly state that Christ ministered the sacraments to his apostles kneeling. Nor, insisted Cranmer, did they find that he ministered it standing or sitting. If the plain word of Scripture were to be followed, those receiving the bread and wine would receive it lying on the ground, as was then the custom and, as Cranmer pointed out, the Tartars and Turks still did.

The letter reveals a startling side to Cramer's character, one far removed from the traditional image of a 'doubting Thomas'. On the contrary, here was a man at the height of his career. Both Cranmer and Knox were invited to give further thought to the matter. On 22. October, just two weeks after Cranmer had sent his letter, the Council took the decision to add the Black Rubric to the 1552 Prayer Book. This text justified the practice of kneeling and ruled out any imputation of idolatry by that action, rejecting any notion of the real presence. It is usually taken that the publication of the Black Rubric represents a defeat for Cranmer and a victory for his opponents. Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch has maintained that, on the contrary, the Black Rubric marks Cranmer's victory over his adversaries, since it supports Cranmer's own theological understanding of the sacrament. This revisionism is probably going too far, since it was only the opposition of men like Knox that led to the publication of the Rubric in the first place. Nonetheless, Professor MacCulloch is right to claim that the Black Rubric supports, and does not overturn, the position which Cranmer took in his letter of 7 October. Despite lacking parliamentary sanction, the Rubric defends Cranmer's text in the rite of 1552 and the spirit of the Book presented to parliament.(n15)

The final letter in this collection dates from April 1554 and is a witness to the vicissitudes of the early English Reformation. Edward VI's short reign came to an end with his untimely death in July 1553. The accession of Lady Jane Grey as Queen caused rifts among the evangelicals in the capital, with Nicholas Ridley as bishop of London being a strong supporter. The Duke of Northumberland, however, soon realized that all was lost and he threw up his hat for Queen Mary in the market place in Cambridge on 20 July.(n16) With Mary's accession, the game was up for Cranmer and the evangelicals. Ridley was quickly imprisoned for treason in July for his support of Lady Jane Grey and Edmund Bonner resumed his activity as bishop of London from September 1553.(n17) Cranmer effectively ceased his work as archbishop of Canterbury in September 1553. The last entry in his register is the institution of his colleague William Cooke as vicar of Croydon on 13 September. The following day, he was imprisoned in the Tower. Latimer himself had been sent to the Tower on the 13 September.(n18) Most of what is known about Rowland Taylor comes from the pages of Foxe. He was a client of Cranmer's, being appointed rector of Hadleigh, which lay in the deanery of Bocking, in the archbishop's immediate jurisdiction, in 1544. Implicated in Northumberland's plot to make Jane queen in 1553, Taylor was arrested shortly after Mary's accession, only to be pardoned three months later. He was arrested again in March 1554, during Holy Week, and imprisoned in the King's Bench.(n19)

In March 1554 Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley were all sent to Oxford.(n20) This triumvirate was a principal target for the Marian regime. Between them, they represented the whole span of the English Reformation, starting in the 1520s. The government had decided to put the trio on trial at Oxford. The instrument was to be a delegation of the Canterbury convocation, headed by Hugh Weston, which was to act as a tribunal to investigate the prisoners. This was not a trial, rather a disputation which would display the heresies of the three men, all Cambridge graduates, to the world, thus providing material for a full heresy trial once Roman obedience has been re-established. The disputation lasted from 14 until 20 April.(n21)

This is the background to the dramatic letter M which was written by Rowland Taylor and sent to Oxford. The purpose of the epistle, which is in Taylor's own hand, is hortatory as it is clearly designed to bolster the three men in their disputation, or 'Thys yowr interpryce', as Taylor calls it. Taylor persists in calling Ridley bishop of London, ignoring Bonner's promotion to that see, and betrays no trace of doubt in the truth of the evangelical cause. Associating with him fellow evangelical prisoners in London, Taylor praises the three leaders of the reformed cause and urges them to martyrdom. Their stand 'ys most plesand to behold. Thys is an other maner of notabl nobilite then being in the forfrontt in wordly warfairs'.

In truth, the outcome of the Oxford disputation was inconclusive. Although the authorities claimed success, they did not publish any official transcript of the proceedings. Both Cranmer and Ridley complained to London about the disputation. Cranmer himself was depressed and wrote to the Council to speak his mind. He suggested that '(as by their haste might well appear), they (his opponents) came, not to speak the truth, but to condemn us in post haste, before the truth might be thoroughly tried and heard'. Hugh Weston refused to deliver the letter, which survives in two different versions, and it is unclear whether it ever actually arrived in London.(n22) Be that as it may, the Marian regime had all three men firmly in their sights. For them, there would be no escape.(n23)

III

A

(May, 1533? Letter from Ralph Morice, the archbishop of Canterbury's secretary, to John Cockes, his chancellor, concerning the appointment of William Boleyn to the rectory of Moulton)

Master chauncellour, in my ryght hartie wise I commende me to your mastreship. And thes be to advertyse you that yt ys my lorde's expresse commandement that I shuld wryte unto you, that in caase ye have not admytted the resignation of Mr Bigges of Sarum concernyng the benefice of Multon as sone as you maye, send the resignation agayne unto the said Master Bigges or cancell the same, for as his grace is mynded that the sute whiche hathe byn made therin shall nowe take none effecte. As knowithe Gode who preserve youe.(n24)

(BL, Harleian MS. 6148, fol. 77; L.P., VII, no. 90, duplicated in no. 417 [misdated to 1534]; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 28 [also misdated to 1534])

B

(8 July 1533? Letter from Thomas Baschurch, rector of Chevening, to the archbishop resigning his living in favour of Richard Astall)

Please yt your grace to understande that uponn recepte and sight of your grace's honorable lettres missives and also licence ad communicand' concernyng the resignation of my benifice of Chevening uponn and for a certeyn annuall pension for master Richarde Astalle's preferment,(n25) he and I have had communication in the cause and be aggreed uponn the summe of viiili st. yerely to be paid to me, the churche being bounde for the same accordyng to your grace's lettres in that behalf; whiche thyng I most humbly beseche your grace may be so doon, for the whiche I shalbe your true bedes man.

