Preface

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

James Gairdner and R. H. Brodie (editors)

Year published

1903

Pages

7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57

Annotate

Comment on this article
Double click anywhere on the text to add an annotation in-line

Citation Show another format:

'Preface', Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 19 Part 1: January-July 1544 (1903), pp. VII-LVII. URL: http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=80292 Date accessed: 24 July 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Contents

Preface

Scotland was now, more than ever, the great source of anxiety and vexation to Henry VIII. It has been shown in the last two Prefaces how the sanguine hopes he had entertained after the battle of the Solway Moss had been completely overthrown in the course of a single twelve month. The pledges of Scotch prisoners had proved slippery; cajolery and gifts to a few noblemen could not bind a nation. Unreasonable demands had only provoked an infinity of double dealing. The Governor had revolted to the Cardinal; the infant Queen had been crowned; Henry himself had not duly confirmed the treaty; Scotch merchant ships had been arrested on the coast of England; partizans of the English King had continually diminished; and finally, in December, the Scotch Parliament had declared the treaty null for want of confirmation, and renewed the old alliance with France. The situation was really worse than before the victory of the Solway, for France had by this time been declared England's enemy.

Yet the Scots were not seeking for war, but only for security, and desired to send a herald to procure a safe conduct for new ambassadors to pass into England, and another for the Patriarch Grimani to do so on his return homewards. (fn. 1) The Duke of Suffolk, however, staid the herald and a man of the Patriarch's upon the Borders till he should hear from the King; (fn. 2) who, quite approving of his act, bade him tell the herald that as he came, not from the three Estates of Scotland, but from Arran and the Cardinal, the King had appointed the Duke to hear his credence. And after hearing it, Suffolk was further to tell him that if those who sent him would join with the other Lords in the Parliament to perfect the treaty, lay hostages, and then send up ambassadors, the King might perhaps deign to hear them; but no proposals for a new treaty would be listened to, for if the old one was not considered valid, there was no security for another. (fn. 3) This answer must have been intimated to Arran and the Cardinal before the month of January was much more than a week old, for Ross herald was sent home with it on the 5th; (fn. 4) yet it was simply ignored in letters which they both wrote to Henry VIII. on the 19th, Arran writing at the same time a separate letter to Suffolk not to stop the messenger but allow him to go up to the King, as the matters of his charge concerned greatly the quietness of both realms. (fn. 5) The purport of their letters to the King was that after much trouble there was now perfect obedience to the Queen and Governor, all the noblemen being at last agreed to act as loyal subjects, and they desired a safe conduct for the bishop of Orkney and other ambassadors for the establishment of tranquillity and the common good of both countries.

The unanimity was certainly remarkable, but it was scarcely such as Henry could relish; for an agreement had just been made "in the Rood Chapel of Greenside beside Edinburgh" on the 13th between Commissioners on the part of the Governor (three of whom were members of the proposed embassy) and the earls of Cassillis and Glencairn, and three others, Commissioners for the earls of Angus and Lennox as well as for themselves. (fn. 6) All the four earls agreed to be true to the Queen and to aid the Governor in defence of the realm and "Haly Kirk"; and the Governor promised for his part, in the Queen's name, to discharge the summons of treason against George Douglas on Angus and others finding security for their future loyalty. In pursuance of this agreement a decree was made at Edinburgh on the following day that Angus should enter his brother George or else deliver Tantallon to the Governor's keeping, that the said George should deliver his son, James Douglas, Master of Morton, that Cassillis should deliver his brother Mr. Thomas Kennedy, and Glencairn his eldest son, Alexander Cunningham (called the Master of Glencairn), that Lennox should be bound to obedience under a penalty of £10,000 or be answerable for all his past insurrections, and that various others besides should find pledges or give bonds; the pledges to be entered on the 15th, the day after the date of the document. (fn. 7)

This was a considerable revolt from England; but Sir George Douglas was equal to explaining his conduct calmly to the Duke of Suffolk, to whom he wrote the whole state of matters on the 15th. (fn. 8) Admitting that he and his friends were now bound to "refuse the opinion of England and to take a plain part in defence of Scotland," he said it was a matter of necessity for the time. He had been in Stirling with Angus and Lennox, and they had come to Leith on the 10th. Daily they had offered battle in the fields within half-a-mile of Edinburgh till the night of Monday the 14th, but were not strong enough to assault the town. Robert Maxwell had come with Angus to Stirling and spoken with his father lord Maxwell in the Castle; after which they had both gone over to the Governor and the Cardinal. None of the Northern men except John Charteris would join them in opposition; several great men, discouraged, made private agreements with the Governor, and the Douglases had to do the like as their adversaries were ten to one. The pledges required of Angus and his brother were Tantallon Castle and Sir George's two sons; but Sir George had entered himself instead or they would have put his sons to death. It was clear therefore that for the present he could not keep his engagements; but he hoped, he wrote, to make all his countrymen serve the King if he could once get liberty.

The cool assurance of this added fuel to the King's indignation. He marvelled at the "untrue dealing" of Angus and Sir George, as well as of the others who had experienced "inestimable benefits" at his hands; and he was bent on taking signal vengeance. Suffolk received orders at once to make two "notable raids," in the East and in the West, sparing none of the Douglases' friends, but wasting with fire and sword the lands of them and the Maxwells. (fn. 9) The King also despatched Richmond herald to Scotland with authority to demand his prisoners from the Scottish Parliament. (fn. 10) But these summary proceedings were not quite so easy as he imagined. The Scottish Parliament had been porogued on the 15 December (fn. 11) to the 18 February; and though Suffolk was quite ready to carry out the raids, he found reason presently to forbear one of them. Angus had sent to him his chaplain and secretary John Penven, (fn. 12) or Penman as he was sometimes named, and another servant named Sandy Jerden (Alexander Jardine) with a letter of credence. Penven explained to Suffolk, much as Sir George Douglas had done, the circumstances which had driven Angus and his brother to agree with the Governor, especially as Maxwell and his son had failed them at need; but he assured Suffolk they were as whole in heart to the King as ever; and if the King would send "a main army" in March before help could reach Scotland from France or Denmark he would be master of all Scotland South of Forth and have all the Douglases and their friends with him. Penven also had a credence to bear to the King himself; and Sir George and Angus would leave Scotland and come to the King if he thought they could do better service that way. Suffolk replied that he had information quite contrary to what they told him—that all the King's party in Scotland would forsake him, and that Angus himself had told a Scotchman sent to him that "he feared he should have no more ado with England." They assured him, however, that Angus was as much devoted to the King as ever. Suffolk felt that he could not detain a messenger accredited to the King, and as the Douglases still preferred to be true at heart he must countermand an order to burn Sir George's property at Coldingham. (fn. 13)

On the 1 January the King had determined to recall Sadler, with some idea of despatching him with a message to the next Scotch Parliament if a safe conduct could be obtained. (fn. 14) He conveyed to the King Suffolk's opinion as to the best modes of prosecuting a war against Scotland, if it should be decided on, in the coming year. Suffolk suggested that an invasion early in the year would be advisable, to destroy the corn then left and prevent the sowing of grain; which would compel the Scots in the existing scarcity, before they could obtain help from France and Denmark, either to do as the King required them, or see their whole country wasted South of the Forth. But for want of grass the army could hardly enter before the 1 May; and, till then, it would be as well to leave the Merse alone for relief of the army when it came. An alternative plan was to lay 2,000 more men in garrisons for three months, so as to destroy everything within sixteen miles of the Borders and stop the sowing. The Borderers would be thus driven inland beyond the Forth for food, as even their fishing would be cut off, and they would be quite unable to invade England. In either of these cases an army of 20,000 men would be necessary; but in the first case, only for a six weeks' invasion; in the second, during three months for defence. (fn. 15) The King approved of the invasion policy, but was anxious that it should take effect if possible in March as he intended to invade France later in the year, and desired to know Suffolk's opinion whether sufficient victualling could be procured so early. He thought enough provisions could be obtained from Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and the Midlands; and that even 14,000 foot and 2,000 horse, in a month or, perhaps, twenty days, could sack Edinburgh, at least the town, and burn Teviotdale and the Merse on their way home. He intended also to revoke Suffolk that he might accompany him into France, and to send Hertford to replace him on the Borders. (fn. 16)

Suffolk's reply, written on the 14 February, was that an invasion in March would not be possible. Necessaries for either army could not be procured within so short a time; and if it could the carriage was impracticable for reasons which he stated. Such at least was his opinion; but if the King and Council thought otherwise he would do his best to press the matter forward. (fn. 17) On the 5th the Council wrote to him that the King would send his decision in a day or two as to the main invasion, but was anxious to keep the Scots harassed by Border raids, as they desired peace only to have time to sow their corn and get aid from France and Denmark. Neither the Douglases nor others should be spared; and if Sir George and his friends remonstrated they should be told that the King was informed that the Governor had given Coldingham and Cockburnspath to the Humes, and although Sir George still kept possession it was necessary to overrun them that the Governor and Cardinal might think him out of credit with the King. On the West Borders the like severity was to be used. Wharton was to appoint Robert Maxwell, as hostage for his father, "a very short day to come in" according to his promise, and whether he came in or not, a great raid was to be made on his father's lands the night following. If he came it would be a punishment for his and his father's untruth; if he did not, that alone was ample justification. (fn. 18)

On receipt of this two days later Suffolk wrote to the King, anticipating apparently the decision that had not yet been communicated to him as he saw the King's "earnestness" for the invasion, and submitting a plan by which it might really be done in March. (fn. 19) But on the 9th the Council wrote again to him that the King, weighing the difficulties of the case, had adopted his alternative policy of increasing the Border garrisons by 2,000 men; and that the King would send 15,000 soldiers and mariners into the Firth of Forth to burn the town of Edinburgh if the castle would not yield, and also to land in Fife and waste the country to St. Andrews, while the garrisons, now 3,000 strong, should keep the Scottish Borders occupied, a rumor being raised at the same time that a "main army" was to enter Scotland by land. (fn. 20) So the great blow had to be deferred, and nothing more serious was actually effected for some time than a night raid by Wharton on the West coast (fn. 21) in which Annandale was completely burned and devastated, and twenty prisoners carried off across the Border, though the invaders were hotly pursued in returning. (fn. 22) In the interval Suffolk sent in his estimate of the expense of an expedition of 15,000 men by sea and of 4,000 horse and 14,000 foot by land, giving his opinion at the same time that the land expedition was preferable. For by sea they could only burn the town of Edinburgh (the castle could not be taken) and destroy places within easy reach on either side of the Firth; and then the King would be no nearer his purpose and his friends in Scotland in worse favor than ever. But if the Earl of Hertford were sent in command of a good army by land they might be in Scotland by the 14 April and back again by the 15 May. (fn. 23)

The Earl of Hertford was sent Northwards as the King's lieutenant, and was with Suffolk at Darlington on the 4 March. (fn. 24) Here they remained together for a few days consulting on affairs of Scotland; (fn. 25) but by the 12th Hertford had reached Newcastle, where he had summoned Wharton and Sir William Eure to meet him on Monday the 17th. (fn. 26) That night they duly arrived, and on Tuesday morning Hertford presented them with the King's letters patent creating them lord Wharton and lord Eure, with other patents to them and Sir Ralph Eure of the offices of Warden of the East, West and Middle Marches; after which he laid the King's plans before them in great secrecy, and asked their advice how 4,000 horsemen could pass through Scotland to Edinburgh to join an invading force by sea. They at first considered that it might be done if they were only sure that the force sent by sea would have landed by the time they got there; but returning would be very dangerous, and with all good will for the exploit they declared finally that it was not feasible. The same answer was returned by the Captain of Norham and experienced men on the East Marches. But lord Eure and Sir Ralph his son agreed to make a raid as far as Haddington, burning that and other towns on their way homewards; while Wharton by another raid should burn Hawick, remaining two days and nights in Scotland and likewise burning the villages on his return. These exploits, distracting the attention of the Scots, would make the landing at Leith more easy. (fn. 27)

