Critical Apparatus for this Page
View an Image of this PageCommentary on the GlossesCattley Pratt ReferencesCommentary on the Text
 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Curtop

[Very probably James Curthroppe, Oxford MA and Fellow of Corpus Christi, who was Dean of Peterborough from 1549 until his death in 1557. See Foster, Fasti]

Curtop is listed among those who disputed with Ridley (1570, p. 1606; 1576, p. 1371; and 1583, p. 1441).

[NB: A 'maister Cartor' is listed in a similar list on 1563, p. 934. Probably Foxe corrected 'Cartor' to 'Curtop' in 1570 et sq.]

During Ridley's disputation on 17 April 1554, Curtop cited a passage by Chrysostom to prove that Christ's blood was really in the wine (1563, pp. 972-73; 1570, p. 1618; 1576, p. 1381; and 1583, p. 1451).

Philpot's fifth examination was before Bonner, Rochester, Coventry, St Asaph, as well as Story, Curtop, Saverson, Pendleton and others. 1563, pp. 1398-1405, 1570, pp. 1968-72, 1576, pp. 1695-98, 1583, pp. 1803-05.

Curtop was a witness against Cranmer. 1570, p. 2056, 1576, p. 1772, 1583, p. 1879.

Cranmer twice asked Curtop to witness his appeal to the next general council. 1563, p. 1492, 1570, p. 2060, 1576, p. 1777, 1583, p. 1882.

[NB: ECL 262, fols. 261r - 267r are notes on a Paul's Cross sermon, made a week after Trinity Sunday, 1555, by Dr Curtop.]

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Henry Cole

(1500? - 1580)

LL.D. (1556 - 1557) Archdeacon of Ely (1553). Provost of Eton (1554). Dean of St Paul's (1556). Vicar general to Cardinal Pole. Judge of the archiepiscopal court. Dean of the Arches (1557). (DNB)

Henry Cole was one of the catholic disputants in the Oxford disputations of 1554. During the debates, Cole had short acrimonious exchanges with Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer (1563, pp. 932, 938, 944-46, 951, 955, 969 and 972; 1570, pp. 1591, 1593, 1581[recte 1597]-99, 1602 and 1605-6; 1576, pp. 1358-59, 1362-64, 1367 and 1371; 1583, pp. 1428, 1430, 1433-35, 1438 and 1440-41).

[Back to Top]

Later in the disputation, he interrupted the debate and called Latimer a liar (1563, p. 984; 1570, p. 1627; 1576, p 1388; and 1583, p. 1458).

Cole was secretly asked to prepare a funeral sermon for Cranmer. 1563, p. 1498, 1570, p. 2063, 1576, p. 1780, 1583, p. 1885.

Cole preached a sermon prior to the martyrdom of Cranmer. 1563, p. 1498, 1570, p. 2065, 1576, p. 1781, 1583, pp. 1885-86.

In an attempt to reinstate catholicism at the University of Cambridge, a commission under the direction of Cardinal Pole ordered the condemning and burning of the bones and books of Phagius and Martin Bucer. Members of the commission were Cuthbert Scott, Nicholas Ormanet, Thomas Watson, John Christopherson and Henry Cole. 1563, pp. 1537 [recte 1549]-1558 [recte 1570]

[Back to Top]

Henry Cole was chosen by Pole to be a persecutor of the University of Cambridge. 1563, p. 1537, 1570, p. 2142, 1576, p. 1862, 1583, p. 1956.

Cole was sent to King's College, Cambridge, to examine certain scholars on 9 January 1557. 1563, p. 1538, 1570, p. 2143, 1576, p. 1863, 1583, p. 1956.

He was awarded a doctorate at Cambridge. 1570, p. 2150, 1576, p. 1858, 1583, p. 1963.

William Holcot was charged with treason by Cole and Geffre for supporting Cranmer. 1583, p. 2135.

Cole was one of those holding a commission from Cardinal Pole to disinter Peter Martyr's wife and burn her bones. 1563, p. 1558, 1570, p. 2152, 1576, p. 1859, 1583, p. 1968.

He was one of the recipients of the proclamation from Philip and Mary authorising the persecution of protestants. 1563, p. 1561, 1570, p. 2155, 1576, p. 1862, 1583, p. 1974[incorrectly numbered 1970].

Bonner sent Thomas Hinshaw before John Harpsfield and Henry Cole. 1563, p. 1690, 1570, p. 2242, 1576, p. 1937, 1583, p. 2043.

Elizabeth Young's eighth examination was before Bonner, the dean of St Paul's and Story. 1570, pp. 2273-74, 1576, pp. 1962-63, 1583, pp. 2069-70.

Her ninth examination took place before the dean. 1570, p. 2274, 1576, p. 1963, 1583, p. 2070.

Cole was committed to the Fleet after the death of Mary. 1563, p. 1707, 1570, p. 2301, 1576, p. 1992, 1583, p. 2101.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Hugh Weston

(1505? - 1558)

Dean of Westminster (1553 - 1556). Archdeacon of Colchester (1554 - 1558). Dean of Windsor (1556 - 1557) [Fasti]. Prolocutor of the Lower House [Diarmaid MacCulloch, Thomas Cranmer: A Life (Yale, 1996), pp. 563-68].

Hugh Weston was appointed Prolocutor of the 1553 Convocation, over which he presided and during which he disputed with Philpot and Aylmer (1563, pp. 906-16; 1570, pp. 1571-78; 1576, pp. 1340-47; and 1583, p. 1410-17).

According to a story related to Sir Thomas White (and printed by Foxe), Sir Thomas Wyatt declared from the scaffold that Elizabeth and Edward Courtenay were innocent of any involvement in his treason. Weston, who was on the scaffold, cried out to the crowd that Wyatt had confessed otherwise before the Privy Council. Allegedly White, on hearing a report of the incident, denounced Weston as a knave (1570, p. 1587; 1576, p. 1355; and 1583, p. 1425).

[Back to Top]

Weston was prolocutor (technically Weston was prolocutor of the lower house of convocation) and head of a delegation sent to dispute with Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer (see MacColloch, Cranmer, p. 563) at the Oxford Disputations (1563, pp. 932 and 936; 1570, p. 1591; 1576, p. 1358; 1583, p. 1428).

He received the doctors sent from Cambridge to the disputation (1563, p. 936; 1570, p. 1592; 1576, p. 1358; 1583, p. 1429).

He presided over the Oxford disputations of 1554 (1563, pp. 936-85; 1570, pp. 1592-1627; 1576, pp. 1358-88; 1583, pp. 1429-59).

[NB: A brief account of the entire disputations, which mentions Weston throughout, is given on 1563, pp. 933-35; part of this brief account listing the disputants with Ridley was reprinted in 1570, p. 1606; 1576, p. 1371; and 1583, p. 1441).

Weston presided over John Harpsfield's disputation for his D.D. on 19 April 1554. Weston debated with both Cranmer and Harpsfield (1563, pp. 986-91; 1570, pp. 1627-32; 1576, pp. 1389-92; 1583, pp. 1459-63).

Weston presided over the commissioners at the condemnation of Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer on 20 April 1554 (1563, pp. 935-36; 1570, pp. 1632-33; 1576, p. 1393; 1583, pp. 1463-64).

Weston received a letter from Ridley of 23 April 1554, protesting that he had broken his promise to allow Ridley to examine a copy of the record of his disputation and also protesting the conduct of the disputation and demanding that Weston show Ridley's written answers to the propositions disputed to the Upper House of Convocation. Weston refused to deliver the letter and also a letter of protest which Cranmer had written to the Privy Council over the Disputations (Ridley's letter - included as part of Ridley's account of the disputation - is printed in 1563, p. 977, but Cranmer's letter and Weston's refusal to deliver the letters are not in this edition (see 1570, p. 1633; 1576, pp. 1393-94; 1583, p. 1464).

[Back to Top]

Weston received Mary at Westminster Abbey for her coronation on 1 October 1553 (1570, p. 1635; 1576, p. 1395; 1583, p. 1466).

He preached at Paul's Cross on 20 October 1553, exhorting his auditors to pray for souls in purgatory, denouncing the communion table as an oyster board and denouncing Cranmer's recent catechism (1570, p. 1636; 1576, p. 1396; 1583, p. 1466).

He attended the execution of Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk, (according to Foxe) against the Duke's wishes. Also (according to Foxe) Weston was heckled by the crowd (1570, p. 1637; 1576, p. 1397; 1583, pp. 1467-68).

He participated, together with Gilbert Bourne and Frances Mallet, in an effort to persuade Walter Mantell to recant (1570, p. 1639; 1576, p. 1398; 1583, p. 1468).

When Sir Thomas Wyatt at his execution cleared Elizabeth and the Earl of Devon of involvement in his rebellion, Weston declared that this contradicted what Wyatt had earlier told the Privy Council. Wyatt retorted that what he said now was true (1570, p. 1639; 1576, p. 1399; 1583, p. 1469).