And as touchyng my resignation, if ther had be any notary here at hande, I wolde gladely have made it in deu forme of the lawe, and so have sent it to your grace by this berer. And for defawte(n26) of one, if this may be sufficient in the lawe, I nowe resigne my said benifice of Chevening into the most honorable hand of your grace by this my writyng, so as it may be for the preferment of the said master Astall; and that I may have an annuall penncion of viiili reserved to me under maner abovesaid oute of the said benifice to be assigned. And in case this cannot stande by the lawe, than shall I be redy at all tyme when I shalbe lawfully required to make a resignation for the entent aforsaid, as the lawe shall require, in deu formie. As knoweth Gode who preserve your good grace.

In caase by ignorance or by over sight anythyng have passed myne hand in this other wise than it is beseemyng, or mought(n27) be hurtefull to me, I trust your grace of your most singular goodnes will take every thyng to the best and see that no preiudice shall growe therby to me. At Chevening, the viiith daye of July.

(BL, Harleian MS. 6148, fol. 79; L.P., VI, no. 786; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 22)

C

(No date, but c. 1533. Letter from John Cockes, the archbishop's chancellor, advocating that a suit concerning Henry, Lord Morley, be revoked to Cranmer's Audience Court; and of a theft from the parish church at Monlake)

Please yt your grace(n28) to be advertised that onn Fryday laste I receyved frome my lorde Morley a lettre(n29) sent to be directed unto your said grace, withe certayne credance by his servauant therunto apperteynyng. In consideracion wherof I culde no lesse doo of dutie in your grace's absence than to enfor the same by wrytyng unto your lordeship. His said lettre ys of suche apparance, I reken, that your grace shall sone(n30) perceyve bothe the effecte and facte therof. And for the credaunce of the same, yt is none other but that forasmoch as my lorde of London(n31) will nott willynglye applye to tender the reporte of the moste honest men of the paryshe there, specially when he ys ons synysterly reported unto, butt rather styfly will regarde the malice of sume one or two persons than the veritie yt self. As I said, forasmoche as this in this matter ys lyke to be provid, my said lorde Morlei's request ys that it will please your grace to send your honorable lettres of commandement unto the parties to cause theym sease of their sute untill your gracis audience do examen the truthe therof. And that the soner, inasmoche as(n32) yt ys thoughte that the discorde therof will engender tumultarye and variance amonges the people in takyng parties therin. What your grace's pleasur ys herin, at your convenient laysur, I am exhorted by my said lorde to send hym wourde therof.

Furthermore, this ys to advertise your said grace that your loodgyng ande howseholde at Mortelaque is in goode state and condition, thankes be unto Gode, notwithstandyng ther hath been(n33) some evill disposed persons in the churche onn Frydaye at nyghte, whiche hath taken away certeyn surpless and other ornamentes owte of the same, whiche was not of so great valewe as they thowghte peraventure they shulde have gotten. As knoweth our Lorde, who preserve your grace in longe helth to your moste gentill harte's ease and desire etc.

(BL, Harleian MS. 6148, fol. 77r-v; L.P., VI, no. 1601; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 25)

D

(20 July, 1537? Letter from the archbishop to Thomas Cromwell concerning the demesne lands from the Charterhouse in the Isle of Axholme)

My verray singuler good lorde, in most hartie wise I commende me unto you.(n34) And whet as my sute hath bene unto you for my frende Henry Stoketh, to have a lees of the demayne landys of the Charterhouse in the Ile of Axholme, I have sent my servaunte this berer to put your lordship in remembrance of the same, desyryng you hartely to move the kinge's highnes in the said sute so that he may have it eyther by leez or elles that he may purchase the said demayne landys accordyng as other have doonn. And in so doyng, your lordship shall do unto me a verray singuler pleasuer. As knoweth almyghtie God, who have your good lordship in his tuicyonn. At Lambeth, the xx of July.

Your own ever assured
T. Cantuarien'(n35)

(PRO, SP1/134, fol. 210; L.P., XIII (i), no. 1424; P.S., Cranmer II, p. 337; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 8)

E

(13 August 1537? The archbishop to Sir Richard Rich concerning a testamentary suit)

After moste hartie commendations. Theis shalbe to advertise you that concernyng your requestes, I am sorye that I may not write to Thomas Argall, my clerke, for the revocation of the lettres ad colligend' graunted to White and Foxley, forbicause the said lettres muste be revoked by my officer the deane of tharches, maister of my prerogative,(n36) who as I suppose is absent from Londonn. And if he were there present, he wuld not revoke them, but the contrary parte cited, which may not be inconsideration the terme is expired. And by the lettres ad colligend' your frendes can take no harme, inasmoche as by the comon ordre of my courte the parties so obteignyng the lettres ad colligend' ar sufficiently bounde without embesillement, frawde, or cover(n37) to gather the goodes and them to deliver by sufficient inventory at day to them appoynted in my courte. And as concernyng thadministration whereby your frendes may be savid harmeles, and for the treu deliveraunce of(n38) the said goodes, you shall have my lawfull favour and such pleasur as I cann shewe to you. And for the furtheraunce herof I woll write unto mynn officers that no such lettres of administration shall passe untill such tyme that I and you therof more shall consulte. Thus hartely faire you well. From Forde the iiith day of Auguste.