Meanwhile, notwithstanding the King's fiery indignation at the "untrue dealing" of the Douglases, the mission of Penven from Angus had induced him to think over matters. He had really no friends in Scotland whose friendship was not paid for; and to discard some of them who still professed loyalty, merely because they were manifest double dealers, would nowise improve his prospects. Without trusting them in the least degree—or only trusting their sense of their own interests—perhaps something might yet be made of them. Penven had made a good impression on the King before now, and had last year received a promise of a benefice in England. (fn. 28) Now the King took him into his own service and sent him back to his former master as a royal chaplain and no longer that of a Scotch earl, with what particular message we do not know, as indeed this journey back is only a matter of inference. Certain it is, however, that Penven was at Darlington going Southwards on the 25 January (fn. 29) and that he was at Douglas on the last day of February, from which place he was despatched again Southwards that day by the Earls of Angus and Glencairn, no doubt after full consideration of a message from the King. The return message this time was of urgent importance, and the two Earls particularly desired an answer before the 9 March. Henry in reply said their letter was obscure and the time too short for him to comply, but if they would despatch Penven once more to him with diligence, taking care that their enemies did not catch them again at a disadvantage, and would behave "like men of honor and courage," he assured them they should lack no reasonable assistance. (fn. 30) On the 5th Angus replied from Dalkeith that he was very anxious to assure Henry of his faithful mind, notwithstanding all that he had heard to the contrary, and he sent up Penven again with a credence (fn. 31) both from him and from other lords. Passing by Darlington once more on his way up, Penven informed Hertford that the purport of his message was to hasten the invasion of Scotland, the land army entering by Berwick, while a naval force proceeded to Leith with victuals. The lords also wished ten or twelve ships sent by the West sea to annoy Argyle, and a garrison of 2,000 or 3,000 left on the Borders to annoy the lairds of Johnstone (fn. 32) and Buccleuch. The King's friends would assist if the invasion took place before the Scots obtained assistance from France. (fn. 33)

Now, the Scottish Parliament had met on the 18 February, only to be prorogued to the 28 March; (fn. 34) and Richmond herald still remained at Berwick awaiting the King's pleasure as to his further procedure, (fn. 35) till Hertford at Darlington, learning that there was to be a meeting of Scotch lords at Stirling on the 10th, instructed him to repair thither at once and execute his charge to them. (fn. 36) He accordingly went and demanded from the lords the delivery of the Scotch prisoners released upon parole; but he came back with a "slender answer." (fn. 37) Penven, meanwhile, accompanied by Lennox's secretary Thomas Bishop, had delivered to the King the message of Angus and his friends. (fn. 38) Four Scotch earls, Lennox, Angus, Cassillis and Glencairn, had sent them to declare in what imminent danger they were placed, as Cardinal Beton and the earl of Arran were preparing forces against them; and they besought the King, it seems, to send an army for their relief. (fn. 39) Such, at least, was Henry's own interpretation of the message, and we have no other. Henry intimated that it would be very expensive and not altogether seasonable to send an army on their behalf; but he sent down Sir Robert Bowes to Lord Wharton at Carlisle with a commission to them both to make a treaty with commissioners sent from the four earls under which he would do the thing required if pledges were given that he could trust.

So there was still a King's party in Scotland—treacherous double dealers, no doubt, they might be, but there was still a King's party. How unstable it was. Henry must have been well aware; but even past experience, perhaps, did not lead him to expect that the snowball would begin to melt immediately in his hands. Within three weeks, however, he found it necessary to revise very materially the instructions to Wharton and Bowes, owing to the fact that Angus had so fully committed himself to Arran and the Cardinal that negotiation with him was quite out of the question. Yet not very long after he had drawn up new instructions for negotiating with the other three noblemen, Lennox, Glencairn and Cassillis, he found that Cassillis also had gone over to the Governor and the Cardinal; and discouraging as were these repeated defections, he drew up a third set of instructions to negotiate with Lennox and Glencairn only, hoping for greater constancy in them. (fn. 40)

The "slipperiness" of Angus had become manifest at the very beginning of April, though at first the Privy Council thought it might be well hushed up. (fn. 41) On Monday 31 March he seems to have paid a visit to Hamilton, where Lord Maxwell presented him to the Governor, and he returned next day to Douglas. On Thursday following (3 April) he and Maxwell and some of the Douglases were arrested, evidently by their own consent, and Sir George Douglas shortly afterwards. The Master of Morton, Sir George's son, was quite equal to continuing his father's explanations. Maxwell, he admitted, had been taken by his own consent; but his father and Angus were suffering for what they had done in the King's behalf. Since Penven's coming home they had been regarded as public enemies and they were to be shipped off to France in the Lyon, or else have their heads struck off. (fn. 42) Duplicity could hardly go further. But the Master of Morton was in his own house of Dalkeith which he said he was pretty sure he could keep as well as Tantallon to the King's use; he hoped for the King's help, however, if he was besieged, the Governor being now engaged in besieging Glasgow, which Lennox kept. The hint was not lost; and Hertford replied to him sympathetically. He regretted that his father and Angus were in trouble by the perfidy of Maxwell, but was glad he was determined to avenge it. He must be on his guard, however, against being entrapped like the rest, and he need not doubt that the King would aid him. If Angus and Sir George were sent to France in the Lyon with the French Ambassador and Grimani, the King's ships would intercept them. (fn. 43) It was needful to do everything to keep the King's remaining friends in Scotland together. (fn. 44)

We need not trouble the reader with the Master of Morton's answer and the further communication with him. The great aim of Hertford was to get him to deliver Tantallon Castle into the hands of the English, which he and Alexander Jardine, the keeper, declared themselves perfectly ready to do. But of course there was a very considerable difference between promising and performing. (fn. 45) The King knew that nothing was to be expected from the Douglases, and the defection of Angus had, as his Privy Council wrote to Hertford, compelled him to alter his plans for the subjugation of Scotland. Before Hertford left for the North he had intended to have Leith fortified and just afterwards he had planned with Lisle, the Lord Admiral, how to fortify the Calton Hill also; which places he had hoped to keep with the help of Angus while later on he proceeded to the invasion of France. But now he was afraid they might be recovered by the enemy, to his serious detriment when he should have a better opportunity to invade, as he intended to do next year. He therefore instructed Hertford to forbear from fortifying those places, and merely burn the town of Edinburgh, "beat down" the castle, sack Holyrood palace, sack, burn and destroy Leith and all the towns and villages round about, "putting man, woman and child to fire and sword" wherever resistance was made; then passing over to Fife, do a like work of destruction there, not forgetting to turn upside down the Cardinal's town of St. Andrews, so that "the upper stone might be the nether, and not one stick stand by another," sparing no creature alive, and if there were any chance of winning the castle to raze and destroy it piecemeal. A month spent in these operations while the Wardens committed like havock on the Marches and especially, if possible, destroyed Jedburgh, would be most "to his Majesty's honor," the army's surety and the saving of expense. (fn. 46)

These grim instructions issued on the 10 April were received by Hertford at Newcastle on the 12th; and though he felt bound to carry them out as far as practicable, he did not think them politic. Leith he believed could be fortified, and being the chief port of Scotland, on which Edinburgh depended for supplies, the keeping of it would force the capital and all the country round to yield. This would also encourage Lennox to come in, as he knew the French could not trust him and "the title of Scotland" would prevent his agreeing with the Governor; so that he would have to yield to the King the strong fortress of Dumbarton, which together with Leith would give him the command of the whole country South of Forth. Of the order to beat down Edinbugh Castle Hertford probably had his opinion, though he did not express it; but as to the demolition of St. Andrews he ventured to point out the difficulties, as it would involve a long march with ordnance by land, while by sea it was not clear that a landing could be effected. (fn. 47)

After a night's thinking over the order about Leith he was no better satisfied. Last year when the King's ships were in the Firth the Scots were afraid that they carried timber to make a bulwark on Inchkeith of which they would cover the walls with turf; and if this had been done, as he learned from good authorities, it would have been the undoing of Edinburgh, as no ships could have come into Leith, or hindered the victualling of it when it was in English hands. (fn. 48) His remonstrance, however, on being carefully considered by the Council, was overruled and the fortification of Leith forbidden. (fn. 49) Meanwhile he awaited at Newcastle the arrival of Lisle, the lord Admiral, with the fleet which was to convey the army into Scotland. The lord Admiral had taken leave of the King on the 20 March and sailed for Harwich next day. (fn. 50) A few days later he lay "in the Wands" without Harwich, (fn. 51) but was stayed for some weeks afterwards, no doubt for lack of favourable wind, and he only reached Shields on the 20 April. Hertford then at once prepared to embark the troops, but they were still detained till the 30th before they got a wind to take them out of the Tyne. (fn. 52)

The Government of Scotland was taken unprepared. On Saturday morning, 3 May, the people of Edinburgh beheld a great fleet arriving in the Firth of Forth. (fn. 53) That afternoon the ships lay before Inchkeith, and on the morning of Sunday the 4th at 9 o'clock the army landed without opposition at Granton. (fn. 54) Marching towards Leith they found 6,000 Scots horse and foot prepared to dispute their passage, drawn up along a brook between Leith and Edinburgh with ordnance "laid in two straits." The Governor and Cardinal were present. But after half an hour's fighting the Scots gave way and the Governor and Cardinal fled. At another passage, just before the town of Leith there was further resistance with some pieces of artillery; but these were soon silenced. The English occupied the town for two nights unmolested, the soldiers and mariners taking booty to the value of £10,000 (worth £100,000 in our day). In the harbour, too, were two princely ships, the Salamander and the Unicorn, which were seized to the King's use and laden with cannon shot. But what a town it would be to keep! Hertford again sorely regretted his instructions. It was equal to Antwerp or Dieppe as a port; and it could be made very strong. None of the neighbouring heights could command it with the artillery of those days, and all the country would be glad to be the King's subjects. (fn. 55) After the occupation of Leith on Sunday night, Hertford received a message by a herald from the provost and burgesses of Edinburgh, who next morning came offering, if protected against the power of Scotland, to submit and have the treaties accomplished. Hertford told them that he was sent to revenge the untruth of the nation and he intended to have their town and castle to use as he thought fit, putting all who would resist to fire and sword. The provost replied that in that case they would defend themselves; but if Hertford declared what terms he would accept, they would deliberate about opening their gates to him. Hertford said he would make no conditions, but, as the ordnance was not yet landed and the army could not march till next day (Tuesday), he gave them till 7 o'clock in the evening to make up their minds. (fn. 56)

That Monday the English ships came into Leith harbour and unloaded. On Wednesday the 7th Hertford, leaving lord Stourton in Leith with 1,500 men, advanced towards Edinburgh. He was met by a herald and trumpet from the provost and town council, who offered to deliver the keys of the town if the lives and goods of the inhabitants were spared and the town saved from fire. Hertford said he took their former answer as final—that unless he offered terms they would resist, and asked if they would deliver the castle. The herald replied that the castle was out of their power, but they would deliver the town. Hertford then sent him back with a message that if they would turn man, woman and child into the fields and come out to meet him he would do as he found cause. As Hertford came nearer the Provost sent to desire his favor, saying the town should be yielded without resistance. Hertford said, as they were desirous of its security, they must deliver him the keys. But while he was expecting the surrender the inhabitants of one or two houses in the suburbs raised fire and smoke and the town prepared to resist. On this he sent forward Lord Lisle and the vanguard, who, entering by the suburbs, attacked the Canongate before Sir Christopher Morice, master of the ordnance, had time to drag his artillery up the steep incline to batter the iron gate. This, of course, was ill advised, and though the Scotch gunners, who defended the gate, were beaten off there was some confusion, in which Lord William Howard was wounded in the cheek by an arrow from one of his own side. But while the archers and gunners shot at the battlements of the gate, so that defenders durst not show themselves, a cannon was brought hard up to the gate itself and blew it open. The way was then cleared and cannon were carried right up through the town. The hardy gunners even ventured, against orders, to attack the Castle, which replied with damaging effect, dismounting one of their pieces. The attack was foolhardy; the gunners were ordered to withdraw after blowing up the disabled gun. Further attempts on the Castle were hopeless; but it was determined utterly to destroy the town. Fire was set to it in two or three places, and the burning was continued next day and two days following. (fn. 57)

