THE POU'FICAL, ECONOMKI, AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF EDWARD W's RElGN AS VIEWED 1’HROUGH THE $ERMON$ AND LETTERS 0F HUGH LAYEMER Thesis for flu Degree of DH. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Sister Mary Teresita Austin, R. S. M. 1961 UNWERSITY! women: suite 951 unmm. meme»! THE POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, AND SOCIAL ASPECTS OF EDWARD VI'S REIGN AS VIEWED THROUGH THE SERMONS AND LETTERS OF HUGH LATIMER BY Sister Mary Teresita Austin, R. S. M. A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of History 1961 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LATIMER'S SERMONS REFLECT THE CONTROL THAT THE REGENCY HAS OVER THE REIGN OF EDWARD VI . . . . . . . . . . Education of Edward VI Regency under Somerset The Marriages of Edward and His Sisters Latimer's Conflict with the Lord Admiral LATIMER'S VIEWS ON ECONOMIC PROBLEMS . . . . . . . . . Enclosures Coinage Inflation LATIMER LAMENTS SOCIAL CONDITIONS . . . . . . . Principles of Right Dealing The Poor and the Vagabond Education London Manners and Morals Dress Burial Customs Marriage Rites Medicine and Physicians Fast and Fish CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Page iv 27 32 36 42 47 58 58 80 89 99 104 118 127 138 146 154 161 166 172 175 184 189 194 iv I . INTRODUCTION Tudor England, in particular the reign of Edward VI, 1547-1553, will be the general subject of the following discussion. The political, economic, and social conditions of the age have been studied insofar as they are revealed in the sermons and other writings of Hugh Latimer, outstand- ing preacher and social critic of this Tudor era. In the interests of objectivity, every effort has been made to divorce from the text any consideration of the doctrinal controversy which, although it highlighted the period, might serve only to bias the modern reader. Since the purposes of this paper have been to cast light upon the political, economic, and social institutions of Tudor England,:as well as to examine their original critics and participants, the discussion has divided itself into three main parts. Within each of the three divisions an attempt was made to elaborate the details of Tudor politics, economy and society, respectively. These particulars are viewed as revealed to us in the preaching of Latimer and as substantiated by his words. Now, however, the task remains for us to briefly review the major areas, in order to see the overall picture Hugh Latimer paints of his England. Viewing Edwardian political institutions focused the reader's attention on monarchy and the prevailing attitudes with regard to the boyAking. Latimer's presentation of the ethical and religious basis of this single sovereign's rule comprised an important contribution on this subject. Like- wise, the King's education, marriage, and the distribution of state financial resources entered into this consideration of monarchy. The trickery and connivance, which would seem to have characterized all too many of those who presumed to act in behalf of the youthful king, is exemplified in the case cf'the Lord Admiral. While Latimer found occasion in his sermons to criticize much that went on at court, his disapprobation of the Lord Admiral is both more extensive and caustic than anything else he has to say regarding the political scene. Either by command or choice, he delivered several sermons in defense of the Lord Admiral's riddance by way of attainder. This instance would seem to exemplify Tudor England's acceptance of the clergyman as critic in matters of political controversy. Enclosure, high prices, coinage are the key words in any study of Tudor economy. Next to religious issue, nothing did more to induce rebellions than the enclosure movement. The son of a yeoman, Latimer had been raised close to the soil; luis ideal England was an agrarian nation. In his mind, the lruman displacement resulting from enclosure could not be vi justified, even in the light of his "new learning." Just as members of the court were objects of his barbs of political criticism, so too, contemporary businessmen (rent raisers, extortioners, usurers, etc.) felt themselves subject to his censure in matters of economy. Throughout the years of his preaching career at court, Latimer never ceased to advocate those changes that would help to bring equity into an in- equitable existing order, in which the rich were magnificently ostentatious and the poor were starving and desperate. How- ever, he most certainly did not consider the government's practice of clipping and debasing coins as among the justi- fiable solutions. For him, its only service was an apt ana- logy to the debased currency of Christian behavior. While justice was of grave concern in Latimer's commen- tary on matters political and economical, it takes on even greater proportions in his social criticism. Here, more so than in some other areas, his sermonizing would seem to have had some influence--to the benefit of the poor. Not only the lack of justice, but also the decadent state of education provided topics for his sermons. In his mind, this decay was due to the loss of church revenues, the gradual extinction of the yeoman class, and lack of government support. In addition to those issues of obviously grave concern, the vii sixteenth-century preacher comments upon seemingly less signi- ficant topics; such as, customs in London society, discipline, dress, marriage and funeral rites, the practice of medicine, and the prescriptions for fasting. In all of these he empha- sizes the social, as well as spiritual implications. Thus, whether in the briefest of phrases or the fieriest of sermons, the words of Hugh Latimer afford the modern stu- dent both fact and opinion--thereby clarifying his previous knowledge, deepening his understanding, and broadening his perspective of Tudor England during the reign of Edward VI. The writer wishes to express her gratitude to all those who so selflessly have aided in the preparation of this research. To Doctor Marjorie Gesner who gave of her wide knowledge of Tudor history and Tudor literature, is owed the greatest debt. She has generously assisted, often at great personal sacrifice of time and convenience, in the preparation of this work. Also to Doctor Richard Sullivan, my sincerest thanks. He read the manuscript and made sugges- tions for revisions which were gladly adopted. Lastly, to the community of the Religious Sisters of Mercy who re- moved the obstacles which might have prevented the completion of this work. II. PROFILE A small house built near the church in Thurcastone, Leicestershire, was the birthplace of HUgh Latimer.l Rather fancifully we may imagine the Latimer family, in medieval times, had acquired by fortunate inter-marriage, extensive possessions in the neighborhood of Leicestershire. Some of the village churches in the vicinity still bear armorial remembrances of the Latimer family.2 Hewever, the Leices- tershire Latimers cannot be traced as far as heraldry took cognizance of them. If Hugh Latimer's family can be traced at all, it is through the members of the younger branch, Who had settled in Yerkshire and had allied themselves with the eminent Nevilles of State.3 Hugh's family may have descended from this line. Perhaps a younger member of the family had been driven into exile, then had returned to settle in quiet at Thurcastone and to found a family of the yeoman Latimers. Hugh describes his family in a sermon 1Robert Demaus, Hugh Latimer (London, 1869), p. 12. The name Latimer is preserved in the village of Northampton near Kettering. - Edward Arber, Sermon on the Plou hs (Westminster, ’1895), p. 3. ' A» -2Demaus, p. 12. The seal was gold on a red field. The name Latimer, often spelled Latymer, means, according to etymologists, interpreter of Latin. James J. Ellis, Hugh Latimer (New York, 1893), p. 2. 3Isobel D. Thornley, England under_thefl¥brkistfil460-l485 (London, 1920), p. 20. before King Edward: "My father was a yeoman, and had no lands of his own, only he had a farm of three or four pound by year at the uttermost, and hereupon he tilled so much as kept half a dozen men. He had walk for a hundred sheep; and my mother milked thirty kine."4 The important thing to remember about the Latimer family, however, is that Hugh, the offspring of the yeoman branch, was to capture the minds of many and was destined to fame of quite a different character. The little village of Hugh Latimer's childhood numbered no more than a hundred persons in 1484 nor in 1491, whichever date is correct for his birth.5 He was born either in the last days of Richard III's reign or in the beginning of that of Henry VII. Hugh was the youngest of the family. There were six sisters and several brothers.6 None of the brothers lived beyond infancy, yet the sisters must have grown to womanhood because Latimer speaks of them in one of his sermons. "He married my sisters with five pounds or twenty nobles apiece, so that he brought them up in godliness, and fear of God."7 The reader may recall that John of Gaunt was possibly The WOrks of Hugh Latimer, ed. George F. Corrie, 2 vols. (University Press, Cambridge, 1844-45), I, 101 -- hereafter cited as WOrks. 5W'orks, II, 137. 6 John Foxe, The Acts and Monuments, ed. S. R. Cattley and George Townsend, 8 vols. (London, 1837-41), VII, 437. 7W'orks, I, 101. a relative of Latimer, and had been a protector of Wycliffe. Wycliffe was an English clergyman who had attacked the abuses of the Church, and Gaunt sympathized with the attack.8 Further than the quote above not much is known of Latimer's Sisters. One can conjecture that they each married one or other of the neighboring yeomen. It is possible, also, that some of them married into the thriving citizenry of Leicester. Tradition has not preserved the names of their husbands. The youth of Hugh Latimer was, then, that of a yeoman. It is very likely that his early boyhood was spent tending the cattle and other animals. A rather homely allusion has been made to one of his daily duties. Hugh was not ashamed to speak of this incident before the king, Edward VI: "They say in my country when they call their hogs, 'Come mingle, mangle, come pur, come pur,' even so they made mingle mangle ot it."10 However, Hugh Latimer possibly did not participate, especially as he became older, in the strenuous work of the farm. If one can credit his biographers, he was a delicate, , ll . . . . but precoc10us boy. RecogniZing this, hlS father undoubtedly 8 Demaus, p. 15. John Stowe, Annals of England from the First Inhabitants until 1600 (London, 1926), p. 6. 9Foxe, VII, 438. 10 Works, I, 290-7. 11Foxe, VII, 437. 4 charged him with the marketing. Relieved of the harder work connected with the farm, he had time for meeting people at the markets, and for attending the religious festivals of the day. From these experiences sprung his acute awareness of the England that was beginning to emerge from a medieval to a modern age. During these years America was discovered, and the Reformation and Renaissance were moving across the Channel to England. But as yet Hugh's life was untouched by the com- mercial prosperity that was to follow these movements. During those boyhood years stories were likely told in the evening around the Latimer hearth, of the exploits of Bosworth Field where many of the neighbors had fought. Even the memories of Agincourt and Crecy must still have dwelt in the minds of the older generation, and were related to the younger ones.12 On April 7, 1374 the Crown had presented to Wycliffe the rectory of Lutterworth in Leicester; and he held the pastorate there until his death in 1384.13 Thus the shire in which Latimer was raised (Leicester) must have been exposed to Lollardism.14 Nevertheless Latimer does not seem to have been too much influenced by the disputes of Lollardism. From his 12Foxe, VII, 437. 13Charles Knight, The Popular History of England (N.P., N.D.), II, 93. 4 "Latimer", Catholic Encyclopedia, l6 vols. (New York, 1910), IX, 332. earliest boyhood he had been trained by his father whom he describes as follows: "In my time my poor Father was as diligent to teach me to shoot as to learn any other things, and so I think other men did their children. He taught me how to draw not with strength of arms as other nations do but with strength of the badge. I had my bows bought me according to my age and strength as I increased in them, so my bows were made bigger and bigger, for men never shot well except they be brought up to it."15 Perhaps the father saw in his son a still greater gift, for he provided him with a good elementary education. Hugh may have shown, as Foxe says, an outstanding ability for learning very early in childhood.16 It is reasonable to believe that this thirst for knowledge was abetted by the books Which he was able to procure from the Abbey Library of Leicester, which held much good literature. The first fifteen years of Hugh's life must have been rather uneventful except for the following occasion to which he alludes in one of his sermons. Henry VII had raised an army and young Hugh's father was enlisted. To the child it ‘was a matter of pride that his father had been called into the King's army, and it remained always in his memory that 15WCrks, I, 197. 16Foxe, VII, 437. he had buckled the armor on his father when he went forth to battle. From this expedition of his father, Hugh received his first picture of the kingdom and London,17 the place that was to be so often in his sermons of later years. Latimer's desire for learning, and aptitude for study led his father to send him to the University of Cambridge.18 Early in his attendance at Cambridge Hugh was elected to a fellowship in Clare Hall. This recognition of talent so early in his college career may account for the reputation which he acquired for learning ability. Though this is all that we know of Latimer's boyhood, we can assume that the piety of his parents and his own genuine vocation settled the matter of his life's work. He would be— come a priest. Accordingly he was in residence at Cambridge more or less continuously for the quarter of a century follow- ing his entrance. In February, 1510, supposedly at the age of eighteen, he received his bachelor's degree.19 As stated, Hugh had been elected to a Fellowship early in his university career. The income from this must have relieved 17Works, I, 101. 18W'orks, I, 100. 19Dictionary of National Biography, 34 vols. & supplements end. Sidney Lee & Leslie Stephens (New York, 1930), XI, 632. Phereafter cited as D.N.B. and Calendar of State Papers, Foreign, LEChNard VI and Mary. W. B. Trumbull, 2 vols. 1547—1580 (London, 1861) , I, 16. his father of some of the financial burdens entailed by his son's education. The graces for his degrees in Art still exist in the University Grace Book, and show that he was excused from part of the course. However, he proceeded, as was customary, to a Master of Arts degree in 1514.20 Latimer, in the years intervening, remained, presumably teaching in the university. He must have been ordained to the priesthood in this interval for he alludes to the ordin- ation as follows: "I never preached in Lincolnshire afore, not come here afore, save once when I went to take order at Lincoln, which was a good while ago; therefore I cannot say much of Lincolnshire, for I know it not."21 Early in his priestly career Latimer showed real talent for preaching since in the Proctor Books his name appeared in 1522 as one of the twelve men licensed. This was the first official recognition of the singular ability in that special field of labor for which he possessed such eminent qualifications and in which he was destined to play such an important part in Tudor history. 20Demaus, pp. 22-23. Latimer was likely preparing for his 12th term -- this was very early in his career to be elected. Most writers feel that he studied at Christ College and that this fellowship required him to move to Clare Hall to continue his studies. Harold S. Darby, Hugh Latimer (London, 1953), pp. 161-7. 21 Demaus, 23. In recognition of Latimer's ability, he was selected to carry the silver cross of the university in all solemn pro— cessions, to quote Strype, "For his gravity and years he was preferred to keep the Cross."22 The custodian of the crucifix was responsible for its maintenance and safety and its presence on all ceremonial occasions. Many great personages who would play an important part in Latimer's career were received in reception by the cross—bearer. Among the most noteworthy were Wolsey in 1520;23 Catherine of Aragon in 1520;24 and finally, in 1522, Henry VIII.25 Latimer received a modest sum of six- teen pence for performing his duty on the occasion of Henry VIII's visit.26 Custos crucis was also chaplain of the university's New Chapel, a post involving varied and important responsibilities ”John Strype, WW 3 vols. in 6 Parts (Oxford, 1822), II, Pt. 1, 15 (hereafter designated as Strype, Eccles. Mem.). "This magnificent silver crucifix was sold during Edward VI's reign for its 336 ounces of silver. The crucifix was elaborately ornamented. Rising above the staff were two rows of figures of various bishops and saints, above this scene was the Coronation of the Blessed Mother. ’The Blessed Mother and St. John stood at either side of the Crucified Christ." Allan Chester, Hugh Latimer (Philadelphia, 1954), 7. 23 Strype, Eccles. Mem. III, 1, p. 368. 24Demaus, 13. 25Nicholas Ridley, The Works of Nicholas Ridley, ed. Henry Christmas (Cambridge, 1833), p. 406. 26Demaus, 28. although the primary duty was to say the anniversary masses for the souls of the university's dead benefactors. Certain fiscal responsibilities were also entailed: it was Latimer's duty to collect rents from local properties which had been bequeathed to the university and he supervised the expendi- tures of these properties. His accounts for these funds were subject to a yearly audit. Other of Latimer's duties were custodian of the university lecture rooms and keeper of the . . . 2 small treasure-house of books in the UniverSity Library. Simultaneously with the carrying on of these various duties at Clare Hall, he attained the degree of Bachelor of Divinity in 1524, but as it appears from the proctor's books he did not pay the customary fee and his right to the degree was afterwards denied. What was really of interest at this time was his dis- putation for the Bachelor's degree. It was directed against . . . 2 . . the doctrines of Philip Melanchton. 8 Another pOint of interest is that, on August 28, 1524, a deed was executed conveying 27Chester, 7. "Latimer's accounts were audited in 1523, 1526 and 1528. There are several records of payments for bearing the cross, and for his work as custodian of university buildings. Records show a salary for him as librarian and keeper of public school buildings in 1525, 1527 and 1528. Income from these likely amounted to about five pounds in 1529. He was replaced by Nicholas Heath, who later (1543-45) became bishop of WOrcester in Latimer's place, and later Archbishop of York and Lord Chancellor of England during the years after Latimer's death." works, I, 136. Gustave Constant, Reformation in England, 2 vols.