Your lovynge frende
T. Cantuarien'(n39)

(PRO, SP 1/123, fol. 200; L.P., XII (ii), no. 435; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 4)

F

(14 January 1538? Letter from the archbishop of Canterbury to the vicegerent concerning examination of those who oppose the king; and concerning news from Rome)

After most hame commendations unto your lordeship. Theis shalbe to signifie unto the same that bicause I harde that it was reported by some of this countrie that the krug was deade, I with Mr Hawte, sheriff,(n40) and certen other Justices of the peace examined divers to try oute the furste autour therof, by whome that brute was broughte into theis parties, whiche examination I do send unto your lordeship herin enclosed.(n41) And in one of the saide examinations the matier is drevyn unto Thomas Graunte, who utterly first denyed that ever he harde or spake any suche matier. And syns he hath confessid that he harde it but of a stranger commyng frome Dover, whome he knoweth not, and in the other examination the matier is dryven unto John Helde of Nonyngton, and to John Huggen of Cestre, but Huggen denyeth that he spake the said wourdes. Nevertheles the said Helde affirmeth before the said Huggen that he spake theym.

Also in examination of this matier I cam to knowlege of an other matier concernyng my lorde prince, whiche was spoken by one preist unto an other(n42) wherof I have thone in warde and thother I truste to have this nyght.(n43) I kepe also in warde Thomas Graunte, John Helde and John Huggen untill I knowe the kinge's pleasur what shalbe donn with them, whiche I beseche your lordeship that I with other the kmge's iustices of peace may be asserteyned of with expedition.

I have receyvid from Rome very strange newis(n44) sente to me frome one that was somtyme my servaunte and nowe servaunte unto the cardinall whiche was bysshop of Wurceiter.(n45) As thei were sent unto me, so I send theym unto you herein enclosed. Thus, my lorde, right hartely faire you well. At Forde, the xiiiith day of Januarye.

Your own ever assured
T. Cantuarien'(n46)

(PRO, SP 1/128, fol. 86; L.P., XIII (i), no. 76; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 6)

G

(16 February 1538? Thomas Cranmer to King Henry VIII regarding Luther's attack on the 'Donation of Constantine'; and the letting in farm of land for Edmund Cartwright, the archbishop's brother-in-law)

Pleasith it your highnes to be advertised that I have sent unto the same herwithall a booke translated oute of the Dowche tonge whiche Marten Luther hath compiled agaynste the false, fayned 'Donacion of Constantyne' mentioned in the 96 Distinction,(n47) in the whiche boke one thing specially I thought good to advertise your highnes of, whiche I have marked with an hande in the margent.(n48)

Furthermore, where the chawnceler of your gracis augumentations(n49) movid your highnes for a grounde named Panthurste, parcell of the landes whiche I exchanged with your grace, to be letten in ferme to Edmunde(n50) Cartewright, who hath marled a suster of myn, and your grace graunted the same, as your chaunceller said unto me. And after your grace confirmid the same to myself, I am nowe enformed that your grace hathe graunted the same unto Sir Nicolas Carewe, whiche if your grace have donn, I am assured it was bicause your grace was not put in rememberaunce of the said Edmunde Cartewrite. Pleasith it your grace to knowe that the said Edmunde hath not sufficient wherof in those parties to finde hymself, his wife and children, if the said grownde be taken frome hym, so that to put hym frome that ferme is to put hym clene oute of that countrye. Inconsideration wherof I beseche your grace that the said Edmunde may have the leace therof for xxi yeres, or at the leste for ii or iii yers, so that in the meane tyme he may provide hym of some other lyvinge. Thus almyghtie God preserve your highnes in His blessid tuition. At Forde, the xvith daye of Februarye.

Your grace's most humble
chaplayn & bediman
T. Cantuarien'(n51)

(PRO, SP 1/129, fol. 64; L.P., XIII(i), no. 297; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 7)

H

(5 October 1538? The archbishop of Canterbury to the vicegerent, Thomas Cromwell, concerning the suppression of Greyfriars in Canterbury)

My singuler good lorde, in my moste hartie wise I commend me unto your lordeship. And where as I perceyve that your lordeship, not withoute(n52) urgent and godly considerations, hath suppressyd alredie divers fryers' houses and bistowed theym aponn honest men (as I am enformed), whiche your godly proceding I truste shall aswell extende unto Canterbury as in other plac...,(n53) to thentente that the irreligious religion ther may be extincted with other; and forasmoche as the gray friers in Canterbury lieth very commodiously for this berer Thomas Cobham, brother unto my lorde Cobham and my servaunte,(n54) specially by cause the same ys not only in his natyve country, but also nyghe unto his frendes, theis shalbe to besech your lordeship to be so good lorde unto hymm as to helpe hym unto the said house of the gray fryers, for having alredie some londe of his awnn, he shalbe the more hable to maynteyne the house in an honest state. And in thus doyng your lordeship shall both do for the preferment of an honest man, and also make hym more hable to do the kinge's grace service and your lordeship such pleasur as shall ly in hymm during his lif. Thus, my lorde, right hartely faire you well. At Lambeth, the vth daye of October.