On the 8th the Wardens of the East and Middle Marches with 4,000 horse arrived by land in aid of the expedition. On the 9th Hertford again attacked Edinburgh, which had chosen a new provost and repaired the principal "port" of the town with stone and earth. The assault was quickly delivered, the gate forced open with artillery, and the town won anew. The work was very thoroughly done. Even Holyrood Abbey was pretty well burned, though the exploit was more dangerous than was expected owing to the shot from the castle. A detachment, moreover, was sent over to Fife which burnt Kinghorn and the neighbouring villages. (fn. 58) By the 15th Hertford and Lisle were able to report that they had devastated the whole country to within six miles of Stirling, and they would burn Leith next day. The enemy, they said, would never recover from the mischief done, nor be able to gather any power that year, whatever aid came from France or Denmark; and so, after burning Leith, they proposed to march homeward. (fn. 59) On the route they of course continued the same practices. They burned Musselburgh, Preston, Seton, Haddington, Dunbar, and as many other peels, houses and villages as they could reach. One ineffectual effort was made to stop them on the 17th at a narrow pass by lords Hume, Seton and Bothwell, with the power of the Merse and Teviotdale. But the resolute advance of the English, as soon as a mist which had separated the armies had dispersed, almost immediately caused the enemy to withdraw, and the invaders reached Berwick on the following night. (fn. 60)

Many further details of the campaign will be found in the documents. But I must not pass over the fact that the arrival of Hertford and Lisle and the attack on Edinburgh led to the liberation of Angus and his brother, and with them of lord Maxwell, who had allowed himself to be taken prisoner by the Scottish government, and lord Gray, another of the Solway prisoners put in confinement in Scotland. Sir George Douglas himself came to Hertford on Sunday, 11 May, telling him that but for the arrival of the English he and his brother would have lost their heads. They had been delivered in the hope that they would show themselves good Scotsmen in defence of their country like their ancestors; but Sir George said he would be at the King's commands, as he trusted his brother also would be. (fn. 61) In the course of their interviews Hertford did not fail to remind him of the Master of Morton's promise relative to the delivery of Tantallon Castle to the King. But this occasioned no difficulty. Tantallon, Sir George said, belonged to his brother who, he believed, would not stick at it and he would get his brother to visit Hertford in the camp. Angus himself, however, had written in the meanwhile to Hertford that all he had was at the King's command, who, he hoped, would consider his house quite as ready to do him service as any other man's. (fn. 62) This answer Hertford took at its true value, and he would willingly on his way to Berwick have made some attempt to attack Tantallon by force, but that he was short of artillery and powder, and even scarcity of provisions required the army to pass on. (fn. 63)

Lord Maxwell seems not to have been quite such a clever double-dealer as Sir George Douglas. He, too, made advances to Hertford as one who could justify his conduct to Henry VIII. himself; but the result was that he was cleverly captured by lord Lisle, and his rival Sir George Douglas warned Hertford against him. "I am advertyst," wrote Sir George, "my lord Maxwell is efter yow, and he is ane fyne fallow. Your lordship is wys anewcht." (fn. 64) Maxwell, in fact, finding that he had put himself in Hertford's power, still maintaining that his imprisonment had been entirely due to his devotion to the King of England, desired to be sworn Henry's vassal and offered to deliver Lochmaben Castle on certain conditions. (fn. 65) Hertford proposed that he should go up to London and explain himself fully to the King. At this he looked uncomfortable and wished Hertford to write letters in his favor, as he feared that he had been misreported. He said he much desired to accompany the King into France. Perhaps, Hertford sarcastically suggested, he would not object to be taken by the Frenchmen and so work his liberty? No, he replied, he would lay his son as a hostage. (fn. 66) Hertford took care that he should go up securely conducted, and on his arrival in London, as we shall see hereafter, he was lodged in the Tower. (fn. 67)

Decisive as had been the success of the English in Scotland, no one seems to have anticipated such a result, and news of a far less favorable character seems actually to have been printed in London, "to the slander of the King's captains and ministers." A proclamation was consequently issued on the 18 May requiring all persons having such pamphlets in their possession to bring them within 24 hours to the lord Mayor and Alderman to be burnt. (fn. 68) Of course this did not prevent the dissemination of the false news abroad; and long before the truth was known in different countries it was reported that the Scots had won a great victory. Even at the Emperor's court at Spire this was generally believed. (fn. 69) At Venice and throughout Italy the French had published the complete overthrow of Henry's host by the Scots on Good Friday with the death of the earl of Angus, and the story was confirmed from Rome "with incredible rejoicing." Of course, when the truth was found to be so entirely of an opposite character, the disappointment was serious, and it was at once perceived that the King would now proceed to an invasion of France. (fn. 70)

Meanwhile at Carlisle on the 17 May a treaty was actually signed by Wharton and Bowes on the King's behalf with commissioners of the two Earls, Lennox and Glencairn, who were now the only friends in Scotland on whom Henry could apparently rely. (fn. 71) What came of this we shall see by and by.

The King might have been well satisfied with the vengeance he had taken on Scotland. But Hertford, having returned into England as far as Newcastle, suggested a warden raid to burn Jedburgh as soon as the horses worn out in the late expedition should be sufficiently rested. (fn. 72) The King quite approved and sent orders on the subject to lord Eure and his son Sir Ralph, the Warden of the Middle Marches. Lord Eure wrote to Hertford that the exploit would require at least 5,000 or 6,000 men; for last time that Jedburgh was burnt (in 1523) there were 7,000 or 8,000, and "the journey of Edinburgh" had made many horses unserviceable. Other horses, too, had been lost and some men taken prisoners by the Scots. But still he would do his best. (fn. 73) Next day his son, Sir Ralph, wrote more hopefully that he believed it could be managed with the aid of 500 horsemen out of the bishopric of Durham. (fn. 74) Lord Wharton, Warden of the West Marches, promised to come from Carlisle to Chipchase to assist the project (fn. 75) ; and on the 10 June the two Wardens did the business pretty effectually. They started together on the night of Monday the 9th and next morning summoned the provost and burgesses of Jedburgh to deliver the town; who demanded 12 hours' respite to send to lord Hume. The assault was then given and the town won without resistance. The town and abbey were then set on fire, and the invaders, having laden with spoil 500 horses, promised themselves the further pleasure of burning a number of Scotch villages on their return. And this they did to some extent; but they found that Scotsmen were playing the like game South of Tweed in Norhamshire. They accordingly rode fast and attacked the marauders, taking prisoners no less than 212 horsemen and 17 footmen. (fn. 76)

Before taking a momentary leave of Scotch affairs, one incident deserves to be noted, which is of marked significance in relation to an event of later date. On the 17 April, while Hertford was lying at Newcastle, a Scotchman of the name of Wishart brought him a letter from the laird of Brunstone desiring him to send on the messenger to the King, as he had a special credence. This, as Hertford correctly gathered, was to the effect that the laird of Grange (James Kirkaldy), late Treasurer of Scotland, the master of Rothes (Norman Lesley, eldest son of the Earl) and John Charteris, were ready, with the King's support, to apprehend or slay Cardinal Beton on his way through Fife to St. Andrews, and if the King would enable them to keep 1,000 or 1,500 men in wages for a month or two, they would, while his army was in Scotland, with the help of the Earl Marshal of Scotland and some others, destroy the Cardinal's abbey and town of Arbroath and all other bishops' and abbots' houses on that side, and apprehend the chief opponents of the amity between the two kingdoms. (fn. 77) This proposal required some consideration. The Council were going to have written to Hertford about it on the 24th, but merely instructed him on that day that if the laird of Brunstone and three other lairds whom they named would deliver hostages or join the army, their lands and goods should be respected. (fn. 78) Two days later, however, they despatched Wishart back again with the reply that if the lords and gentlemen named by Brunstone would undertake the "feat" against the Cardinal and were compelled to fly to England they should be "relieved as shall appertain"; that the time was too short to discuss the project of burning the ''Kirkmen's" lands, but that if they would lay hostages to Hertford to accomplish it, he would deliver them £1,000 for the necessary expenses. (fn. 79) A month later the King sent back the messengers of these conspirators to Hertford with instructions to send them by sea with two Englishmen to the mouth of the Tay. (fn. 80) The murder of Cardinal Beton was only accomplished two years later; but two of its leading instruments were William, laird of Grange, son of the laird just mentioned, and that same Norman Lesley, master of Rothes, who offered to undertake it this year.

Scotland was now no longer able to give England trouble in the war with France, for which all the available resources of the Kingdom were immediately drawn upon. The plan of joint invasions from opposite sides had been arranged at the end of the preceding year with the Viceroy of Sicily, whom the Emperor had sent over for the purpose (fn. 81) ; and as it was agreed that both princes should invade in person by the 20 June, there was just sufficient time to change the disposition of the forces lately employed in the North. Hertford was recalled from the Borders and Shrewsbury was appointed in his place. (fn. 82) To crown the King's success against Scotland, the Emperor in April had at length yielded to repeated and urgent solicitations on his part that he would declare the Scots enemies; and they were so proclaimed at Brussels on the 7 May. The demand, which was made under the treaty, had been long evaded, first on the ground that Henry himself had not declared war against them—afterwards, that Henry should, in that case, make a similar declaration against Christian III. of Denmark, whom the Imperialists only recognised as Duke of Holstein. Henry's demand was, in truth, very inconvenient to the Emperor, as leading to an interruption of old commercial relations between Scotland and Flanders. But the Emperor's was scarcely less inconvenient to Henry; and the Council spoke of it to Wotton as apparently indicating a desire to frustrate the treaty. Layton, at Brussels, in a private letter to Paget, intimated that he had very little hope of getting the Government there to declare open enmity against the Scots. But as the Emperor promised to do so if the King would declare against Christian, a point was gained in diplomacy; and as the English Council refused to discuss anything else till they had got fuller satisfaction on that head, Chapuys himself suggested to the Emperor and the Queen of Hungary that the declaration against the Scots would do little injury to Flanders, as they would be unable to traffic during the war. He succeeded in obtaining from the King a pledge to declare against Holstein when formal proof had been shown that Holstein was the Emperor's enemy, provided the Emperor on his part would declare at once against the Scots, whose interference would manifestly be in aid of France against both. The Queen of Hungary had no great difficulty in forwarding a certificate of Christian's defiance of herself and her Government. But the Emperor presently received ambassadors from Christian, with whom he ultimately made a treaty at Spires on the 23 May; and in the meantime he thought it best, following Chapuys's advice, to acquiesce in the King's demands. (fn. 83)

It is time now to speak of events, domestic and other, from the beginning of the year, unconnected with the Scotch war.

Sir Thomas Wriothesley, one of the King's two principal secretaries, was on New Year's day created baron Wriothesley. (fn. 84) On the 14 January Parliament met again, after prorogation, at Westminster, and in a session which lasted till the end of March (fn. 85) twenty-five Acts were passed, of which but a very few are of great historical significance. One was for the punishment of treasons committed outside the King's dominions. A second, relating to the alteration of the King's style was not passed without a conference between deputies of the two Houses on the 5 Feb. Another was for the settlement of the succession in view of the King's last marriage. Another released the King from repayment of his last loan. By another the statute of the Six Articles was modified to prevent persons being arraigned for heresy except upon a presentment by the oaths of twelve men before the Commissioners, and charges for offences more than a year old were excluded from prosecution. There was further an Act "for the examination of the Canon Law"—a measure for which the Church had waited in vain ever since "the Submission of the Clergy" in 1532, and which was not much nearer accomplishment now than before.

