(1533 - 1603) (DNB)
Elizabeth was suspected of involvement in Wyatt's rebellion, and together with Edward Courtenay, the Earl of Devon, who was also suspected of the same crime, she was committed to the Tower on 15 March 1554 [this is Foxe's error; it was actually 18 March 1554] (1563, p. 927; 1570, p. 1587; 1576, p. 1355; 1583, p. 1425).[Back to Top]
Foxe repeats his statement that Elizabeth was taken to the Tower, but this time he gives the correct date of 18 March 1554 (1570, p. 1639; 1576, p. 1398; 1583, p. 1469).
It was reported to Sir Thomas White, Lord Mayor of London, that Wyatt, on the day of his execution, asked the Lieutenant of the Tower, Lord Chandos, for an interview with Edward Courtenay and begged his forgiveness for having falsely accused Elizabeth and him of complicity in his treason (1570, p. 1587; 1576, p. 1355; 1583, p. 1425). Sir Martin Bowes, the recorder for London, told White that he had heard that Wyatt begged Courtenay to confess the truth (1570, p. 1587-88; 1576, p. 1355; and 1583, p. 1425).[Back to Top]
Foxe gives another version of the story in which Sir Thomas Wyatt at his execution cleared Elizabeth and the Earl of Devon of involvement in his rebellion. In this version, Hugh Weston told Wyatt that he had said the opposite to the Privy Council. Wyatt retorted that what he now said was the truth (1570, p. 1639; 1576, p. 1399; 1583, p. 1469).[Back to Top]
t the trial in the Star Chamber of an apprentice named Cut, who was charged with sedition for stating that Wyatt had cleared Elizabeth, Stephen Gardiner accused Elizabeth (who was not present) of treason and disloyalty to her sister Mary, who had favored her, and declared that Wyatt's confession implicated her (1570, p. 1588; 1576, p. 1355; 1583, p. 1425). On this occasion, Lord Chandos, the Lieutenant of the Tower, declared that he was present at Wyatt's interview with Courtenay and that Wyatt had urged the Earl to confess (1570, p. 1588; 1576, p. 1355; 1583, p. 1425-26).[Back to Top]
Elizabeth was released from the Tower and placed in the custody of Sir John Williams. Later she was sent to Woodstock and placed in the stricter custody of Sir Henry Bedingfield (1563, p. 1004; 1570, p. 1642; 1576, pp. 1400-1; 1583, p. 1471). In the 1563 edition, this account is followed by passages praising Elizabeth's mercy in not punishing Bedingfield when she became queen (1563, p. 1004). These passages were never reprinted.[Back to Top]
(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.
Foxe relates that an apprentice named Cut, dwelling in St Laurence Lane, whilst drinking with a plasterer named Denham discussed Sir Thomas Wyatt's exoneration at his execution of Edward Courtenay and Elizabeth. Cut's words were reported to Stephen Gardiner and Cut was summoned before the Star Chamber, where he was accused of having said that Wyatt was forced by the Privy Council to incriminate Courtenay and Elizabeth in his treason (1570, p. 1588; 1576, p. 1355; and 1583, p. 1425).[Back to Top]
[NB: Richard Cutt, a grocer's apprentice, and one Thomas Pender were placed in the pillory on 20 April 1554 for saying that Wyatt had exonerated Elizabeth (City of London Record Office, Repertory 13, fol. 153r and J. G. Nichols, (ed.) The Chronicle of Queen Jane and of two years of Queen Mary, Camden Society original series 48 (1850), p. 75).][Back to Top]
Lord Mayor of London (1550 - 1551) and six times Master of the Skinners' company
During Mary's reign Sir Andrew Judd's protestant sympathies brought him into conflict with Stephen Gardiner but he appears to have retained Mary's trust. (See H. S. Vere-Hodge, Sir Andrew Judde (privately printed, Tonbridge School, 1953).
He was sent by Stephen Gardiner to Sir Thomas White with the command to bring Cut to Star Chamber, to be tried for sedition (1570, p. 1588; 1576, p. 1355; and 1583, p. 1425).