Your own ever assured
T. Cantuarien'(n55)

(PRO, SP1/137, fol. 102; L.P., XIII (ii), no. 537; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 9)

I

(20 April 15447 Letter from the archbishop to the warden of All Souls College, Oxford, for the provision of munitions to aid the king in his war against France)

I commende(n56) me hertilie unto you.(n57) And wheras I did latelye write unto you to furnishe the kinge's maiestie with one demy launce and ii light geldinges againste his grace's going this sommer into Fraunce, your aunswere wherin as yet I doo not knowe, thies shalbe farther to signifie unto you that the kinge's maiestie's pleasure is ye shall with all diligence send up hither to London the said demy launce and geldinges, if you can by any meanes possible provide the same, so that they may be here by the iiijth or vth day of May at the furthest; or elis at the least to send up one demy launce well furnished with an able man and all thinges thereto apperteyning. And herof not to faile in any wise. Thus hertilie fare ye well. From my manor at Lambhith the xxth of Aprill.

T. Cantuarien'(n58)

(All Souls College, Oxford. MS. CTM, p. 303, no. 21; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 12)

J

(8 January 1550. Letter from the archbishop to Matthew Parker, master of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, instructing him to preach at St Paul's Cross)

After hartie commendations. Thies be to signefie unto you that the kinge's maiestie's Counsaile have appointed you to preach one sermon at Paule's Crosse onn Sonday the xvith day of Marche; and not to rifle therof(n59) as you will aunsvere unto them for the contrary. Wherefore I pray you puerly and sincerely to set fourth Gode's worde there, and to exhorte your audience to theyr due obedience(n60) to hi[s] maiestie's highnes' lawes and statutes, and to unite an[d] charite among them selfes as apparteyneth. Th[us] fare you hartely well. From my manor at [La]mbethe, the viiith of Januarii anno Domini 1550.(n61)

Your lovynge frende
T. Cant'(n62)

(BL, Additional MS. 19,400, fol. 19; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 14)

K

(17 October 1552. Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, to the lords of the Privy Council concerning the Book of Common Prayer and the practice of kneeling at communion)

After my right humble commendations unto your good lordshipps. Where I understaunde by your lordshipps' lettres that the kinge's maiestie his pleasure is that the Boke of Commen Service shoulde bee diligentlye perused, and therin the prynter's errourse to bee amendid, I shall travaile therin to the uttermost of my power. Albeit I had neade first to have had the Boke written which was passed by acte of parliament and sealed with the greate seale,(n63) which remaynith in the handes of Mr Spilman, clerke of the parlament,(n64) who is not in London, nor I cannot learne where he is. Nevertheles, I have gotten the copie which Mr Spilman delivered to the printers(n65) to printe by, which I thincke shall serve well enough.

And where I understaunde further by your lordshipps' lettres that some bee offended with kneeling at the tyme of the receavinge of the sacrament, and woulde that I, callinge to me the bushop of Londonn(n66) and some other learnede men as Mr Peter Martyr(n67) or suche like, should with theim expend and waye the said prescription of(n68) kneelinge, whether it bee fitt to remaynn as a commaundement or to bee left out of the Boke, I shall accomplish the kinge's maiestie his commaundement herin, albee it I trust that wee with lust ballaunce waled this at the makinge of the Boke, and not onlie wee but a greate menny bushops and other of the best learned within this realme, and appoincted for that purpose. And nowe the Boke beinge read and approved by thole state of the realme in the high courte of parlament, with the kinge's maiestie his roiall assent, that this shoulde bee nowe altered againe without parlament, of what importaunce this matter is, I referr to your lordshipps' wisdome to considre.

I knowe your lordshipps' wisdome to bee suche that I trust ye will not bee moved with thes gloriouse and unquiet spirites, which can like nothing but that is after their own fansye and cease not to make troble and disquietnes when thinges bee most(n69) quiet and in goode ordre. If suche men should bee hearde, although the Boke were made everye yere a newe, yet should it not lacke faultes in their opinion. But (saie thei), it is not commaunded in the Scripture to kneele, and whatsoever is not commaunded in the Scripture is against the Scripture and utterly unlaufull and ungodlie. But this saing is the chief foundation of therror of thanabaptistes and of divers other sectes. Thes sainge is a subvertion of all ordre, aswell in religion as in common pollicye. If this sainge bee true, take awaie the hole Boke of Service, for what should men travell to sett an ordre in the forme of service, if no ordre can bee sett but that is alreadye prescribed by the Scripture?

And because I will not troble your lordshipps with recitinge of manny scriptures or proves in this matier, whosoever teacheth auny suche doctrine (if your lordshipps will geave me leave), I will sett my rote by his to bee tried by tier that his doctrine is untrue, and not onlie untrue but also seditiouse and perillouse to bee hearde of auny subiectes, as a thinge breakinge the bridle of obedience and losinge theim from the bonde of all princes' lawes. My good lordshipps, I praye youe to considre that there bee two praiers which go before the receavinge of the sacrament and two ymmediatlie followe, all which tyme the people praying and geavinge thanckes to kneele; and what inconvenience there is, that it may not bee thus ordered, I knowe not. If the kneelinge of the people shoulde bee discontynued for the tyme of the receavinge of the sacrament, so that at the recept therof thei should rise up and staunde or sitt, and then ymmediatlie kneele downe againe, it should rather importe a contemptuous(n70) then a reverent receavinge of the sacrament.