As regards foreign affairs, the first matter worthy of mention is the Pope's unsuccessful attempt to mediate between Francis and the Emperor by the mission of Cardinal Farnese, who had left Rome at the end of November. He succeeded in making some impression on Francis, but after seeing the Regent of the Netherlands on the 12 January he passed on to the Emperor, from whom he received nothing but a rebuff. (fn. 86)

A diet had been summoned to meet at Spires on the 30 Nov. 1543 to provide for war against the Turks and remedy grievances in Germany. (fn. 87) But the Emperor remained at Brussels till after Christmas, and on his journey up the Rhine turned aside to Heidelberg to visit the Elector Palatine, so that he did not arrive at Spires till the 30 January, and the only prince who had preceded him was Duke Henry of Brunswick. Proceedings were formally opened on the 20 February, when the Lutherans objected to Duke Henry's presence, and very little progress had been made when Ferdinand King of the Romans arrived on the 12 March. (fn. 88) Meanwhile on the 24 February a French herald with coat of arms on his back and letters in his hand reached the town without guide or safe conduct, alighted at the court and was making his way to the Emperor's chamber when he was stopped by the Viceroy's order and committed to the custody of Hainault herald. Examined next day, it was found that his name was François Maillard, and that he had been despatched by King Francis and L'Aubespine from Fontainebleau about two months before and had come from Nancy by way of Strassburg. He had two letters, one to the Emperor and the other to the Estates at the Diet, but Granvelle refused to receive them. His conduct was so irregular and obtrusive that he was told he deserved to be hanged; but he was simply sent back with a letter agreed to by the Princes of the Diet showing why the letters he brought could not be received. This was a repulse to the Ambassadors waiting at Nancy whom Francis was sending to the Diet, and they wrote a letter of remonstrance, forwarding the address in writing which they meant to have delivered. (fn. 89)

At this Diet the Emperor was extremely anxious to conciliate the Protestants and succeeded in obtaining a considerable grant for the war, the chief difficulty coming from the Imperial cities, which possessed a large amount of property in France. But a form of pacification in religious matters which had been accepted by the Protestants was refused by the Catholics, and the matter was deferred by a joint decree of the Emperor and the King of the Romans to another diet to meet on the 1 October. (fn. 90) The very attempt, however, to settle questions belonging to the faith without reference to the Pope created deep dissatisfaction at the Vatican, as we shall see hereafter.

The alliance of Henry and the Emperor created in foreign parts an interest in England which had not been felt for some time. The Duke of Nagera, who during the preceding year had served the Emperor in Italy, Germany and Flanders, took leave of him at Brussels in December in order to return to Spain, but desired to visit England on his way. An interesting diary of his visit is preserved, by which it seems that he crossed from Calais to Dover on Saturday the 2 February, was a week later at Rochester, and on Monday the 11th dined with Chapuys in London. The King, hearing of his arrival, sent the Earl of Surrey to visit him, appointing next Sunday, the 17th, for his reception, at which he summoned a large company of noblemen and gentlemen to be present. The King himself, however, did not appear in public but gave him and two Spanish friends who had accompanied him a private interview; after which they visited the Queen and the Princess Mary and were entertained with much festivity. "The Queen," says the diarist (who is one of the Duke's suite), "has a lively and pleasing appearance and is praised for a virtuous woman." (fn. 91)

Another illustrious Spaniard then visited England—the Duke of Alburquerque, who arrived in London on the 24 March. He was for some time unable to see the King, whose ulcerated leg had brought on feverish symptoms; and he was unable to leave so soon as he had intended from a difficulty in obtaining ships for his passage. The Duke of Nagera had likewise been troubled in that matter, some vessels he had provided having been wrecked on the Goodwins and on the Isle of Wight, so that he was even then waiting for passage at Plymouth. The weather, too, became boisterous when Alburquerque desired to depart. But another cause prolonged his stay still further. For while he was feasted at court and shown all the magnificence of the royal palaces, the King despatched a courier to the Emperor desiring leave to retain him in his company in the invasion of France. He had made a most favourable impression both on the King and on the Court generally, and the Emperor readily yielded to Henry's request. But it was sorely against his own wall and only for the Emperor's sake that he remained in England. (fn. 92)

An official change must now be noted. On the 21 April lord Audeley of Walden found himself through increasing infirmities under the necessity of surrendering the custody of the Great Seal, which he sent in a white leather bag to the King at Westminster. The King kept it in his own possession till next day, when he delivered it to Lord Wriothesley to keep during the Lord Chancellor's illness. On the 23rd Wriothesley as Lord Keeper used it at his own house in Canon Row to seal some patents and writs and then sealed it up again in the bag. On the 30th the Duke of Norfolk took his oath as Lord Keeper in Westminster Hall, and he retained the Seal in his possession till the 3 May, when, Audeley being dead, he brought it to the palace and delivered it to the King. A court was then summoned and the King, sitting on his throne, re-delivered the Seal to Wriothesley and appointed him Lord Chancellor. (fn. 93) He continued to hold that office till the end of the reign; and never had Chancellor a busier time. The enormous quantity of property that was daily changing hands in the country is testified by the numerous entries on the patent rolls, the contents of which are now so much more voluminous than they were in the early years of the reign. And doubtless there was found a corresponding increase in the whole business of the Chancery. But the prospective invasion of France naturally gave a great additional stimulus to official activity—all the more so, as it was clear the King's resources would be severely taxed to endure the strain.

Under these circumstances we may perhaps too severely criticise a proclamation issued on the 16 May for the enhancement of the value of the coinage as an attempt to defraud creditors for the advantage of the Crown. It was intended, no doubt, for the Crown's advantage, but not in that way. A debasement of the currency had already taken place in 1542, when gold was coined of 23 carats fine and one carat alloy and silver of ten ounces fine and 2oz. alloy; (fn. 94) and the process was carried further in the later years of the reign. But the pretext, at least, for this proclamation was a fair one. Even in March 1542, when debasement was clearly intended, the excuse was that the standard in England differed from that of other countries, and that the King had determined to have certain approofs and trials made of gold and silver coins both of his own and of other realms, "whereby the perfect fineness and allays might the sooner come to his Majesty's knowledge." (fn. 95) No doubt real inconvenience had arisen even then from the difference in purity of English and foreign coinage; and Chapuys wrote at the time: "It is said they are going to raise the value of coin, as has been done in France." (fn. 96) So also in this proclamation issued two years later the step is justified on the ground that, in spite of all the statutes against its exportation, coin was daily carried out of the realm and the officers of the ports were unable to prevent it. The only remedy, therefore, was the enhancing of the value of gold and silver within the realm itself. Gold hitherto valued at 45 shillings an ounce was now raised to 48 shillings, and silver, in the same ratio, from 3 shillings and 9 pence to 4 shillings an ounce. All gold and silver henceforth brought to the Tower to be coined was to be paid for at these higher rates, the gold being of 24 carats and the silver of the finest. A new gold coinage was to be issued in sovereigns of 20 shillings and half sovereigns of ten shillings. The "royal" of gold when full weight was to be valued at twelve shillings, the "angel" at eight shillings and the half and quarter angel at four and two shillings respectively. Of silver also there was to be a new issue, viz:—a "testorne" to be current at the

value of twelve pence, a groat "with a whole face" at fourpence and a half groat at twopence. But all debts due before the beginning of the month were to be paid at the old rate of seven shillings and sixpence an angel. (fn. 97)

The coinage being thus "enhanced," it was, perhaps, not unnatural, according to the economic views then prevalent, to issue another proclamation to regulate the prices of meat and poultry; and very interesting is the tariff of these things issued on the 21st., (fn. 98) as showing the scale of prices with which the provision merchants were expected to be content. Nor do we know that at home there was much dissatisfaction. But the rate of exchange with Flanders does not seem to have been well ascertained, and when the army was sent abroad in June with victuals from England, priced according to an official tariff, the discontent and inconvenience were very serious. In fact, the prices of "the King's victuals" had to be lowered, as the supply out of Flanders was cheaper. (fn. 99)

Preparations for the coming war were now actively going on; and on the same day as the proclamation of the new coinage another proclamation was issued for all Frenchmen who had not taken out letters of denization to leave the realm within twenty days; after which time no one was to retain any such Frenchman in wages. (fn. 100) The result was that about eleven hundred and eighty letters of denization were taken out and paid for, as the special denization roll for this year of the reign bears witness. (fn. 101)

A very religious decree was also issued that, considering the miserable wars in Christendom (which the King, of course, would fain have kept out of himself), there should be "general processions" with an English litany "in all cities, towns, churches and parishes." This was ordered by a royal letter to Cranmer dated the 11 June, and Cranmer intimated it to his suffragans a week later. The royal letter states that litanies had been previously enjoined, but the people had shown no great amount of devotion and had come "slackly" to the processions, which were by and by abandoned. Now, however, a form of prayers in English was ordered, which the King's letter commanded to be used, not merely for a month or two like the prayers previously enjoined, "and after slenderly considered," but to be earnestly set forth. (fn. 102) The order, of course, was obeyed for some time at least, and the prayers are declared by a contemporary to have been "the godliest hearing that ever was in this realm." (fn. 103)

On the 17 June lord Cobham was appointed Deputy of Calais (fn. 104) in the room of lord Maltravers, who by his father's death had now become Earl of Arundel. As an important landholder, not only in Sussex but in Shropshire and Worcestershire, it was probably thought that Arundel would be more usefully employed in getting ready his levies in England for the war than by continuing at Calais, and he certainly had left his government there sometime before, perhaps, shortly after his father's death in January. (fn. 105) On St. George's day (23 April) he was made a Knight of the Garter. (fn. 106) The Deputyship of Calais was an expensive post and the King had found it necessary to give Arundel £200 above his official fees, which apparently he thought might now be saved; but on Cobham's remonstrance it was again renewed. (fn. 107)

The King had for some time been looking for the assistance of foreign soldiers, especially Germans. Even in 1542 when he had made no demonstration of hostility to France he had been trying to obtain a body of horse and foot willing to fight any enemy, under his pensioner, Baron George von Heideck, who had come to England with Duke Philip of Bavaria in 1539, and had written to him frequently ever since about events in Germany. (fn. 108) But the Baron, though he always expressed great devotion to Henry's service, when spoken to on the subject this year by Wotton at the Diet of Spires, simply repeated his usual compliments, believed that the King was already "better sped" and took his departure. (fn. 109) Perhaps the loss was not a great one, if he was at all like his brother, who a year before had been discharged from the service of Francis I. for taking wages for nearly double the men he brought into the field. (fn. 110) There was certainly no lack of offers from other leaders, and on the 14 April King Ferdinand wrote to Henry in favor of a Spaniard, Antonio de Moria, who desired to enter his service. (fn. 111)

In the autumn of 1543 Wallop and Sir Thomas Seymour believed that they had secured the services of a captain of Cleves named Gymynyck, but, when it came to the point, he was not satisfied with the terms. The King, however, succeeded in engaging one Christopher von Landenberg to serve him with 1,000 horse and 4,000 foot, and instructed his ambassador Wotton to engage another captain with 1,000 horse in place of Gymynyck's band. (fn. 112) The Emperor was already bound by the treaty to supply him with 2,000 horse and 2,000 foot, and at the King's request had agreed that these forces should be under the command of the Count of Buren, (fn. 113) son of Henry VIII.'s old friend Isselstein. The King then sent over Vaughan and Chamberlain to visit Buren and inform him that he meant to add to his men 2,000 footmen, whom he hoped to raise on the same terms as those in his contract with Landenberg. Buren agreed to be bound like Landenberg, except as concerned the valuation of the florin, in which he thought Landenberg had been deceived, as good soldiers could not be obtained at such a rate and the Emperor paid by the florin of 25 stivers. It proved that Buren was right. Landenberg, who was ignorant of French, had made a bargain which he could not keep, and the terms had to be readjusted to the Emperor's scale of payment. With some little trouble the matter was re-arranged, and Landenberg was engaged to muster his men at Aix la Chapelle before proceeding to a general muster at Aire on the 20 June. (fn. 114)

There is no particular interest in the story of Buren's levy of 2,000 footmen for the King; but it may be read in detail in these papers. (fn. 115) As to Landenberg's men, however, there is somewhat more to tell.