1st Baron Chandos (1490? - 1556)
Lieutenant of the Tower (1553 - 1554) [DNB]
Brydges asked Lady Jane Grey to write some verses in a book when he attended her on the scaffold. Rerum, p. 238. [This story was never reprinted by Foxe in any edition of the A & M, although there is some evidence that it is accurate - see J. G. Nichols, (ed.), The Chronicle of Queen Jane and of two years of Queen Mary (London, 1850) Camden Society, original series 48, pp. 57-58.][Back to Top]
Lady Jane Grey handed him her book at her execution (1563, p. 919; 1570, p. 1584; 1576, p 1352; 1583, p. 1422). In this passage Brydges is referred to as 'Bruges' in each edition.
At the Star Chamber trial of one Cut, who was tried for saying that at his execution Sir Thomas Wyatt had, at his execution, cleared Elizabeth and Edward Courtenay of complicity in his rebellion, Brydges swore that Wyatt had begged Courtenay to confess his guilt when they met - with Brydges present - on the day of Wyatt's execution (1570, p. 1588; 1576, p 1355; 1583, p. 1425).[Back to Top]
Sir John Brydges was one of the examiners of John Rogers on 22 January 1555. 1563, pp. 1023-26; 1570, pp. 1657-59; 1576, pp. 1414-15; 1583, pp. 1484-86.
He was one of the commissioners charged with carrying out John Hooper's execution. 1563, pp. 1058 and 1060; 1570, pp. 1681 and 1682; 1576, pp. 1435 and 1436; 1583, pp. 1508 and 1509.
Brydges ordered that Hooper be executed quickly and also ordered his son Edmund to see that Hooperwas only allowed to say a prayer at the stake. 1563, p. 1061; 1570, p. 1683; 1576, p. 1436; 1583, p. 1510.
Philpot's sixth examination was before the Lord Chamberlain to Queen Mary, Viscount Hereford, Lord Rich, Lord St John, Lord Windsor, Lord Shandoys, Sir John Bridges, Chadsey and Bonner. 1563, pp. 1405-12, 1570, pp. 1972-78, 1576, pp. 1698-1702, 1583, pp. 1805-10.
Lord Williams, Lord Chandos, Sir Thomas Bridges and Sir John Browne arrived in Oxford, prior to Cranmer's martyrdom. 1563, p. 1498, 1570, p. 2063, 1576, p. 1780, 1583, p. 1885.
Sir John is probably the 'Bridges' whose cattle John Maundrel tended during Mary's reign. 1570, p. 2073, 1576, p. 1788, 1583, p. 1894.
Chandos interrogated a young boy who was believed to be carrying messages between Elizabeth and Edward Courtenay during their imprisonment in the Tower. He ordered the boy not to see Elizabeth. 1563, p. 1713.
William Hastlen was charged with heresy by Sir John Brydges and sent to Sir Leonard Beckwith to be examined. 1583, p. 2137.
Hastlen was sent to Sir John Brydges' house to write answers to the articles against him and then sent to the Marshalsea, under the watch of Master Waghan, the jailor. 1583, p. 2137.
[At times Foxe refers to him variously as 'Lord Shandois', 'Chandos' or 'Shandoys']
(1496/97 - 1566)
Lord Mayor of London; JP for Kent (1555) [DNB; Bindoff, Commons; PRO, SP11/5, no. 6]
Bowes told Sir Thomas White that he had heard a report circulating at Westminster that Sir Thomas Wyatt had, in an interview with Edward Courtenay, urged the earl to confess the truth of his involvement in his rebellion (1570, pp. 1587-88; 1576, p 1355; 1583, p. 1425).
The last examination of Philpot was on 16 December 1555 before Bonner and other bishops, including Bath, Worcester and Lichfield, into which entered William Garret, knight, the lord mayor and the sheriff (Thomas Leigh) of London and Sir Martin Bowes, knight. 1563, p. 1441, 1570, pp. 1997-98, 1576, p. 1719, 1583, p. 1827.[Back to Top]
(1492 - 1567) [DNB]
Lord Mayor of London (1553 - 1554) and founder of St John's College, Oxford [DNB].