A prayer Weston made for the safe delivery of a child by Queen Mary is printed in 1563, p. 1015 (Latin and English versions); 1570, p. 1653; 1576, p. 1410; 1583, pp. 1480-81 (English only).

Foxe calls Weston a man whom 'all good and godly men worthily despise' and prints Laurence Saunders' account of Weston's attempting to persuade Nicholas Grimald and Saunders to recant. 1563, pp. 1041-42; 1570, p. 1667; 1576, p. 1422; 1583, p. 1496.

Weston was reported by Hooper to have obtained a commission in May 1554 to establish a disputation, despite its illegality. 1570, p. 1687; 1576, p. 1440; 1583, p. 1513.

On 21 March 1555 Bradford talked with Dr Weston, after being told of Weston's intention to visit via the earl of Derby's servant (when master Collier, Warden of Manchester had come to dinner at the Counter). 1576, p.1536. Bradford and Westo spoke to each other in the presence of Master Collier, the earl of Derby's servant, the subdean of Westminster, the keeper (Master Clayden), and others. 1570, 1799-80, 1576, pp.1536-7, 1583, pp.1619-20.

[Back to Top]

On 25 February, at about 5pm, Master Weston visited Bradford and asked to speak with him in private. When the two men were alone, Weston thanked Bradford for his writings to him and then produced the work that Bradford had sent him. It was entitled, 'Certayne reasons againste Transubstantiation gathered by John Bradforde, and geuen to Doctour weston and others'. 1563, p. 1212. They discussed transubstantiation. 1563, pp. 1211-12, 1570, pp. 1801-2. [In 1570 this meeting is dated as the afternoon of 28 March].

[Back to Top]

On 25 February (1563) or 28 March (1570 onwards) Weston told John Bradford of Grimald's recantation. 1563, p. 1212, 1570, p. 1801, 1576, p. 1538., 1583, p. 1621.

Bradford's reasons against transubstantiation were given to Weston and others. 1563, pp. 1211-12, 1570, pp. 1800-1, 1576, pp. 1537-38, 1583, pp. 1620-21.

On 5 April, at 2pm, Weston went to visit Bradford in the Counter. Weston had not visited him earlier due to ill health and also because he had been busy withstanding monks from entering Westminster. He also thought that Pendleton would be coming to see him. Weston told Bradford that the pope was dead and that Weston had petitioned the queen and so thought that death would not come to Bradford soon. 1570, p. 1802, 1576, pp. 1538-39, 1583, pp. 1621-22.

[Back to Top]

As Weston left Bradford on 5 April, he set for Master Weale. 1570, p. 1802, 1576, p. 1539, 1583, p. 1622.

After Weston left Bradford on 5 April, the keeper, Master Claydon, and Steven Bech came to Bradford and spoke unkindly to Bradford even though they had hitherto appeared to be friendly to him. 1570, p. 1802, 1576, pp. 1538-39, 1583, pp. 1621-22.

Weston was one of the audience at the re-examination of Ridley and Latimer and interjected a question. 1563, p. 1363; 1570, p. 1926, 1576, p. 1652, 1583, p. 1761.

Philpot's eleventh examination, on St Andrew's day, was before Durham, Chichester, Bath, Bonner, the prolocutor, Christopherson, Chadsey, Morgan of Oxford, Hussey of the Arches, Weston, John Harpsfield, Cosin, and Johnson. 1563, pp. 1425-34, 1570, pp. 1986-92, 1576, pp. 1710-15, 1583, pp. 1817-22.

Cranmer was condemned by Weston and others of the university. He was committed to the mayors and sherriffs of Oxford. 1570, p. 2047, 1576, p. 1765, 1583, p. 1871.

Hugh Weston displeased Pole for being willing to give up his deanery.

Weston was caught committing adultery and appealed to Rome for clemency.

He died after Queen Mary. 1563, p. 1707, 1570, p. 2301, 1576, p. 1992, 1583, p. 2102.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
John Feckenham

(1518? - 1585)

Dean of St Paul's. Last abbot of Westminster. [DNB]

Feckenham was made dean of St Paul's on Midsummer's Day, 1554. 1563, p. 1151; 1570, pp. 1636 and 1760; 1576, pp. 1396 and 1551 [recte 1503]; 1583, pp. 1467 and 1587

He conversed with Thomas Hawkes in June 1554 trying to persuade him to recant. 1563, pp. 1153-54; 1570, p. 1762; 1576, p. 1505; 1583, pp. 1588-89

In the letter exhibited by Bonner about Bartlett Green, reference was made to John Dee and Feckenham. 1563, pp. 1444-45, 1570, p. 1999, 1576, pp. 1721-22, 1583, p. 1828.

Feckenham traveled to Colchester with Bishop Bonner to try to win Thomas Causton and Thomas Higbed back to catholicism. 1563, p. 1104; 1570, p. 1716; 1576, p. 1465; 1583, p. 1539.

He tried to persuade Hooper to recant after he was condemned on 29 January 1555. The effort was unsuccessful but false rumors spread that Hooper had recanted. 1563, p. 1057; 1570, p. 1680; 1576, p. 1434; 1583, p. 1507.

Feckenham was one of those who presided over an examination of Thomas Tomkins on 9 February 1555. 1570, p. 1712; 1576, p. 1461; 1583, p. 1535.

He was one of those who examined first Thomas Causton, and then Thomas Higbed, in Bonner's palace on 8 March 1555. 1563, p. 1105; 1570, p. 1718; 1576, p. 1466; 1583, p. 1540.

He wrote a ballad, Caveat emptor , on the subject of the restoration of monastic lands. 1570, p. 1729; 1576, p. 1497; 1583, p. 1559.

Feckenham received a letter from William Paulet. 1563, p. 1239, 1570, p. 1860, 1576, p. 1592, 1583, p. 1680.

He discussed eucharistic doctrine with Bartlett Green. 1563, pp. 1463-64, 1570, pp. 2025-26, 1576, p. 1746, 1583, p. 1854.

Feckenham claimed that Green was converted by Peter Martyr's lectures and that Zwingli, Luther, Oecolampadius and Carolostadius could never agree doctrine. 1563, pp. 1463-64, 1570, pp. 2025-26,, 1576, p. 1746, 1583, p. 1854.

[In a letter that was never delivered] Bartlett Green told John Philpot of his presentment on 17 November before Bonner and two bishops, Master Dean, Roper, Welch, John Harpsfield, and two or three others. 1563, p. 1460, 1570, p. 2023, 1576, p. 1744, 1583, p. 1852.

A letter by the thirteen prisoners reproaching Feckenham for his slander dated Feckenham's sermon as 14 June 1556. 1563, pp. 1526-27, 1570, p. 2097, 1576, pp. 1809-10, 1583, p. 1916.

Feckenham spoke up in defence of John Cheke. 1570, p. 2141, 1576, p. 1862, 1583, p. 1955.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
John Harpsfield

(1516 - 1578)

Chaplain to Bishop Bonner. Archdeacon of London (1554 - 1559); dean of Norwich (1558 - 1559). Brother of Nicholas Harpsfield. [DNB; Fasti]

Harpsfield preached a sermon at the commencement of the 1553 convocation (1570, p. 1571; 1576, p. 1340; and 1583, p. 1410).

He sparred with Philpot in the debates at the 1553 convocation. (See 1563, pp. 909, 912 and 914-15; 1570, pp. 1573-74 and 1576-78; 1576, pp. 1342 and 1345-46 and 1583, pp. 1412 and 1416-17).

He was one of the catholic disputants at the Oxford disputations of 1554; he debated with Cranmer and Ridley (1563, pp. 932-34, 938, 955, 967-69 and 978; 1570, pp. 1591-93 and 1605-6; 1576, pp. 1358-59 and 1370-71; 1583, pp. 1428, 1430 and 1440-41).

Harpsfield disputed on the eucharist for his D.D. on 19 April 1554; Cranmer disputed with him (1563, pp. 986-91; 1570, pp. 1627-32; 1576, pp. 1389-92; 1583, pp. 1459-63).

He gave a Latin oration in St Paul's before King Philip (1570, p. 1643; 1576, p. 1402; 1583, p. 1473).

He witnessed Bonner's burning Tomkins' hand with a candle, and he urged Bonner to cease the torture (1570, pp. 1710-11; 1576, p. 1460; 1583, p.1534).

Together with William Chedsey and John Feckenham, Harpsfield attempted to persuade John Hooper to recant after his condemnation on 29 January 1555. The attempt was unsuccessful but it caused false rumors of Hooper's recantation to spread (1563, p. 1057; 1570, p. 1680; 1576, p. 1434; 1583, p. 1507).

Harpsfield witnessed the degradation of John Rogers and John Hooper on 4 February 1555 (1563, p. 1058; 1570, p. 1681; 1576, p. 1435; 1583, p. 1508).