(Eng. trans. by E.L. Watkins, London, 1942), I, p. 380. 2 . . . . 8Philip Hughes, The Reformation in England, 3 vols. (New York, 1950-54), I, 52. 10 certain lands to Latimer and others in order to find a priest to celebrate mass in the Chapel of Clare Hall for the soul of John Bolton.29 The above two events in Latimer's life indicate that he still held firmly his belief in the Roman Catholic faith at this time. One of the listeners at the B.D. discourse who from this time on became his intimate friend and companion was Thomas Bilney, or Little Bilney (as Latimer affectionately spoke of him). He went to Latimer after the denunciation of the "new opinions" and began to instruct Latimer along the lines of thought that he was exploring at the time. Latimer became a companion to Bilney in his social work among parish- ioners and among the sick.30 Shortly thereafter we hear of the incident of obtaining pardon for a Mistress Checke, which brought him before Henry VIII for the first time.31 This ummentous event led Latimer to the episcopal palace at WOr- cestershire, later to the pulpits of Windsor and Westminster and finally, even to the fires of Oxford. In the fall of 1524, the first of Latimer's extant letters was written appealing to It. Greene, the vice—chancellor of Cambridge, in behalf of 2 9Darby, Hugh Latimer (London, 1953), 29. 30WOrks, I, 334-35. 31 . Sermons of Hugh Latimer (London, 1906), 279. 11 Sir Richard Windfield, who was desirous of becoming steward of the university. Evidently Latimer was on his way to his home in Thurcastone as the letter was written from Kimbalton, October 14, 1524.32 Hugh Latimer formed an intimate friendship with Robert Barnes, prior of the Austin Friars at Cambridge. Previously to this Latimer had had some trouble with the Bishop of Ely over certain doctrines that he was preaching in his diocese. When the Bishop inhibited him from further preaching, Barnes exempted him from episcopal jurisdiction and lent him his pulpit on Sunday, December 24, 1525. Barnes at the same time preached a very violent sermon at St. Edward's Church. The abbot was soon after obliged to abjure before Wolsey as legate, and Latimer had to explain himself before the same authority. He conducted himself safely through the interview and was given a special privilege, liberty to preach throughout all 4 England.3 32Works, II, 295-97. 33Foxe, VII, 451-452. 34Strype,~Ecc1es. Mem. III, 1, 368. John Strype, The Life and Acts of Mathew Parker, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1840), I, 62. D,N,BI XI, 613, St. Mary's and St. Edward's were univer- Sity churches and the latter served as chapels for the students 0f Clare and Christ Colleges. Chester, 23. Wolsey sensed Iatimer's manliness and was impressed by his Englishness, his 12 However, it is worthy of note that Latimer had not turned aside entirely from orthodoxy at this time. The men whom Wolsey had selected for Cardinal College were not necessarily the best for their positions. Rather, they were men who were Wolsey's friends, upholders of Bilney's teaching and of the new learning. For three years all seemed quiet at Cambridge, but when the new ideas broke forth, controversy was in full flame, especially in Wolsey's new Christ College. By the time of Wolsey's death Latimer had come to the attention of the king.36 During this time he preached his famous sermons On the Cards just before Christmas, December 19, 1529. He invoked criticism by these sermons and also incurred more disapproval because he was known to have favored King . 3 . . . Henry VIII's divorce. 7 Latimer's name was included in the bold demeanour and frank tongue. Perhaps secretly he enjoyed the "cut-and-thrust" duel with the two chaplains, the Doctors Capon and Marshal. Darby, 24. 35H. A. L. Fisher, The History of England, 1485-1558 (London, 1928), 276-8. As Papal legate (1475-1530) Wolsey had control of church property, he suppressed small monasteries, and took their revenues and endowments for new colleges; also he founded a new college at Oxford known as Christ Church. 36Francis Gasquet, Henry VIII and the English Monasteries, 2 vols. (London, 1906), I, 385. 37Works, II, 297, a letrteru which may have been errone- ously attributed to Latimer by Foxe, was written to Henry VIII, .Dec. 1, 1530. Gardiner came to Cambridge and obtained a select COHmdttee of divines to report upon the validity of marriage 133 Catherine. Latimer's name is marked as favorable. He is liésted as "Master of Theology" and is on the Doctor's list. -D-DV.B., X1, 613. Works II, 309. 13 list sent down from Cambridge as favorable to the King's purpose.38 On March 13, 1530, he was invited by Henry to preach at Windsor, probably to the deep annoyance of his opponents; likewise, to the keen delight of his friends. King Henry highly commended the sermon. The usual gratuity paid to a court preacher was paid to Latimer, and a further . 40 . sum was added from the privy purse. His travel expenses from Cambridge were paid through the benevolence of the Vice -chancellor. 41 At the end of the year 1530 Latimer was aware of the ten- Sion one might feel as a chaplain near royalty. Through the Suing of his friends to Cromwell, now the man of the hour, he was given the parish of West Kingston, Wilts, on the farthest edge of the diocese of Salisbury};2 At Kingston, Latimer 3 . . . 8Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic of the Reign ()1? Henry VIII, 1509-47, ed. J. S. Brewer, James Gairdner, .\ wlth R. H. Brodie, 21 vols. (London, 1862-1932), v, 317. 39D.N.B., XI, 613. 40Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, ed. Robert Lemon ::r1¢1 M.A.E. Green, 12 vols. and an addenda (London, 1856-72), ' 749. WOrks, I, 1—24. "Significant enough to mention that ‘:11€3 sum.would just cover Latimer's two weeks in London." Q"l'lester, 61. 41Lettergand Papers, V, 751. 4 . W 2Chester, 64. Chester believes he was rewarded With the est Kingston living by Henry for his services in promoting :he divorce. West Kingston had been made vacant by the death 15 William Dowlying. The living was in the gift of the Bishop 14 carried out his parochial duties in the peace and the quiet of a small parish. He spoke of the difficulties of his assignment due to the great fatigue he suffered, but he seems to have found satisfaction in it after the tumult of court life and his earlier years at Cambridge. Memories of childhood must have brought a certain nostalgia to Latimer as he traveled over the old Roman fosseway that led from Glou- cester and Warwick on to Thurcastone, his distant home. There were other links to his native village. The manor of W981: Kingston, like Thurcastone, belonged to members of the same family, and the Marquis of Dorset was lord of Thurcastone. No doubt Latimer's father had paid the rent of three or four Pounds for his small farm at Thurcastone to the Marquis of Dc>rset. The same coat-of-arms of the Leicestershire Latimers, of whom we can only presume that Hugh was an offshoot, hung in the village church of Kingston. According to a survey of ecclesiastical incomes compiled in 1535 his pastorate carried an annual stipend of seventeen 2: Salisbury, but appointment was by the Crown. Foxe, VII, 1: _ 4. The statement by Foxe that the see ‘of Salisbury at that :LJJTIe was left vacant by Campeggio as he was an absentee. This th the Crown free to dictate the provision to benefices 20minally in the gift of the Italian bishops, such as Salis- ury and Worcester, who represented Tudor interests in Rome. the parish of West Kingston is now in the dioceses of Glouces- wer and Bristol whose bishops are the patrons. Latimer, it as believed, was not yet the king's personal chaplain at this ime. 15 pounds, one shilling, the equivalent of about eight hundred and fifty pounds money today. The register in Salisbury records that Latimer was formally instituted as rector by Richard Hilley, vicar general of the diocese, acting for Campeggio in absentia.43 There is no adequate record of Latimer's activity during this period, except that gleaned from his extant sermons and letters. From these one learns what stirred the authorities. It was a sermon preached in a nearby church at Marshfield, a town about eleven miles east of Bristol. The contents of this sermon gave great offense to Dr. William Sherwood, who dated his letters to Latimer from Derham, a village in Gloucestershire, very near west Kingston.44 There was still another letter from Hubberdin, who preached against the new 45 learning, to set him aright. 3Foxe, VII, 773, it is recorded in appendix "Quarto decima die mansis Januarii, anno 1530 (1531), Magister Richardus Hilley, Vicarius Generalis, in domo residentiae infra, clausum canonicorum Sacrum situta Ecclesiasam parochialem de west Kingston in Archideaconatus Wiltes. Sacrum Deac., per . . . Domini Will. Dowlying ultimi reatus vocantem a . . . ad collationeum plena juro spectante, Magistri Hugoni Latymer, presbytero, Sacrae Theologiae Baccalauria, auctoritate qua fungebatur contulit, ad ipsum, Rectorem dictae Ecclesiae de canonica obedientia. SC. jura- tum instituit canonica in eadem cum suis juribus & C et Scriptim fecit Archideaconia Wiltes, et ejus officali pro ipsius inductine & C." Campeggio Register, f. 24 Printed in the Appendix to Foxe, VII, 773, 774. 44 Wbrks, II, 309-17, 468, 474. Foxe, VII, 478-480. WOrks, 45flggkg, II, 317—322. Strype, Eccles. Mem. I, 12, 175. 16 Both of the above mentioned letters are important in this brief account of Latimer's life because they show that he advocated that the Scriptures be translated into English. The more widespread reading of the Scriptures, because of their ease of access, brought about a social as well as a doctrinal change. If Latimer wished for only a simple, daily round of parochial duties, with an occasional sermon to give support to his new beliefs, he should then have been a little less vehement in his words and manner against the traditional faith and practices. On March 8, 1531, he was called before a committee for interrogation.46 This was occasioned by Latimer's sermon preached in London at St. Mary's Church. It appears that the king‘seemed not to have listened to the complaint at first; but soon after Latimer returned to his parish, he was again called to London. Latimer's patron, Sir Edward Boynton,47 a personal friend of the king, accom- panied the Rector to the Vice-Chancellor. Seemingly he 46Foxe, VII, 249. 47 . . Foxe, VII, 478—84. Sir Richard Boynton was the head of an ancient and wealthy family of Wiltshire. He was a near relative of Cardinal Pole, was in favor with Henry VIII, and was vice—Chamberlain to three of the King's queens. The property of Sir Edward lay within a few miles of Latimer's parish. l7 . . . 48 . satisfied Dr. Hilley, but later he was Cited to appear, on January 28, 1532, to answer other matters. On March 1, 1532, he stood before the convocation, where he refused to sign the articles that were submitted to him.49 Meanwhile, he was held in custody at Lambeth. Finally he signed two articles and was thereby absolved and warned to appear again on April 15, 1532.50 Scarcely back to his duties, he gave new offense to William Greenwood, a fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge.51 This offense he administered in a letter. Undoubtedly, this was the letter which caused him to be present at a convocation on April 19, 1532.52 Latimer appealed to the King, whose supremacy over the church convocation the council had been obliged to acknow- . . ‘ 53 . ledge in the preceding years. However, Latimer confessed that he had erred, not only in discretion, but in doctrine. 48D.N.B., XI, 614. Dr. Hilley, Chancellor to the Italian Bishop of Salisbury, Cardinal Compeggio, saw Latimer in the presence of Sir Richard Boynton after hearing the opinion of various points on which he was accused of heresy, thought it best to serve him with citation January 10, 1532, to appear before the BishOp of London at St. Paul's on the 29th of January. ' 49Foxe, VII, 455. 50works, II, 353-4. Slflggkg, II, 356-57. Strype, Eccles. Mem. I, 2, 175. 5 2State Papers, XXXIX, 476. 53EQ££§J II, 368. Foxe, VII, 486-7. 18 Henry took him back into favor on condition that he would not offend again.54 Latimer, free to return to Kingston, almost immediately preached, on March 9, 1533, a violent sermon, and this despite his recantation.55 The matter was reported in convocation, with the recent recantation which had been sent down to Bristol; however, the two men Hubbardine and Powell who had called up Latimer to answer the charges, were in trouble themselves for forbidding prayers for Anne Boleyn, newly proclaimed queen. With the help of Latimer's friend, John Hillsey, who defended him and discredited his accusers,56 the whole affair gained for him more popularity than before. He was honored with an appointment to preach before the-King every.Wednesday in Lent during the spring of 1534.57 In 1535 he was named one of the nine commissioners to investigate the case of Thomas Patmer, a heretic. In the following summer he was honored by being elected to the episcopacy, and was given the Bishopric of Worcester. 54Works, II, 356-57. 55Works, II, xv. 56 Works, II, 357-366. 57Works, II, 367. 58 Edward Arber, An English Garner, Tudor Tracts 1532-1588 (Westminster, 1903), 5. l9 WOrcester had been held by Cardinal Jerome de Ghenucci, an Italian, who was deprived of his office by an Act of Parliament, for being a non-resident.59 Latimer was duly elected about the middle of August, and consecrated bishop by Cranmer, in September.60 He received the temporalities of his see on October 5, 1535.61 However, before the new bishop could occupy his see he had to pay for the first fruits of the new office. As he was unable to meet these charges, Anne Boleyn advanced the sum of two hundred pounds to the newly-elect.62 After this duty was discharged, events moved smoothly to the installation of Latimer in his episcopal see. Latimer was well acquainted with his new diocese, because his old parish of west Kingston lay just outside its southern border. The diocese was then much larger than it is today. It included the important towns of WOrcester, Gloucester, and Bristol, as well as smaller, but equally well-known places like Tewkesbury, Warwick, and Stratford-on-Avon. The bishop held title to several "palaces" or residences in addition to 59Calendar of State Papers, Venetian, Vol. I-IX (1202—1603) ed. Rawden Brown, Cavendish Bentinck and Horatio Brown, 9 vols. (London, 1864-1898), IV, 971. sqwggkg, II, 368-71. 6¥W953§J II, 368-369. 2Demaus, 205. Foxe, VII, 540. Latimer was consecrated according to the Roman Catholic ritual with the omission of the oath of allegiance to the pope. Chester, 104. 20 the manors and farms from which he derived the greater part of his income. His principal residence was at Hartlebury on the banks of the Severn, near Kiddeminster. He had other domiciles at WOrcester, at Alvechurch, and at Kempsey on the Severn toward Tewkesbury. As bishop he also had a London residence in the Strand Place.63 The revenues at worcester were small in comparison with those of such wealthy sees as London or Winchester.64 In 1533, two years before Latimer's accession, the income from the spiritualities was one thousand forty-nine pounds and nineteen shillings. It seems he never received a full income and was always in need;65 he also asked for an assistant to lighten the burden of parish duties. The first appearance of Latimer as a bishop in Parliament and Convocation was on February 4, 1536. He preached two sermons before the Convocation on June 9, 1536.66 He is known to have been in his diocese only three times. Letters written from Hartlebury or nearby show him to have been there from October until Christmas, in 1536; from late July until Christmas, in 1537; and from mid-June in 1538 until 63Demaus, 204. 64Darby, 108. 65 works, II, 412-13. 66Works, I, 56-57. 21 . . 67 mid-January in 1539. During this period he made one trip at least to London. This was the occasion of Queen Jane Seymour's funeral solemnities, where he was asked to sing the solemn requiem 68 . mass and preach the sermon for the Queen. Immediately after the funeral Latimer seems to have returned to Hartle- bury, where he resumed the visitation of the monasteries. There are many letters to Cromwell during this period. The last is in behest of an old friend who had taken care of him during his illness, while in London, and now was in . . 70 need of a favorable word in a lawsuit. Latimer's letters to Cromwell in the latter half of 1538 are taken up with such matters as destruction of shrines, repeated expressions of hope that some of the monasteries might be reserved for the reformed religion, and other mat- ters for promoting the "New Learning." As one scans through the letters in chronological sequence, a note of increasing uneasiness can be detected.71 Instead of the friendliness and self-confidence which had marked the earlier letters from 67Works, I, 33—58. 68Works, II, 386-387. 69W'orks, II, 388-389. 70W'orks, II, 417-418. 71W'orks, II, 380-381. 22 Hartlebury during the two preceding years, there is now often found a note of querulousness. The sparkle of humor is still there, but there is an overlay of complaining and often, too, even of anger.72 It is as if Latimer saw the "handwriting on the wall," and somehow felt that he had slipped from the full confidence of the vicar—general;73 likewise, that he detected within the government factions adverse to himself gathering force. Such suspicions, if he had them, were warranted, as events that follow will show. After the last letter was written, Latimer was obliged to return to London to take part in the debate which led to the enactment of the Six Articles and, subsequently, to the loss of his bishopric. However, though he even lost support through the death of Anne Boleyn, the Seymour faction now favored him.74 The king, however, seems to have cooled in his ardor for Latimer's preaching by this time.75 In the three years following the Convocation Latimer was never invited to preach in London, although the king had not for— gotten him, and had, in the autumn of 1538, sent to him at 72E2££§J II, 397-398. 73ygggg, II, 399. 74WQ£E§J II, 415-416. 75W'orks, II, 402. 