When Sir Thomas White heard a report that Hugh Weston had publicly proclaimed, at Wyatt's execution, that Elizabeth and Edward Courtenay were guilty of complicity in Wyatt's rebellion, he declared that Weston was a knave (1570, p. 1587; 1576, p. 1355; and 1583, p. 1425).
White was commanded to bring one Cut, an apprentice accused of stating that Wyatt had cleared Elizabeth of complicity in his rebellion, to the Star Chamber. There White witnessed Stephen Gardiner's speech denouncing Elizabeth and Courtenay for conspiring with Wyatt; he also heard Lord Chandos, the Lieutenant of the Tower, testify that Wyatt, before his execution, had begged Courtenay to admit his guilt (1570, p. 1588; 1576, p. 1355; 1583, p. 1425).[Back to Top]
[NB: White himself was probably the source for all of these stories. There is certainly some measure of verification for them: Wyatt had visited Courtenay before his execution and Lord Chandos was present (although there are differing accounts of what was said) - see J. G. Nichols, (ed.), The Chronicle of Queen Jane and of two years of Queen Mary, (London, 1850) Camden Society Original series 48, pp. 72-73. One Richard Cutt, a grocer's apprentice, and one Thomas Pender were placed in the pillory on 20 April 1554 for saying that Wyatt had cleared Elizabeth (Corporation of London Record Office, Repertory 13, fol. 153r and The Chronicle of Queen Jane, p. 75)].[Back to Top]
White was presumably present at Bourne's sermon at Paul's Cross on 13 August 1553, as he commanded the crowd to behave themselves, although they ignored him. 1563, p. 1173, 1570, p. 1780 , 1576, p. 1520 , 1583, p. 1604.
'The Maior & Sherifs did lead Bourne to the schoolmasters house, which is next to [the] pulpit' after the sermon mentioned above. 1563, p. 1173, 1570, p. 1780, 1576, p. 1520, 1583, p. 1604.
White may have given the commandment for Bradford to be burned at four o'clock in the morning, a rumour which caused a multitude to gather at Smithfield at that hour. 1563, p. 1175, 1570, p. 1780, 1576, p. 1520, 1583, p. 1604.
(1521? - 1554) (DNB)
Sir Thomas Wyatt was the king's ambassador to the emperor before Sir Henry Knyvet. Wyatt's servant William Wolfe was taken on by Knyvet as steward of his household. 1583, p. 1786.
In 1554 Sir Thomas Wyatt led a rebellion in Kent against Mary, provoked by fear that Mary's marriage to Philip would 'bring upon this Realme most miserable and establish popish religion'. The duke of Norfolk was sent against Wyatt but Norfolk's followers deserted and he retreated.
Wyatt advanced on London in February 1554. Wyatt could not gain entry into London and was resisted and apprehended at the Temple Bar. Wyatt was executed. Foxe promises to relate a story about the removal of Wyatt's head from the spike on Hay Hill where it was displayed, but he never did (1563, pp. 916-17; 1570, pp. 1579-80; 1576, pp. 1347-48; and 1583, pp. 1418-19).[Back to Top]
In 1570 et seq. Foxe prints an account of Mary's oration - there is an earlier, different version of this speech in 1563, pp. 1730-31 - at the London Guildhall denouncing Wyatt. Foxe's marginal notes to this speech, in 1570 et seq., defend Wyatt against Mary's charge that Wyatt looted Southwark (1570, p. 1580; 1576, p. 1348; and 1583, p. 1418).[Back to Top]
Foxe states that Wyatt, at his own request, spoke with Edward Courtenay on the day of his execution and, before the Lieutenant of the Tower, got down on his knees and begged forgiveness of Courtenay for having falsely accused both him and Elizabeth of involvement in his rebellion (1570, p. 1587; 1576, p. 1355; 1583, p. 1425). [It is reported elsewhere that Wyatt did speak with Courtenay on the day of his execution, but what they said is not known; see J. G. Nichols, (ed.), The Chronicle of Queen Jane and of two years of Queen Mary, (London, 1850) Camden Society Original series 48, pp. 72-73].[Back to Top]
Wyatt also allegedly proclaimed from the scaffold that Elizabeth and Courtenay were innocent of any complicity in his crimes, but Hugh Weston who was also standing on the scaffold cried out to the crowd that Wyatt had confessed otherwise to the Privy Council (1570, p. 1587; 1576, p. 1355; and 1583, p. 1425).[Back to Top]
Sir Martin Bowes informed Sir Thomas White that he had heard a report circulating at Westminster, that Wyatt had urged Courtenay to confess the truth (1570, pp. 1587- 88; 1576, p. 1355; and 1583, p. 1425).