But it is not expreslye conteigned in the Scripture (saie thei) that Christ ministred the sacrament to his apostles kneelinge; nor thei finde it not expresly in Scriptur that he ministered it staundinge or sittinge. But if wee will followe the plaine wourdes of Scripture wee shall rather receave it lyinge downe on the grounde (as the custome of the wourlde at that tyme almost everywhere), and as the Tartars and Turks [use](n71) yet at this daie to eate their meate lying upon the grounde. And the wourdes of the evangelistes importe the same, which bee (Greek text cannot be converted in ASCII text) and (Greek text cannot be converted in ASCII text), whiche signifie properlie to lie downe upon the florr or grounde, and not to sitt apon a forme or stole. A[nd] thesame speache use thevangelistes where thei s[aie] that Christ fead five thowsaunde with v loves,(n72) w[here] it is plainlie expressede that thei satt down upon the grounde and not upon stoles.

I beseche your lordshipps to take in good parte this my longe babelinge, which I write as of my self onlie because the bushopp of London is not yet come, and your lordshipps required aunswer with speede, and therfore ame I constrayned to make some aunswer to your lordshipps afore his coming. And thus I praye God longe to preserve your lordshipps and to increase the same in all prosperitie and godlines. At Lambeth, this vijth of October 1552.

Your lordeschippes to commaunde
T. Cant'(n73)

(PRO, SP 10/15, fols 34-35; printed in T.W. Perry, Some historical considerations relating to the declaration on kneeling (London: Masters, 1863), pp. 77-79; P. Lorimer, John Knox and the Church of England (London: King, 1875), pp. 103-105; C. Smyth, Cranmer and the Reformation under Edward VI (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1926), pp. 263-65 (part only); summary in Calendar of State Papers, domestic series, of the reign of Edward VI, 1547-1553 (ed. C.S. Knighton; London: HMSO, rev. edn, 1992), no. 725; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 17)

L

(29 June 1553? Letter from the archbishop to the dean and chapter of Westminster concerning the appointment of a scholar in the school)

After my hertie commendations. Wheras within that the kinge's maieste's grammer scole at Westmynster there is one scoler's rowme or place now vacant, as I am enfourmid; forasmuche as this berer my freende hathe made speciall request unto me to write unto you in the favor of one Roger, a childe of his wife's by her other(n74) husbaunde, for the preferrement of hym to that rowme, thies shalbe hertily to desire you the rather for my saake to admit the childe therunto, if that place be not alredye supplied, or els to graunt that he may have preferrement(n75) of another rowme that shalbe next vacant; and for your gratuity thenn to be sheued, I shall not faile to reaquit the same anothe[r](n76) tyme, as oportunyty may serve. Thus hertily fare you well. At my manir of Lambhith, the xxixth of June.(n77)

Your lovynge frende T. Cantuarien'(n78)

(Westminster Abbey Muniments, no. 43047; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 19)

M

(April, 1554? Letter from Rowland Taylor to Nicholas Ridley, Thomas Cranmer and Hugh Latimer)

To Mr Rydley & in his name also to Mr Cranmer & Latymer(n79)

Ryghtly reverend father in Chryst, I wyssh yow to enyoe contynewally Gode's grace & pece throwg Chryst. And God be praysed again & again for thys yowr most excellent promotione whitch yow ar called un[to] at thys presentt, that ys that yow ar cownted wordy to be allowed as one of Chryste's recordes, pr...tors(n80) & witnesses. Ingland haith had but a fe[w] lerned bysschopes that wold styke to Chryst ad ign[em] inclusive. Ons again I thangk God hartely in Chr[yste] for yowr most happy onsett, most valiant proce...ding,(n81) most constantt suffering of all sulch infamye, hyssinges, clappinges, tautes, open rebukes, lose of lyving & lybertye for the defens of Gode's cawes, truth and glorye.

I can not utter with pen how I rejoice in my hartt for yow iii sulch captans(n82) in the forw...(n83) under Chryste's crose, banner or standert in sulch a cawes & scrimmyssch whain not only one or ii of owr(n84) dere redemere's strong howldes ar besedgied, but all Hys cheff(n85) castelles ordened for owr savegaird ar trayterowsly impungned. Thys yowr interpryce in the syght of all that be in heaven, and of all Gode's peple in erth, ys(n86) most plesand to behold. Thys is an other maner of notabl nobilite then being in the forfrontt in worldly warfairs.

For Gode's salk pray for us, for we faill not dayly to pray fo[r](n87) yow. We ar stronger & stronger in the Lord, God be praysed, and we dowt not but yow be soo in Chryste's own [sw]ett scole. Heaven ys all & holly of owr syd. Therfor Gaudete in Domino semper, et iterum gaudete et exultate.(n88)

Your assured in Chryst Roland Taylour(n89)

(BL, Additional MS. 19,400, fol. 29; Ayris and Selwyn, no. 88; printed with numerous small errors in The Letters of the Martyrs (compiled M. Coverdale; ed. E. Bickersteth; London: Shaw, 1837), pp. 129-30.