23 Hartlebury, a stag shot in the king's forest.76 In 1539 Latimer was called to London to attend the Parlia- ment, which met on April 28. Convocation opened at St. Paul's on May 2. Latimer was asked to act on a committee to draw up articles of uniformity of doctrine.77 The members failed to agree within ten days and, under pressure from the king, the Act of Six Articles was passed on June 6.78 During the next three days Latimer was absent from Parliament.79 He was not safe, however, from the severities that attended a refusal to sign agreement to the Six Articles. On July 1 Latimer and Shaxton both resigned their bishoprics.80 During the next year Latimer was kept in the custody of Dr. Sampson, bishop of Chichester. Henry gave Latimer a considerable pension of a hundred marks a year to be paid by the Court of Argumen- tations. Although this was not to be compared with the revenues of his bishopric, it made him financially better off than a parish priest. On September 29, 1539, he received 76EQ£§§J II, 404. Strype, Eccles. Mem., I, Pt. 1, 562. Pt. 2, 371. The letter in gratitude was addressed to Cromwell: "And your lordship would have thanked the king's grace highness for my stag, in my name. I have been much bounden to you. I have made many merry in these parts." 77works, I, 136. 78works, I, 134. 79Calendar of State Papers Relating to Ireland of the Reigns of Henryngdward VILgMary and Elizabeth, ed. H.C. Hamilton, 5 vols. (London, 1860-1890), I, 234-5. 80W'orks, I, 136. 24 three months pension; and thereafter he had been paid semi- . . 81 annually even into the reign of Edward VI. After Dr. . 82 . Sampson was confined to the Tower, Latimer was released to leave London, but was prohibited from preaching either near the city or in the universities or in his own diocese. Of the next years little is known of Latimer's activities. Finally, with six years remaining of Henry's reign, Latimer was called before the Council of Greenwich to be questioned about Crome's book on new learning, and was placed in custody in the Tower. There he, in his own words, describes his days . . 84 , until Henry the Eighth's death. "Cast into the Tower, and there to look daily for death."85 Latimer was released from the Tower in 1547.86 This was achieved by the general pardon given upon the accession of Edward VI to the throne. For the first time in eight years, on January 1, 1548, he was allowed to preach.87 From this 81Chester, 152. 82Constant, I, 380. works, I, 164. Acts of the Privy Council, ed. John Roche Dasent, 32 vols. (London, 1890-1907), I, 417, 458. (Hereafter designated as APC.) 83Works, I, 164. 84works, I, 276. 85Arber, 7. 86 . State Papers Domestic, I, 83,and Foxe, VII, p. 547. 87Apc, II, 344; III, 382. 25 time until Mary's accession to the throne, Latimer preached frequently before the king and council and before the "little II - 88 people of the English realm. Latimer's renewed career was to be a very short five years. He was soon called to court during Mary's reign. In April, 1554, he was imprisoned in the Bocardo common jail at Oxford.89 He was later tried by the Bishops of Lincoln, . . . 90 Gloucester, and Bristol, commISSIOned by Cardinal Pole. Finally he was condemned on October 1, 1555, and burned at the stake October 16, 1555.91 His memory has been kept alive by friends and enemies alike. But that which illumines this memory is the content of his sermons and letters. They are valuable to anyone 88Letters and PaperngDomestic, II, 5. 89Works, II, 435—555. werks, II, 345 and 444. An entry into Privy Council books, September, 1553, reads: "This daye Hugh Latymer, clerc, appeared before the Lordes, and for his seducious demeanor and was committed to the Tower." A letter to the Lieutenant of the Tower to deliver Sir John Williams “the bodyes of the late Archbishop of Canterbury." Doctor Ridley and Latymer were to be conveyed by him to Oxford."_A§g, IV, 340. 90James A. Mfiller, Stephen Gardiner and the Tudor Reaction (New YOrk, 1926), 269-285. 91Foxe, VII, 247, 251. An interesting note on the expenses for Latimer's last days was found in Demaus: "Bread and ale, ii d.; oysters, i.d.; butter, ii d; eggs, ii d; lying, vii d.; Total ii d., vi d. three fagots of wood to burn Ridley and Latimer, 12, 0; one load of furze fagots, 3, 4; for the carriage of these four loads, 3, 0; a post, 1, 4; two chains, 3, 4; two staples, 6; four laborers, 2, 8. Total 253, 2 d." Demaus, 517. 26 trying to achieve a deeper knowledge of the Tudor period. The greatest and most stirring dramas in human life are those which so often occur in the inner theater of the soul, hence sometimes escape the eyes of men. Hugh Latimer tried to externalize some of this travail on the part of his contem- poraries in his sermons and letters. 27 III LATIMER'S SERMONS REFLECT THE CONTROL THAT THE REGENCY HAS OVER THE REIGN OF EDWARD VI. "It hath pleased God to grant us a natural liege king and lord of our own nation; an Englishman; one of our own religion. God hath given him unto us, and [he] is a most precious treasure; and yet many of us do desire a stranger to be king over us." Thus spoke Hugh Latimer on the occasion of a sermon before King Edward VI. Edward VI was the son of Henry VIII and Jane Seymour, and was born in 1537. He was scarcely nine years old when he became king in 1547, and, of necessity, had to be ruled by others. His death at the age of fifteen added to the instability of the period. Even though Latimer could not fail to perceive this evil of his day, yet he cautions, "NOW'We have a lawful king; yet, nevertheless, many evils do reign."2 Since the political aspect of the reign of Edward VI is to be considered here, Latimer gives us his particular interpre- tation with a backdrop of England in the mid-sixteenth century. Edward's reign was entirely influenced by his protectors: Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford, Duke of Somerset, and John Dudley, Earl of warwick, Duke of Northumberland. Henry VIII's 1Works, I, 91. 2works, I, 91. 28 design of prolonging his authority into the new reign had led him to appoint a council, of whom the above two mentioned men were members. Even before the death of Henry VIII was made known, Seymour as protector to the young king, had placed himself at the head of the council. Obviously this was never intended by Henry VIII. The other Lord Protector, John Dudley, Duke of Nerthumber— land (warwick), had his eye on the throne for his own family. With this in mind he secured the marriage of his son, Guilford, to Lady Jane Grey. Having accomplished this alliance, he set about bringing into play events which caused the downfall of Somerset. He then induced young Edward to name Lady Jane Grey as his successor to the throne. However this occurred at the end of the reign of Edward VI. Latimer can rightly be called the apostle of the England which really reflects the short period of Edward VI's reign -- a reign in which Latimer played such an important role. This role he assumed in the period of 1548-1552 when he literally hurled thunderbolts at the abuses of the government. These abuses were economic, social, political, and moral. These evils Latimer saw had infected the England which he loved so well. As few as five of the extant sermons belong to the period before 1525-1540, and thirty-eight belong to the period :fifldowing. It is on these last sermons that his contemporary 29 reputation depends, rather than on the hundreds of earlier sermons. The sermons before the young king were not delivered in the Royal Chapel. A pulpit was set up in the inner private garden, and Edward, due to his precarious state of health, listened to them through a window opening upon his bedroom.3 Latimer spoke fearlessly, even though he must have known, or 'at least suspected, what this fearlessness would cost him. Latimer insisted that the king was the rightful monarch, despite the fact that he had to have councilors such as Seymour and Dudley. He says, "Therefore doubt not but the title of king is a lawful thing, is a lawful title, as of other magistrates. Only let the kings take heed that they do as it becometh kings to do, that they do their office well. It is a great thing, a chargeable thing."4 Even though Latimer put all authority in the king, he realized the greed of the men who now influenced him. Yet, the best government would have been severely tested in England during the years 1547-1558. The miseries of the country at that time defied remedies. Most of the abuses were inherited from Edward's father's reign, and were the result of Henry VIII's shortsightness and rapacity. Other abuses resulted 3Foxe, VII, 463. 4WOrks, I, 193. 30 from the emerging economic system. Although started in the reign of Henry VII, they were carried forward to a greater intensity in the reign of his son. The reformers depended upon the strength of the king.5 Emphasis was still on trust in the king and obedience to him. The right of rebellion as a means of securing political justice, if contemplated, was never expressed. From one point of view the Edwardian monarchial policy was to maintain old patterns, and to modify, but not to change them. There was a good reason for Latimer's emphasis on obedience to the monarchy. Sir Thomas Smith, one of Somerset's few friends, and Secretary of State in the reign of Edward's youngest sister, declared: "The Prince is the life, the head and the authority of all things that be done in the realm of England."6 The whole period of Edward VI's reign can, perhaps, be best seen through sermons, especially those preached before the boy king. These spoken words reached thousands of listen— ers. They helped to shape both spiritual and political 5Edmund Goldsmith, A Collection of Historical Documents -- Illustrative of the Reigns of the Tudor and Stewart Sovereigns, 2 vols. (Edinburgh, 1886), II, 14-18. 6 . . . Keith Feiling, England under the Tudor and Stuart Sovereigns (New York, 1927), II, Pt. 1, 67. 31 attitudes. The people who heard these official homilies could not help but be impressed by their ideas, as well as by their straight-forward simple diction. Hugh Latimer may have been unique in his direct, salty, idiomatic utterances from the pulpit to the multitude.7 One fact that cannot be emphasized too often is that the listening public was interested in politics. Also these sermons were given out-of-doors, and thus afforded an opportunity for greater audiences to gather and listen. These sermons, as delivered, were an important means of disseminating propaganda, and were shrewdly used by authority. Hugh Latimer used as text in his Second Lenten sermon of the year 1549, "Woe to thee, 0 Land, where the king is a child"; and he followed this in another place by saying, "Blessed is the land where there is a noble king."8 But in the new monarchy the prince was the mainstay of the state,9 and it was a serious thing for England that the successor of a powerful and resolute man should be a boy of nine years. Certainly the boy had more than usual ability; he had been trained to his office; he was already aware of 7Darby, 167. 8WOrks, I, 117. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 473-76. 9J. D. Mackie, The Earlier Tudors, 1485-1558 (Oxford, 1952), 479. 32 . . . . 10 . . his royalty, in spite of his youth. Latimer noted this and, well aware of the comments on Edward's youth, blasted them with the following: "But let us pray God maintain and con- tinue our most excellent king here present, true inheritor of this our realm both by nativity and also by the special gift or ordinance of God."11 Education of Edward VI From the moment of his birth at Hampton Court on Octdber 12, 1537, Edward had been surrounded with all the attention due to the long expected heir to the English Crown. The utmost care was taken of the King. At first he was brought up by women, but at the age of six he was turned over to the men. His household, which was considerable, was given a definite organization when his father went to France in July, 1544. He was taught deportment and horsemanship by the head of his household, his governor. As early as 1546 he played a part in the reception of the French ambassador, at which function he seems to have behaved with dignity.13 10 . . Raphael Holinshed's Chronicles of EnglandL7Scotland, and Ireland, Henry Ellis, ed., 6 vols. (London, 1807), III, 233. 11Works,I, 113. Foxe VI, 352. 12Hiolinshed, III, 920, 1107. 13 . . . A. F. Pollard, The History of England from the AcceSSion of Edward VI to the Death of Elizabeth, 1547-1603 (London, 1929), 362. 33 Particular attention was paid to his physical health. In the spring of 1549 he was riding, running, and shooting. How- ever, he never had the strength of his father nor a great interest in sport. Latimer, in his description of the king, states this about the sport of kings: ". . . and yet a king may take pastimes in hawking, or hunting or such like pleasure . . . use them for recreation when he is weary of weighty affairs."l4 Most of his time, and evidently much of his interest, was devoted to his studies. He had a quick intelligence, and he was well taught. His principal tutor was John Cheke of Cmmhmidge, a protégé of Butts, who was able to challenge Gardiner on the pronunciation of Greek.15 His other teachers included Richard Cox, later bishop of Ely, and Anthony Cooke.16 Frontthese masters he learned English and Latin and Greek, according to the principles inculcated by Erasmus. Although some of his written work probably owed something to his mas- ters, much of it seems to be his own, including his diary which 14 Works, I, 120. R. Schuyler and H. Ausubel, The Making Of English History (New .York, 1952) , 198-199. 5Strype, Eccles. Mem. II, Pt. 2, 109. Patrick Frasier TYtler, Englgnd under the Reign of Edward VI and Mary, 2 vols. (London, 1938).II.71. Gilbert Burnet, HistorLof the Reformation, 3 vols. (London, 1865), II, 4. l6D.N.B., IV, 1001. 34 he began in 1550.17 His penmanship he learned from Roger Ascham.18 John Belmayne taught him French.19 He had a German tutor, Randolph, and-seems to have learned German well. The story that he was "not unversed" in Italian and Spanish lacks support?0 It is very probable that the famous composer, Doctor Christopher Tye, was his musical preceptor; but he was taught the lute by Philip Van Wilder.21 The diary referred to above was a daily account of Edward's reaction to the times, as well as personal memoirs. It is hard for us in our modern day to realize that one so young could have such insight into the political turmoil of the times. His diary, appearing under tHe title, Jogrnal of Edward VI, is almost cold-blooded in its impersonal attitude toward certain things. He is the only king to have left us an account of his personal feelings and attitudes. Latimer can be deemed correct in the following statement made during one of his sermons, "I will tell you this, and I speak it even as I think; his majesty hath more godly wit and l7Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 182. 18Stanley H. Kuvitz and Heward Haycraft, British Authors Before 1800 (New Ybrk, 1952), 13. 19Mackie, 479. Burnett, II, 34. 20Mackie, 479. Burnett, II, 34. Foxe, V, 702. 21 . . . . . Henry Ellis, Original Letters Illustrative of English Ifistory, ll.vols. (London, 1824-46), II, 130-137. 35 understanding, more learning and knowledge at this age, than twenty of his progenitors that I could name, had at any time of life."24 Nor can it be denied that he had good school masters, for Edward's administrator hastens to add later in a sermon before the king, that ". . . he hath such school— masters as cannot be gotten in any realm."2 Edward had the Tudor talent; he understood theological discussions of his day, and his observations on such famous affairs show much good sense. well informed on the ordinary political events, he certainly grasped much of their immediate significance, although he may not have comprehended all their meaning. All that he was conscious of was that he was king; and never did he betray signs of personal regard for men who served him, and who used his royalty to compass their own ends. He may have suspected the motives of his kinsmen and ministers, but he certainly noted, without signs of emotion, their risings and fallings, and even their executions. He merely noted in his diary the execution of Lord Somerset -- a man Whom he evidently liked, and one who had been close to him and had treated him With kindness.26 For the insurgent 24 7 works, I, 118. Burnet, II, 34. Foxe, V, 702. 25W’orks, I, 131. Constant, II, 299. 26Edward VI, Journal of King Edward's Reign (Cotton Library, 1844) entry on January 22: "The Duke Somerset had his head cut off on the Tower Hill between eight and nine in the morning." 36 peasants he showed little sympathy. From the moment of his father's death he was king. Latimer noted well this particular characteristic in the person of Edward VI when he said: "It hath pleased God to grant us a natural leige lord of our own nation; an Englishman; . . . God hath given him unto us, and 27 [he] is a most precious treasure . . . . Regency under Somerset The work of ruling the land, which was in those days the personal concern of the king, could obviously not be accom- plished by a child of nine. It must be done in his name, and the question was: who should wield the royal power until the child grew up? As was noted before Henry VIII had endeavored to provide for the time of the minority of his son by appointing, in his will, protectors and a council. But the word of a dead king could not prevail against the authority exercised in the name of a living monarch.28 The question, as shown, was settled by the mere fact of power. The council was the general repository of executive power; and, at the moment of Henry's death, the council was dominated by a clique. This clique, though not truly protestant, was determined to at least maintain the reformation which Henry had effected, if not to carry it 27EQ£E§J I, 91. Burnett, II, 370-375. 28 A. F. Pollard, England undgr,Protector Somerset (London, 1900), 61. 37 further.29 Throughout the whole reign of the boy king there was a constant struggle for power between ambitious politicians whose attitude toward economic and social questions was affec- ted, not only by their own predilections, but by their search for popularity; and, in many cases, by their desire for per- sonal gain.3O Edward Seymour, earl of Hertford, became Duke of Somerset; John Dudley became earl of Warwick. The first device was the establishment of a protectorate under Somerset. He, as the king's uncle, had some title to this office.31 Latimer praises this council as he says: "And when had the king's majesty a council that took more pain both 1 night and day for the setting forth of God's word, and profit 32 of the commonwealth?" But Somerset proved unequal to the hour, and in the autumn of 1549 he was overthrown by Dudley, earl of Warwick, who had Somerset sent to the Tower. In February 1550, however, Somer- set was released from the Tower, and for some eighteen months the rivals maintained an uneasy alliance. During this time Warwick gained an ascendancy over the young king. He finally 29J. G. Nicholas, Literary Remains of King Edward VI, 2 vols. (Roxburghe Club, 1857), I, 98. 