He was one of those who presided over the examination of Thomas Tomkins on 9 February 1555 (1570, p. 1712; 1576, p. 1461; 1583, p. 1535).

Harpsfield was one of those who examined Thomas Causton and Thomas Higbed on 18 February 1555 (1563, p. 1104). Bonner ordered him to deliver a rebuttal to the confession of faith of Thomas Causton and Thomas Higbed (1563, p. 1107; 1570, p. 1719; 1576, p. 1468; 1583, p. 1541).

He conversed with Thomas Hawkes in June 1554, arguing the necessity of infant baptism. 1563, pp. 1151-52;1570, pp. 1760-61; 1576, p. 1551 [recte 1503]; 1583, pp. 1587-88

He escorted Thomas Hawkes to the Gatehouse at Westminster on 1 July 1554. 1563, p. 1156; 1570, p. 1765;1576, p. 1765; 1583, p. 1590

John Harpsfield conferred with the bishop of Durham about John Bradford. 1563, p. 1191, 1570, p. 1787, 1576, p. 1526, 1583, p. 1609.

On 16 February 1555 John Harpsfield and two others went to see Bradford in prison, to defend the line of bishops in the catholic church. Bradford refuted the argument. 1563, pp. 1202-03, 1570, pp. 1792-93, 1576, pp. 1530-31, 1583, pp. 1614-15.

Smith was examined by Bonner and Harpsfield, among others, met with Harwood in the garden, and was re-examined. Smith was then left in the garden until Harwood was examined, after which Smith was examined again. 1563, pp. 1252-55, 1570, pp. 1870-72, 1576, pp. 1601-03, 1583, pp. 1691-92.

Robert Smith was examined by John Dee, Harpsfield and Bonner on eucharistic doctrine. 1563, p. 1252, 1570, p. 1870, 1576, p. 1601, 1583, p. 1691.

Philpot's fourth examination was in John Harpsfield's house before Bonner, Bath, Worcester and Gloucester. 1563, pp. 1393-98, 1570, pp. 1965-68, 1576, pp. 1692-95, 1583, pp. 1799-1803.

[In a letter that was never delivered] Green told Philpot of his presentment on 17 November before Bonner and two bishops, Master Dean, Roper, Welch, John Harpsfield, and two or three others. Dr Dale, Master George Mordant and Master Dee were also there. 1563, p. 1460, 1570, p. 2023, 1576, p. 1744, 1583, p. 1852.

[Back to Top]

Philpot's eighth examination was before Bonner, John Harpsfield, St David's, Mordant and others. 1563, pp. 1419-20, 1570, pp. 1982-83, 1576, pp. 1705-06, 1583, p. 1814.

During Philpot's ninth examination, Bonner called for John Harpsfield, who attended the session to examine Philpot, and Chadsey, who had however left for Westminster. 1563, pp. 1420-24, 1570, pp. 1983-85, 1576, pp. 1707-09, 1583, pp. 1815-16.

Philpot's eleventh examination, on St Andrew's day, was before Durham, Chichester, Bath, Bonner, the prolocutor, Christopherson, Chadsey, Morgan of Oxford, Hussey of the Arches, Weston, John Harpsfield, Cosin, and Johnson. 1563, pp. 1425-34, 1570, pp. 1986-92, 1576, pp. 1710-15, 1583, pp. 1817-22.

Later on the day of his thirteenth examination, Philpot spoke with John Harpsfield, Bonner and Chadsey. 1570, pp. 1996-97, 1576, p. 1719, 1583, pp. 1823-24.

John Harpsfield urged Thomas Whittle to recant and composed a bill of submission for Whittle to sign. 1563, pp. 1454-55, 1570, p. 2017, 1576, p. 1737, 1583, pp. 1845-46.

John Harpsfield wrote a letter to Bonner about Whittle's suscription. It mentioned one of Penbroke's men who wanted license to erect a school. Harpsfield hoped for Penbroke's sake that it be requested, and he and M Johnson (Register) were working to that effect. 1563, pp. 1455-56, 1570, pp. 2017-18, 1576, p. 1738, 1583, pp. 1846-47. [In all editions after 1563, the heading incorrectly gives the author of the letter as Nicholas Harpsfield.]

[Back to Top]

Robert Farrer talked with Laurence Sheriff in the Rose tavern and suggested to Sheriff that Elizabeth had been involved in Wyatt's rebellion. Sheriff complained to Bonner about Farrer before Mordaunt, Sir John Baker, Darbyshire, Story, Harpsfield, and others. 1570, p. 2296, 1576, p. 1988, 1583, p. 2097.

[Back to Top]

Bonner sent Thomas Hinshaw before John Harpsfield and Henry Cole. 1563, p. 1690, 1570, p. 2242, 1576, p. 1937, 1583, p. 2043.

Bonner attended evensong with John Harpsfield prior to causing several boys to be beaten in 1558. 1563, p. 1692, 1570, p. 2264, 1576, p. 1955, 1583, p. 2061.

Bonner and Harpsfield laughed at and mocked Edward Benet for his beliefs. 1576, p. 1968 [incorrectly numbered 1632], 1583, p. 2075.

Harpsfield was committed to the Fleet after the death of Mary. 1570, p. 2301, 1576, p. 1992, 1583, p. 2102.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
John Seton

(1498? - 1567)

Chaplain to Bishop Gardiner [DNB; Venn]

John Seton was one of the official disputants in the Oxford disputations of 1554 (1563, pp. 932, 936-38, 967, 983 and 984; 1570, pp. 1591-93, 1615, 1625 and 1630; 1576, pp. 1358-59, 1378, 1387 and 1391; 1583, pp. 1428-30, 1448, 1457 and 1461).

[NB: A brief account of the Oxford disputations of 1554, printed only in 1563, mentions Seton debating with Cranmer 1563, p. 933)].

John Seton spoke with John Bradford in the early hours of the morning after Bradford's second examination. He told him of the behaviour of Latimer and Ridley, but Bradford told him that he would do nothing that could offend the people, and that John Harpsfield therefore wished to confer with the bishop of Durham. Seton called Bradford 'arrogant, proud, vaynglorious, and [that he] spake lyke a Prelate'. Bradford warned him not to judge him lest he be judged, but Seton insisted that the lord chancellor could be charitable. 1563, p. 1191, 1570, p. 1787, 1576, p. 1526, 1583, p. 1609.

[Back to Top]
 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Nicholas Ridley

(d. 1555) (DNB)

Bishop of London (1550 - 1553). Martyr. [DNB]

Nicholas Ridley gave John Rogers a prebend in St Paul's (1563, p. 1023; 1570, p. 1656; 1576, p. 1413; 1583, p. 1484).

He led the bishops who compelled John Hooper to wear vestments at his consecration. Ridley wrote a letter to Hooper apologising for this in Mary's reign (1563, pp. 1050-2; 1570, pp. 1676-7; 1576, p. 1404; 1583, pp. 1504-5).

He preached a sermon at Paul's Cross, at the behest of the privy council, supporting Jane Grey's claim to the throne. After Mary's accession Ridley visited the queen at Framlingham and was arrested (1563, p. 903; 1570, p. 1569; 1576, p. 1338; and 1583, p. 1408).

He was engaged, over dinner with John Feckenham and Sir John Bourne, in a debate on the nature of the eucharist. An account of the debate, 'penned with his own hand,' is first printed in 1563, (1563, pp. 928-31; 1570, pp. 1589-91; 1576, pp. 1356-58; and 1583, pp. 1426-28). There is no earlier printed version or manuscript of the exchange.

[Back to Top]

Ridley was examined by Weston and the other members of the catholic delegation to the Oxford disputations on Saturday 14 April 1554 (1563, p. 933 and 937-38; 1570, p. 1593; 1576, p. 1935 [recte 1359]; 1583, pp. 1429-30).

[NB: There is a summary of Ridley's disputation on Tuesday 17 April 1554 which was printed in its entirety only in 1563, pp 933-34].

Ridley disputed with Richard Smith and the other catholic doctors on 17 April 1554 (1563, p. 957-78; 1570, pp. 1606-22; 1576, pp. 1370-84; 1583, pp. 1441-54).

Ridley's preface to his account of the disputation is 1563, pp. 956-57 and (in a differently worded version) 1570, p. 1632; 1576, pp. 1392-93; 1583, p. 1463.

Ridley's conclusion to his account of the Oxford disputations is printed (only) in 1563, p. 978.

Ridley wrote to Weston protesting the conduct of the 1554 Oxford disputations and demanding that Ridley's written responses to the three propositions be shown to the higher house of convocation (1563, p. 977; 1570, p. 1633; 1576, pp. 1393-94; 1583, p. 1464).

The queen's letter ordering Ridley, together with Cranmer and Latimer, to be held in the custody of the mayor and bailiffs of Oxford during the disputation is printed in 1563, p. 999.