(n1.) Thomas Cranmer: Churchman and Scholar (ed. Paul Ayris and D.G. Selwyn; Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1999 [1993]). Henceforth cited as Ayris and Selwyn.

(n2.) J.E. Cox (ed.), Miscellaneous Writings and Letters of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, Martyr, 1556 (Cambridge: Parker Society, 1846), pp. 229-459. Henceforth cited as P.S., Cranmer II.

(n3.) For Cranmer's family tree, see A.F. Pollard, Thomas Cranmer (repr.; London: Cass, 1965 [1905]), Table after p. 384; and D. MacCulloch, Thomas Cranmer: A Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996), pp. 130-31; (henceforth cited as MacCulloch, Cranmer).

(n4.) P. Ayris, 'God's Vicegerent and Christ's Vicar: The Relationship Between the Crown and the Archbishopric of Canterbury, 1533-53', in Ayris and Selwyn, pp. 116-21.

(n5.) Lambeth Palace Library, Thomas Cranmer's register (henceforth cited as LPL, C.R.), fols 339v-340r, no. 426 in my forthcoming edition.

(n6.) LPL, C.R., fol. 425, no. 1106 in my forthcoming edition.

(n7.) LPL, C.R., fol. 341v, no. 438 in my forthcoming edition. See British Library (hereafter cited as BL) also BL, Harleian MS. 6148, fols 32, 33v, 34v-35r and Public Record Office (henceforth cited as PRO), SP 1/101, fol. 110; P.S., Cranmer II, pp. 255, 257, 260, 319-20; J.S. Brewer, J. Gairdner and R.S. Brodie (eds.), Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of King Henry VIII (London: HMSO, 1862-1910), VI, nos 885, 1208, 1242; X, no. 113 (henceforth cited as L.P.).

(n8.) P.S., Cranmer II, pp. 349-56.

(n9.) For the text of the surviving examination, signed by Cranmer, see B.L., Cotton MS. Appendix L, fols 73-74 (modem pencil foliation). See also P.S., Cranmer II, pp. 360-61. For Ringsley, see also MacCulloch, Cranmer, p. 203.

(n10.) D.E. Knowles, The Religious Orders of England (3 vols.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1948-59), III, pp. 360-66.

(n11.) P. Ayris, 'Thomas Cranmer and the Metropolitical Visitation of Canterbury Province 1533-35', in S. Taylor (ed.), From Cranmer to Davidson: A Church of England Miscellany (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1999), pp. 15-16.

(n12.) LPL, C.R., fol. 16r-v, nos 56-58 in my forthcoming edition. The commissions are printed in D. Wilkins, Concilia Magnae Britanniae et Hiberniae (4 vols.; London, privately published, 1737), III, pp. 829-30, 835.

(n13.) See C. Buchanan, What Did Cranmer Think he was Doing? (Bramcote: Grove, 1976), esp. pp. 23-25.

(n14.) MacCulloch, Cranmer, pp. 525-26.

(n15.) MacCulloch, Cranmer, p. 528, where the historiography of the idea that the Black Rubric represents a defeat for Cranmer is analysed. For a reproduction of the Rubric, which was tipped into copies of the 1552 rite, see P. Ayris, Cranmer: Primate of All England. Catalogue of a quincentenary exhibition at The British Library, 27 October 1989-21 January 1990 (London: British Library, 1989), p. 39.

(n16.) For the general background, see MacCulloch, Cranmer, pp. 542-43.

(n17.) MacCulloch, Cranmer, pp. 542, 545; for Bonner, see Guildhall Library, London, MS. 9531/12 part 2, fok 323-83.

(n18.) MacCulloch, Cranmer, p. 553. For Cooke's appointment, see LPL, C.R., fol. 424, no. 1104 in my forthcoming edition of the register.

(n19.) LPL, C.R., fol. 392r, no. 815 in my forthcoming edition of Cranmer's register; see also J.S. Craig, 'The Marginalia of Dr Rowland Taylor', Historical Research 64 (1991), p. 412 n. 7; see also MacCulloch, Cranmer, pp. 562, 568. For Foxe's account, see J. Foxe, Acts and Monuments (ed. S.R. Cattley; 8 vols.; London: Seeley & Burnside, 1837-41), vol. VI, pp. 676-703.

(n20.) MacCulloch, Cranmer, p. 561.

(n21.) MacCulloch, Cranmer, pp. 563-68.

(n22.) P.S., Cranmer II, pp. 445-46. For a discussion of this and Ridley's letter, see MacCulloch, Cranmer, pp. 568-69.

(n23.) I am extremely grateful to Dr Gotthelf Wiedermann of Cambridge University Library for the opportunity of discussing with him many of the points which arose during the study of the letters included in this article.

(n24.) The rectory of Moulton lay in the deanery of Bocking, a collection of parishes in Essex and Suffolk under the immediate jurisdiction of the archbishop of Canterbury rather than the local diocesan bishop. The man instituted to the rectory was in fact William Boleyn, cousin to Anne Boleyn. Cf. LPL, C.R., fols 339v-340r; this is item 426 in my forthcoming edition of the register. The relevant institution in the register reads as follows: 'William Boleyn instituted as rector of the parish church of Moulton, deanery of Bocking, by his proctor Edward Barnaby, vacant by the resignation of John Bigges. Patron: the archbishop. Barnaby first promised to pay an annual pension to be assigned by John Cockes, vicar general in spirituals, official principal and auditor of causes. Inductor: dean of Bocking and a suitable chaplain. Dated: Dunstable, diocese of Lincoln, 12 May 1533. On 7 June in the chapter house at St Paul's cathedral in London, Cockes issued a decree assigning a pension of £11 with the express consent of the archbishop, which was to be paid in equal portions at the feasts of All Saints and SS. Philip and James.'