30Pollard, Somerset, 207-08. 31John Strype, Memorials of the Most Reverend Father in God, Thomas Cranmer, 3 vols. (London, 1853), II, 367. 32WOrks, I, 117-18. 38 persuaded young Edward that opposition to his plans (Warwick's) was treason against the royal person. And so in October 1551, warwick was made Duke of Northumberland and Somerset was again sent to the Tower33 to be beheaded there on January 22, 1552. Thereafter Northumberland did all for himself in the name of the king, who now appeared on the political stage. From the beginning to the end Latimer's sermons, given on Friday , propounded his views on the Tudor theory of monarchy. The theory itself was commonplace. What is interesting in Latimer's treatment of it is the intensely ethical and religious undergirding which he provides. In a protestant commonwealth, released from obedience to the Universal Church, all authority, temporal and spiritual, rests with the monarch.34 The king had 'his authority from God.35 As for worldly wealth, says Latimer, the king must have sufficient for his honor. As he puts it: "He shall not multiply unto himself too much gold and silver . . . and the necessity of it is that a king have a treasure always in 33Letters and Papers, October 16, 1551; also October 11, 1549, William Trumbull, Calendar of State Papers Foreign of the Reign of Edward VI, 1547, 1553 (London, 1861), 47. 34Feiling, 66-67. 35Charles Wriothesley, A Chronicle of England during the Reign of the Tudors, ed. William Hamilton, 2 vols. (London, 1875—1877), I, 178. 39 readiness."36 As to the ways by which the king was to gain this necessary money to run the business of government, Latimer states that it should necessarily come from the people through taxes.37 Latimer instructs the king on the theory of taxation by the state and the means of carrying it forth within its limits: "God appointed every king an sufficient living for his state and degree; and it is lawful for every king to some goods and possessions. But to exhort and take the right of the poor, is against the honor of the king?38 For a clear picture of the revenues granted to the king by order of Parliament we turn to Strype in his Ecclesiastical Memorials: ". . . an aid of twelve pences the pound of goods of his material subjects, and two shillings the pound of strangers. And this is to continue for three years."39 The _same Parliament gave Edward a second aid, of every ewe kept in several pastures three pence; and of every wether kept in the commons, three half—pence. The Hanse gave the king eight pence for three years, throughout all England. 36W'orks, I, 97. 37W'orks, I, 299-300. 38W'orks, I, 394, 508. 39Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 155. 40 The need for taxation by Edward's government was due to the bankruptcy of Henry's treasury. This bankruptcy is often attributed to Henry's personal extravagances, as well as to the costliness of foreign wars. There was a progressive decline in the revenues of the Crown towards the end of Henry's reign. The ordinary royal income was still derived from the ancient taxes, consisting of tenths, fifteenths, and subsidies. Owing to the enclosures and the subsequent decay of small holdings, and the scarcity of meats and other provisions brought on by the excessive sheep farming, the right of pur- veyance had been greatly reduced. A similar fate had over- taken the tenths, fifteenths, and subsidies. These direct variable taxes had been derived from the tenth levied on cities, and the fifteenth levied on rural districts. This custom of assessing had come down from the mid-fourteenth century, and had not been increased in comparison to prices.40 While the government expenses rose there were not sufficient taxes being collected to cover these expenses. The government's debasing of coinage resulted from the discovery of gold and silver in America, and caused a sharp increase in prices. Somerset tried to remedy the matter by his efforts to restore 0 Frederick Dietz, Finances of Edward and Mary, "Smith College Studies in Historyy" No.2 (Northampton, 1918), 77-91. 41 money to its original value, but it was practically impossible to do 30.41 The advice given to the king shows that Latimer felt it lawful for him to tax his subjects for all just pur- poses, but he must not tax so much that his subjects are impoverished, nor may he permit any of his subjects to have too much at the expense of those who are poorer than themselves. It rests with the king to determine equitably how much is sufficient either for himself or for any of his subjects.42 Here again he may not trust his councillors in the government who are guided by self-interest. Latimer puts it this way: "And so, for a necessary and expedient occasion it is warranted by God's word to take tax of the subject. But if there be sufficient treasures and the burdening of the subjects for a vain thing, so that he will require thus much or so much of his subjects . . . then this covetous intent, and the request thereof is too much."43 However the king must see to it that he has enough to redress cases of inequity. He must, also, always be ready to hear the complaints of his subjects, the little unimportant people, as well as the great.44 4 lPollard, Somerset, 91. 42W'orks, II, 98. 43werks, I, 97, 98. 44works, I, 126-127. 42 Another duty of the king was that he must see to it that the judges and magistrates also do justice, else he will be as guilty of injustice as they. For as the preacher says: "And why? Is he not supreme head of the church? What is the supremacy, a dignity and nothing else? Is it not accountable? I think it will be chargeable dignity [kingship] WHEN ACCOUNT SHALL BE ASKED OF IT."45 All this imposes a heavy responsibility upon the king.46 Since the Friday sermons were addressed to the king and his court in 1549, it is not surprising that Latimer speaks more of the duty of kings and magistrates than he does of the duty of the subject. But the subject's responsibilities are clear by implication, and in the later sermons similar economic and social obligations are explicitly affirmed.47 The Marriages of Edward and His Sisters Latimer, in his last sermon before Edward VI, gave the following admonition regarding the young king's marriage: "And here I would say a thing to your Majesty: I shall speak it of good will to your highness: I would I were able to do your Grace good service in any thing, ye should be sure to 45WOrks, I, 152. 46Works, I, 125, 130. 47E2£E§J I, 265-266; II, 190-191. 43 have it. But I will say this: for God's love beware where you marry; choose your wife in faithful stock. Beware of this worldly policy; marry in God: marry not for the great respect of alliance, for thereof cometh all these evils of breaking of wedlock, which is among princes and noblemen. And here I would be a suitor unto your majesty; for I come now rather to be a suitor and a petitioner, than a preacher; for I come now to take my leave, and to take my ultimum vale, at leastwise in this place; for I have not long to live, so that I think I shall never come here into this place again; and therefore I will ask a petition of your highness. For the love of God, take an order for marriages here in England."48 A plot had already been laid for bringing about the marriage of Lady Jane Grey to the young king.49 Still another plan was that he would marry Mary, Queen of Scots. Somerset had per- petrated this plan, acting upon the policy of the late king to bring about a union of the two realms. we have already seen that Latimer had advised the young king to marry an English woman. From such a union would come, he hoped, in the fullness of time, a true Englishman to the English throne.50 48Works, I, 243. 49 Tytler, I, 131. Burnet II, Pt. 2, 242. 50Works, I, 94-97. 44 Latimer had to concede to Somerset's plan of the marriage of Edward VI to Mary, Queen of Scots.51 There were numerous threats and promises to induce the Scots to carry out Somerset's project.52 However, the scheme was unpopular with the Queen Dowager, Mary of Guise, both on religious grounds and on national party principles. The unfortunate Battle of Pinkie, in which the Scots were defeated, widened the breach between England and Scotland.53 Mary was no longer safe in her own realm, and was removed to France. In a letter which Sir Thomas Chamberlain wrote to the Council are found details of a conversation which he had with the French Ambassador. They concern the treaty of marriage between King Edward VI and the Princess Elizabeth of France. Princess Elizabeth was the god-child of King Henry VIII, and was at this time, only seven years of age. In June, 1551, Edward VI had been made a Knight of the Garter; in July he was invested with the insignia of St. Michael; and on July 19, 1551, there was signed at Angers a treaty whereby Edward, resigning his claim to the hand of Mary of Scotland, betrothed himself to Elizabeth of France. 51Letters and Papers (July, 1547), II, 4. 2State Papers, Foreign, 140. 53 . State Papers, Domestic, I, 45. APC, II, 225. 45 This year witnessed a great exchange of civilities.54 Mary of Guise, returning from a visit to France, was given a magnificent reception. So, while Latimer advised having Edward marry an English- woman, the King's counsillors, Somerset and Warwick, pro- jected diverse plans. As Latimer states to Edward: "Therefore let our king what time his grace shall be so minded to like the wife choose him one which is of God; that is what is of the household of the faith."56 Latimer concludes with other requirements for a good wife for Edward: love, chastity, and virtues to enthrone her in the heart of the king and of England.57 The preacher is concerned to ensure the succession of the crown, as likely he knows full well that, frail as Edward VI is, ought to consider marrying and having an heir. Otherwise one of his sisters, Mary or Elizabeth, will succeed him to the throne.58 4Calendar of LettersgiDispatchesg_and State Papers Relating to Negotiations between England and Spain. Preserved in the Archives at Vienna, Simancas, IX-XIII, ed. M.A.S. Hume & Royal Tyler (London, 1912), vols. IX, 227. 55Holinshed, III, 865. 56W'orks, I, 94. Strype, Memorials of Thomas Cranmer, ed. P. E. Barnes, 2 vols. (London, 1833), 296. 58Tytler, II, 154. 46 In the meantime Mary and Elizabeth were the king's living heirs. They must marry Englishmen.59 If either married a foreigner, never let her come to the throne. For a foreign king would be the worst fate that Latimer could imagine for England, for it would bring back the strange religion. Latimer harps on this subject. "Oh what a plague were it, that a strange king, of a strange land, and of a strange religion, should reign over us . . . God keep such a king from us."60 He warns his listeners that if such a plague would fall on them, it would be punishment for England's vices. "The king's grace hath sisters, my lady Mary and my lady Elizabeth, which by succession and course are inheritors of the crown, who if they should marry strangers, what would ensue? God knowest."6 No one doubts Mary's right to succession. Plain in appearance, intense in feelings, half Spanish in temperament as in blood, she never looked for ideas or inspirations beyond the Catholic world of southern Europe as her mother had known it. She was deeply religious, and in a world where the most fervent Catholics saw that reform must touch the Papacy or all would be lost, she remained a complete Papist. 59Holinshed, III, 913. 6OTytler, I, 113. 61W'orks, I, 91. 62Foxe, VI, 352. 47 Latimer defended the crown in his anxiety over the suc- cessor for the throne. All who instigated or sympathized with the increasing Protestantism of the Edwardian policy knew, as Latimer did, that should Mary ascend the throne, such an event might be fatal for them, as well as for their religious activities. Latimer's Conflict with the Lord Admiral The Protectorate was promoted and defended by HUgh Latimer. He especially protected it in his remarks concerning Thomas Seymour. Thomas Seymour was the brother of Edward Seymour (Lord Somerset, the young king's Protector). Thomas Seymour was an ambitious man. He imagined that he had not been suf- ficiently considered in the distribution of honors and estates made by the executors of Henry VIII. Since he was uncle to the young king, he persuaded himself that his authority ought to be second to that of his brother; and he secretly paid his addresses to the Queen Dowager, Catherine Parr.63 This, of course, was done with the object in mind of increasing his own power. Admiral Thomas Seymour was a gallant, accomplished, and (if Holbein's brush has not flatteredL a very handsome man. Catherine Parr, in her misguided notion that he loved her and not her jewels or her dowry, gave him her hand. 63Tytler, I, 54. APC II, 241—9. 48 The whole affair proves interesting in illustrating the rivalry that existed between the two brothers, and indicates that the Lord Admiral's (Thomas Seymour) towering ambition could be content with no common share of power. Marriage to the Queen Dowager (Catherine Parr) was the "rung" in the ladder of his ambitious climb to fame.64 After the death of Catherine the Lord Admiral now aimed higher, and began secret addresses to the Lady Elizabeth.65 He also, it was who laid a plot for accomplishing the marriage of the Lady_Jane Grey to the young king.66 The ambition of the Lord Admiral, Thomas Seymour was restless. His intrigues, often detected and so often pardoned, became so frequent, and his resolution to bring about a change in the government became so manifest, that it was impossible for his brother, the Lord Protector, Edward Seymour, to over- look or despise.67 This neglect (or call it indulgence) of his brother, seems to have served only to fire an ambition already devastating. It seems to have encouraged those fierce passions, which from the first had made Thomas Seymour tyrannical and domineering. 64 . State Papers, Domestic, 8. APC, II, 250. 65 Tytler, I, 64—67. APC,II, 251—2. 66 Tytler, I, 137-141. APC,II, 257. 67Tytler, I, 135. Burnett, II, 158. Ellis, II, 153, 157. £39, II, 254. 49 With the servants about the young king over whom the Lord Admiral maintained an undue influence, he continued his secret intercourse.68 He had gained the heart of the Lady Elizabeth.69 He courted popularity, kept an almost royal establishment, secretly amassed large sums of money, and was so unguarded as to throw off speeches by which it was evident that he con— templated some desperate strike against the government and his brother (Edward Seymour), the Lord Protector.7O He was guilty of various kinds of corruption. He organized a faction within the Council in Opposition to his brother. And it is certain that he hoped to become co-protector, if not to usurp Somerset's position altogether. One of the Lord Admiral's minor offences was that he attempted to win the support of the young king by supplying him with money, a point noted here only because, in 1548, Edward VI used some of this money to pay Latimer for his court sermons o 68Tytler, I, 138. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 187. APC, II, 251-2. 6 9Tytler, I, 135. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 187. APC II, 257. 7OTytler, I, 152. APC II, 255. 71 Tytler, I, 150. Journals of the House of Commons, 1549, ed. T. Varden and T. E. May, 17 vols. (London, 1852), Card 1. APC, II, 253. 50 At last the Council prepared a set of charges against the Lord Admiral (Thomas Seymour); and, on March 4, 1549, he was accused of treason and condemned by the Act of Parliament.72 Finally, on March 22, 1549, he was beheaded on Tower Hill. Ever since that time historians have been debating the degree of the Admiral's guilt, the legality of the procedure by which he was executed; and above all, the responsibility of his brother, Edward, the Lord Protector, for the Admiral's death. Whatever the true answers to these questions may be, it was loudly asserted, immediately after the Lord Admiral's death, by certain members of his faction, that his execution was judicial murder, instigated by his brother, Edward, Lord Somerset. Latimer in the last five of his Friday sermons before Edward VI, either undertook, or was assigned, to answer these charges.73 In his sermon on March 24, 1549, two days after the execution of the Lord Admiral, he reproved those who challenged the decrees of the Council and Parliament, and exhorted his audience to accept the decisions of constituted authority by telling them: "I will not say but that the king and his council may err; the parliament houses, both the high 72Tytler, I, 152. Burnet, III, 205. APC II, 253. 7 3A£Q_II, 410. Darby, 192. 51 and the low, may err; it becometh us, whatsoever they decree, to stand unto it, and receive it obediently, as far forth as it is not manifest wicked, and directly against the word of God. It pertaineth unto us to think the best, though we can not render a cause for the doing of everything; for caritas omnia credit, omnia sperat, 'Charity doth believe and trust all things.’ We ought to expound to the best all things, although we cannot yield a reason." Latimer spoke precisely in answer to those who saw proof of innocence in the courage with which the Admiral went to his death. Latimer answers "This is no good argument, my friends: a man seemeth not to fear death, therefore his cause is good. This is a deceivable argument: He went to his death boldly, ergo, he standeth in a just quarrel."75 Latimer further alleged that while the Lord Admiral was in the Tower awaiting execution he had addressed letters to the Princess Mary and to the Princess Elizabeth in which he urged them to conspire against the Lord Protector, Somerset. In his fourth sermon before Edward VI Latimer says, "The man wrote certain papers which I saw myself. There wenetwo little ones, one to my Lady Mary's grace, and another to my Lady 74 werks, I, 148, 165. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 126. 75works, I, 160. 52 Elizabeth's grace, tending to this end, that they should con- spire against my Lord Protector's grace: surely, so seditiously as could be."76 Latimer asserts that on the block the Lord Admiral turned to the Lieutenant of the Tower and said, "Bid my servant speed the thing that he wots of."77 The words were overheard, and the letters were foundjxithe servant's shoe. Latimer further charged, with grudging admiration, that the Lord Admiral had been able to manufacture both the pen and ink with which the letters were written. He tells how they were found: "They were sewed between the soles of a velvet shoe. He made his ink so craftily and with such workmanship, as the like hath not been seen. I was prisoner in the Tower myself, and I could never invent to make ink so. It is a wonder to hear of his subtilty. He had made his pen of the aglet of a point, that he had plucked from his hose, and thus wrote these letters so seditiously, as ye have heard, enforcing many matters against my Lord Protector's grace, and so forth."78 In the same sermon Latimer asserted that he had met, years before, a prostitute condemned for robbery, who, before she was hanged at Tyburn, confessed that her first fall from virtue 76WOrks, I, 152, 161-2. 