He was summoned, together with Cranmer and Latimer, before Weston and the commissioners on 20 April 1554. He refused to recant what he had said during the disputations. He was condemned and taken to the sheriff's house (1563, pp. 935-38; 1570, pp. 1632-33; 1576, p. 1393; 1583, pp. 1463-64).

On 21 April 1554, Ridley was compelled to observe, having been brought from the sheriff's house, a procession in which Weston carried the sacrament and four doctors carried a canopy over Weston (1563, p. 936; 1570, p. 1633; 1576, p. 1393; 1583, p. 1464).

Ridley wrote a letter to Cranmer, which was sent together with copies of his account of the disputation and news of recent developments (1570, pp. 1633-34; 1576, p. 1394; 1583, pp. 1464).

Foxe mentions Ridley's condemnation and disputation in passing in 1570, p. 1639; 1576, p. 1399; 1583, p. 1469.

In a letter of 10 October 1554, Heinrich Bullinger asked John Hooper to pass his commendations toRidley, Hugh Latimer and Thomas Cranmer (1570, p. 1692; 1576, pp. 1444-45; 1583, p. 1518).

Ridley was one of the authors of a petition to Philip and Mary asking them for a chance to defend, in public debate, the Edwardian religious reforms (1570, p. 1656; 1576, p. 1413; 1583, p. 1483).

Laurence Saunders sent a letter to Ridley, Thomas Cranmer and Hugh Latimer from the Marshalsea(1563, pp. 1042-43; 1570, pp. 1667-68; 1576, pp. 1422-23; 1583, pp. 1496-97).

Foxe describes Ridley's character. 1563, p. 1283, 1570, p. 1895, 1576, p. 1623, 1583, p. 1717.

John Bradford was persuaded to enter the ministry by Ridley. Ridley called Bradford to take the position of deacon and, at Bradford's willing, ordered him deacon. 1563, p. 1173, 1570, p. 1780, 1576, p. 1623, 1583, pp. 1603-04.

He led the bishops who compelled John Hooper to wear vestments at his consecration. Ridley wrote a letter to Hooper apologising for this in Mary's reign. 1563, pp. 1050-2; 1570, pp. 1676-7; 1576, p. 1404; 1583, pp. 1504-5.

In a letter of 10 October 1554, Heinrich Bullinger asked John Hooper to pass his commendations to Ridley, Hugh Latimer and Thomas Cranmer. 1570, p. 1692; 1576, pp. 1444-45; 1583, p. 1518.

Ridley was one of the authors of a petition to Philip and Mary asking them for a chance to defend, in public debate, the Edwardian religious reforms. 1570, p. 1656; 1576, p. 1413; 1583, p. 1483.

Laurence Saunders sent a letter to Ridley, Thomas Cranmer and Hugh Latimer from the Marshalsea.1563, pp. 1042-43; 1570, pp. 1667-68; 1576, pp. 1422-23; 1583, pp. 1496-97.

During Bradford's second examination, Doctor Seton described Ridley and Latimer as being unable to answer anything at all at their examinations. 1570, p. 1786, 1576, p. 1526, 1583, p. 1607.

John Bradford sent a letter to Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley. 1570, p. 1815 1576, p. 1551, 1583, p. 1634.

Rowland Taylor wrote a letter to Thomas Cranmer, Nicholas Ridley and Hugh Latimer when they were prisoners in Oxford. 1570, p. 2072; 1576, p. 1787; 1583, p. 1893.

Foxe recounts the life of Ridley. 1563, pp. 1283-96, 1570, pp. 1895-96, 1576, pp. 1623-24, 1583, pp. 1717-30.

Ridley was kind to Heath, archbishop of York during Edward VI's reign. 1563, p. 1285, 1570, p. 1896, 1576, p. 1623, 1583, p. 1717.

Ridley was kind to Edmund Bonner's mother. She would dine at Ridley's manor in Fulham with Ridley and Mistress Mungey, Bonner's sister. 1570, p. 1896, 1576, p. 1623, 1583, p. 1717.

Ridley's sister and her husband, George Shipside, were also kind to Bonner's mother and sister. 1570, p. 1896, 1576, p. 1623, 1583, pp. 1717-18.

Ridley was converted through the reading of Bertram's Book of the Sacrament, and confirmed in his beliefs through conference with Cranmer and Peter Martyr. 1563, p. 1285, 1570, p. 1895, 1576, p. 1623, 1583, p. 1717.

After Mary's accession, Ridley was kept first in the Tower, then in the Bocardo in Oxford, and then held in custody at Master Irish's house until his death. 1563, p. 1285, 1570, p. 1896, 1576, p. 1624, 1583, p. 1717.

Ridley was cast into Bocardo prison with Hugh Latimer. 1563, p. 1285, 1583, p. 1718.

A conference took place between Ridley and Latimer in prison on the objections of Antonian, in other words, those of a popish persecutor, such as Winchester. 1563, pp. 1285-94, 1583, pp. 1718-24.

Letters of Ridley. 1570, pp. 1896-1902, 1576, pp. 1624-30, 1583, pp. 1724-30.

A letter was sent by Ridley to West, in which Ridley asked West and also Dr Harvey to remember their promises to him. Foxe also includes West's letter and Ridley's response. 1570, pp. 1900-01, 1576, pp. 1627-28, 1583, pp. 1728-29.

Grindal wrote to Ridley from his exile in Frankfort, to which letter Ridley replied. He mentioned his imprisonment with Cranmer, Latimer and Bradford. He mentioned that he knew that Ferrar, Hooper, Rogers, Taylor of Hadleigh, Saunders and Tomkins, a weaver, had all been martyred, as had Cardmaker the day before he wrote this letter. He had heard that West had relented, and Grimald been cast into the Marshalsea. He had also heard that Thomas Ridley, of the Bull-head in Cheapside, had died. He had heard that his brother-in-law, Shipside, had spent much time in prison but was now released. 1570, pp. 1901-02, 1576, pp. 1628-30, 1583, pp. 1729-30.

[Back to Top]

The examination of Ridley and Latimer by White (Lincoln) and Brookes (Gloucester) took place on 30 September 1555. White and Brookes received their commission from Cardinal Poole. 1563, pp. 1297-98, 1570, pp. 1903-09, 1576, pp. 1631-39, 1583, pp. 1757-60.

A communication took place between Ridley and Brookes in Irish's house on 15 October, on which day he was degraded, and at which Edridge ('reader then of the Greek lecture') was present.. 1563, pp. 1374-76, 1570, pp. 1934-35, 1576, pp. 1659-60, 1583, pp. 1768-69.

Ridley had a discussion with Brookes on 16 October, on which day he was degraded. 1563, pp. 1374-76.

Foxe recounts the behaviour of Ridley at supper the night before he was martyred. 1563, pp. 1376-79, 1570, pp. 1936-37, 1576, p. 1661, 1583, p. 1769.

Foxe recounts the behaviour of Ridley and Latimer at their martyrdom. 1563, pp. 1376-1379, 1570, pp. 1937-39, 1576, pp. 1661-62, 1583, p. 1769.

Ridley gave his gown and tippet to Shipside. 1563, p. 1377, 1570, p. 1937, 1576, p. 1661, 1583, p. 1769.

Ridley gave a new groat to Henry Lea. 1563, p. 1377, 1570, p. 1937, 1576, p. 1661, 1583, p. 1769.

Ridley spoke with Lord Williams before his martyrdom. 1563, p. 1379, 1570, p. 1937, 1576, p. 1662, 1583, p. 1769.

Ridley's friendly farewell. 1563, pp. 1379-81, 1570, pp. 1939-43, 1576, pp. 1622-28, 1583, pp. 1770-76.

Ridley's lamentation for a change in religion, in which he makes reference to Latimer, Lever, Bradford and Knox, as well as Cranmer and their part in the duke of Somerset's cause. 1570, pp. 1945-50, 1576, pp. 1670-78, 1583, pp. 1778-84.

Cranmer was confirmed in his reformist beliefs after conference with Ridley. 1570, p. 2045, 1576, p. 1763, 1583, p. 1870.

Cranmer was examined by Bonner and Ely and condemned on 12 September 1556 (seven days before the condemnation of Ridley and Latimer). 1563, pp. 1491-92, 1570, p. 2046, 1576, p. 1765, 1583, p. 1871.

In the third year of Edward's reign, Cranmer and Nicholas Ridley admitted Robert Drakes to minister the sacraments. 1563, p. 1505, 1570, p. 2074, 1576, p. 1788, 1583, p. 1895.

Letter to Augustine Bernher [BL, Harley 416, fo.16v. Printed in LM, p. 72 et seq. Also in 1570, p. 1902 et seq.].

Letter to Augustine Bernher [BL Harley 416, fos.17v and 32r. Not printed in Foxe or LM].

Letter to Bernher [BL Harley 416, fo.32r. Not printed in AM or LM.]