(n25.) The relevant entry from Cranmer's register, which is item number 438 in my forthcoming edition, reads: 'Richard Astall instituted as rector of the parish church of Chevening, deanery of Shoreham, vacant by the resignation of Thomas Baschurch. Patron: the archbishop. Astall first swore to provide an annual pension for his predecessor. Inductor: dean of Shoreham, or his deputy. Lambeth, 15 October 1533. On the same day, John Cockes issued a decree assigning a pension of £10 to Baschurch to be paid in four equal instalments: on the feasts of the Annunciation, the Nativity of St John Baptist, St Michael the Archangel and the Birth of Our Lord.' Cf. LPL, C.R., fol. 341v.

(n26.) 'defalt' erased in MS.

(n27.) 'anythyng have passed myn hande' erased in MS.

(n28.) 'lorde' struck through in MS.

(n29.) The letter from Henry Parker, 8th Baron Morley, is to be found at BL, Harleian MS. 6148, fol. 77v; L.P., VI, no. 1600; not noted in Ayris and Selwyn. Morley writes to Ralph Morice concerning a chantry priest at Harlow and to secure an audience with the archbishop for his servant, who has a letter for Cranmer.

(n30.) Corrected from 'soma' in MS.

(n31.) John Stokesley, bishop of London.

(n32.) 'inasmoche [fol. 77v] as' in MS.

(n33.) 'by' in MS.

(n34.) Following the dating of Letters and Papers, Ayris and Selwyn assign this to 1538 and concluded that it was an unpublished letter of the archbishop. While the dating is unclear, it was nevertheless printed in the published collection of Cranmer's letters under 1537. Cf. P.S., Cranmer II, p. 337.

(n35.) The last two lines are in Cranmer's own hand. Endorsed: 'To my singuler good lorde, my lorde pryvay seale'; 'My lord of Canterbury's lettre in the favour of Henry Stokethe for the demaynes of the Charterhouse in thyle of x [sic] Axholme.'

(n36.) Richard Gwent. Cf. PRO, PR. OB 11/25, fols 1r-v and 200. The relevant commissions entrusting these powers to Gwent are numbered A12-A13 in my forthcoming edition of Cranmer's register.

(n37.) 'coven' in MS.

(n38.) 'of' repeated and struck through in MS.

(n39.) The last two lines are in Cranmer's own hand. Endorsed: 'To my very loving frend Sir Richard Riche, knyght'.

(n40.) William Haught, who was sheriff of Kent 1537-38 and took up office on 14 November 1537; cf. List of sheriffs for England and Wales, from the earliest times to A.D. 1831 (ed. A. Hughes and J. Jennings; London: HMSO, 1898), p. 69.

(n41.) The examinations are to be found in BL, Cotton MS. Appendix L, fols 73-4 (modern pencil foliation); L.P., XIII (i), no. 76 (2). The paper is now much damaged and incomplete, but is signed by the examiners. The chief examiners were the archbishop, who heads the list as T. Cantuarien', and William Haught. The two reining justices, who signed the document, were James Hales and William Boys.

(n42.) In the Cotton MS., this section of the text is in Cranmer's own hand, added as an insertion which necessitated him erasing his signature, which he then placed at the end of the text. The priests alluded to are John Harteley from Smeeth and John Stockton from Brabourne, both in Kent.

(n43.) Corrected to 'have now alredy in warde' as a contemporary insertion in Cranmer's own hand.

(n44.) The news, concerning Ireland and Rome, is contained in PRO, SP 1/128, fols 88-90; fully calendared in L.P., XIII (i), no. 77.

(n45.) Geronimo de' Ghinucci who was deprived of the see of Worcester in 1535.

(n46.) The last two lines are in Cranmer's own hand. Endorsed: 'To my very singuler good lorde, my lorde prevay seale'.

(n47.) Distinction 96 of Gratian's Decretum. In his commonplaces on the canon law, Cranmer had already identified the Donation as an objectionable text. Cf. Lambeth Palace Library, MS. 1107, fol. 13; printed in, Memorials of Thomas Cranmer (ed. J. Strype; 4 vols; Oxford: Ecclesiastical History Society, 1848-54), III, Appendix and Addenda, pp. 771-72. For the dating of this manuscript, cf. Ayris and Selwyn, pp. 316-18, and MacCulloch, Cranmer, p. 54.

(n48.) The text of the Donation which Cranmer sent is BL, MS. Royal 17C, XI, fols 1-29. The sending of the text to the king was a small part of a wider campaign to secure a marriage and political alliance for Henry in Germany by overcoming the king's habitual distrust of Luther; cf. MacCulloch, Cranmer, pp. 213-14. The title of the work on fol. 1 is 'The Donationn of Constantin, emperour, with a glose and comment. Anno 1537'. The section of the MS. alluded to in Cranmer's letter occurs on fols 14v-15r. The comment at this juncture makes a telling point in respect of papal power. The text runs: 'Also he [the pope] hathe brought yt therunto that he namethe hym self lorde and king of England.' Cranmer adds the sign of a hand in the margin and the following comment, in his own handwriting: 'So dyd Bonifacius 8us declare the realme of Fraunce to be devolved unto the see of Rome for the conmmacie of Kynge Philippe, but for the same he had a shameful ende; for Kynge Philippe robe hym prysoner & made hym to dye a miserable deth.'