During the Star Chamber trial of one Cut, who was charged with sedition for claiming that Wyatt (on the scaffold) had cleared Elizabeth and Courtenay of any complicity in his rebellion, Sir John Brydges, who was present at Wyatt's interview with Courtenay, claimed that Wyatt begged Courtenay to confess the truth and seek the Queen's mercy (1570, p. 1588; 1576, p. 1355; and 1583, pp. 1425-26).[Back to Top]
Foxe declares that he will pass over Wyatt's rebellion, as it has been dealt with in more detail elsewhere (1570, p. 1637; 1576, p. 1397; 1583, p. 1467).
The execution of Wyatt on 11 April, and his statement that neither Elizabeth or Courtenay were involved in his conspiracy (1563, p. 1001; 1570, p. 1639; 1576, p. 1397; 1583, p. 1467).
Elizabeth was suspected of being involved in Wyatt's rebellion. 1563, p. 1711, 1570, p. 2288, 1576, p. 1982, 1583, p. 2091.
MarginaliaAnno. 1554.And likewise do you geue to euery of the sayd housholders straightly in commaundemente, that they or theyr wiues depart not out of the said Citie vntill this holy time of Easter be past.
By some unaccountable oversight, no edition after that of 1563 gives the "prescript or monitory" of Bonner here referred to: it will be found both in Latin and English, among the Documents at the end of this Appendix, No. II. Two or three inaccuracies in Foxe's Latin have been corrected from the original in the Bonner Register, fol. 345.[Back to Top]
The proclamation expelling foreigners from England appeared in every edition of the Actes and Monuments (1563, pp. 926-27; 1570, p. 1587; 1576, p. 1354; 1583, p. 1425). Foxe probably derived it from a version printed by John Cawood. (For surviving copies of the proclamation see Tudor Royal Proclamations, II, pp. 31-32).[Back to Top]
An interesting difference occurs between 1563 and later editions over the English exiles, with 1563 emphasising divine providence and the later editions being more factual and neutral ('The great care & prouidence of God for his people' (1563); 'Englishmen fled out of the realm for religion' and 'The number of English exiles well neare 800. persons' (later editions)). Many of the glosses point to twists in the attempt by Gardiner and others to implicate Elizabeth in the Wyatt rebellion ('Lady Elizabeth and Lord Courtney vpon suspicion of Syr Thom. Wyats rising committed to the Tower', 'A poynt of practise of Ste. Gardiner agaynst the Lady Elizabeth', 'D. Weston against the Lady Elizabeth'); others imply the untruthfulness of Elizabeth's enemies, who were prone to tell 'tales' in the star chamber ('Cut prentise in Londō bronght before Ste. Gardiner', 'Ste. Gardiners tale in the starre chamber agaynst the Lady Elizabeth', 'The Lord Shandoys false report in the starre chamber, agaynst Lady Elizabeth and Lord Courtney'). The Lord Mayor's disdain for Weston is pointed to ('The Lord Mayors iudgement of D. Weston'): this was perhaps part of a wider attempt to encourage the hostility of London to Mary's reforms and reign. The approval by parliament of the queen's marriage is played down as the 'mention' of it ('Mention of the Quenes mariage in the Parlament'), perhaps reflecting Foxe's sensitivity about the complicity of parliament in Mary's reign.[Back to Top]
"Demoure," in all the old editions, means "sojourn," from demoror. See Todd's Johnson.