Letter to Bradford. [BL Harley 416, fo.32v. Printed in LM, pp. 62 et seq. and 1570, p. 1897 et seq.]

Foxe records Nicholas Ridley's writings against idolatry. 1583, pp. 2128-31.

Lord Dacre would have paid a ransom to Mary for his kinsman Nicholas Ridley's life if it were possible but she refused. 1563, p. 1733, 1583, p. 2131.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Owen Oglethorpe

(d. 1559)

President of Magdalen College, Oxford (1535 - 1552 and 1553 - 1559); dean of Windsor (1554 - 1556); bishop of Carlisle (1557 - 1559). Performed the coronation ceremony for Elizabeth. [see DNB ].

Owen Oglethorpe was one of the participants in the Oxford disputations of 1554 (1563, pp. 936-38, 943-44, 969 and 971; 1570, pp. 1591-93, 1596-981[recte 1597], 1616 and 1618; 1576, pp. 1358-59, 1362 and 1379-80 and 1583, pp. 1428-30, 1432-33, 1449 and 1451).

[NB: A brief account of the Oxford disputations, only in 1563, mentions Oglethorpe debating with Cranmer (1563, p. 933). He is listed as debating with Ridley (1563, p. 934; 1570, p. 1606; 1576, p. 1371; 1583, p. 1441).]

According to Foxe, Oglethorpe was present when William Glynn asked Ridley's forgiveness for insulting him during Ridley's disputation on 17 April (1563, p. 971; 1570, p. 1618; 1576, p. 1380; 1583, p. 1451).

Elizabeth spent the night at the house of the dean of Windsor on her way to Woodstock. 1570, p. 2292, 1576, p. 1985, 1583, p. 2094.

Oglethorpe was a participant in the Westminster disputation of 1559. 1563, p. 1717, 1583, p. 2119.

Owen Oglethorpe died after Queen Mary. 1563, p. 1707, 1570, p. 2301, 1576, p. 1992, 1583, p. 2101.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Richard Smith

(1500 - 1563)

1st Regius Professor of Divinity (1535 - 1548, 1554 - 1556, 1559 - 1560) (DNB)

According to Foxe, Richard Smith forced Hooper to leave Oxford University because of his evangelical convictions (1563, p. 1049; 1570, p. 1674; 1576, p. 1429; 1583, p. 1502).

Foxe prints a letter of Smith's, written in Edward VI's reign, to Cranmer, in which Smith offered to write in defence of clerical marriage and declared that it would be against his conscience to write against Cranmer's treatise on the Eucharist and the Reformed doctrine of Edward VI (1570, p. 1606; 1576, p. 1370; 1583, p. 1441).

[Back to Top]

Richard Smith was appointed as one of the official disputants in the Oxford Disputations of 1554 (1563, p. 932).

According to an account of the Oxford disputation of 1554, which was only printed in 1563, Anthony Smith was appointed to debate with Cranmer on Monday 16 April 1554 (1563, p. 933). Almost certainly Richard Smith was meant.

Cranmer, during his disputation on 16 April 1554, when pressed on alleged inaccuracies in his translations, countered that some translation had appeared in a work of Smith's. Queried about this by Weston, Smith refused to answer (1563, p. 951; 1570, p. 1602; 1576, p. 1367; 1583, p. 1437).

Smith is mentioned in a brief account of the Oxford Disputations, as disputing with Ridley (1563, p. 934; 1570, p. 1606; 1576, p. 1371; 1583, p. 1441).

Richard Smith was Ridley's main opponent during the Disputations; he also debated sporadically with Latimer and participated briefly in Cranmer's debate with John Harpsfield (1563, pp. 932-34, 958-59, 963-67, 974-75, 978, 981-85 and 988; 1570, pp. 1606, 1612-15, 1617, 1620-22, 1624-27 and 1629; 1576, pp. 1372, 1375-78, 1380, 1382-84 and 1386-88; 1583, pp. 1442-43, 1446-48, 1450-54, 1456-58 and 1461).

[Back to Top]

He was one of those who examined Thomas Causton and Thomas Higbed on 18 February 1555 (1563, p. 1104). He volunteered to rebut the joint confession of Thomas Causton and Thomas Higbed, but Bonner would not let him speak, ordering John Harpsfield to answer them instead (1563, p. 1107; 1570, p. 1719; 1576, p. 1468; 1583, p. 1541).

[Back to Top]
 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Richard Ward

Bailiff of Derby.

Richard Ward persecuted Joan Waste of Derby. 1563, p. 1545, 1570, p. 2137, 1576, p. 1858, 1583, p. 1951.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Thomas Harding

(1516 - 1572)

John White's chaplain. Of Lincoln. Catholic controvertialist. Born Combe Martin, Devonshire. [DNB]

Author of STC 12758-12763.5.

Jane Grey wrote a letter to Thomas Harding (he had been her father's chaplain) reproving him for apostasy during Mary's reign. The letter is not in the Rerum and, although it is printed in 1563 (pp, 920-22), Harding is unnamed in that edition. He was identified, however, when the letter was reprinted in 1570 (p. 1582-83) and subsequent editions (1576, pp. 1349-41 [recte 1351] and 1583, pp. 1420-21).

[Back to Top]

Harding participated in the 1554 Oxford disputations, challenging both Ridley and Latimer on Greek vocabulary and grammar (1563, pp. 934, 970 and 981; 1570, pp. 1606, 1616 and 1624; 1576, pp. 1371, 1379 and 1388; 1583, pp. 1441, 1450 and 1456).

On 14 February 1555 Harding went to see Bradford in prison. Harding talked of his fear for Bradford's soul, and that he himself had spoken against Peter Martir, Martin Bucer, Luther and others for their beliefs. 1563, p. 1200, 1570, pp. 1790-91, 1576, p. 1529, 1583, pp. 1612-13.

In February 1555 Willerton, a chaplain to Bishop Bonner, went to speak with John Bradford in prison. They discussed the doctors and scripture and agreed that each would write down his own arguments over transubstantiation. Willerton sent his few sparse answers to Bradford the next morning and went to see him in the afternoon. They discussed whether or not the scriptures should be in the vernacular. Bradford gave Willerton his answers on transubstantiation and told Willerton to form his answers as reasons. 1563, pp. 1199-1200. Willerton was with Creswell, Harding, Harpsfield and others. 1570, p. 1790, 1576, p. 1528, 1583, p. 1612.

[Back to Top]

Harding was with Creswell, Willerton, Harpsfield and others who visited Bradford in prison in February 1555. 1570, p. 1790.

In his rejoinder against John Jewel [STC 12760], bishop of Salisbury, Harding dismissed Foxe's version of the three Guernsey martyrs as a series of inflammatory lies. He also charged that Perotine Massey was a whore and responsible for the death of her child. 1570, pp. 2130-34, 1576, pp. 1852-55, 1583, pp. 1946-49.

[Back to Top]

Foxe challenged Harding to disprove the legitimacy of Perotine Massey's marriage to David Jores. 1570, p. 2131, 1576, p. 1853, 1583, p. 1947.

Foxe refuted Harding's case that Massey was responsible for the death of her child. 1570, pp. 2131-32, 1576, p. 1853, 1583, p. 1947.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
Thomas Watson

(1513 - 1584)

Chancellor of Cambridge University (from 25 September 1553); Master of St. John's (Cambridge) (from 28 September 1553); Dean of Durham (from 18 November 1553); Bishop of Lincoln (1557 - 1559) (DNB)

In the 1553 Convocation, Thomas Watson engaged in a long debate with James Haddon on the meaning of a passage in Theodoret, regarding the Eucharist (John Philpot, The trew report of the dysputacyon had and begonne in the convocacyon hows at London the XVIII day of Octobre MDLIIII, [Emden, 1554], STC 19890, sigs. C8v - D14; 1563, p. 912; 1570, p. 1576; 1576, p. 1344; 1583, p. 1414; also see Rerum, p. 227. Philpot's account, reprinted by Foxe, abridges this argument. It is given in BL Harley 422, fols. 38r - 40r, which was not printed by Foxe, but is printed in R. W. Dixon, A History of the Church of England (6 vols, London, (1884 - 1902), IV, pp. 81 - 85).

[Back to Top]

Watson, supported by Henry Morgan and John Harpsfield, debated with Richard Cheney on the Real Presence on the fifth day of the 1553 Convocation (1563, pp. 912-17; 1570, pp. 1576-1576 [recte 1577]; 1576, pp. 1344-45; and 1583, pp. 1415-16).

Watson was one of the official disputants in the Oxford disputations of 1554 (1563, pp. 932, 936-38, 973-76; 1570, pp. 1591-93 and 1618-21; 1576, p. 1358-59 and 1381-83; 1583, pp. 1428-30 and 1451-54).

