NOTES TO CHAPTER V

Note A. The conduct of the Percys in Northumberland was outrageous enough, but, as good luck would have it, no one was murdered. Moreover the Percys and the thieves of Tynedale were responsible for this, not the gentlemen and commons of the county as a body.

116Note B. When one of the lesser monasteries was suppressed, the monks were given a choice of two courses; they might either be transferred to one of the large houses of the same Order, which was not yet suppressed, or they might receive a paper from the King by which they were released from their vows and received licence to begin life over again as ordinary laymen. These were called “capacities.”

Note C. Holinshed identified the Abbot of Barlings with Captain Cobbler. There is no hint of this in any contemporary chronicle, and the most cursory reference to the State Papers shows that it was a mistake. Nevertheless the error has been very generally copied^[580].

Note D. There is a curious story that Shrewsbury was very uneasy lest he should be accused of treason for levying men to resist the rebels. It is first told by Holinshed (1577), but no foundation for it can be discovered in contemporary chronicles and documents. Holinshed asserted that he had been told it by “men of good credit that were then present.” According to this story, the Earl consulted his friends and legal advisers as to whether he might lawfully muster men. They replied that he might do so. He retorted, “Ye are fools. I know it in substance to be treason, and I would think myself in a hard case, if I thought I had not my pardon coming.” Thereupon he sent out orders for the muster, and wrote to the King begging for a pardon. The King sent him both a pardon and thanks. The men assembled expecting the Earl to lead them to join the rebels, but he took a solemn oath before them all that he was true to the King alone^[581]. The baselessness of this story appears when it is compared with Shrewsbury’s letters. On 4 Oct. he sent news of the rising and asked for orders^[582]; at the same time he sent out a summons to the neighbouring gentlemen to muster at Mansfield next day^[583]. On the 6th he acknowledged the receipt of the King’s letters missive, containing orders to assemble his men, and described the musters which he had appointed^[584]. Cromwell wrote a flowery letter of compliments and thanks to him on the 9th, but without a suggestion that any pardon was needed^[585]. The King sent him further orders and a new commission on the 15th, but without hinting that he had been over zealous^[586]. Noblemen were expected to suppress riots without waiting for orders, and it was made a charge against Hussey that he did not muster his men at the first alarm. The only foundation which there can be for Holinshed’s story is some vague memory that the Earl’s attitude at the beginning of the rising awakened doubt. He was a devout man, and very much opposed to innovations in any form^[587]. Personal loyalty kept him true to the King, but there is every reason to believe that he had much stronger sympathy for the rebels than for Cromwell.

Note E. The reduplication of names is very confusing. Sir Marmaduke Constable was the cousin of Sir Robert Constable of Flamborough, not his brother or his son, although they both bore the same name. Robert Tyrwhit was a different person from Sir Robert Tyrwhit, the commissioner who was taken at Caistor. Christopher Askew, again, was a different person from Sir Christopher Askew, one of the Lincolnshire gentlemen who was most enthusiastic in the rebels’ cause.

117