77Works, I, 162. 78 werks, I, 160-162. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 53 had been brought about by the Lord Admiral. Latimer states, "A whore, a vain body was led from Newgate to the place of execution for a certain robbery that she had committed, and she had a wicked communication by the way . . . . This woman, I say, as she went by the way, had wanton and foolish talk . [And amongst all other talk she said that such a one (and named this man) had first misled her.]"79 In his sermon in the following week Latimer defended the Bill of Attainder, and argued that the Lord Admiral had received as much justice as if he had been tried by the Lords. He says, "By this ye may perceive it is possible for a man to answer for himself, and be arraigned at the bar, and neverthe- less to have wrong: yea, ye shall have it in the form of law, and yet have wrong, too." . . . Paul was allowed to answer for himself . . . ."80 Two weeks after the above quoted sermon had been delivered, Latimer, in his Good Friday sermon, added another item to his list of the Admiral's particular faults. He asserted that the Lord Admiral had been a scoffer of religion as proved by his attitude toward family prayer in his wife's (Catherine Parr) household. Latimer says: "I have heard say, when that good 79Works, I, 164. 80 WOrks, I, 181-183. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 188. 54 queen that is gone had ordained in her house daily prayer both before noon and after noon, the admiral gets him out of the way, like a mole digging in the earth."81 And finally, Latimer completes his invectives against Thomas Seymour, the Lord Admiral, by the following: "He was, I heard say, a covetous man, a covetous man indeed: I would there were no more in England! He was, I heard say, an ambitious man: I would there were no more in England! He was, I heard say, a seditious man, a contemner of common prayer: I would there were no more in England! Well: he is gone." However, Thomas.Seymour, the Lord Admiral was not without supporters in the faction-ridden court. Therefore, nothing could be more logical than to suggest getting rid of him by way of attainder. Latimer stood by the decision of the govern- ment of that day. His protestations as to the sanctity of government, as stated in the pulpit, held great weight with his listeners.83 The Lord Admiral, Thomas Seymour, was no coward, and had come to his death on Tower Hill with such boldness, as we have noted before, that those not favorable to his brother, the Blflggksj I, 228-29. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 189. 82Works, I, 163. 8 3Works, I, 220. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 190-191. 55 Lord Protector, were quick to assert that he must have been . 84 . . . . . . innocent. This crlthlsm of the king and the counc11 Latimer would not have; and it is obvious in what Latimer . . 85 says that he is no mere mouthpiece of Lord Somerset. The Lord Admiral represented the very type of men whom Latimer considered the greatest menace to honest living. What kind of counsel Latimer gave the Lord Admiral in his role as confessor a few days before the death of the Admiral, we shall never know. However, it is certain that Latimer could make . . . 86 no pleas in defense of his penitent. It is not surprising that Latimer's allegations of treason, fornication, and irreligion provoked the Admiral's faction to indignant protest. Latimer noticed that his sermons now were not listened to with the attention formerly given them, and complains: "Surely it is an ill misorder that folk should be walking up and down in the sermon time, as I have seen in this place this Lent: and there should be such huzzing and buzzing in the preacher's ear, that it maketh him oftentimes to forget his matter. 0 let us consider the king's majesty's goodness! This place was prepared for banqueting of the body; and his 4 8 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. I, 195-9. Constant, II, 141. Innes, 198. 85W'orks, I, 185. 86Works, I, 183. 56 majesty hath make it for the comfort of the soul, and to have the word of God preached in it; showing hereby that he would have all his subjects at it, if it might be possible. Consider what the king's majesty hath done for you; he alloweth you all to hear with him. Consider where ye be."87 Specifically the Admiral's friends branded Latimer's statements as lies; and charged that he had been suborned by the Lord Protector and the Council. Latimer explains: "The council needs not my lie for the defense of that that they do. I can bear it of myself. Concerning myself, that which I have spoken hath done some good. You will say this: the parliament- house are wiser than I am, you might leave them to the defence of themselves. Although the men of the parliament-house can defend themselves, yet have I spoken this of a good zeal, and a good ground, of the admiral's writing; I have not feigned nor lied one jot, I take God to witness. Use therefore your judgment and languages as it becometh christian subjects. I will now leave the honourable council to answer for themselves. He confessed one fact, he would have had the governance."88 Some alleged, however, that Latimer had been suborned by the Duchess of Somerset, the Protector's wife, who was pOpularly 87Works, I, 204. 88WOrks, I, 184. 57 believed to have been piqued because protocol required her to yield precedence to the Admiral's wife, Catherine Parr, as 89 . . . . . former queen. In either case, his enemies likened Latimer to Doctor Ralph Shaw. Doctor Shaw was the prebendary of St. Paul's, whose services Richard Crookback suborned to proclaim . . . 90 the illegitimacy of the sons of Edward IV. ”It behoves them of the parliament to look well upon the matter: and I, for my part, think not but they did well; else I should not yield the duty of a subject. Some liken me to Doctor Shaw, that preached at St. Paul's Cross, that King Edward's (Edward H91 IV) sons were bastards. Latimer's statements must be judged in terms of his known sincerity of character. He maintains that religion can now be supported and strengthened only through the law (the king and his council), since there is no other outside authority except that of the Crown. 9 Foxe, II, 15. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 92, 94, 141. 90Foxe, VI, 283. 9 1works, I, 183-184. 58 IV. LATIMER'S VIEWS ON ECONOMIC PROBLEMS Among the many economic problems facing Latimer in the reign of Edward VI, perhaps the most important was that of enclosure. Enclosure is a generic term used to designate three different processes: (a) the substitution of large holdings for small ones, by the ejection of tenants with the consequent decay of their tenements; (b) the conversion of arable land and grazing land into sheep runs, the sheep being kept for their wool and not for their meat; and (c) the en- closure of common lands and wastes. Latimer had grown up familiar with the life of the farmer in medieval England. He was of yeoman stock, and never lost pride in the stock from which he had sprung. He always remained free from pretense and camouflage. He was happy in his memories of childhood days spent as a farmer's son. He now sees the picture gradually changing. "And the preacher has kept well enough in touch with the life of his native village to be able to quote the differences in rent and costs known by his father and the less fortunate man now tilling the same land."2 He was always in touch with rural England of‘Which he was proud to be a part. lStrype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 360. 2 Darby, 9. Foxe, VII, 437. 59 The class of yeomen to which Latimer belonged had enjoyed a moderate prosperity in the later years of the fifteenth century. But from the turn of the sixteenth century it had suffered grievously from many economic abuses, especially those of enclosures. The early sixteenth century witnessed a gradual transition in economics, as well as in the social and political fields. The Reformation had increased the speed of alterations within human society. These alterations had begun long before Henry VIII had mounted the throne of England. Those people who suffered from the consequent changes of the times attributed much of their less desirable position to the "new learning", and the rejection of old customs, now taking the form of the far-reaching enclosures of the land. The very fact of the people's discontent was of great concern to Latimer. He says in his last sermon preached before Edward VI, "I remember mine own self a certain giant, a great man who sat in commission about such matters; and when the townsmen should bring in what had been inclosed, he frowned and chafed, and so near looked and threatened the poor men, that they durst not ask their right."3 The social disorders of England came to a head during the reign of Edward VI. They were really the disorders of the 3Works, I, 248. 60 century; and seem to have threatened the very life of England. There was an uprising of the lower classes against the "nouveau riche”. Consequent events in England prove that however much these rebellions might have been stimulated by economic change, they were not wholly the result of the "new learning”. Like most uprisings the basic cause of discontent was the growing wealth of the gentry and the increasing poverty of the peasantry. The growing wealth of the gentry was caused by the enclosures, and thus enclosures continued to be a chief cause of discontent. Enclosures were constantly denounced, and more and more agrarian demands were made. Hugh Latimer's sermons and letters were directly pointed at some of the abuses of the time. He was aware of the human displacement caused by the enclosure movement; and succinctly described it as follows: "For where there have been a great many householders and inhabitants, there is now but a shepherd and his dog."5 Concerning more indirect effects of the enclosures, Latimer warned: "For if ye bring it to pass that the yeomanry be not able to put their sons to school (as indeed universities do wonderously decay already), and that they be not able to marry their daughters to the avoiding of whoredom; 4 . . Presevered Smith, The Age of Reformation (New York, 1920), 314. 5Works, I, 100. 61 I say, ye pluck salvation from the people, and utterly destroy the realm." The England that Latimer was looking back to with nostalgia was an agricultural England, where the towns were few and small; and all of them, including London, had their fields. Latimer could thus use the ploughmen and their ploughs as an image to reach the people. Part of the population lived in little agricultural communities called manors, each set in the midst of unfenced arable fields. Usually there were three of these fieldsr but sometimes only two, to which were attached some meadowland. The fields were divided into strips, often a furlong in length. These fields were tilled by various cultivators. The essential feature of the manor was that the lord kept his own land, a "demesne". His land, also, was sometimes in the form of strips, and he farmed it with the aid of dependents. Latimer proudly describes his own particular manner of life on a manor. He contrasts it sharply with the present abuse of the land due to the enclosure system. He says: "He [Hugh's father] kept hospitality for his poor neighbors, and some alms he gave to the poor, and all this he did of the I said farm, where he that now hath it payeth sixteen pound 6Works, I, 102. 62 by year, or more, and is not able to do anything for his prince, for himself, nor for his children, or give a cup of drink to the poor."7 By the year 1500 life in the manor had lost much of its old simplicity. Enclosure of the land in various forms was going on. There was enclosure of the waste and forest for agricultural purposes. There was enclosure of open field strips into a smaller number of hedged fields to promote better individual tillage. There was enclosure of village commons, and the enclosure of arable lands to be used for pasture. Latimer says, "I read of late in an Act of Parliament; and this act made mention of an Act that was in King Henry's days, . . . ; yea, and such another business there was in King Edward's time, the second also. In this Parliament . . . the gentlemen and the commons were at variance, as they were now of late. And there the gentlemen that were landlords would needs have away much lands from their tenants; and would needs have an Act of Parliament, that it might be lawful for them to inclose and make several from their tenants, and from the commons, such portions of their lands as they thought good . . . at last it was concluded and granted that they 7Works, I, 101. 63 might so do; provided alway, that they should leave sufficient to the tenant . . . . Or who shall now judge what is sufficient? . . . ; if they had it then in their power . . . they would leave no more than sufficient . . . then if they had any more taken from them since that time, then had they now not sufficient."8 Many peasants had shaken themselves free from their burdensome personal services, and had thus lost their old security of tenure. The lease—holder was at the mercy of the lord when his lease expired, and was likely to have to pay a heavy fine for the privilege of renewal. He might, perhaps, have his rent increased. He was also liable to pay a fine every time that the estate passed from one holder to another. Some tenancies dated so far back, and had been consecutively passed through so many hands that it was impossible to deter- mine who had been the original holder.9 The position of the hired laborer, into which many of the smaller copyholders and customary tenants had sunk, was little better than vagrancy.10 Landlords became more and more astute businessmen; they managed their lands as a business. One result of the new spirit was rack—renting, unreasonable and tyrannous increases 8W'orks, I, 248-49. 9Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 360. 10Pollard, Somerset, 30. 64 in rent.11 The landlord with enclosures tended to turn arable land into pasture, substituting sheep-raising for tillage; and finally enclosed all the waste.12 The commoners were robbed by the forfeiture of the monastic lands. Both common fields and commons, no doubt, disappeared in many places; and the country saw the first notable install- ment of enclosure. The confiscation of the lands of the monasteries began as a decision of Parliament, on February 4, 1539. This decision was an outgrowth of the famous Merton- Westminster Statute as far back as the year 1235.13 After the abbeys had fallen the great woods were cut down and sold. Consequently, the poor had then great difficulty in getting wood for fire; and various small home industries dis- appeared. "we of the clergy had too much"; says Latimer, "but that is taken away, and now we have too little."14 Although the actual extent of the enclosure movement is debatable, it certainly changed the form of life from a better to a worse one. It was certainly an eventual change to a poorer people. The agrarian policies became a burning issue; llStrype, Eccles. Mem. II, Pt. 2, 360-361. 12 Strype, Eccles. Mem. II, Pt. 2, 361. 3John Alzog, Manual of Universal Church History, 4 vols. (Dublin, 1890), III, 319. 14Works, I, 100. 65 and Latimer comments, in his usual vigorous style, as follows: "Thus all the enhancing and rearing goeth to your private commodity and wealth. So that where you had a single too much, you have that; and since the same, ye have enhanced the rent, and so have increased another too much: so now ye have double too much, which is too, too much. But let the preacher preach till his tongue be worn to the stumps, nothing is amended. we have good statutes made for the commonwealth, as touching commoners and inclosers; many meetings and sessions; but in the end of the matter there cometh nothing forth."15 Elsewhere in the same sermon Latimer states: "Furthermore, if the king's honour, as some men say, standeth in the great multitude of people; then these graziers, inclosers, and rent- rearers, are hinders of the king's honour . . . . My lords and masters, I say also, that all such proceedings which are against the king's honour (as I have a part declared before, and as far as I can perceive), do intend to make the yeomanry slavery, and the clergy shavery. For such works are all singular, private wealth and commodity."16 While the royal legislation formerly, as we have already stated, tried to restrain enclosure, the crown usually in the lsflpgkgj I, 101. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 360. l6W'orks, I, 100. 66 final analysis, gave in by legalizing it. The summer of 1549 saw uprisings all over the country, which in Norfolk under Robert Ket reached the proportions of a major rebellion. The Lord Protector's (Edward Seymour) failure to deal firmly with these disorders ruined his credit, already shaken by the intrigues and execution of his brother, Thomas Seymour, the Lord Admiral. The Lord Protector was swept from power, but was readmitted to the council, April 1550. Upon his return he tried to slow down the pace of change against which Latimer had been so vehemently preaching. However, Warwick, who had won over the young king and had been made Duke of Northumber- land, now packed the council and pushed through his agrarian statute. As a result Somerset was charged with a bogus plot, and executed in January, 1552. After his death the lords of Edward VI's Council destroyed any improvement that had been achieved on agrarian policy.l7 Latimer was not alone:hihis outcry against the evils of enclosure. Note what Thomas Lever, a very grave preacher, contemporary of Latimer , has to say: ". . . one reason of this plenty of miserable object in London was the destruction of tillage in the country, the demolishing cottages there; whereby it came to pass that the poor had neither work or 7Frederick C. Dietz, Political and Social History of England (New York, 1942), 205. 