[NB: A brief account of the Oxford disputations of 1554 mentions Watson's debating with Ridley (1563, p. 934; 1570, p. 1606; 1576, p. 1371; 1583, p. 1441).

In an attempt to reinstate catholicism at the University of Cambridge, a commission under the direction of Cardinal Pole ordered the condemning and burning of the bones and books of Phagius and Martin Bucer. Members of the commission were Cuthbert Scott, Nicholas Ormanet, Thomas Watson, John Christopherson and Henry Cole. 1563, pp. 1537 [recte 1549]-1558 [recte 1570]

[Back to Top]

On 20 August 1553, Watson preached a sermon at Paul's Cross where, to protect him from a potentially hostile crowd, he was guarded by two hundred soldiers (1570, p. 1634; 1576, p. 1395; 1583, p. 1465).

Thomas Watson was chosen by Pole to be a persecutor of the University of Cambridge. 1563, p. 1537, 1570, p. 2142, 1576, p. 1862, 1583, p. 1956.

Watson was sent to examine certain scholars at St John's College, Cambridge, on 9 January 1557. 1563, p. 1538, 1570, p. 2143, 1576, p. 1863, 1583, p. 1956.

He gave answer to an oration made by a fellow of Cambridge. 1563, p. 1538, 1570, p. 2143, 1576, p. 1863, 1583, p. 1956.

He thanked the fellows of Trinity College for their oration at the arrival of the commissioners. 1563, p. 1538, 1570, p. 2143, 1576, p. 1863, 1583, p. 1956.

The reformation of the University of Cambridge commanded by the queen's commissioners in 1557 was to take place at Watson's discretion. 1563, p. 1541, 1570, p. 2145, 1576, p. 1866, 1583, p. 1958.

Scot, Watson and Christopherson discussed and agreed to the exhumation of Bucer and Phagius. 1563, p. 1541, 1570, p. 2145, 1576, p. 1866, 1583, p. 1958.

Watson preached a sermon on Candlemas day. 1570, p. 2150, 1576, p. 1858, 1583, p. 1963.

Watson was present at the examination of John Rough and denounced him as a heretic. 1570, p. 2227, 1576, p. 1923, 1583, p. 2030.

Thomas Rose was imprisoned in the bishop of Lincoln's house in Holborn. 1576, p. 1978, 1583, p. 2083.

Watson was a participant in the Westminster disputation of 1559. 1563, p. 1717, 1583, p. 2119.

Watson was imprisoned in the Tower after the death of Mary. 1570, p. 2301, 1576, p. 1993, 1583, p. 2101.

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
William Glynn

(1504? - 1558)

Bishop of Bangor (1555 - 1558) (DNB), President of Queens' (1553 - 1556) (Venn)

William Glynn was one of the Catholic disputants at the Oxford disputations of 1554.

During Ridley's disputation on 17 April 1554, Glynn accused Ridley of ignoring the Scriptures and the Fathers. Ridley was wounded by this remark, especially since Glynn had been an old friend. Later, according to Foxe, Glynn visited Ridley where he was being held and begged his forgiveness, which Ridley granted (1563, pp. 936-37 and 971-72; 1570, pp. 1591-92 and 1618; 1576, pp. 1358-59 and 1380-81; 1583, pp. 1428-30 and 1451).

[Back to Top]

William Brandor is mentioned (only in 1563) as disputing with Ridley in the Oxford disputations of 1554 (1563, p. 934). This is almost certainly a confused reference to William Glynn, who was made bishop of Bangor in 1555.

Made Bishop of Bangor (1570, p. 1636; 1576, p. 1396; 1583, p. 1467).

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
William Pye

(d. 1557)

D.D., Archdeacon of Berkshire (1547 - 1557); dean of Chichester (1553 - 1557) (Fasti, Foster )

Pye gave an oration at the beginning of the 1553 convocation (1570, p. 1571; 1576, p. 1340; and 1583, p. 1410).

He objected to Philpot?s arguments against transubstantiation and prevailed upon Hugh Weston, the prolocutor of the 1553 convocation, to silence Philpot (1563, p. 911; 1570, p. 1575; 1576, p. 1344; 1583, p. 1414).

He was appointed as one of the official disputants at the Oxford disputations of 1554 (1563, pp. 932 and 936; 1570, p. 1592; 1576, p. 1358; 1583, p. 1428-29).

Pye was one of the catholic disputants in the Oxford disputations of 1554 (1563, pp. 932, 936, 938, 953, 959, 977, 983 and 985; 1570, pp. 1592-93, 1604, 1608, 1622 and 1626-27; 1576, pp. 1358-59, 1368, 1372, 1383 and 1387-88; 1583, pp. 1429-30, 1439, 1443, 1454 and 1458-59).

[NB: A brief account of the Oxford disputations of 1554, which was only printed in 1563, lists Pye as one of those who disputed with Cranmer (1563, p. 933-34). This account also mentions a ?maister Price?, citing canon law against Cranmer (1563, p. 933) and disputing with Ridley (1563, p. 934). ?Price? may very well be a mistake for Pye.]

[Back to Top]

[Also referred to as 'Price' and 'Pie']

 
Person and Place Index  *  Close
William Tresham

(d. 1569)

Vice-Chancellor of Oxford (1532 - 1547, 1556 and 1558) [DNB]

William Tresham was one of the official disputants in the Oxford disputations of April 1554. He debated extensively and acrimoniously with Nicholas Ridley and claimed that Cranmer?s Defense of the Sacrament contained 600 errors (1563, pp. 933-34, 936-38, 948-50, 975-76, 981-82, 989-90; 1570, pp. 1592-93, 1600-01, 1606, 1620-21, 1624-25 and 1629-30; 1576, pp. 1358-59, 1365-66, 1371, 1382-83, 1386-87 and 1390-91; 1583, pp. 1428-30, 1436-37, 1441, 1453, 1456-57 and 1461-62).

[Back to Top]

[NB: A brief account of the Oxford disputations, printed only in 1563, mentions Tresham as disputing with Cranmer (1563, p. 933)].

Tresham addressed the students of Christ Church, urging them to hear mass, discussing the different types of mass and promising them new copes and a new bell for their services (1563, pp. 1007-8; 1570, p. 1647; 1576, p. 1405; 1583, p. 1475).

1465 [1441]

Queene Mary. Disputation of Doctor Ridley Bishop of London at Oxford.

Cran. Yea, but he meant the Romish Church.

MarginaliaD. Cranmer charged with mistranslating. Tho. Aquinas.West. Moreouer you haue depraued S. Thomas, namely where he hath these wordes: In quantum vero est sacrificium, habet vim satisfactiuam: Sed in satisfactione attenditur magis affectio offerentis, quàm quantitas oblationis. Vnde Dominus dicit apud Lucam de vidua quæ obtulit duo æra, quòd plus omnibus misit. Quamuis ergo hæc oblatio ex sui quantitate sufficiet ad satisfaciendum pro omni pœna: tamen fit satisfactoria illis pro quibus offertur, vel etiam offerentibus secundum quantitatem suæ deuotionis, & non pro tota pœna. That is: In as muche as it is a sacrifice, it hath the power of satisfaction: But in satisfaction the affection of the offerer is more to be waied then the quantity of the oblation. Wherfore the lord sayde in Lukes Gospell, of the widowe which offered two mites, that she cast in more thē they al. Therfore, although this oblation of the quantitie of it selfe wil suffice to satisfie for all paine, yet it is made satisfactorie to them, for whom it is offered, or to the offerers, according to the quantitie of their deuotion, and not for all the paine.

[Back to Top]

You haue thus turned it: Quod sacrificium Sacerdotis habet vim satisfactiuam. &c. That is, That the Sacrifice of the priest hath power of satisfaction. &c. And therefore in thys place you haue chopped in this word [Sacerdotis] of þe priest, wheras in the translation of all the newe Testament, you haue not set it, but where Christ was put to death. And again, where s. Thomas hath [pro omni pœna] for all paine, your booke omitteth many things there. 

Cattley Pratt  *  Close
Cattley/Pratt, VI, Appendix, ref. page 468, line 7 from the bottom

The Cambridge MS. gives an answer of Cranmer, "Because I would not write all that long treatise."

[Back to Top]

MarginaliaWeston triumpheth before the victory.Thus you see brethren the truth stedfast and inuincible, you see also the craft and deceit of hereticks, the truth may be pressed, but it cannot be oppressed: therefore crye altogether, Vincit veritas. i. The truth ouercommeth. 

Cattley Pratt  *  Close
Cattley/Pratt, VI, Appendix, ref. page 468, line 4 from the bottom

The Cambridge MS. adds, that Cranmer from respondent, demanded, according to the usage of the schools, to be opponent: "Cran. Oppono: vos respondete scripturis. West. Habebis aliam diem ad opponendum." This day was the following Thursday, April 19th.