Landenberg, who had been in England and received his commission from the King himself, wrote to Henry from Aix-la-Chapelle on the 3 June that he had kept his promise and brought his companies thither as early as the 24 May, though the King's commissaries, delayed, it appears, by a flood, only arrived five days later. He had brought not only the required number of horse and foot but an additional company of horse besides, which he trusted the King would accept, as last summer, when he undertook to furnish 600 horse for the Emperor, he brought him 1,000 and they were all accepted. He was so very zealous that the King could not but express his satisfaction. The Council accordingly wrote to the commissaries to inform him that he was appointed to wait upon his Majesty when he came over, in the Middle ward of his army with 1,000 of his best horsemen; and as to the additional company of horse, 400 in number, though the King was already well supplied with horsemen he was willing to entertain the half of them. As to the foot soldiers they were to be divided, apparently between the van and the rear. At least this was the first intention; but the clause relating to them was struck out of the draft which remains our sole source of information. But presently came news that made the King alter his tone. Landenberg was going beyond his bargain, and, on the plea that the King bade him spare no money but bring picked men, was making demands which the commissaries could not concede without further instructions. On hearing this the King was anxious to have no more to do with him, and the Council wrote to the commissaries to that effect; but Norfolk, alarmed lest Landenberg should transfer his services to the French, stayed the letters, excusing himself all the more for doing so, as he had learned that Landenberg was disposed to "redubb his former sayings." For taking this liberty Norfolk received a reprimand and was ordered to forward the letter; but the bearer of the message was entrusted with another letter, qualifying the previous instructions and directing that if Landenberg seemed sorry for his "outrageous language" towards the King at Spires he and the 1,000 horsemen he had ready would be accepted, provided that they would serve at such wages as the commissaries were authorised to give; but the footmen, if they had not already agreed to march forward, were to be dismissed. (fn. 116)

It was not so easy, however, to negotiate with a commander of armed companies. The King's commissaries, Fane and Windebank, by the advice of Paget, then returning from a special mission to the Emperor, (fn. 117) had despatched a post to England to know how far they might yield to Landenberg's demands, and Landenberg himself despatched four of his captains to the King, Philip count of Eberstein being the first, in his own justification. He and his company were not going to leave Aix-la-Chapelle for the muster at Aire, fixed for the 20 June, until they received a full month's pay or had letters for their conduct signed and sealed by the King. On the 13th the commissaries made a contract with him declaring that for the amelioration of certain articles the letter of retainer had been sent to the King and was hourly expected back, in order that the horsemen might be paid for their coming to Aix, with a month's wages besides, and sent four or five leagues into the country of Liege where they might get victuals. Meanwhile no efforts would be used to make them leave Aix-la-Chapelle, but they would be paid by the commissaries from month to month according to the original contract. (fn. 118) On receipt of the King's answer the commissaries declared to Landenberg his Majesty's good opinion of him and his pleasure that he should wait upon him in the battle, but avoided telling him at first that his band was to be divided, lest he should be displeased and the rest should refuse to go further. The companies at once set forth on the way towards Aire and made an excellent appearance. (fn. 119)

The mission of Eberstein and his companions to England, however, had not made matters more pleasant. Their message showed that Landenberg's band would not serve unless they had at least 1,700 "dead pays" or double pays—400 for each ensign—which was more than the Emperor gave to any similar company. The King had already increased the original allowance from 60 to 100 "dead pays" in every ensign, the highest rate that the Emperor was in the habit of giving, and thought he had given Landenberg full satisfaction. These new demands only strengthened his determination to have nothing more to do with him; but, to show that the fault was not his, he agreed to give them one whole month's wages at the Emperor's rate and so dismiss them. This decision was intimated to the envoys on the 18 June; and the King was the more resolute as it was reported to him that Landenberg had boasted that he had formerly displeased both the Emperor and the King of the Romans, and that he would care far less about displeasing the King of England. (fn. 120)

The result was that Landenberg's men only proceeded as far as the district of Liege, where they "ate up the country" and distressed the poor inhabitants. Fears, moreover, haunted the Emperor lest, being disappointed of a liberal paymaster, he would convey his services to the French. This he was somehow restrained from doing; indeed, his horsemen at last came to serve Henry willingly. (fn. 121) But both at Brussels and at the Imperial Court there remained intense annoyance, and the claims of the poor country people of Liege for compensation for their wasted property created a very unpleasant feeling towards their English ally.

Landenberg, however, was only a special example of the German mercenary captain. Wotton's efforts to retain another such captain with 1,000 horsemen for Henry's service hardly led to more satisfactory results. He spoke on the subject to Granvelle, who, after conferring with the Emperor, told him that his Majesty had appointed a pensioner of his own, Hans von Sickingen, son of the famous Franz von Sickingen who had often been as much a terror to his employers as to his enemies. Wotton, however, objected to pay him 10,000 guldens for conduct money without referring to the King, for he stood out for a special assurance for the payment of his wages, which the Ambassador, in spite of the Emperor's urging him not to lose time, felt he had no authority to give. Neither did the King and his Council think it reasonable. But the Emperor, backed by the Viceroy, had put the matter so strongly to Wotton, saying that he not only requested and exhorted but also commanded him (smiling at the words) to go through with the man, that Wotton at length signed an agreement with him on the Emperor's terms. On this Wotton received an intimation that if he had paid the 10,000 guldens he had exceeded his commission, but the King presumed the Emperor would cause it to be repaid; for the King would rather lose the money than accept the man's service. There was no such difficulty, the Council wrote, in getting other captains, and the King had already, on receipt of Wotton's first letter, made a bargain with one who would muster 450 horsemen about Maestricht. Ultimately, however, as the Emperor had taken upon him to guarantee the payment, the King was content to lose his money and the matter dropped. (fn. 122)

It was, no doubt, very good policy for the Emperor to offer and even press upon the King the services of German free-lances whom he did not trust himself, and who, if not retained on the one side, had no difficulty in going over to the enemy. Men like Landenberg and Sickingen were very inconvenient to keep and not easily tied to a bargain; and when the King himself engaged others, such as Lightmaker (fn. 123) and Stephen and Claes (or Nicholas) Taphoren, (fn. 124) the result, in some cases at least, appears to have been little more satisfactory. But it was the joint interest of the allies to prevent such men joining the French; and the matter clearly concerned the Emperor more than Henry. For Henry intended to invade France only for purposes of his own, and could not have been seriously injured by desertions of this kind if he only succeeded in obtaining such a hold upon France as to prevent her assisting Scotland. Hence it was that the Emperor, even from the first, had no great reliance upon his ally; and a feeling was evidently springing up in the minds of himself and his sister the Regent that they must give him no excuse for deserting them. As early as February 22nd, writing to his son Philip of his rejection of the terms of peace proposed by Cardinal Farnese, the Emperor tells him that he felt bound to carry out his engagement with Henry for the invasion of France, because if he did not it was to be feared that Henry and Francis would presently join in alliance against him. (fn. 125) This, indeed, may be doubted, for the former alliance of Henry with Francis against the Emperor in 1528 was so unpopular, and moreover practically so inconvenient, that it did not last long. But it was only by his present alliance with England against France that Charles had any hope of extracting satisfactory terms from an unquiet neighbour whose cause had the sympathy of the Pope and might possibly be embraced openly by a renewed Italian league.

Francis, on the other hand, was by this time anxious for peace, at least with one or other of his enemies. Ineffectual appeals had already been made on his behalf to the Emperor by the Duke of Lorraine and the Cardinal Farnese, (fn. 126) and he now turned to England. To make any direct proposal, indeed, was not his policy; there would have been a loss of dignity in such a proceeding, which able diplomatists commonly avoided. But he commissioned the Sieur de St. Martin to enter into communication with gentlemen at Calais and at Guisnes, not as one authorised to convey a message, but simply as a Frenchman interested in the welfare of his country, as to the great desirability of peace between the two realms. While there, moreover, he received a letter from the Sieur de Vervins who now commanded at Boulogne as lieutenant for Du Bies, urging him to repeat to Mr. Hall of Calais statements that he had made in his house—namely that the King of France promised, in case of a treaty, to pay Henry VIII. all the arrears of his pension, to make the Scots abstain from war, otherwise he would be their enemy, and even to engage to pay damages of which the King of England himself should be judge for the non-payment of the arrears. Mr. Hall at once went to the King with a letter in which these terms were expressly mentioned and was commissioned to bring St. Martin himself to the King's presence. The King, having the letter of the Sieur de Vervins in his hand, asked St. Martin whether he had made such statements to Mr. Hall as were therein mentioned, and when St. Martin replied yes, said he saw no reason to trust a poor gentleman who had no credit with the French King. Did he expect Francis I. to avow what he had done? "Yes," St. Martin assured him, on his life. The King then said he was sorry the thing had not taken place sooner, for Francis had constrained him to form a league with the Emperor, without informing whom he could make no appointment. But if Francis found any difficulty with the Emperor and would refer it to him, he would not show the Emperor undue favor, but would act, as he had formerly done, the part of a mediator between them. (fn. 127) On hearing from St. Martin how he had been answered, Francis despatched to Henry the Sieur de Framozelles with a regular proposal. (fn. 128) of which the issue will be found in Part II. of the present volume.

The King did his part in communicating to Chapuys the offers made by Francis and assuring him that he would not treat apart from the Emperor. (fn. 129) But the fact that such offers had been addressed to him by Francis raised serious misgivings in the mind of Mary of Hungary, discontented as she was already about Landenberg's men being left in Liege, besides many other mutual complaints between her government and the English. It was her strong suspicion, seeing how unwilling the King and his army were to march directly into France and the unlikelihood of their keeping the field very long, especially when winter drew near, that, if he could only carry Boulogne and Montreuil, he would be glad simply to secure his conquests and, if the Emperor did not accept proposals which satisfied himself, at once dissolve the alliance and make a separate peace. (fn. 130) Much the same were the opinions of the Emperor himself as he was conducting the siege of St. Dizier. From what Chapuys wrote he saw clearly that the King had no real wish to make any great effort against France, and he believed that he would excuse himself for non-fulfilment of treaties by throwing the blame on him. (fn. 131)

The Emperor and his sister, no doubt, were right enough in believing that Henry VIII. had no strong desire to penetrate into the interior of France. He himself gave plausible reasons enough for not thinking of it till he had won the two important towns he was besieging. (fn. 132) But he had certainly no thought of making peace or truce until at least Boulogne was in his hands; and before the end of July an event occurred, which, when it came to his knowledge, only strengthened his resolution to persevere. A Scottish ship was captured by fishermen of Rye off Scarborough, conveying very important despatches which some Frenchmen in her threw overboard tied up with a great coal in order to sink them. But they were fished up, and were found to be letters from the Governor and Cardinal and other noblemen in Scotland to the French King conveyed by one Sieur de Bauldreul whom the Queen Dowager and the French ambassador la Brossé had despatched to the French Court. (fn. 133) Henry, however, was by this time in France and the news did not reach him till August. So what has to be said about it must be deferred till we have the papers in Part II. of this Volume before us.