67 harbour. And so having no subsistence in the tries, they were fain to come up to get bread, or beg for it in the city."18 Lever continues in this strain, "0 Merciful Lord, what a number of poor, feeble, halt, blind, lame, sickly; yes, with idle vagabonds, and dissembling catiffs mixed among them, lie and creep begging in the miry streets of London and Westminster. It is a common custom with covetous landlords, to let their housing decay, that the farmer shall be fain, for a small regard, or none at all, to give up his lease, that they taking the ground into their own hands, may turn all to pastures. So now old fathers, poorer widows, and young children, lie begging in the miry streets."19 There were a few besides himself, according to Hugh Latimer, who gig try to forestall the abuses resulting from the enclosing of the land. He spoke of one such man in his first sermon before Edward VI, saying: "In this realm are a great many folks, and amongst many I know but one of tender zeal who at the motion of his poor tenants hath let down his land to the old rents for their relief."20 The man referred to by Latimer was John Hales, "A royal commission had been 18Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 13. 9 Strype, Eccles, Mem., II, Pt. 2, 147. 2 0Works, I, 102. 68 issued and acted upon in 1548 with a view to redress the grievances and misery occasioned by these inclosures: and Mr. Hales, one of the commissioners, attempted in the next session of parliament to have three different bills passed with the same view, "but in the end of the matter there came nothing forth."21 John Hales was a commissioner of high quality and integrity, and for that reason had been appointed for inquiry into the abuses and hard pressures upon the poor. He was the most active instrument of the policy of purity. Hugh Latimer goes on to pray that there be many more like him (John Hales) in the realm: "For God's love let not him be a phenix, let him not be alone, let him not be an hermit closed in a wall; some good man follow him, and do as he giveth example."2 In the first year of the reign of Edward VI a king's commission was formed. This was due entirely to the influence of the Lord Protector, Somerset. Among the principal members of the commission were Hugh Latimer, John Hales, and Thomas Lever. The commission drew up various articles or proposals which were based on the ideas of the Commonwealth Party.23 Zlflpgng I, 101-102. Strype, Eccles. Mem. II, Pt. 1, 145. 22Works, I, 102. 3 . State PapegsL_Domestic, I, 56. 69 The Commonwealth Party had been formed to investigate and overcome the evils arising from enclosure. An attempt was made to carry out their proposals by legislation. One of these proposals insured farmers and tenants against arbitrary eviction by the landlord. Another sought to prevent destruc- tion of farms and the withdrawal of land from cultivation. After Latimer's"5ermon on the Plough? preached in January, 1548, there were attempts at insubordination, during the following spring, in several counties of England, as already mentioned. As a result of these uprisings petitions were presented to the king in May, 1548.25 Latimer, as has already been stated, was released from the Tower on the occasion of Edward VI's coronation. He was asked to preach the following year. He delivered four sermons, entitled "Sermons on the Plough", one only of which is extant. It is his most famous, and most often quoted sermon. It deals with the equality of man, and pleads with the landlords to treat their tenants with justice. To return now to an account of the king's commission which was formed for the redress of enclosures, the commissioners addressed a proposal to Edward VI and Lord Somerset. The 4 2 Constant, II, 113. Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 235. 25Strype, II, Pt. 2, 148. Pollard, Somerset, 32. v. supra, p. 64. 70 proposal read as follows: ". . . by the universal consent of all the whole realm made for restitution, preservation and maintenance of the state, and policy of the same; and namely for the maintenance and keeping up of houses of husbandry, for avoiding destruction, for pulling down towns for enclosures and converting arable land into pastures; for limiting the number of sheep men could have, and the plurality and keeping of favors."26 Edward VI decided, with Somerset, to take action through the whole Council, although all of its members did not share his views on enclosures, and this on account of the fact of their own vested interests. The first ordinance which Somerset proposed against enclosures was issued on June 1, 1548. It recalls, as has been mentioned before, the statutes of Henry VII and Henry VIII, and puts these Statutes once more into force. Latimer says: "I read of late in an Act of Parliament; and this Act made mention of an Act that was in King Henry's days, the third I trow it was; yea, and such another business there 27 was in King Edward's time, the second also." A Commission of Enquiry, similar to that appointed by 26Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 349. 27Works, I, 243. 71 WOlsey in 1517,28 was charged to report all enclosures effected since 1485.29 In addition the Commission was to discover who made the enclosures at the time, the number of acres converted into pasture, and the profit occurring; who owned more than two thousand or occupied more than two farms in the same place, and whether those who had received monastic land maintained a farm of adequate size with a sufficient number of laborers as the statute directed.30 The purpose of this commission was not the immediate punishment of offenders, but to secure informa- tion necessary to draft the bills intended to be laid before Parliament. The reform bills were introduced during the session which opened on November 8, 1548. As Latimer says in his first ser- mon preached before Edward VI, "Furthermore, if the king's honour, as some men say, standeth in the great multitude of people; then these graziers, enclosers, and rent-rearers, are hinderers of the king's honour."31 Some of these reform bills were passed. One of these was a tax on sheep. This was designed 28Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 1, 148. 29 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 359. 30 . Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 360. 31Works, I, 100. 72 to discourage the conversion of arable land into pasture. But the proposal remained a dead letter. Latimer says: "But to extort and take away the right of the poor, is against the honour of the king. If you do move the king to do after that manner, then you speak against the honour of the king; for I full certify you, extortioners, violent oppressors, ingrossers of tenements and lands, through whose covetousness villages decay and fall down, the king's liege people for lack of sustenance are famished and decayed, -- they be those which speak against the honour of the king."3 In fact all the bills specifically directed against enclosure were rejected by Parliament. One such bill proposed that landowners rebuild farms which had been allowed to fall into ruin. Latimer pleads: "Surveyors there be that greedily gorge up their covetous goods; hand-makers; honest men I touch not; but all such as survey, they make up their mouths, but the commons be utterly undone by them; . . .34 The landlords are urged to maintain agriculture and to employ the necessary labor.35 Another bill made it obligatory to raise two cows and a calf for every 32Works, I, 93-94. 33Journal, 35. May 12, 1550. 34Works, I, 102. 35 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 360. 73 hundred sheep.36 A third forbade dealers to buy and sell the same livestock without keeping it for a prescribed period.37 The bill against monopoly of farms was not even read in Parliament; and a majority vote threw out a bill which ordered destruction of large private parks. Against this abuse of monopoly Latimer raises his voice, saying: "Which evils, I fear me, are much used in these days, in the marriage of noblemen's children; for joining lands to lands, possessions to possessions, neither the virtuous education nor living being regarded . . ."38 However, in 1549, King Edward VI again directed commissions to investigate and act against unlawful enclosures. He gave extensive instructions for each county. One of these commissions for the redress of unlawful enclosures and other abuses was directed by such men as Hugh Latimer, John Hales, John Arscot, John Mersche, and Henry Hawkes. These commissioners were empowered to reform all manner of things as put forth by the laws. They also received the right to try to correct all abuses. 36Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 356. 37 Strype, Epcles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 352. 38Works, I, 95. 74 The men responsible for the unlawful enclosures were highly indignant at the commissioners for examining into the wrongs committed against the commoners. They even went so far as to accuse John Hales of inciting the people to rebellion.39 In giving powers to the commissioners King Edward VI issued a directive specifying that the commissioners amend and correct all abuses. While the commissioners were attempt- ing to carry out instructions, another uprising took place in the West. The landowners to whom the commissioners were sent were, as already stated, indignant about examinations and any questions on the reasons why poor men's commons and livings had been taken away. Latimer lashes out at them: "Of this 'too much' cometh this monstrous and portentous dearth made by man, notwithstanding God doth send us plentifully the fruits of the earth, mercifully, contrary unto our desserts: notwithstanding, too much which these rich men have, causeth such dearth, that poor men, which live of their labor, can not with the sweat of their face have a living, all kind of victuals is so dear;"40 The landowners pretended that these things were mere innovations, and, of course, could not be 39 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 268. 4 0werks, I, 99. 75 altered. They blamed John Hales for the inquiry and for the instructions to the king and his councilors. The landowners thus examined tried by every means to get a favorable report, or to invalidate any evidence against themselves. Some of the commoners were threatened with the loss of their holdings if the Commission decreed against them. Others were indicted‘ for telling the truth.42 In spite of all the "sleight of hand" maneuvers, the commissioners obtained sufficient testimony of abuses to present to the council, so that they could proceed to an address of their wrongs. John Hales prompted the king, Edward VI, to grant a general pardon to all transgressors against the enclosure laws.44 He fondly hoped that, as a result of this leniency, the enclosers would, in turn, reform their actions. The pardon had the opposite effect and made the greedy become greedier than before. Latimer rather tersely notes the futility of the efforts of John Hales in the following: 41J. M. Cowper, The Decay of England (London, 1871), 73. 42ngkg, I, 137. John Hales, A Discourse of the Common 'Weal of This Realm of England, ed. Elizabeth Lamond (Cambridge, 1893), repr. 1929, was attributed to William Stafford until it was shown by Miss Lamond, E.H.R., VI (1891), 284-305, to be derived from a MS by John Hales written in 1549. 43Works, I, 178. 44Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 261. 76 ". . . many meetings, and many sessions, but in the end of the matter there cometh nothing forth."45 In order to defeat the statute some owners, instead of pulling down the houses, kept them standing either without tenants; or, occasionally, having them occupied by a shepherd or a milkmaid. The commission had tried, also, to convert the land back to agriculture. This was evaded by plowing and sowing a single furrow down through a hundred acres of ground, leaving the remaining land in sheep pasturage. Other landlords, in order to dissimulate the number of sheep that they actually possessed, had their kinfolk, relatives, and servants take them for a while.46 These efforts to deceive the commissioners who were sent out to benefit the commonwealth did not escape the keen eye of Hugh Latimer. As we have noted previously, he addressed the king and council on the uselessness of preaching on the subject.47 45WOrks, I, 101. 46 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 362. 47Works, I, 101” 77 When the Act of Uniformity was first enforced on Whit Sunday, June 9, 1549, the commoners revolted almost simul- taneously, in the following counties: Wilts, Sussex, Hants, Berks, Kent,Gloucester, Somerset, Suffolk, Warwick, Essex, Hertford, Leicester, Worcester, and Rutland. They revolted, not entirely because of the change in religion, but to make an occasion to voice their feelings against other abuses. In the first of these counties Sir William Herbert put himself at the head of a body of troops, dispersed the insurgents, and executed martial law on the guilty. In the other counties tranquility was restored by the exertions of the resident gentry, and the persuasions of the moderate among the yeomanry. The peOple wanted simply an immediate return to the order of things by which the nations had been blessed, and the prosperity, unity, and concord which they had formerly experienced. So they by their very intelligence revived the hopes of the discontented; they assembled again in numerous bodies, and proceeded to do justice without com- missioners.49 In general they acted without concert and without leadership; and, as a result their enthusiasm was soon lost and died away. 8Journal, 6. 9Strype. Eccles, Mem., II Pt. 2, 131. 78 In Oxford, Norfolk, Cornwall, and Devon, the uprising assumed a more dangerous shape. Armies were formed, threatening and boldly defying the government, and chal- lenging it to remedy matters. Mercenary troops, raised in Italy, Spain, and Germany, finally suppressed this insur- rection. However, men had rallied to the leader, Robert Ket,with surprising loyalty. The twenty—four hundred who had joined him in Norfolk, had swelled to a force of twelve thousand. Although Ket had been idealistic in his endeavors, he was conquered by the Earl of Norwich; and both he, as the captain of the insurgents, and his brother as accomplice, were hanged for sedition. Although Hugh Latimer was always in full sympathy with the poor commoners, and their wrongs were apparent to him at all times, he neve; took their part against the govern- ment.50 The commoners wanted their own way, i.e., their ‘ grievances redressed, while the gentlemen commissioners wanted affairs settled in the way that they had worked out.51 In 1552, there was another insurrection in Buckingham— shire, under Isaac Herne, with the same demands and complaints as those of the commoners in 1548 and 1549.52 50Journal, 7-8. Wriothesley, II, 77. 5 1Strype, Eccles. Mem., I, Pt. 2, 114. 52 ’ Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 1, 2. 79 The abuses were not to run their full course in the reign of Edward VI. Neither was Hugh Latimer ever to see any benefits achieved from his pleadings, reiterated again and again against the abuses of the times, especially that of the enclosures.53 Regardless of the futility of his efforts, Latimer dared to speak out before the king and the council regarding the abuses social and economic that had been brought upon the "little" people of the nation that he loved. He was not, however, without hope for the future when he said: ". . . that the king's majesty when he cometh of age will see a redress of these things so out of frame; giving example by lettering down his own lands and then enjoining his subjects to follow him."54 Latimer did not think it amiss to comment, in his court sermons, on the great evils of the day, especially that of enclosures and their social and economic effects on the people. As a preacher of the Tudor period, whose opinions reached throngs of people, Latimer denounced the Act empowering a judge to determine, and to state, just what was sufficient land allotted to a tenant to insure him a decent living. 3 . . . Foxe, III, Letters relating to the SuppreSSIOn of the Monasteries, 7-13; and 384. 54Strype, Eccles. Mem., I, Pt. 1, 143. 80 However, the voice of Latimer was scarcely heard above the tumult of the clamor raised by the lords and the gentry, who insisted upon enclosing as much as they pleased. As stated before, Latimer had called those who were effecting enclosures "giants" who sit in the commission and intimidate and threaten poor men. Even in his last sermon preached before Edward VI and his council, Latimer pleads with the enclosers to treat the peasantry with honesty and brotherly love. Concluding this section on enclosures, let Latimer's own words bear weight: "Oh, it is a great matter, when brethren love and hold well together!"56 Coinage Land enclosure was certainly a major abuse; but closely allied to it, and affecting the poor just as seriously, was the debasement of coinage. The reducing the amount of land in the possession of the crown had lessened the amount of revenue pouring into the crown's treasury from the crown's lands, but had set a bar on their future earning potential. Thus really began the defeat of Henry VIII's great plan for 55WOrks, I, 270. 56werks, I, 271. 81 turning the chief form of wealth of the country of England to the support of the state.57 It had been the policy of both the grandfather of Edward VI, and of his father to surround themselves with men as highly trained and as highly skilled as possible. Thus such unscrupulous officials as Dudley, Paget, and wriothelesy had been advisors to Henry VIII, and had enriched themselves upon the spoils obtained from the enclosures and the seizure of monastic lands. This channelling of the funds into their own pockets, instead of into the treasury of the realm, had brought about a state near bankruptcy, and the inflation of the coinage. It was this same group -- Dudley, Paget, and wriothelesy -- that now clustered about the youthful Edward VI. It was they who were to bring the kingdom out of the financial crisis which it encountered between the years 1547 and 1553. A fruitful expediency was the debasement of the coinage, which was already at a very low standard. The clipping and debasing of the coins enhanced the prices of all commodities. This situation , which will be considered later in discussions of the cost of living problems, was another of the abuses which Latimer notficed. 57works, I, 137. 82 In a court sermon preached before the councillors and officials of Edward VI, Latimer, with righteous indignation, blasts the court as follows: "Thy silver is dross; it is not fine, it is counterfeit; thy silver is turned, thou hadst good silver."58 The price revolution and the debasement of coinage were so inextricably interwoven that it does not seem possible to disentangle them. They, too, are closely associated with the other social and economic abuses which occurred during the reign of Edward VI. The general rise in prices, due to the above causes, was a serious thing for the government. The crown lands had been rented on long-term leases. It was impossible for the government to increase the rates of rent before the expiration of the leases. However, with the lower value of money, it was imperative that the rents be increased. And so, growing pains in a period of change may be said to have lain at the bottom of the debasementof coinage. There was a sort of poetic justice in the economic situation of the reign of Edward VI. The crown, with its 58W'orks, I, 137. 