This disordered disputation 

Commentary  *  Close

Foxe concluded the account of Cranmer's disputations by transposing a brief description of it to its proper chronological place (textual transposition 16).

sometime in latine, sometime in English, continued almost till 2. of the clock. Which being finished, and the arguments wrytten and deliuered to the handes of M. Say, the prisonner was had away by the Mayor, and the Doctors dined together at the vniuersitie Colledge.

Disputation at Oxford betweene D. Smith, with his other Colleagues and Doctors, and Bishop Ridley. Aprill. 17. 
Commentary  *  Close
Block 19: Ridley's disputation

In the Rerum, Foxe's account of Ridley's disputation was based on a single version of Ridley's own narrative of his disputation (Rerum, pp. 660-95). One again, Grindal had obtained a copy of Ridley's account of his disputation in the Bishop's own hand (BL Harley 417, fol. 119r) and once again, it does not seem to have been available to Foxe for the Rerum. In the Actes and Monuments, Foxe continued to rely on this narrative, but he had multiple versions of it. There are a number of different versions of Ridley's narrative which survive in Foxe's papers: BL Lansdowne MS 389, fols. 118r-124v and 130r-134v; ECL MS 262, fols. 3r-15v and 17v-25v; BL Harley MS 422, fols. 54r-58v and (in Latin) fols. 68r-83v. The number of these copies is testimony to Foxe's zeal in obtaining as much material on the Oxford disputations as he could gather; he obtained one copy from Grindal (see 1570, p. 1901).

[Back to Top]

As with Cranmer's disputation, the 1563 version of Ridley's disputation has sections of text which are not in the Rerum; almost certainly because Foxe's single copy of Ridley's narrative was defective and also because Foxe had multiple versions on which to draw for the 1563 edition.

 

Commentary on the Glosses  *  Close
Ridley

In the initial stages, the glosses are less adversarial than in much of the Cranmer section because Ridley leaps in more forcefully and dictates the agenda for a time; the glosses mostly respect and emphasize his divisions and offer commentary on procedure and clarification. Once disputation itself begins, the glosses return to a more familiar pattern, with many logical points (e.g. 'A rule of Logike for confirmation of the argument' (1563), '* The rule of Logicke is this A propositione de tertio adiacente, ad eam quæ est de secundo, cum verbo recto significante existentiam, valet consequentia affirmatiue &c', 'This argument holdeth after the same rule as did the other before', 'This argument is not formall in the 2. figure').

[Back to Top]

As with Cranmer, there is one example of Foxe correcting Ridley (in this case clarifiying a point about the beneficiaries of the promise in bread and wine, '* No promise made to bread & wine, as they be common bread and common wine, but as they be sanctified & made sacramēts of the Lords body and bloud, they are not now called bread nor wine, haue a promise annexed to them, or rather (to say the trueth) annexed to the receauers of thē'). Several definitions of obscure terms are in all editions ('Anthropophagi, are a kinde of brutishe people that feed on mens flesh', 'Anagogicall sense is that which hath a high and misticall vnderstanding that lyeth abstruse & profound vnder the externall letter'). A feature emerging for the first time in this section is the taunting of the martyrs' tormentors with their embarrassing past actions ('D. Smith purposing to write for the mariage of Priestes', 'But where were these Iudges in K. Edwardes tyme', 'D. Weston in K. Edwards dayes subscribed' and 'The Iudges * geue an vntrue verdite: for D. Cranmer meaning by the Counsell, spake no word of Ridley'). It may be that Foxe simply took the opportunity as it arose, but it may also be that the margin's accusations partly served to distract the reader from Ridley's cautious response to the question of his involvement in setting forth the catechism.

[Back to Top]

This section includes a portion of the 1563 text which is unusually well annotated. This spate of marginalia occurs largely around pp. 961-62 (from the gloss '3'), and does not seem to be focussed on a particular subject (it straddles Ridley's response to the second and third propositions). Many of the references on p. 962 are (unnecessarily, to judge from later practice) repeated pointers to Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10. They give the impression of an uncertain experiment in adding marginalia in this early version, which may be compared with the grounding of much of the later annotation in the layout and other features of 1563.

[Back to Top]

As with Cranmer's disputation, several of the glosses offer comments on the sacrament. The gloss 'The Analogie of the sacramēt is the similitude and likenes whiche they haue with the thinges they represent' gives a definition of the analogy of the sacraments, once again emphasising their representative function; the glosses 'The true presence of Christes body in the Supper not denyed' and 'The fayth & confession of D. Ridley in affirming the true presēce in the Sacrament' point to a discussion of the true presence, and to Ridley's belief in it; the gloss 'Christes abode in heauen is no let for him to appeare on earth when he will, but whether he wil, that must be proued. Againe it is one thing to appeare on earth, an other still in the Sacrament, and to be present the same time with his body in heauen, whē he is bodely present in earth' once again points the reader back to the sacramental significance of the discussion of Christ's presence in heaven: these cases are less a matter of comment than of making clear to a less learned reader what was familiar to the disputants. There is a group of references which emphasise the singleness of Christ's sacrifice ('One Christ but not one body, nor after on bodely substance in all places'; 'One Christ and one sacrifice in all places, and how: to wit, christ by veritie the sacrifice by, signification' and 'How one christ is offered in many places at once'): this relates to the implicit opposition between protestant and catholic, the former recognizing the all-sufficiency of a single sacrifice, the latter misled by carnality to endless, unintentionally parodic re-enactments. This also links to the rules of polemical engagement: the importance of presenting oneself as a defender of what is holy and truthful was paramount in mounting these attacks, and the implication that the central rite of the catholic church was a continuous performance of ingratitude and disdain for Christ gave license for just anger.

[Back to Top]

The gloss 'Quam sit Stupida & crassa responsio tua' is a Latin transcript of insults translated in the text; the point of the translation would seem to be to leave the reader in no doubt of the vehemence of the precise terms employed: once again, a contrast is drawn between the moderate and the railing protagonists. See also 'Sacrifice called vnbloudy is nothing els but a representation of the bloudy Sacrifice of Christ' and 'D. Weston bloweth vp the triumph' (attacking Weston's arrogance). For examples of 1583 being less well produced than earlier editions, see the glosses 'Christes appearing on the earth sometime, taketh not away his residēce in heauen. How christ appeared in earth', 'Quam sit Stupida & crassa responsio tua', 'Of this Catechisme read before pag. 1357'. The gloss 'The protestantes falsely belyed to teach nothing but a figure in the sacrament' uses 'protestantes', a word not in the text, but perhaps more acceptable (or at least accepted) by 1570.

[Back to Top]
MarginaliaAprill. 17.THe next day folowing which was the 17. of April, was brought forth D. Ridley to dispute, against whom was set D. Smith to be principall opponent. 
Cattley Pratt  *  Close
Cattley/Pratt, VI, Appendix, ref. page 469, line 7

A full account of this Dr. Smith is given by Strype in his "Memorials," Mary, chap. xxviii., and "Life of Cranmer," pp. 171, 172. It appears there that the offence which he had committed, and which caused him to flee into Scotland, was his endeavouring to excite opposition to P. Martyr at Oxford, putting him even in danger of his life; and his writing a book in favour of the "Celibacy of the Clergy" against Cranmer. This was in the year 1549. He wrote two letters from Scotland of apology to the archbishop, of which this is one, belonging to 1550.

[Back to Top]
MarginaliaD. Smith sent to dispute agaynst D. Ridley. Touching whych D. Smith, 
Commentary  *  Close

Foxe made some interesting additions to Ridley's disputation in the 1570 edition. The first of these was a brief account of Dr. Richard Smith's career together with a grovelling letter from Smith to Cranmer written in 1550 (see textual variant 55). This letter, with another similar epistle from Smith to Cranmer, written about the same time, was printed in Peter Martyr Virmigli, Defensio D. Petri Martyris Vermelli Florentini ... ad Ricardi Smythaei Angli, olim Theologicae professoris Oxoniensis duos libellos de Caelibatu Sacerdotum, et votis monasticis, nunc primum in luce editu (Basel: Peter Peran, 1559), pp. 645-48. (The letters may well have been given to Martyr by Cranmer himself). Foxe almost certainly translated this letter from Martyr's book.

[Back to Top]
for so much as mention heere happeneth of hys name, first the reader is to be aduertised what is to be attributed to his iudgement in religion, which so oftentimes before hath turned and returned to and froe, grounded (as it seemeth) vpon no firme conscience of doctrine, as both by hys articles by him recanted may appeare, and also by hys owne letter sent a little before in king Edwardes dayes to the Archbishop of Caunterbury from Scotlande. 
Cattley Pratt  *  Close
Cattley/Pratt, VI, Appendix, ref. page 469, line 8

The recantation here alluded to, or one of them at least, was put into print under the title, "A godly and faythfull Retractation made and published at Paule's Crosse in London, the yeare of our Lord God 1547, the 15 daye of May, by Mayster Richard Smyth, Dr. of divinitye; &c. Londini, 1547."