But it is time to speak of things of even higher importance, which the story of the mercenaries and the negotiations has compelled us to pass by. The treaty which Wharton and Bowes arranged at Carlisle on the 17 May with commissioners of Lennox and Glencairn promised at last to give the King some means of controlling the government of Arran and Cardinal Beton. The chief commissioner of Lennox was his brother Robert, bishop elect of Caithness, and the leading provisions were:—First that Lennox and Glencairn should cause "the Word of God" to be taught and preached in Scotland—of course in derogation of the Cardinal's authority; second, that they would remain friends with England and refuse any league to the contrary; third, that they would see that the young Queen of Scots was not conveyed away; fourth, that they would assist the King to win Jedburgh and other places; and fifth, that they would help to make the King Director and Protector of Scotland during the young Queen's minority. In return for which conditions the King also pledged himself in five Articles to the Earls;—first, to save their possessions harmless in the war; second, to make Lennox Governor of Scotland under him, with a Council of the King's appointment and other conditions; third, that he should have revenues to maintain that estate, the King having custody of such strongholds as should be necessary for him as Director and Protector; fourth, to maintain Lennox's title against Arran if the young Queen should die without issue; and fifth, to give Glencairn a pension of 1,000 crowns if he and Lennox gave hostages for fulfilment of the King's demands, Glencairn's pledge for his ransom being accepted for him, and Lennox's brother, the elect of Caithness, for him.

These had been all along the terms on which Wharton and Bowes were to negotiate. But to make matters quite safe, now an additional article was put into the treaty, that whereas Lennox had, by his secretary and otherwise, made suit to marry the King's niece, the lady Margaret Douglas, and now had renewed that suit, the King promised, if Lennox performed his covenants, and he and the lady Margaret on seeing each other were agreed, both to allow the marriage and further to consider Lennox's good services. (fn. 134)

Matters being so arranged, Wharton received orders if Lennox should land from Scotland in the West Marches, to entertain him gently and send him with an escort up to Court. (fn. 135) On the 2 June the King wrote to the two Earls, Glencairn and Lennox, rejoicing at a report (apparently not very well founded) that they had got the upper hand of their adversaries, which would advance his own affairs in Scotland. (fn. 136) Lennox, meanwhile, had embarked at Dumbarton on the 28 May along with Alexander Cunningham, Glencairn's son and heir, (fn. 137) and after a few days landed at Chester; (fn. 138) so that he required no attention from Wharton, but pursued his own course up to London. (fn. 139) He arrived at Court on the 13 June, (fn. 140) and on the 26th an agreement was made between him and commissioners of the King on the basis of the negotiation with Wharton and Bowes, in which he further agreed to surrender to the King Dumbarton Castle and the Island of Bute, and help to win Rothesay Castle for him also; while the King, on his part, agreed to the marriage and endowed him with certain lands in respect thereof, with compensation for Dumbarton and Bute and for the loss he would sustain in France by his submission to the King. (fn. 141) The marriage actually took place on the morning of the 29 June. (fn. 142) Of its unhappy issue, born in the following year, there is no occasion here to speak. (fn. 143)

As we have already said, the King's resources were severely taxed to meet the expenses of the coming war. As early as the 1 March he issued special commissions for the sale of Crown lands, which were shortly followed up by another for the sale not only of Crown lands but of lead and prizes taken in war, leases, manumissions of bondmen, wardships and marriages. (fn. 144) In June following, also, when about to cross the Channel, he signed new and more definite commissons with the like object. (fn. 145) On the 11 July he gave a commission for the mortgaging of lands to the citizens of London. (fn. 146) And though absolved by parliament from the repayment of his last loan he contrived, after crossing the sea, to extract a new one from the Bishops, the lay lords and others of his subjects. (fn. 147) Yet with all this he was already obliged to borrow money at 12 per cent., (fn. 148) and the financial prospect must have been full of anxiety.

On the 11 July, being on the point of leaving England for the war, he appointed his Queen, Katharine Parr, Regent in his absence, (fn. 149) with a special Council for her guidance, with whom he and his attendant Council kept in continual communication. On the 14th, according to Hall, he crossed the Channel and on the 15th the Council attending on him intimated his arrival at Calais. (fn. 150)

But the story of the invasion of France must be reserved for the Preface to Part II. of this Volume.

J. G.

NOTE ON THE DEBASEMENT OF THE CURRENCY.

See. pp. xxxiv-xxxvi.

In connection with what has been said on this subject in the foregoing preface it may be useful here to give abstracts of four documents among the Accounts of the Mint, which, though all of the time of Edward VI., have special reference to the period on which we have now entered. It will be seen that the debasement of the currency at the end of this reign had already begun, not in 1543 as stated by Ruding but a year earlier, under an indenture dated 16 May, 1542. In July following the Mint had begun to coin gold of 23 carats with one carat of alloy; but the minting of this coinage ceased in December, 1542, and January, 1543, was resumed in February and March, 1543, and again suspended in April till after January, 1544. Later in the reign, there were further debasements, the gold being reduced to 22 carats and then to 20, at which it stood at the beginning of Edward VI.'s reign, while the silver was in like manner reduced from 10oz. fine and 2oz. alloy (the debased standard of 1542) to 6oz. fine (or equal weights of pure silver and alloy), and finally to 4oz. fine with 8oz. of alloy, at which it was continued into Edward VI.'s reign.

I.

O. Declaration of the account of Sir Martin Bowes and Thomas Skipwith (executor of Ralph Rowlett, dec.); which Bowes and Rowlett, as masters and workers of the King's moneys in the Tower, England and Calis, covenanted with the late King Henry VIII., by indenture of 16 May, 34 Hen. VIII., to "make and strike into print" certain gold moneys of the standard of 23 carats fine gold and one carat of allaye, and silver moneys of the standard of l0oz. sterling silver and 2oz. of allaye, and to answer the King of every 1lb. troy of gold of that standard 20s., over and besides 4s. taken up by the warden of the Mints upon every 1lb. towards wastes and charges in working, and of every 1lb. of silver of that standard 5s. 6d., over and besides 2s. 6d. similarly taken up by the warden. Which Bowes and Skipwith, before John earl of Warrewike, Great Master, Sir Wm, Herbert, knight of the Order and master of the Horse, and Sir Walter Mildmaye, commissioners appointed by pat. 3 Feb., 4 Edw. VI., do make this account, for the space of one year and nine months from 1 July, 34 Hen. VIII. to the 31 March, 35 Hen. VIII., as appears by presentments testifying the monthly coinage, one subscribed by John Browne, then warden of the Mint, another by Hugh Eglinby, comptroller, and the third by Sir Martin Bowes.

Charge:—The accountants are charged with 34,043 1/4oz. of gilt plate received of Sir Edm. Pekham, then cofferer of the Household, between 9 May and 24 Nov., 34 Hen. VIII., as appears by indenture dated 9 May, 34 Hen. VIII., which, valued at 4s. 2d., according to the said indenture, amounts to 7,092l. 10s. 8½d.; also with 38,697 3/4oz. of white and parcel gilt plate similarly received at 3s. 8d. the oz., 7,094l. 9s. 9½d.; also with ready money received of Pekham "of the loan and benevolence money at several times for the provision of bullion" between 4 July, 34 Hen. VIII., and 20 March, 35 Hen. VIII., as appears by indenture dated 4 July, 34 Hen. VIII., 27,652l. 18s. 9d.; and also with ready money received between 27 May and 30 June, 36 Hen. VIII., as appears by certificate subscribed by Gregory Richerdson, one of the King's auditors of the prests, 10,000l.

And they are charged with the coinage of 541lb. 6oz. of gold, into the aforesaid standard of 23 carats, viz. in July, 34 Hen. VIII. 160lb., Aug. 43lb. 6oz., Sep. 47lb., Oct. 29lb., Nov. 40lb., Feb. 89lb., March, 133lb. (in Dec, Jan. and April, 34 Hen. VIII. and the eleven following months none of the same standard gold was wrought within the said Mint), the King's gain in which, at 20s. the lb. over and besides the 4s. taken up by the warden, is 541l. 10s. They are charged with the gain upon the coinage of 22,053lb. of silver into the said standard of 10oz., by the "advouchement" of the said Browne and Eglinby, viz. in July, 34 Hen. VIII., 2,975lb., Aug. 4,000lb., Sept. 4,000lb., Oct. 2,404lb., Nov. 2,400lb., March, 1,509lb., April, 2,050lb., Feb. a°35° 1,900lb., March, 1,915lb. (in Dec, Jan. and Feb., 34 Hen. VIII., and in May to Jan., 35 Hen. VIII., none of the said standard moneys was wrought) the King's gain upon which, at 5s. 6d. the lb. over and besides the 2s. 6d. taken by the warden, amounts to 6,064l. 11s. 6d. They further answer "in the price," 34,044 1/4oz. of gilt plate and 38,697 3/4oz. of parcel gilt received of Sir Edm. Pekham, then cofferer, as appears by indenture dated 9 May, 34 Hen. VIII., the gilt at 4s. 2d. the oz. and parcel gilt at 3s. 8d., "which said prices was paid to the said Sir Edmond for the same, as in the same indenture is contained"; for which plate they answer to the King 4d. an oz. more than was therein covenanted, by reason of a proclamation published after the receipt of the same and the indenture mentioned in the title of this account, by both which the oz. of sterling silver was advanced to 4s.; and this 4d. an oz. amounts to 1,212l. 7s. 1½d. Also they are charged with 266l. 13s. 4d. gained in buying l,777 3/4oz. ½dwt. of fine gold "by him provided" after the said proclamation and indenture had advanced the price to 48s., for which they gave but 45s.; and likewise with 1,860l. 6s. 11d. obq. gained in buying 227,566 3/4oz. of silver under the price (4s.) assigned by the said proclamation and indenture, which Sir Martin provided at 3s. 8½d.

Total 61,785l. 8s. 2 1/4d.

Discharge:—They are allowed for 12lb. 4oz. of silver allaye put to the said 541lb. 6oz. of gold, at ½oz. to every lb., "towards the wastes," holding 9oz. fine silver in every pound weight, at 4s. 0 3/4d. the oz. of fine silver, 22l. 10s. 11 1/4d.; and for 5,513lb. of copper allaye put to the commixture of the said 22,053lb. of silver, at 6d. the lb., 137l. 16s. 6d. Also for money delivered to John Browne, warden of the Mint, towards building and repair of houses and offices, by the King's warrant dated Westm., 14 March, 33 Hen. VIII., as appears by indenture dated 1 May, 34 Hen. VIII., 400l. Also for money paid to Sir Edm. Pekham, cofferer, viz. 15 July, 34 Hen. VIII., 3,680l. 18s. 3d., 31 July, 3,680l. 18s. 3d. and 4,421l. 5s. 4d., 6 Sept., 3,680l. 18s. 3d., 16 Sept., 3,680l. 18s. 3d., 20 Sept., 3,680l. 18s. 3d., 26 Sept., 1,226l. 19s. 5d., 26 Jan., 2,453l. 18s. 10d., 12 July, 35 Hen. VIII., 4,907l. 17s. 8d., 20 May, "eodem anno" 2,000l., 31 Aug., 38 Hen. VIII., 27l. 18s. 1d., 14 Oct., 34 Hen. VIII., 6,000l., 24 Nov. "eodem anno" 10,000l., 26 Jan. "dicto anno" 1,200l., 31 Aug. 38 Hen. VIII., 199l. 15s. 0 ½d., and 26 Nov., 38 Hen. VIII., 10,000l.; in all, as appears by the several indentures, 60,842l. 5s. 7 ½d.

Total 61,402l. 13s. 0 3/4d.

And so they are indebted upon the determination of this account 382l. 15s. 1 ½d., which sum is here exonerated and discharged because, amongst others, it is charged upon this accountant in another declaration of account made before the said commissioners 10 Jan., 4 Edw. VI. Signed: J. Warwyk, W. Herbert, Wa. Mildmay, Will'm Dunche. Seals broken.

Parchment roll of six membranes stitched together at the one end.

II.