9Dietz, Finances, 73-76. 60Mackie, 607. 83 hungry land-grabbers, had cheated the people by debasing the coinage to get immediate funds. And yet it had to take back the poor money in revenues at its face value. It also had to pay an increased value on all of its supplies; while the real value of the revenues, expressed in terms of purchasing power, was seriously reduced. Latimer bitterly points up the fact when he says: ". . . So no doubt the fall of money hath been here in England the undoing of men.”61 The society of Latimer's time was rapidly changing. It was passing from a wide distribution of land among the peasants, at easy rents, to a gradual abolition of peasant holdings. This definitely affected the debasement of coinage problem because, whereas before the peasant could get his living almost entirely from the land, he was now forced to purchase certain commodities with much cheaper money. Con— solidation of farm lands into larger rented farms implied a replacement of mere "subsistence agriculture“. Such an agricultural system would produce only for the market. The prices of wheat, barley, oats, and cattle rose to two and three times their previous costs. At the same time wages, which had been fixed by law, remained close to their former level.62 61werks, II, 41. 6 2Journal, September 9, 1551, 45. 84 To understand the financial straits of Edward VI's time, it is necessary to glance quickly at the reign of his father, Henry VIII. The wars which Henry VIII had carried on with France and Scotland had seriously drained the government's resources, long before Edward VI and his council had attempted to take over the financial burden.6 Thus war debts, the permanent reduction of royal revenues, the alienation of crown land, the increased expenditures induced by the rise of prices; and finally, the growing debt abroad, had caused this financial crisis. One may also include here, added to this list of financial woes, the heavy burden of the upkeep of the English fleet recently placed upon the state, as well as the cost of the upkeep of the garrisons and fortifications at Calais, Berwick, and other places. The chantries were confiscated, their lands and goods sold, and new taxes were enacted. But even so, not enough was raised to cover the domestic and foreign bills. Shifts were made to use funds for normal charges; and so, in the end, the entire government became deeply involved in debt. Loans for funds were solicited from Flanders,65 from the 3Dietz, Finances, 76. 64 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 57. 65 . . State Papers, Foreign (September 5, 1549), 46. 85 Fuggers,66 and from banking institutions in Antwerp. As a last resort to escape this heavy burden of debt, the government further debased the coinage. It is recalled that this process of debasement had preceded and followed the reign of King Edward VI. An enormous amount of base gold and silver coin was in circulation, which it now seemed impossible to redeem. Executors in the reign of Edward VI maintained the same methods as their predecessors.68 The alloy was increased until it was necessary to call in all moneys and recoin them.69 At last the council resolved to resume the coining of money in standard values. Edward VI took an enormous interest in the change of coinage. Since this account is primarily concerned with the abuse of the debasement of coinage, rather than the process of debasement, let us note how this abuse affected the people of England. Hugh Latimer has this to say: "And they say the evilness of money hath made all things dearer."7O It is true 6§Lpig.(8eptember 11, 1549), 199. Journal, 66. 6 7The Caiendar of Patent RollngEdward VII 1547—1553, 5 vols. and an Index, vol. VI, ed. R. H. Brodie (London, 1924-9), III, 135. 68 Journal, May 9, 1551, 39. C. R. Markham, King Edward VI (London, 1907), 30. 69 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 1, 187. Journal, August 17, 1551, 43. 70Works, I, 68. 86 that the debasement of coinage afflicted the poor classes with still greater deprivations and sufferings. Another class, too, people who heretofore had probably never been tempted to dishonesty, were now caught up in this mad rush for quick riches, and took to counterfeiting coins. While in office as Vice-Treasurer of the Mint at Bristol, Sir William Sherington had coined a large quantity of testors of base alloy and under-standard value. By this means he had enriched himself, but had defrauded the government.71 This same Sir William Sherington had been associated with Lord Thomas Seymour's tampering of the funds from the royal mint for the purpose of aiding him to get the money to work against his brother, Edward, Lord Protector. Hugh Latimer mentions the open restitution of Sherington, saying: "I am not afraid to name him; it was Master Sherington, an honest gentleman, and one that God loveth. He openly con- fessed that he had deceived the king, and he made open restitution."72 It is true that Hugh Latimer called Sherington an "honest" gentleman, even though he knew that he had been a counterfeiter; but, no doubt what Latimer had in mind in thus referring to Sherington was that he was honest in admitting his guilt, and making restitution. 71works, I, 452. 72 WOrks, I, 263. Strype, Eccles. Mem. II, Pt. 2, 190 (Con- fession of Sherington), Nov. 5, 1549. 87 Latimer refers, also, to acts of secret restitution. In Acts of Privy Councily II, 239-40, there is a reference that the preacher (Latimer) had just given in the amount of one hundred and eighty pounds to the king's council. The Act reads: "Mr. Doctour Latymer brought in ciiij1i into the Council Chamber which he had recovered of one that had con- 73 cealed the same from the Kinges Majestee." Another note entered in the Acts of Privy Council, March 27, 1550, tells of a secret restitution given to the reformer (Latimer). It states: "This daye, Sir Mychall Stanhopp, knight, by commandment and order of the Lord Protectour's Grace and Counsoil, received of Mr. Latymer of suche the Kinges money as come of concelement and now delivered by exhortacion of the said Mr. Latymer, the somme of three hundred lxxiij1i whereof they appointed presently fifty pounds by way of his attendance at Courte used for payments in his charge."74 That the King's good servant, Mr. Latimer, did much to persuade people to make restitution can well be attested from numerous references to it in his sermons to all classes of people. Latimer used, as a text for his sermons at this time, 73APC, II, 266. 74APC, I, 404-5. 88 the effect that such evils as counterfeiting and the other evils mentioned, would eventually have upon Christian living. He called such depraved morals the debased currency of Christian behavior.7 The cases of counterfeiting are far too numerous to mention in total here; but that it was a great evil can be attested to by convictions mentioned in the Acts of the Privy Council.7 "But I tell you," says Latimer, "that if any man or woman hath stolen or purloined away somewhat from his neigh— bor, that man or woman is bound to make restitution and amends. And this restitution is so necessary that we shall not look for forgiveness of our sins at Christ's hand, except this restitution be made first; else the satisfaction of Christ will not serve us: for God will have us to restore or make amends to our neighbor, whom we have hurt, deceived, or have in any manner of ways taken from him wrongfully his goods, whatsoever it be."77 75 R. E. Routh, They Saw It Happen (An anthology of witnesses' accounts of events in British history, 1485-1688) (Oxford, 1956), 35. 7§e22. II, 538. III, 331, 387, 400. IV, 36, 38, 44, 79, 80. APC, IV, 259. April, 1553. 77W'orks, II, 13. 89 Thus Latimer's awareness of the havoc which was played upon the whole nation by those in high places stooping to counterfeiting and to otherwise debasing coinage, had a direct effect upon his preaching. This keen awareness, shining through his sermons, adds colorful overtones to a drab picture on minting, and the changing and re-evaluating of the Edwardian money. As said, he was not unaware of the evils; but, by his naivété, he came close to the real truth when he lay all the blame on the covetousness of man, saying: "No, no, covetousness was joined with it. Covetousness followeth lechery, and commonly they go together . . . and that must be gotten by covetousness . . . for they oppressed the poor . . . . Covetousness is the root of all evil: . . . covetousness was the cause of rebellion this last summer.” Inflation Chief among the causes of the malaise during the reign of Edward VI was the irregular rise of prices. Prices were raised arbitrarily without any consideration of supply and demand. Naturally, this had a bad effect on various classes of men. Such an evil led Hugh Latimer to aim telling shafts at the habitual business practices of men of his age. 78W'orks, I, 245-6, 247. 90 The portion of the peasantry that was lucky enough to have long leases on farms, or that had copyhold tenures of the low but unbreakable kind, reaped profits from the soaring prices of their products. Profits accrued to these peasants because their rent could not be raised. Landlords could raise the rack—rents and collect heavy fines for the renewals of leases from other less fortunate members of the peasantry, and from farmers whose leases were renewed annually, or who had fallen into debt after a period of years. The result was that one group of peasants was profiting without paying a penny of rent, while another group, not socially distinguished except by date of their leases or legal forms of their tenure, was being oppressed the more. And this oppression was a result of compensating for the immunity from tax enjoyed by the other group.80 Meanwhile, the yeoman freeholder, who paid no rent or a purely nominal one to the lord of the manor, was selling his corn and cattle for three times the price that his grandfather had been able to procure.81 Thus, while some men flourished exceedingly; 9 . 7 wriothesley, II, 30. Strype, Eocles. Mem. LI, Pt. 2, 482. Tytler, I, 367-371. 0 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 131. 1 Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 153. Tytler, I, 365—369. 91 others, including many lords and squires, were in real distress during the reign of King Edward VI. A great number of people throughout the English realm were in dire need because of the scarcity of food of all kinds. The land of England was virtually in the hands of the sheep-growers. The peasants became more like to slaves than the ancient yeomanry of the realm. The laborer could not earn enough on which to live decently. Wages remained the same although the price of foodstuffs had tripled as the result of the agricul- tural crisis. Latimer had this to say of the prevailing conditions, ". . . this covetous farmer or landed man of the gospel bought corn in the markets to lay it up in store, and then sell it again . . . some farmers will regrate and buy up all the corn . . . and lay it up in store and sell it again at a higher 82 price, when they see their time." Latimer pleads with the king to appoint informers such as were appointed in the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VIII. These informers would let Edward VI know how the officers of the realm were participating in his plans for economic reform.83 Edward VI must have attempted the reforms pleaded for by 82W'orks, I, 279. 83 John U. Nef, Industry and Government in France and EnglandJ_lS4O-l640 (New York, 1940), 26. 92 Latimer. The following Proclamation was issued on November 20, 1551:". . . set prices of Beef, Oxien, and Muttons, which was meant to continue but to November; when as Parliament should have been to abbrogate that, and to appoint certain Commissioners to cause the Grafters, to sell at prices reasonable and that certain Overseers should be besides to certify if justice was being doneJ' An entry in Edward VI's Journal, May 20, 1551, states, "This yeare at Easter flesh was at excessive prices, for beeffe was sold at thre pence the pounde, a quarter of veale at fower shillindes, mutton a quarter of the best at iii 3. iiii d. so that my Lord Maior and Aldermen were greatie exclamed of the people; but they could not remedy it, for the grasiers sold their cattell at so high prices that the butcher could not sell it at meane prices. Also wheat was sold at xxvi's. viii d. the quarter, and other graine after the same rate."84 The exceedingly large proportion of foods carried out of the land was one of the principal causes of the high prices. Proof of the fact that food was being exported is shown by the king's Proclamation: ". . . according to the laws of the land no one should carry and convey lamb, pork, butter, cheese, corn, grain, wool, coal, ale, beer, tallow, 84Journal, May 20, 1551, 53. 93 hides, or any other kind of victual.”85 This same proclama— tion stated further that transporting of victuals to Scotland was forbidden. At no time does it appear that there was a crop failure, so that the abuse must have been great is testi— fied by these numerous proclamations against exporting England's produce. Certainly, Hugh Latimer, in his denunciations, had in mind, not only the rent raisers, the oppressors of the poor, extortioners, bribetakers and usurers, but he denounced the manufacturers as well.86 In support of this denouncing the manufacturers we have the quote from wriothesley Who refers to Latimer as having referred to "everie craft", which certainly means the manufacturers. The poor classesin the towns were more affected by the high prices and by the fraudulent dealings of the manufac- turers than they were by the debasement of the coinage. The poor unemployed bitterly complained against their employers, who sought laborers in the cheapest market, and preferred the unmarried apprentice to the married journeyman; and this, of 85Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 1,.346. Proclamations issued on May 7, 1550, 1551, to continue until the Feast of All Saints (NOvember 1), followed by another on July 3, listing all fells, leather, bell-metal (only to Calais-Castles of Guines and Hammer excluded in this time), September 24, 1550, Journal, 26. 86Works, I, 279. 94 course, because the wages of the former would be less.87 However, as fast as the prices rose, so rose the rent of the peasant class. In fact shrewd men bought up whole rows of houses. The landlords doubled, tripled, and even quad- rupled the cost of rent. In London, nine-tenths of the family dwellings were owned and "let" by the middlemen. These price increases entailed the gravest social con- sequences, being, as.they were, advantageous for certain classes, and disastrous for others. Until some equilibrium and stability of price control were reached, the rich were enabled to corner a considerable amount of the nation's wealth. They were able to embark on commercial adventures on a grand scale, and thus to display in their lives an ostentation and magnificence unknown to previous ages.88 Latimer tells of a merchant who had "travailed all the days of his life in the trade of merchandise, and had gotten three or four thousand pounds by buying and selling; but . . . he would (now) get a thousand pounds a year by only buying and selling of grain here within this realm."8 Strype, evidently from his perusal of the sermons of Latimer, arrives at the same conclusions regarding the monopoly of 87 Mackie, 460. Pollard, History, 30. 88Works, I, 261. 89 Works, I, 279. 95 the nation's wealth.90 Latimer bluntly refers to these get-rich—quick "nouveau riche" when he says: "Ye are known well enough, what ye were afore ye came to your office, and what lands ye had then, and what ye have purchased since, and what buildings ye make daily."91 Here he pauses and throws in a jibe, saying that if they must make the best of their money by charging exorbitant prices, they should: ". . . so build, that the king's work- men may be paid. They make their moan that they can get no money. The poor labourers, gunmakers, powdermen, bow—makers, arrow-makers, smiths, carpenters, soldiers, and other crafts, cry out for their duties. They be unpaid, some of them, three or four months; yea, some of them half a year: yea, some of them put up bills this time twelve months for their money, and cannot be paid yet."92 In the time of Edward VI's father Acts had been passed to protect the peOple from the treacheries practised in clothing-making and the manufacture of other products. These Acts attempted to guard against short-weight, short measure, 90Strype, Eccles. Mem., II, Pt. 2, 134-135. 91Works, I, 261. 92Works, I, 262. 96 and undue shrinkage and stretching.93 However, in the reign of Edward VI many of the proclamations issued against these abuses, were being disregarded. Latimer draws the attention of King Edward VI to this fact. He says: "I hear there is a certain cunning come up in the mixing of wares. How say you? Were it no wonder to hear that cloth-makers should become poticaries?”94 Latimer also has this to say: "If his cloth be seventeen yards long, he will set him on a rack, and stretch him out with ropes, and rack him till the sinews shrink again, while he hath brought him to eighteen yards."95 The cloth manufacturer had shaken himself free from local custom, and had emerged into a wholesale businessman, operating his enterprise on a competitive basis. The new clothier found an ally in the grazier who supplied the wool in bulk; and in their new alliance the industry came into contact with agriculture. Latimer goes further and tells how the manufacturers thicken the cloth with flock-powder, making it substantial 3Commons Journal, 91. Making of WOolen Cloth, January 3, 1550. 94Works, I, 138. 95Works, I, 138. 97 looking, yet deceptive.96 He complains, "Oh, that so goodly wits should be so ill applied. They may deceive the people, but they cannot deceive God. They were wont to make beds of flocks, and it was a good bed too: now they have turned their flocks into powder, to play the false thieves with it."97 Even when Latimer was preaching his last sermons as an old man, he still insists upon measure for measure for all. Listen to his words: "Let every one, therefore, have a measure, and let no man abuse the gifts of God."98 Again we note his earnestness in a letter to a certain gentleman: "What theft is; that is to take or detain by any manner of way another man's good against his will that is the owner as some define it . . . the sin is not forgiven, except the thing be restored again that is taken away."99 To reforming preachers like Latimer, and to laymen whose views he tried to shape, the economic distress of the mid— sixteenth century was far more than an economic problem. Although all seemed to be aware of the inexorable economic 96§2mmgg§_ggg£g§lJ January 8, 1550. Bill for Merchants and Artificers. The Bill for Perfect Making and Dying of Cloth to Mr. Gasnolde, December 12, 1550. 