MarginaliaPet. Martir and Iohannes Alasco, banished the realme.In the meane while, vpō the Proclamation before mencioned, not only þe strangers in K. Edwards time receiued into the Realme for Religion, amōg whō was Pet. Martir, Iohn Alasco vncle to the King of Poleland,
The identification of John Alasco (i.e., John a Lasco or, more properly, Jan Łaski) as the king of Poland's uncle is Crowley's mistake; Laski's nephew was the chancellor of Poland.
'Cleveland' is the duchy of Cleves.
Foxe added Emden to Crowley's list of places to which the exiles fled (cf. 1563, p. 927 with 1570, p. 1587; 1576, p. 1354; 1583, p. 1425). Crowley's failure to mention it is an indication of how isolated the Emden exiles were from their English brethren in Switzerland.
"I heard saye (writes Haggarde) of one in Gravesende Barge, belyke some pilgryme of Goddes churche, that the poore menne of that country which in dede were very poore, before the repayre of our Englishmen thether, are now become jolye fellowes. And by what meanes think you? By letting out their cotages in the townes to our countrymen. Who because they be glad to have them, use no debating of the matter, as we do, but bidde them aske and have." - Displaying of the Protestantes, fol. 117 verso.[Back to Top]
Foxe's description of the diaspora of religious exiles from England was copied in the 1563 edition from Crowley's chronicle (cf. Crowley, Epitome, sig. Ffff3v with 1563, p. 927) (This was the last borrowing Foxe made from Crowley's chronicle in Book 10). Foxe added details to it in subsequent editions (see textual variant 30).[Back to Top]
MarginaliaMarch 15. MarginaliaLady Elizabeth and Lord Courtney vpon suspicion of Syr Thom. Wyats rising committed to the Tower.In the saide moneth of March, the Lorde Courtney Earle of Deuonshire, whome the Queene at her first entring deliuered out of the Tower, and Lady Elizabeth also the Queenes Sister, were both in suspection to haue consented to Wiats conspiracie, and for the same this March were apprehended and committed to the Tower.[Back to Top]
Touching the imprisonment of which Lady Elizabeth and the Lord Courtney, thou shalt note heere for thy learning (good Reader) a politicke point of practise in Steuen Gardiner Bishop of Wint. not vnworthy to be considered. This Gardiuer being alwayes a capitall enemie to the
Lady Elizabeth, and thinking nowe by the occasion of maister Wyate to picke out some matter against the Lorde Courtney, and so in the end, to entangle the Lady Elizabeth, deuised a pestilent practise of conueyance, as in the story heere following may appeare.
Two anecdotes follow, both centring around Sir Thomas White the Lord Mayor in 1554, and both concerning the alleged involvement of Elizabeth and of Edward Courtenay in Wyatt's rebellion. Although not named by Foxe as his source, White passes several acid tests that identify Foxe's informants: he is a witness to all the events recounted, he is a prominent figure in both anecdotes and he is consistently reported in a favourable light in both anecdotes. Both anecdotes first appear in the 1570 edition (see textual variant 31). White died in 1567.[Back to Top]
Is the material Foxe obtained from White accurate? Wyatt had visited Courtenay before his execution, although what was said cannot be verified. Several sources reported that Wyatt had cleared Elizabeth and Courtenay on the scaffold, over the objections of Hugh Weston (J. G. Nichols, [ed.], The Chronicle of Queen Jane and of two years of Queen Mary, Camden Society Original Series 48, [London, 1850] pp. 72-74).[Back to Top]
The story is this. The same day that Sir Tho. Wyate died, he desired the Lieutenant to bring him to the presence of the Lord Courtney. Who there before the Lieutenaunte and the Sheriffes, kneeling downe vpon his knees, besought the Lorde Courtney to forgeue him, for that he had falsly accused both the Lady Elizabeth and him, and so being brought from thence vnto the scaffold to suffer, there openly in the hearing of all the people cleared the Lady Elizabeth, and the Lorde Courtney to be free and innocente from all suspition of that commotion. At which confession, MarginaliaD. Weston against the Lady Elizabeth. Doctor Weston there standing by, cryed to the people, saying: Beleeue him not good people, for he confessed otherwise before vnto the Counsell.[Back to Top]