(n49.) Richard Rich, 1st Baron Rich.

(n50.) 'Edmude' in MS. For the archbishop's family tree, cf. Pollard, Thomas Cranmer, Table after p. 384. Cranmer's sister referred to here is Agnes.

(n51.) The last three lines are in Cranmer's own hand. Endorsed: 'To the kinge's highnes'; 'Februarii xvio'; 'Tharchebusshop of Cantuar' to the kinge's highnes'.

(n52.) 'wtoute' in MS., where 'toute' is added as a contemporary correction.

(n53.) Properly 'places'?; text gone at this point.

(n54.) Thomas Brooke alias Cobham, brother of George Brooke alias Cobham, 9th Baron Cobham; Thomas married Cranmer's niece Susan.

(n55.) The last two lines are in Cramner's own hand. Endorsed: 'To my very singuler good lorde, my lorde privie seale'; 'Cant' the vth of October'.

(n56.) Endorsed: 'To my loving freend the wardyn of All Soules Colledge in Oxford yeve thies. Hast. Hast.'

(n57.) John Warner, M.A., M.D. Warner was appointed warden of All Souls in 1536. Cf. LPL, C.R., fol. 359r-v, no. 553A-C in my forthcoming edition of Thomas Cranmer's register.

(n58.) The signature is in Cranmer's own hand. Later endorsements, in differing hands, read: 'For one dimi launce and ii light for so to be sent with the king into Fraunce'; 'Cranmer's letter to the warden regarding a demi-lance and 2 geldings to be sent to the king in France'; 'Probably 1544'.

(n59.) 'theof' in MS.

(n60.) 'to theyr due obedience' inserted as a contemporary correction in Cranmer's own hand.

(n61.) For similar letters inviting Parker to preach both at Paul's Cross and before the king, cf.. P.S., Cranmer II, pp. 418, 425, 429.

(n62.) The last two lines are in Cranmer's own hand. Endorsed: 'To my welbeloved fiend Mr Doctor Parker at Camberige'.

(n63.) The Book of Common Prayer of 1552, which was enforced by Act of Uniformity; cf. Statutes of the realm, ed. by A. Luders, T.E. Tomlins, J. Raithby et al., 11 vols (London, 1810-28), IV, pp. 130-31.

(n64.) Francis Spilman, identified by Knighton as clerk of the parliaments.

(n65.) Richard Grafton; cf. MacCulloch, Cranmer, p. 525.

(n66.) Nicholas Ridley, a Cambridge friend of the archbishop, and who was one of his stongest supporters, appointed to the see of London in 1550 following the deprivation of the conservative Edmund Bonner.

(n67.) Peter Martyr, who came to England at Cranmer's invitation in 1547 and was made Regius Professor of Divinity at Oxford. Martyr provided a paper for Cranmer on the faults of the 1549 Prayer Book to guide him in the task of revision, but his work has not survived; cf. MacCulloch, Cranmer, p. 505.

(n68.) 'of of' in MS.

(n69.) 'most [fol. 34v] quiet' in MS.

(n70.) 'contemptuous [fol. 35] then' in MS.

(n71.) Paper gone at this point. Perry has 'sh[ew]'.

(n72.) Cf. Mt. 14.13-21; Mk 6.32-44; Lk. 9.10-17; Jn 6.1-13; cf. Mt. 15.32-38.

(n73.) The last two lines are in Cranmer's own hand. Endorsed: 'To my veray goode lordes of the kinge's most honorable councell'; '7 Octob' 1552. Bish' of Canterb' to the Cll'; et genua flect' in communio. (Greek text cannot be converted in ASCII text)'.

(n74.) 'oth' follows 'other' and is struck through in MS.

(n75.) 'the' precedes 'preferrement' and is struck through m MS.

(n76.) 'anothe' m MS., but the paper is tom at this point.

(n77.) I am grateful to Dr Charles Knighton who points out that, in the context of the Westminster records, the year of composition is likely to be 1553.

(n78.) The last two lines are in Cranmer's own hand. Endorsed: 'To my loving freendes the deane and chapiter of the kinge's maieste's colledge at Westm' yeve this.' Later annotations are: 'Yt ys decred that this letter shalbe sped at myhelmas'; 'Cranmer, tharchbishop of Canterbury'; 'For a scholershipp in Westm'.

(n79.) Nicholas Ridley, formerly bishop of London; Thomas Cranmer, formerly archbishop of Canterbury; and Hugh Latimer.

(n80.) Properly 'promotors'?; paper now missing.

(n81.) Properly 'proceeding'?; paper now missing.

(n82.) 'caplans' in MS.

(n83.) Properly 'forward'?; paper now missing.

(n84.) 'owr' interlined as a contemporary correction.

(n85.) 'cheff' interlined as a contemporary correction.

(n86.) 'ys most ys most' repeated and the first occurrence struck through in MS.

(n87.) MS. reading unclear.

(n88.) 'exullate' in MS. The quotation is from Phil. 4.4.

(n89.) Endorsed: 'To Doctor Redlye, byshope of Lond...'; 'Refer ys [sic] agayne to Bull'.

~~~~~~~~

By Paul Ayris