R.O. [A summary of the coinage from 1 June, 1544, to 30 Sept., 1547].

i. "Gold moneys of 23 carats fine":—

"Memorandum, there is made into moneys in th'office of Sir Martin Bowes, knight, by th'avouchment of Robert Brocke, comptroller, William Byllingesley and John Yorke, 'samasters,' from the first day of June in anno r. r. H. viijvi xxxvito unto the last day of March eodem anno, as appeareth by the monthly indentures of the same, 5,761lb. 6oz.; whereof" is to be answered to the King upon every lb. "so made" 24s., viz. 6,913l. 16s., and "upon the remedy in the assay" of every lb. 2s. and "in the sheare" of every lb. 18d., viz. 1,008l. 5s. 3d., total [7,922l. 1s. 3d.]. Whereof is to be allowed for money paid to the coiners for workmanship of every lb. 8d., 192l. 12d.; also for 14oz. of standard gold at 46s. the oz. allowed to the coiners "towards their waste" (in margin, "after the rate of ob. wt. uppon every 10lb. wt.") 32l. 4s.; and also 288oz. of standard gold wasted in melting "after the rate of 5oz. of every hundrethe pounde wt.," at 46s. the oz., 662l. 8s.; in all 886l. 13s., leaving to the King 7,035l. 8s. 3d. Signed: Martyn Bowes, undertresorer, Rob't Brock, W'm Byllyng [esley].

ii. "Silver moneys of 9 ounces fine":—

"Memorandum, there is made into moneys in th'office of Sir Martyn Bowes, knight, by th'avouchement of Robert Brocke, comptroller, William Byllingesley and John York, 'saymasters" from 1 June to 31 March, 36 Hen. VIII., as appears by the monthly indentures, 62,203lb. Whereof:—Is to be answered to the King upon every lb. 8s. 8 ½d. 5 mites, viz. 27,143l. 2s. 6d. and upon the remedy in the assay 1 ½d. and in the sheare 2 ½d. in every lb., in all 28,179l. 16s. 10d. Whereof to be allowed for coining at 9d. the lb., for 51lb. 9oz. of standard silver allowed the coiners towards their waste, after the rate of 1oz. upon every 100lb., 777lb. 6oz. of standard silver wasted in the melting, viz. 15oz. in every 100lb., and 464lb. of standard silver wasted in "blaunchinge," viz. 9oz. upon every 100lb. minus in toto 2lb. 6oz., at 39s. 3d. q. ½mite the lb., in all 4,872l. 18d. q., 4 mites, leaving to the King 23,307l. 15s. 3 ½d. 1mite. Signed by Bowes, Brock and Byllyngesley.

iii. "Gold moneys of 22 carats fine":—

Mem., there is made into moneys in the office of Sir Martin Bowes by the avouchment of Robt. Brocke, comptroller, Wm. Billingesley and Thos. Stanley, 'saymasters, from 1 April, 36 Hen. VIII., to 31 March, 37 Hen. VIII., as appears by monthly indentures, 6,869lb. 6oz., whereof is to be answered to the King for 4,749lb. 6oz. made in April, May, &c., to December, after the rate of 50s. upon every lb., 11,873l. 15s., and for 2,120lb. made in January, February and March by virtue of a commission to Sir Edm. Pekham, high treasurer, and other officers of the Mint, dated 1 (27 in §III.) Jan. 37 Hen. VIII. for the advancement of 12d. in every oz., making the King's gain less in every lb. 11s., after the rate of 39s. upon every lb. 4,134l.; also is to be answered upon the remedy in the assay 2s. and upon the sheare 18d. for every lb., 1,202l. 3s. 3d. Whereof is to be allowed for workmanship at 9d. the lb., also for 11 7/8oz. of gold wasted in making the 4,749lb. 6oz., at 45s. 10d. the oz., "after the rate of ob. wt. upon every x. lb. wt." and 5 1/4oz. 1dwt. wasted in making the 2,120lb. at 46s. 9d. the oz., 39l. 12s. ½d., also for 237 ½oz. of gold wasted in melting the 4,749lb. 6oz., at 45s. 10d., and 106oz. wasted in melting the 2,120lb., at 46s. 9d., 792l. 0s. 11d., and also for 212lb. 1oz. of white and red "alley" mixed in the same gold holding 8oz. of fine silver and 4oz. of alley in every lb. Troy, at 37s. 4d. the lb., 395l. 17s. 9d. And so remains to the King 15,724l. 15s. 5d.

iv. "Silver moneys of 6oz. fine":—Made between 1 April, 36 Hen. VIII., and 31 March, 37 Hen. VIII., 73,398lb., whereof is to be answered to the King upon every lb. 20s. and upon the remedy in the assay 3d. and in the shear 4d. upon every lb., 75,538l. 15s. 6d. Whereof is to be allowed to the coiners for workmanship of 53,833lb. at 11d. and workmanship of 19,565lb. "and melting of the sezell coming of the same" at 14d., 3,608l. 12s. 9d.; also for 44lb. 10 1/4oz. of standard silver wasted in making, viz. 1oz. upon every 100lb., at 28s. the lb., 62l. 15s. 11d.; also for 1,039lb. 10oz. of standard silver wasted in melting, viz. 17oz. upon every 100lb., at 28s. the lb., 1,455l. 15s. 4d.; also for 1,304lb. of standard silver wasted in blanching, viz. 21 1/4oz. upon every 100lb. plus in toto 4lb. 8oz., at 28s. the lb., 1,825l. 12s. And so remains 68,585l. 19s. 6d. Signed: Martyn Bowes: Rob't Brock: W'm Byllyngesley: Thomas Stanley.

v. "Gold moneys of 20 carats fine":—Made between 1 April, 37 Hen. VIII., and 31 March, 1 Edw. VI., 3,586lb., whereof is to be answered for 2,754lb. made in April, May, June, July, Aug. and Sept. at 4l. 10s. of every lb., and for 832lb. made in Oct., Nov. and Dec, at 4l. upon every lb., by virtue of a commission directed to Mr. High Treasurer, 20 March, 37 Hen. VIII., for the advancement of 12d. in every oz. of fine gold, making the King's gain less by 10s. in every lb., and also upon the remedy in the assay at 2s. and in the shear at 2s. 6d., total 16,527l. 17s. Whereof must be allowed:—For workmanship at 9d. the lb., 134l. 9s. 6d., for 6 7/8oz. of standard gold allowed to the coiners towards their waste in making the 2,754lb., viz. ½dwt. upon every 10lb., at 42s. 6d. the oz., 14l. 12s. 2 ½d., and 2oz. 1 ½dwt. of standard gold wasted in making the 832lb., at 43s. 4d. the oz., 4l. 9s. 11d.; also for gold wasted in melting the said amounts, viz. 206 1/4oz. at 42s. 6d. and 62 ½oz. at 43s. 4d., being at the rate of 7 ½oz. of every 100lb., 573l. 13s. 11 ½d., and also for 600lb. of white and red alloy, holding 9oz. fine silver and 3oz. of alloy in every lb. Troy, at 42s. the lb., 1,260l. And so remains to the King 14,540l. 11s. 5d.

vi. "Silver moneys of 4oz. fine":—Made between 1 April, 37 Hen. VIII., and the 31 March, 1 Edw. VI., 50,100lb., whereof is to be answered of every lb. 29s. 4d., and for remedy in the assay 3d. and in the shear 4d. for every lb. and for the gain of buying silver "by reason of th'alley which was found in the same as well in the account of the 36th and 37th years as in this present year," 133l. 6s. 8d., in all 75,074l. 11s. 8d. Whereof is to be allowed to the coiners for workmanship, at 11d. the lb., 2,296l. 5s., for 751lb. 6oz. of standard silver wasted in melting 50,100lb., viz. 18oz. upon every 100lb., 1,116lb. 6oz. wasted in blanching, viz. 26 3/4oz. upon every 100lb., and 41lb. 9oz. wasted in making, viz. 1oz. upon every 100lb., all at 18s. 8d. the lb., 1,782l. 8s. 8d. And so remains 70,995l. 18s. Signed by Bowes, Brock, Byllyngesley and Stanley.

vii. "A proof made of the standard of 4oz. fine by Robert Brocke, William Byllingesley and Thomas Stanley in the month of December anno r. r. H. viijvi xxxviijo and avouched by the hand of Sir Martin Bowes, knight, and delivered unto him in his charge" (being a reckoning of the items given in the above accounts in the case of the coining of 751lb. of silver.) Remainder 1,066l. 14s. 2 ¾d. Signed as before.

viii. "Silver moneys of 4oz. fine":—Made between 1 April and 30 Sept., 1 Edw. VI., 11,613lb. 6oz., whereof is to be answered of every lb. 26s. 8d., being 2s. 8d. less than in the former account by the appointment of Sir Edm. Pekham, high treasurer of the Mints, by reason of a commission to him dated 16 March, 1 Edw. VI., and also upon the remedy in the assay 3d. and shear 5d. of every lb.; in all 15,871l. 15s. 8d. Whereof:—to be allowed for workmanship of 11,463lb. 6oz. at 10d. the lb. and of 150lb. made into small moneys as pence and half pence, at 12d. the lb., 485l. 2s. 11d.; also for 90lb. 11 ½oz. of standard silver wasted in melting, viz. 9 ½oz. upon every 100lb., minus in toto 10 ½oz., and for 187lb. wasted in blanching, viz. 19 ½oz. of every 100lb. minus in toto, 18oz., at 21s. 4d. the lb.; in all 781l. 12s. 9d. And so remains 15,090l. 2s. 11d. Signed.

ix. "Gold moneys of 20 carats fine":—Made between 1 April and 30 Sept., 1 Edw. VI., 3,573lb. Whereof is to be answered 20s. for every lb., which is less by 3l. than the former account by reason of a commission directed to Sir Edm. Pekham, 16 March, 1 Edw. VI., and upon the remedy of the assay at 2s. 5d. and shear at 2s. 7d. of every lb., and for 100lb. of alloy found in the gold at 45s. 3d. the lb., and "for graynes of golde founde in the swepe, 4oz. at 48s. 4d."; in all 4,702l. 11s. 8d. Whereof to be allowed for workmanship at 9d. the lb., for 595lb. of alloy holding 8 ½oz. of fine silver in every lb., at 45s. 4d. the lb., and for 178 ½oz. wasted in melting, viz., 5oz. upon every 100lb. at 48s. 4d. the oz., in all 1,915l. 3s. 3d. And so remains 2,787l. 8s. 5d. Signed.

Parchment roll of seven membranes written on the one side only.

III.

R.O. "The duplicament of the declaration of the account" of Sir Martin Bowes, appointed by pats. 3 June, 36 Hen. VIII. and 12 April 36 Hen. VIII. to be one of the under-treasurers of the Mint, who, with the other officers (named), covenanted with the late and present kings to make moneys according to standards mentioned in the indentures of 28 May, 36 Hen. VIII. (23 carat for gold, 9oz. for silver), 27 March, 36 Hen. VIII. (22ca., 6oz.), 1 April, 37 Hen. VIII. (20ca., 4oz.), 5 April, 1 Edw. VI. (20ca., 4oz.); and is now called to account, 12 Feb., 4 Edw. VI., before John earl of Warwicke, Admiral and Great Master, Sir William Harbert, Master of the Horse, and Sir Walter Mildmay, commissioners appointed——(blank) Feb., 4 Edw. VI.

Being Bowes' account, in form as in §I., for the whole period covered by §II. above.