After the execution done of Sir Thomas Wyat, which was the 11. day of Aprill, word was brought immediately to the Lord Maior Sir Thomas White, a little before dinner, how maister Wyate had cleared the Lady Elizabeth and Lorde Courtney, and the wordes also which Doctor Weston spake vnto the people, MarginaliaThe Lord Mayors iudgement of D. Weston.wherunto the Lord Maior aunswering: is this true quoth he? said Weston so? In sooth I neuer tooke him otherwise but for a knaue. Vpon this, the Lord Maior sitting downe to dinner (who dyned the same day at the Bridgehouse) commeth in Sir Martin Bowes with the Recorder, newly come from the Parliament house, who hearing of the Maior and Sheriffes this report of Wiats confession, both vpon the Scaffold and also in the Tower, marueiled thereat, declaring how there was another tale contrary to this, told the same day in the Parliament house, which was, that Sir Thomas Wyate should desire the Lord Courtney to confesse the truth, so as he had done before.[Back to Top]
Vpon this it followed not lōg after that a certain prentice dwelling in S. Laurence lane, named Cut, as he was drinking with one Denhā a plasterer being one of Quene Maries seruaunts, amongst other talke made mentiō how Sir Thomas Wyate had cleared the Lady Elizabeth and the Lord Courtney, to be no cōsenters to his rising. Which wordes being brought to Gardiner (by what meanes I know not) incōtinent vpon the same, Syr Andrew Iudde was sent by the sayd Bishop to þe Lord Maior, MarginaliaCut prentise in Londō bronght before Ste. Gardiner.commaunding him to bring the said prentise to the Star Chamber, which was accused of these words, that he should say that Wyat was constrained by the Counsell to accuse the Lady Elizabeth and the Lord Courtney. Which fellow when he was come to the starre Chamber, the aforesaid Gardiner letting passe other matters that were in hand, began to declare to the whole multitude, how myraculously almighty God had brought the Queenes Maiesty to the Crowne, þe whole Realme in a maner being against her, & that he had brought this to passe for this singular intent and purpose, that this Realme being ouerwhelmed with heresies, shee might reduce againe the same vnto the true Catholicke faith. MarginaliaSte. Gardiners tale in the starre chamber agaynst the Lady Elizabeth.And where she tooke the Lady Elizabeth into her fauour, and loued her so tenderly, and also the Lord Courtney, who of long time had bene deteined in prison, and by her was set at libertie, and receiued great benefites at her hands, and notwithstanding all this, they had conspired most vnnaturally and traiterously against her with that haynouse Traytour Wiate, and by the confession of Wyate (sayde he) and the letters sent to and fro may playnely appeare: Yet there was some in the City of London, whiche reported that Wyat was constrained by the Counsell to accuse the Lady Elizabeth and the L. Courtney, & yet you my L. Maior (quoth he) haue not seene the same punished.[Back to Top]
The party is heere, sayd the Lord Maior. Take hym with you (said Gardiner) and punish him according to his desert, & said further: My Lord, take heede to your charge, the Citie of London is a whirlepoole and sincke of all euill rumours, there they be bread, and from thence spread into all partes of this Realme.
As for the story of the trial of 'one Cut' in Star Chamber, Richard Cutt, a grocer's apprentice, was placed in the pillory on 20 April 1554 for declaring that Wyatt had exonerated Elizabeth (City of London Record Office, Repertory 13, fol. 153r).
MarginaliaThe Lord Shandoys false report in the starre chamber, agaynst Lady Elizabeth and Lord Courtney.There stood by the same time the Lord Shandoys, who being then Lieutenaunt of the Tower, and now hearing the Byshop thus speake, to sooth his tale, came in wyth these words as followeth.
My Lordes (quoth he) this is a trueth that I shall tell you, I being Lieutenant of the Tower when Wiat suffred he desired me to bring him to the Lord Courtney, whych when I had done, he fell down vpon his knees before him in my presence, and desired him to confesse the truth of hym selfe, as he had done before, and to submit himselfe vnto the Queenes Maiesties mercy.[Back to Top]
And thus much I thought of this matter to declare, to the entent that the Reader perceiuing the proceedings of