97 WOrks, I, 138. 98Works, II, 15. 99 WOrks, II, 427. 98 forces, such as enclosures, debasement of coinage, and the subsequent inflation which brought on such social evils as scarcity of food, of labor, and of housing, Latimer‘s approach to the problem was primarily moral and religious. The open Bible was the textbook through which Latimer spoke; and, as he thought, should have driven out the old corruption and ushered in a new era of righteousness. 99 V. LATIMER LAMENTS SOCIAL CONDITIONS Although the economic problems of his age were of deep concern to Hugh Latimer, he was more deeply affected by social problems. Latimer, as well as his predecessors, believed that the sin of covetousness lay at the root of many of the evils of the day. Latimer thought that "Godly preaching" would bring about the reforms that he hoped for, and so never ceased to preach to accomplish this end. He says in a sermon which he preached at Stamford, "Yes, he is angry with covetous men, with ambitious men; . . ."1 Thus the pulpit became the means through which many of the people who hitherto were not too much concerned about the seeming lowering of moral standards, were reached. Hugh Latimer used the Scriptures from which to draw illustrations and instances which would teach a moral lesson. His sermons were never dull. He used picturesque stories and pithy lan- guage. He salted his explanations with many descriptions. He offered his listeners a keen, critical view of society. He exposed the fashionable pretensions of the world. The social evils of the day upon which Latimer so frankly preached, did not escape comment in the London pulpits in general. Preachers were apt to indulge in slightly dangerous and personal remarks 1Works, I, 385. 100 on current affairs, especially when their congregations nodded approval. Knowledge of the people who lived in Latimer's day is available to us through his sermons and letters. He was keenly aware of the life of the times, as his reference to worldliness shows: ". . . they study and do what they can to buckle the gospel and the world together, to set God and the devil at one table."2 Latimer as a reformer became the most absorptive and responsive instrument of his times. He was sensitive to existing conditions, and revealed hidden depths of social awareness hitherto unexplored. The evil, as well as the good, which he saw, he portrayed faithfully; and he emphasized the things that would improve the people whom he loved so com- pletely. That he was often disappointed in the results achieved is demonstrated by the fact that he thought that morals were no better under the "new learning" than under the old. He had hoped that the open Bible would be a means of reform. In a letter to Hubbardine3 he writes: "Ye said that it was plain that this "new learning" (as ye call it) was not the truth, and so not of God; but contrariwise that it was lies, 2Works, I, 529. 3 Strype, Eccles, Mem., I, Pt. 2, 175. 101 and so surely of the devil. This your assertion ye proved by two manner of conjectures: the one is, that the professors of it live naughtily; and the other is that priests be pro- secuted of them."4 The open Bible, Latimer held, was a symbol of the Refor- mation, and, as the textbook of the Reformation should have driven out all the old corruptions, and have ushered in a new era of righteousness. That this result was not accomplished, and that he did not meet with success was a source of distress to him. However, he looked for a solution in the faith that was in him.5 He complains: "And again, she (charity) is sorry to hear of falsehood, of stealing, or such like, which wicked- ness is now at this time most commonly used: yea, there was never such falsehood among Christian men as there is now at this time . . . and they that have experience report it so, that among the very infidels and Turks there is more fidelity and uprightness than among Christian men."6 Latimer seems to be inconsistent in insisting that the "new learning" will right social ills, and then agreeing that it has not done so. But since conflicts and contentions dominate the reign of Edward VI, naturally these led to 4Works, II, 318. 5 Chester, 171. 6Works, I, 451. _ L 102 confusion in social conditions. Latimer found the age one of paradoxes and enigmas, which gave him occasion for profound expression. Regarding the social wrong concerning marriage he exclaims: "For the love of God take an order for marriages here in England. For here is marriage for pleasure and voluptuousness, and for goods; and so that they may join land to land, and possessions to possessions: they care no more here in England. And that is the cause of so much adultery, and so much breach of wedlock in the noblemen and gentlemen, and so much divorcing. And it is not now in the noblemen only, but it has come now to the inferior sort. Every man, if he have but a small cause, will cast off his old wife, and take a new, and will marry again at his pleasure; and there be many that have so done." Regarding charity, Latimer asserts that, as at one time, love was regarded as an all-powerful force, it is now debased and for it is substituted lust and concupiscence. In a sermon preached at Grimsthrope, October 28, 1552, he quotes Saint Paul, "'This I command you that you love one another'; and, 'He that loveth fulfilleth the law'."8 But, continuing in another sermon, he admOnishes his hearers to marry purely in God (notY'to marry for their own fleshly lusts, and for their 7Works, I, 243-244. 8Works, I, 447. 103 own phantasy. There was never such marrying in England as is now. I hear tell of stealing of wards to marry their children to. This is a strange kind of stealing; but it is not the wards, it is the lands that they steal. And some there be that knit up marriages together, but not for any love of godliness in the parties, but to get friendship and make them strong in the realm, to increase their possessions, and to join land to land." Latimer, who had been silent after losing his bishopric in the reign of Henry VIII, began to preach again in the reign of Edward VI. Large audiences heard his biting descrip— tions of social abuses. These abuses Latimer conceived of as offenses against God. In season and out of season, Latimer enunciated remedies in his discourses, alike to royal audiences and to the humble folk of the kingdom. Latimer expresses the vehement conViction that the decadence of the age exceeds that of any other existing before his time. It is true that justice, vagabondage, the low ebb in education and morals, were all subjects of controversy and their solution was essential. But, it is true, also, that absorbed in the study of the social evils cited, the controversialists may have lost sight of other controversial matters. 9ngks, I, 169-170. 104 Principles of Right Dealing A student of today dealing with the reign of Edward VI is a distant observer, and must guard against the fatal lure of over-simplification. So it is in studying the question of justice; the laws are written large; but the manner of their administration is quite another thing. Latimer gives us a clue to the real situation when he states: "Now then there be special laws, which teach us how every man and woman shall live in their calling, whereunto God hath called them. These laws teach how magistrates shall do their duty; execute justice, punish the wicked, defend the good; to see that the common- wealth be well ordered, and governed; that the people live godly, every man in his calling."10 The period was a contentious time; and the people, being of a contentious frame of mind, often ran to the law simply for the sake of vexing each other. But, more often the citi- zenry was driven to seek justice at its proper source, the magistrates of the courts of the day.11 Justice for the ordinary Englishman was in the hands of the justices of the peace under . . . 12 , royal administration. These men were not paid, so they 10Works, II, 6. 11James A. Williamson, The Tudor Age (London, 1953), 204. 12Albert Venn Dicey, The Privy Council (London, 1887), 80-85. 105 combined their private business with the king's service; and they often subordinated the king's interest to their own by giving sparingly of their time to their official duties. Especially in this mid-decade of the sixteenth century, they gave lukewarm response to orders from the privy council, especially if these orders interfered with their own business}' Latimer's request for justice, embodied in all the ser- mons preached throughout the year, was heard in the courts. He gives a typical example of how he begs for justice, and exposes injustice, in the following: ". . . about their own profit there are no more diligent men, nor busier persons in all England. They [judges] trudge, in the term time, to and fro. They foreslow [loiter] no time. They follow assizes and sessions, leets, law-days, and hundreds. They should serve the king, but they serve themselves. And how they use, nay rather abuse their office in the same, some good man will tell them thereof."14 It is not difficult to realize that, if the justices could not be counted upon to give disinterested service to the government, the same might well be even truer of their sub- ordinates and assistants. The latter had always a great deal 13Works, I, 110. 14Works, I, 110. 106 more work to do than they could possibly do well.15 These assistants were especially bound to arrest criminals and suspects, and to maintain good order in general. From a perusal of Latimer's sermons one senses how the unlettered, helpless people felt when they appealed to the ~type of "justice" referred to above, in contrast to the personalized interest and providence of feudal times. Latimer felt this cold treatment of the poor keenly. He faced King Edward VI and the Lord Protector with it, pleading: "I beseech your grace that ye will look to these matters. Hear them yourself. View your judges, and hear poor men's causes. And you, proud judges, hearken what God said in His holy book, 'Hear them, . . . the small as well as the great, the poor as well as the rich.‘ Regard no person; fear no man; . . ." The society of Edward VI's reign was disturbed by changes in ownership of the land: "In this Parliament that I [Latimer] speak of, the gentlemen and the commons were at variance, as they were now of late. And there the gentlemen that were landlords would needs have [taken] away much lands from their tenants; and would needs have an act of Parliament, that it might be lawful for them to enclose and make several from their 15E. F. Heckscher, Mercantilism, Trans. Mendel Shapiro, 2 vols. (London, 1935), I, 246-250. 16'Dicey, 81. 17Works, I, 127. 107 tenants, and from the commons, such portions as they thought good. Much ado there was about this act: at last it was concluded and granted that they might so do; provided alway, that they should leave sufficient for the tenant."18 It was to uproot covetousness, the evil that sprang from enclosure, corruption in the government and in private morals, that forced Latimer to continue in this strain: "Well; it was well that they [the landlords] were bound to leave sufficient for them [the tenants]. But who should be the judge to limit what was sufficient for them? Or who shall now judge what is sufficient? Well; I for my part cannot tell what is sufficient. But me- thought it was well that the tenants and poor commons should have sufficient. For if they had sufficient, thought I, they had cause to be quiet. And then fell I to make this argument within myself: if at that time it were put in their will and power to enclose, leaving to the tenant that were sufficient for him; if they had it then in their power, thought I, that they might this do, they would leave no more than sufficient. If they left to the tenants and poor commons no more in those days but sufficient."19 Latimer believed that the rich should labor the more arduously in order to have the means to give to the poor. 18Works, I, 248. lgWorks, I, 248-249. 108 In this way covetousness would be overcome. Yet he says of the idle person who expects charity without working: "'He that laboureth not, let him not eat.‘ Therefore those lubbers which will not laboun and might labour, it is a good thing to punish them according unto the king's most godly statutes. For God himself saith: 'In the sweat of thy brow [face] thou shalt eat thy bread.‘ Then cometh in St. Paul who saith; 'Let him labour the sorer that he may have wherewith to help the poor.‘ . . . So Christ and all his apostles, yea the whole Scripture admonisheth us ever of our neighbour, to take heed of him, to be pitiful unto him: but God knoweth there be a great many which care little for their neighbors . . . . So these rich franklings, these covetous fellows, they scrape all to themselves, they think they should care for nobody else but for themselves: God commandeth the poor man to labour the sorer, to the end that he may be able to help his poor neigh- bour: how much more ought the rich to be liberal unto them!" Latimer again reverts to his theme of giving generously to the poor for justice sake. He says: "And I pray you, tell me, have ye heard of any man that came to poverty, because he gave unto the poor? Have ye heard tell of such a one? No, I am sure you have not. And I dare lay my head to pledge for it, that no man living hath come or shall hereafter come to poverty, 20Works, I, 408. 109 because he hath been liberal in helping the poor."21 Latimer continues on in the same vein. He is heavily ironic about the matter, and speaks scathingly to those who are standing before him. He tells the Council, now headed by Northumberland, to live righteously and to govern justly while the king is in his minority. He says: "I think there is a great need of such men (promoters) of godly discretion, wisdom, and conscience, to promote transgressors, as rent- raisers, oppressors of the poor, extortioners, bribers, usurers. I hear there be usurers in England, that will take forty in the hundred; but I hear of no promoters to put them up. We-read not, this covetous farmer or landed man of the gospel bought corn in the markets to lay it up in store, and then sell it again. But, and if it please your highness, I hear say that in England we have landlords, nay step-lords I might say, that are become graziers; and burgesses are become regraters; and some farmers will regrate and buy up all the corn that cometh to the markets and lay it up in store, and sell it again at a higher price when they see their time."22 It is small wonder that Latimer was not invited to preach at court again, for Northumberland was not the man to encourage 21Works, I, 408-9. 22Works, I, 279. 110 direct criticism of his government. It was, indeed, impossi- ble to close one's ears and conscience to Latimer's inference when he addressed the Council: "I hear say, that there be some amongst you, which are given to picking and stealing; and so I shewed you the danger of it, and told you how you should make restitution secretly, without any open shame: for it is no shame to forsake sin, and to come to godliness. For no doubt restitution must be make either in effect or affect; that is to say, when thou art able, then thou must make it in effect; when thou are not able, then thou must be sorry for it in thy heart, and ask God forgiveness."23 Latimer had too much sense of humor to believe that the laity unanimously shared his enthusiasm for justice. Yet he believed that in preaching lay England's hope. It was neces- sary, he thought, to drive home lessons in justice, and to preach against that basest form of injustice, which is bri- bery. He says: "Bribery is a princely kind of thieving. They will be waged by the rich, either to give sentence against the poor, or to put off the poor man's causes. This is the moble theft of princes and of magistrates.' They are bribe—takers. Now-a-days they call them gentle rewards: let them leave their colouring, and call them by their chris- tian name, bribes: . . ."24 2 3Works, II, 41. 24W'orks, I, 139. 111 In chiding and trying to reform the irregularities of the magistrates Latimer certainly believed in calling a "spade a spade". In voicing his views he was firmly con- vinced that if a cunning man of law joined hands with the unscrupulous new gentry or with a scion of some well estab- lished house, there was almost no limit to his power of illegal action. This was especially true if the lawyer was a judge. Latimer says: "Are civil offices bought for money? . . . God forfend that any such enormity should be in England, that civil offices should be bought and sold; whereas men should have them given them for their worthiness."25 The sermons of Hugh Latimer on justice, its miscarriage, and the resulting pain and sorrow which injustices entailed, depict the age in which Latimer lived, and are mines of information not easily duplicated. No injustice does Latimer fail to bring to the ears of his listeners. The bribe—takers are taunted with their crimes, and are threatened with their subsequent punishments here and in the next world. Latimer says that each man and woman needs two weapons to build up the character in the matter of truth or justice. He explains: "This is now the first armour that we should have, namely, truth . . . . Now the second weapon is to be just, to give 25Works, I, 185. 112 every man that which we owe unto him; to the king that which pertaineth to him; to our landlords what we owe unto them; to our curate or parson what pertaineth unto him; and though be unlearned and not able to do his duty, yet we may not with- draw from him, of private authority, that thing which is ap- pointed unto him by common authority."26 The numerous references, in Latimer's sermons, to the topic of bribes and bribing are significant evidence of what the people of that time had to endure from the unscrupulous hands of the ministers of justice. Latimer spoke with his usual frankness when he said: "There was a certain woman who was a suitor to a judge [Luke XVIII] . . . When the judge saw her so importunate . . . granted her request. But our judges are worse than this judge was; for they will neither hear men for God's sake, nor fear of the world, nor importunateness, nor anything else."27 So Hugh Latimer plainly tells his courtly audience that the judges of his day are afraid to hear a poor man against a rich man, and reminds them again of their accep- tance of bribes. To illustrate the manner