This rare tract is of only 16 leaves: Bishop Gardiner has made a smart reference to it above (see p. 40). Dr. Maitland pronounces it to be generally unknown: see p. 216 of "A List of some early printed Books in the Archiep. Library, Lambeth, 1843;" where there is a copy, and also in the Bodleian Collections. The following specimen of it is interesting:

[Back to Top]

"There be many thinges" (says Dr. Smith) "ascribed to thappostles, and called traditions deduced from the tyme of thappostles and read in the name of olde Authors, and set furth under the pretensed title of their name, which be fayned and forged and notheng trew, full of superstition and untrewth, feyned Epistles of Clemens, Anacletus, Euaristus and Fabianus and other which arr set furth by the byshop of Rome and his complices, which be forged, feyned and of none auctoritie nor to be beleved, but counterfeyted by theym: who with the color of antiquitie wolde magnify that usurped power of the byshop of Rome."

[Back to Top]

Farther on (the tract is unpaged) we read: - "When I folowed myne own invention not directed by Scripture, I began as the nature of man is to wander, and at the last went cleane contrary to God's woord.

"Wherfore, I hertely exhort every man as touchyng matiers of faith to found the same upon God's certeyn, trew, and infallyble woorde: lest by doyng the contrary, they fall into superstition, idolatry, and other manyfold errers, as I my self sometyme, and many other (although I doo not come hyther too accuse any man) yet I perceyve of late tyme have doone." (See Strype's Memorials under Edward VI. book i. chap. 6.)

[Back to Top]
Which letter I thought heere to exhibite as a certaine Preface before his own arguments, or rather as a testimonie against him selfe, whereby þe reader may vnderstand how deuoutly he magnified them, and their doctrine a little before, agaynst whome he nowe disputeth so busely. Reade (I beseeche thee,) his Epistle, and iudge.

[Back to Top]
The true copie of a certaine Epistle of Doctor Rich. Smith, declaring his affection to the setting forth of Gods sincere woorde.

MarginaliaA letter of D. Smith to Doct. Cranmer Archbishop of Cant.MOst honorable, I commend me vnto your Lordship, doing the same to vnderstand, that I wrote letters to your grace in Ianuarye last, and the 10. day of Februarie, declaring the causes of my sodaine & vnaduised departyng from your grace ouer the sea, and desiring your good lordship of your charitye towarde them that repent of theyr ill Acts, to forgeue me your selfe all that wrōg I did towards your grace, and to obtaine in wryting the kings maiesties pardon for me in all poyntes concerning his lawes: vpon the receit wherof I would returne againe home, & wythin halfe a yeare (at the vttermost) afterwarde wryte, de Sacerdotum connubijs. &c. MarginaliaD. Smith purposing to write for the mariage of Priestes. a Latine booke that should be a iust satisfaction for any thing that I haue wrytten agaynste the same. Reliquaquè omnia dogmata vestra, tum demum libenter amplexurum, vbi Deus mentem meam, vt ea citra cōscientiæ læsionem agnoscam, doceamquè. I wrote not this that I want any good liuing heere, but because mine absence oute of the realme, is dishonour to the Kings highnes and Realme, and because I must needes (if I tarie heere a quarter of a yeare longer) wryte an aunsweare to your Graces booke of the Sacramente, and also a Booke of common places against all the doctrine sette foorth by the kinges Maiestie, which I cannot do wyth good conscience. Wherefore I beseeche your Grace helpe me home, assoone as yee may con-

[Back to Top]

ueniently for Gods sake, and ye shal neuer I trust in God repent that facte.


Ex vrbe diui Andreæ 14. Feb.
Richardus Smithæus.

And thus much touching the forenamed Doctor Rich. Smith, being set heere (as is sayde) to dispute against Byshop Ridly, who was brought now þe next day after to the Archb. to aunswer in the diuinitie schoole. Against whome also besides D. Smith disputed,  

Commentary  *  Close

In the edition of 1570, Foxe transposed a section of the first informant's eyewitness account of the disputations, summarising Ridley's disputation (see textual transposition 5). Foxed used this as an introduction to Ridley's narrative of his disputation.

MarginaliaDisputers against D. Ridley.D. Weston, D. Tresham, D. Oglethorpe, D. Glin, D. Seton, D. Cole, M. Warde, M. Harpsfielde, D. Watson, M. Pye, M. Hardinge, M. Curtop, M. Fecknam. To all them hee aunsweared very learnedly. Hee made a preface to these questions, but they woulde not let him goe forth in it, but caused him to make an end of the same, and sayde it was blasphemie, and some saide he droue of the time in ambiguous things, nothing to the purpose, & so they wold not suffer him to say his mind. D. Smith coulde get nothing at his hand: in so muche that other did take his argumēts and prosecuted them. He shewed himselfe to be learned, & a great clearke. They coulde bring nothing, but he knew it as well as they.

[Back to Top]
The disputation beginneth. 
Commentary  *  Close

Weston's initial speech and Smith's proposing the three questions to be debated first appear in the 1570 edition (see textual variant 56). These were probably added from an account made by one of the notaries; it is probably the only aspect of this disputation for which Foxe did not rely on Ridley's account.

[Back to Top]

West. Prolocutor. Good Christen people and brethren, we haue begon this day our schoole, by Gods good speede I trust, and are entring into a controuersie, whereof no question ought to be mooued, concerning the veritie of the body of our Lord Iesu Christ in the Eucharist. Christ is true, which sayde the wordes. The wordes are true whyche he spake, yea truth it selfe that cannot faile. Lette vs therefore pray vnto God to sende downe vnto vs his holye spirite, which is the true interpreater of his woorde: whiche maye purge away errours, and geue light that veritye may appeare. Let vs also aske leaue and libertie of the Churche to permit the truth receiued, to be called this day in question, wythout any preiudice to the same. Your partes therefore shalbe to implore the assistaunce of almighty God, to pray for the prosperitie of the Queenes maiestie, and to geue vs quiet and attentiue eares. Nowe go to your questions.

[Back to Top]

Doct. Smith. This day (right learned M. Doctor) 3. questions are propounded, whereof no controuersy among christians ought to be mooued, to wit:

MarginaliaThe questions.1. Whether the naturall bodye of Christ our Sauiour, conceiued of the Virgine Marie, and offred for mans redemption vppon the crosse, is verilye and really in the sacrament by vertue of Gods worde spoken by the Priest. &c.

2. Whether in the sacrament after the words of consecration, be any other substance. &c.

3. Whether in the Masse be a sacrifice propiciatorie. &c.

Touching the which questiōs, although you haue publikely and partly professed your iudgemēt and opinion on Saterday last: yet being not satisfied with that your aunswere, I wil assay againe to demaund your sentence in the first question: Whether the true body of Christe, after the woords pronounced, be really in the Eucharist, or els only the figure. In which matter I stande heere nowe to heare your aunsweare.

[Back to Top]
The Preface or protestation of D. Ridley, before his disputation.

MarginaliaThe protestation of B. Ridley.I Receiued of you the other day right worshipful M. prolocutor, and yee my reuerend Maisters, Commissioners from the Queenes maiestie, and her honorable Counsell, three propositions: whereunto ye commaunded me to prepare against this day, what I thought good to aunsweare concerning the same.

[Back to Top]

Now whilest I weied wt my selfe, how great a charge of the Lords flocke was of late committed vnto me, for the which I am certaine I must once render an accompte to my Lord God (and that howe soone, he knoweth) and that moreouer by the commaundement of the Apostle Peter, I ought to be redy alway to geue a reason of the hope þt is in me with mekenes and reuerence, vnto euery one that shall demaund the same: besides this, cōsidering my duty to the Church of Christ, and to your worships being commissioners by publicke authority: I determined with my selfe to obey your commaundement, and so opēly to declare vnto you my minde touching the foresayd propositions. And albeit plainely to confesse vnto you the trueth in these things which ye now demaund of me, I haue thought otherwyse in times past then I now do, yet (God I call to record vnto my soule, I lie not) MarginaliaWhat moued Doct. Ridley to alter his iudgement from the Church of Rome.I haue not altered my iudgemēt, as now it is, either by constraint of any man, or lawes, either

[Back to Top]
for
Go To Modern Page No:  
Click on this link to switch between the Modern pagination for this edition and Foxe's original pagination when searching for a page number. Note that the pagination displayed in the transcription is the modern pagination with Foxe's original pagination in square brackets.
Find:
Type a keyword and then restrict it to a particular edition using the dropdown menu. You can search for single words or phrases. When searching for single words, the search engine automatically imposes a wildcard at the end of the keyword in order to retrieve both whole and part words. For example, a search for "queen" will retrieve "queen", "queene" and "queenes" etc.
in:  
Humanities Research Institute  *  HRI Online  *  Feedback
Version 2.0 © 2011 The University of Sheffield