The charge includes an additional sum of 6,372l. 11s. 3 ½d., advanced upon better examination of the account by comparison with those of Sir John Yorke, under treasurer of the Mint at Southwark, and Thomas Knight, late one of the under treasurers of the Mint in the Tower. The discharge specifies the fees of the officers of the Mint (the patent of appointment being cited in the case of each chief officer, and the "first establishment" and "second establishment" with regard to the rest) from the high treasurer down to the porter and labourers; the diets of the officers when attending at the Tower; the laying of leaden conduyt pipes from Bednall Grene to the Tower for the service of the Mint; the gold and silver of the several standards made into three parts indented, whereof one was delivered to the late King to keep; the fine silver used in making assays of gold; the waste in melting 400lb. of gold and 2,500lb. of silver begun to be made, the gold of 23 carats and the silver of 10 ½oz. fine, by order of the King and Council about June, 1 Edw. VI., and stopped by reason of the King's urgent affairs (and a coinage of 20 carats and 4oz. authorised by commission of the 28 July, 1 Edw. VI., as contained in an indenture of 5 April, 1 Edw. VI., substituted); the writing of standards and books; "extraordinary payments" (viz., coins of 23 carats gold and 9oz. silver delivered to the bp. of Winchester and the earl of Southampton, then secretary, to be shown to the King, the meat and drink of Jerham Bennold and Fraunces Benold, gravers, sent to the Mint, to prove their skill, by the earl of Southampton, "then lord keeper of the Privy Seal," for three months in 36 Hen. VIII., and money paid to the said Jerham and Fraunces for graving, by warrant of 26 March, 36 Hen. VIII.); prests for buildings and repairs; and liveries of money to the high treasurer.

Finally, Bowes is shown to be indebted to the King, 13,762l. 9s. 4d. 1 ½mite, which he delivers to Sir Edm. Peckham and is "discharged and quit." Signed and sealed by Warwick, Herbert and Mildmaye and also signed by Peckham, Dunche, Brocke, Byllyngsle and Stanley.

Parchment roll of 18 large membranes, written on the one side only.

IV.

Coinage for Ireland.

Range of Account from 18 April to 14 June, 1544.

R.O. "The duplicament of the declaration " of the account of Sir Martin Bowes, under treasurer of the Mint, of treasure received in prest for provision of bullion to make a certain mass of harp groats for Ireland at the standard of 8oz. fine silver and 4oz. allaye, by commission to him and Stephen Vaughan, under treasurers of the said Mints in the Tower, Robt. Broke, comptroller, John Yorke and Wm. Billingesley, assayers, and Ric. Harryeyonge, provost of the moneyers within the said Mint, 13 May, 36 Hen. VIII., and of the gain to the King by the coining of the same; also of the cost of coinage, wastes in melting and blanching, ready money coming thereof and delivered to Sir Edm. Peckhame, high treasurer of the said Mints; as contained in a presentment signed by Bowes, Brocke and Billingesley and the said Bowes' indenture with the moneyers. Made, 9 Jan., 4 Edw. VI., before John earl of Warwicke, lord Great Master, Sir Wm. Herbert, knight of the Order and master of the Horse, and Sir Walter Myldemaye, commissioners for taking the accounts of the Mints, appointed by commission dated 3 Feb., 4 Edw. VI.

Charge:—He is charged with 5,000l. received by the earl of Southampton, then Lord Wriothesley, treasurer of the wars against France, for provision of bullion, 18 April, 35 Hen. VIII.; with the gain upon 2,780lb. of the said standard moneys in May, 36 Hen. VIII., converted into harp groats, over and besides 4,549l. 21d. 18 mites by him paid for 1,853lb. 4oz. of fine silver contained in the same at 4s. 1d. 2 mites the oz., or 49s. 1d. 2 mites the lb., a clear gain of 15s. 3 1/4d. in every lb., 2,122l. 12s. 11d.; and he further answers in the making of the said 2,7801b., "at the remedie of th'assaye," 1 1/4d. of every lb., and "at the remedie of the shere," 1 1/4d. of every lb., in all 28l. 19s. 2d. Total 7,151l. 12s. 1d.

Discharge:—He is allowed for 37lb. of the said standard moneys wasted in the first and second melting of the said 2,780lb., at 16oz. in every 1001b., which, at 32s. 8 ½d. 5 mites the lb., is 60l. 10s. 11d.; and for 38lb. of the said standard moneys wasted in the "blaunchinge," at 16oz. in every lb., "plus in toto one pound weight," at the same rate, 62l. 3s. 7 ½d.; for allowance to moneyers of 41b. 7 ½oz. of the said standard moneys towards their waste, 7l. 11s. 4 1/4d.; paid to the moneyers for coinage at 10d. the lb., 115l. 16s. 8d.; and harp groats delivered to Peckhame, 14 June, 36 Hen. VIII., 6,700l. Total 6,946l. 2s. 6 3/4d.

Leaving him indebted 205l. 9s. 6 1/4d.; which sum is here exonerated and discharged, being, amongst others, charged in another declaration of account made before the said commissioners, 10 Jan. 4 Edw. VI. Signed: J. Warwyk: W. Herbert: Wa. Mildmay: Will'm Dun [che]. Seals broken.

Large parchment written on one side only.

Footnotes

1 Vol. XVIII., Part ii., Nos. 512-3.
2 Ib., No. 519.
3 No. 2 of this Vol.
4 No. 8.
5 Nos. 44, 45, 46.
6 No. 24.
7 No. 30.
8 No. 33.
9 No. 51.
10 No. 58.
11 See Vol. XVIII., Pt. ii., No. 498; and in the Present Vol. No. 58.
12 An old diplomatist. See letters of his to Sir George Douglas written from France in 1536. Vol. XI, No. 916 i. ii.
13 No. 58.
14 No. 2.
15 No. 59.
16 No. 71.
17 No. 83.
18 No. 92.
19 No. 95.
20 No. 98.
21 On the 12 February, No. 110.
22 Wharton considered that the expedition would have been more successful but that "all men did not their duties," No. 122.
23 No. 136.
24 No. 159.
25 Nos. 164, 169, 171-3, 180, 182.
26 Nos. 182, 190, 191.
27 No. 223.
28 Vol. XVIII., Pt. ii., No. 349. This benefice apparently was in Winchester diocese, given him by Bishop Gardiner by the King's desire. In March another benefice, in Canterbury diocese, was given him by the King himself. No. 278 (60).
29 No. 58.
30 Nos. 146, 153.
31 No. 165.
32 Hertford calls him by mistake the laird of "St. Johnston's." Of course, Johnstone of Annandale is meant.
33 No. 180.
34 No. 121.
35 No. 159.
36 No. 173.
37 Nos. 228-9.
38 Nos. 216, 220, 225-6.
39 No. 243 (2).
40 No. 337 (1, 2).
41 Nos. 285, 292.
42 Nos. 294, 297, 299.
43 No. 306.
44 No. 310.
45 Nos. 243 (4), 320, 326, 332-4.
46 No. 314. See the full text in Hamilton Papers, II., No. 207.
47 No. 319.
48 No. 327.
49 Nos. 348, 387.
50 No. 230.
51 No. 249.
52 Nos. 366, 432, 451.
53 Knox's Hist. of the Reformation, I. 119. Knox says they came "without knowledge of any man in Scotland, we meane of such as should haif had the care of the realme." Does this mean that there were some Scotchmen who were in the secret?
54 Nos. 463, 464, 533.
55 Nos. 472, 181.
56 No. 472.
57 Nos. 483, 533.
58 Nos. 483, 533, 534.
59 No. 510.
60 Nos. 531, 533.
61 No. 510.
62 Nos. 511, 516.
63 No. 531.
64 No. 516.
65 No. 575.
66 Nos. 593, 615.
67 Direct evidence of this will be found in Part ii. of this Volume; but Nos. 1012, 1030 will show the answer made to his son's efforts on his behalf.
68 No. 524.
69 Nos. 555, 556.
70 No. 560. A no less extravagant rumor was divulged at Antwerp shortly afterwards that the English had captured all the principal persons in Scotland, including the young Queen herself and her mother and Cardinal Beton. No. 606.
71 No. 522.
72 No. 593.
73 Nos. 596, 602.
74 No. 601.
75 No. 622.
76 Nos. 684, 692, 762.
77 No. 350.
78 No. 389.
79 No. 404.
80 No. 589.
81 Vol. XVIII., Pt. ii., Nos. 526-8; and this Vol., Nos. 6, 39, 54.
82 Nos. 656, 657, 670, 671.
83 Nos. 4, 5, 65, 89, 105, 111, 129, 147, 148, 166, 168, 183, 206, 207, 216, 318, 381, 400, 461, 480, 482, 519.
84 Nos. 1, 80 (1).
85 Nos. 25, 258.
86 Nos. 20, 31, 61, 64, 118, 126.
87 Vol. XVIII., Part ii., Nos. 252, 457.
88 Nos. 73, 125, 127, 130, 166-7, 195-6.
89 Nos. 132, 137, 160, 166, 167.
90 Nos. 218, 302, 401, 479, 558, 679.
91 Nos. 118, 296.
92 Nos. 263, 375, 392, 427, 461, 829. A further account of the visits of these two Spanish Dukes will be found in the Spanish Chronicle of Henry VIII. translated by Major Hume. This Chronicle is much more trustworthy in these matters than it is in other things.
93 No. 459.
94 See Ruding's Annals of the Coinage I. 309 (ed. 1840). This debasement was made by indenture 16 May, 34 Hen. VIII. See Exch. Accounts in R.O., Bundle 302, No. 22.
95 See Ruding, as above.
96 Vol. XVII., No. 197.
97 Nos. 513, 528. Comp. W. A. Shaw's History of Currency, pp. 120-1.
98 Nos. 543, 549.
99 Nos. 654, 675, 683, 694, 704, 869.
100 No. 512.
101 See Grants in July, No. 1035 (94).
102 Nos. 732, 737.
103 Wriothesley's Chronicle i. 148.
104 No. 812 (59).
105 He died on the 23 January 1545. See G.E.C.'s Peerage.
106 Nos. 275 (pp. 160-2), 384, 409, 634. Note the expression in No. 409 "the Deputy of Calais, or his deputy."
107 Nos. 680, 691, 812 (59).
108 See references in Vols. XV., XVI. and XVII.
109 Nos. 168, 380, 392.
110 See Vol. XVIII., Pt. i., p. 19.
111 No. 336.
112 Vol. XVIII., Part ii., Nos. 385, 479, 480, 488; and in this Volume, Nos. 188, 195.
113 Nos. 89, 111, 118, 127, 168, 188. Isselstein died in 1539, and the references to the Count of Buren in the indexes of Vols. XV. to XVIII. should not have given the Christian name as "Floris" but "Maximilian." The one reference also in the index of Vol. XIV. to Part ii. is to Maximilian, formerly Sieur d'Isselstein.
114 Nos. 206, 208, 245-6, 281, 308, 312, 328, 346, 380.
115 Nos. 287, 301, 349, 392, 399, 419, 420, 448, 465, 554, 581, 617.
116 Nos. 618, 623, 646, 653, 681-2, 695, 703.
117 The nature of this special mission will be seen in No. 619.
118 Nos. 689, 697.
119 Nos. 713, 726.
120 Nos. 728, 729, 730, 741.
121 No. 955.
122 Nos. 311, 321, 322, 360, 364, 392, 400, 427, 478, 500, 501.
123 Nos. 753, 773-4, 787, 823, 866, 896-7, 925, 941, 951-2, 1017.
124 Nos. 995, 1007-9.
125 No. 126.
126 See Vol. XVIII., Part ii., Nos. 403, 405, 485; and in this Volume, Nos. 20, 31, 54, 61, 64, 118, 126.
127 No. 929.
128 No. 953.
129 No. 955.
130 No. 987.
131 No. 989.
132 No. 955.
133 Nos. 1000, 1010, 1019.
134 Nos. 522 (comp. No. 243 (2) and 337 (2)), 528.
135 No. 602.
136 No. 614 (comp. Nos. 593, 603).
137 No. 639.
138 No. 562.
139 No. 660.
140 No. 730.
141 No. 779.
142 No. 799.
143 Lennox and his secretary Bishop had grants of denization on the 6 July. No. 1035 (62, 63).
144 No. 278 (4, 5, 67).
145 Nos. 812 (77, 87), 1032.
146 No. 891.
147 Nos. 894, 1032.
148 No. 799. Soon afterwards, as we shall see in Part ii., he had to pay a higher rate still.
149 Nos. 889, 890.
150 No. 928.