Marginalia3Where they were, and in what place they haue sene them.
Marginalia4Whom they knowe haue lately come from beyond the sea, specially from Zurike, Strausbrogh, Ftanckforde, Wezel, Emden, and Disburge.
Marginalia5Whom they knowe or vehemently suspect to be common cariers of letters or money thether from thence.
Marginalia6That they bryng to my Lord Mayor al suche seditious bokes as they haue or shal haue foūd hereafter.
The Rerum contains an acccount of Haukes's background and life (p. 445), which is reprinted in all editions of the Acts and Monuments. The Rerum continues with a relatively brief account of Haukes's final examination by Bonner, his condemnation and his journey back to Essex to be burned (Rerum, pp. 445-46). This material was reprinted in the 1563 edition (on p. 1162) but dropped thereafter to be replaced by a more detailed account. The Rerum also contains an account of Haukes's execution, which was reprinted in all versions of the Acts and Monuments and his two 'private' examinations by Bonner (Rerum, pp. 446-62). All of this was fairly typical of the material Grindal assembled for the Rerum: a collection of documents, usually written by the martyr, supplemented with biographical material from oral sources. Two copies of Haukes's account of his 'private' examinations remain in Foxe's papers: BL, Lansdowne 389, fos. 13r-27r and 171r-182v.[Back to Top]
The account of Haukes in the 1563 edition was essentially a reprinting of the material in the Rerum, although the arrangement of this material was different and rather unusual: Haukes's examinations were printed before the details of Haukes's life and martyrdom were given. In the 1570 edition, Foxe rearranged the order of material, placing it in chronological order, with Haukes's life now followed by his examination and then by the details of his martyrdom. Foxe also replaced the public examinations of Haukes by Bonner, and the martyr's condemnation, with material drawn from Bonner's official record. (This material, probably kept in a court book, is now lost).[Back to Top]
Foxe reprinted the 1570 account of Haukes without any significant alteration in the third and fourth editions of the Acts and Monuments.
Many of the glosses draw attention to stages in the narrative and also matters under discussion; indeed Hawkes' is one of the more disputational lives, and the margins reflect this fact. Some of the glosses take specific points made by Hawkes in arguments with his interrogators and draw out the general principles inherent in them ('Fecknam maketh euery act spoken of in the new Testament to be a ceremony'; 'The wordes of Christ are to be vnderstand, not as he spake , but as he ment thē'). The gloss 'Other doctrine taught in the Church of Rome then euer Paule taught' makes Hawkes' point clearer for the reader, and there are also glosses highlighting poor attempts at exegesis by Bonner and Fecknam ('See how Boner proueth holy water by the scripture'; 'Elizeus put salt in the water, not to washe away sinne, but onely to make the water sweete'; 'Boner proueth holy bread by the 5. loaues and 3. fishes'; 'Fecknams reason lyeth in Paules Breches'). In short, Foxe's margins are in some respects similar to those we find in the Oxford disputations sections; he also includes a comment of his own about the sacrament that is not indicated by the text ('It is his sacramentall body, or the Sacramēt of his body, but not his true body'). Bonner gets his usual criticism, his pride and anger both drawing marginal comments ('Boner looked to be curtised'; 'Boner in a fume with Thomas Haukes'), while another gloss uses the disparaging term 'coniure' in relation to his persuasion of Baget ('Boner taketh Baget with him aside to coniure him'). A gloss emphasises his assertion that he is no preacher ('B. Boner iudgeth other men by his own sore'). The limitations of papist debating skills are highlighted ('Boner whē he can not ouercome by doctrine, goeth about to oppresse by authoritie'; 'Fecknam falleth out of his matter to rayling'). The solidity of Hawkes' profession is emphasised in the use twice of the gloss 'Thomas Haukes builded his fayth vpon no man'. The gloss 'Thomas Haukes standing at the stake reasoneth with the Lord Rich' uses the surprising term 'reasoneth' to describe Hawkes' mode of speaking at the stake: a more biblical term might have been expected. There are various errors of placing, with 1570 (as is usual) more accurate in comparison to later editions.[Back to Top]
This letter was part of Haukes's narrative does not come from any official archive.
Haukes. Because we be bound to do nothing contrary to the worde of god.
Boner. Why? Baptisme is commaunded by the worde of god.
Haukes. His constitutiō therin I do not deny.
Boner. What deny ye than?
Haukes. I deny all thinges inuented and deuised by man.
Boner. What thinges be those, that be deuysed by man, that ye be so offended withall?
Haukes. Your Oyle, Creame, Salt, Spettle, Candle, and coniuryng of water. &c.
Boner. Wyll ye deny that, that al the whole worlde, and youre father hath bene contented withall.
Haukes. What my father, and all the whole worlde haue done, I haue nothing to do withall: but what god hath commaunded me to do, to that stande I.
Boner. The Catholike church hath taught it.
Haukes. What is the Catholike church?
Boner. It is the faithfull congregation wher soeuer it bee dispersed throughoute the whole world.
Haukes. Who is the head therof?
Boner. Christ is the head therof.
Haukes. Are we taught in Christe, or in the Church now?
Boner. Haue ye not read in the. viii. of Iohn where he saide, he would sende his comforter which should teach you all thynges?
Haukes. I graunt you it is so, that he would send his coumforter. but to what ende? forsoth to this end, that he shuld lead you into al truth and veritie, and that is not to teach a new doctrine.
Boner. A sir, ye are a right scripture man. for ye wil haue nothing but the scripture. There is a great nūber of your countrey men of your opiniō. Do ye not know one Knight & Pygot?
Haukes. Knyght I know. but Pigot I do not know.
Boner. I thought ye were acquainted wyth him: it semeth so by your iudgement. What preachers do ye knowe in Essex?
Haukes. I know none.
Boner. Do ye not know one Baget there?
Haukes. Yes forsooth, I know hym.
Boner. What maner a man is he?
Haukes. An honest man, so farre as I know.
Boner. Do ye know him if ye see hym?
Haukes. Yea that I do. Then sayd he to one of his seruantes: go call me Baget hether. And than he sayde to me: ye seme to be a very proud man and a stubborne. (He that brought me vp stode all this whyle by.)
Haukes. What should moue youre Lordshyp so to saye?
Boner. Because I se in a man that came with you much humilitie and lowlinesse.
Haukes. It semeth your Lordship speaketh þt to me, because I make no more curtesy to you. And with that came Baget: the Bishop sayde to Baget. How say ye sir, knowe ye this mā?
Baget. Yea forsoth my Lord: with that Baget and I shoke handes. Then sayde the Byshop to Baget: sir, this man hath a chyld, whiche hath lyen three wekes vnchristened, as I haue letters to shewe, who refuseth to haue it baptised, as it is now vsed in the churche: howe say you thereto?
Baget. Forsoth my Lord I say nothing therto, (with low curtesy to the hard ground.)