Life and Letters of Thomas Cromwell, Vol. 1 of 2: Life, Letters to 1535Merriman, Roger Bigelow
History
Life and Letters of Thomas Cromwell, Vol. 1 of 2: Life, Letters to 1535
Merriman, Roger Bigelow
Cromwell, Thomas, Earl of Essex, 1485?-1540
On the day of the arrest, a royal messenger was sent to the French
ambassador, to tell him that he must not be amazed at what had happened,
for though common ignorant people spoke of it ‘variously,’ the King said
that he was determined that Marillac should know the truth. Henry stated
that while he was trying ‘by all possible means to lead back religion to
the way of truth, Cromwell, as attached to the German Lutherans, had
always favoured the doctors who preached such erroneous opinions, and
hindered those who preached the contrary, and that recently warned by
some of his principal servants to reflect that he was working against
the intention of the King and of the Acts of Parliament, he had betrayed
himself and said he hoped to suppress the old preachers and have only
the new, adding that the affair would soon be brought to such a pass
that the King with all his power could not prevent it, but rather his
own party would be so strong that he would make the King descend to the
new doctrines even if he had to take arms against him[710].’ From this
and from another letter written by the council to Wallop at the same
time[711] it appears that the King had been able to devise no more
plausible pretext for the destruction of his minister than that which
had been suggested by the Bishop of Winchester, a pretext which as we
have seen was false and unjust in every respect, but convenient in many
ways, especially as it was sure to win the approval of the mass of the
people, who looked upon Cromwell as a true Protestant and hated him as
such, not being able to see that it was solely owing to political
motives, that he had been connected with the Reformers[712]. But the
fact that the charge on which he was convicted was totally
unjustifiable does not in any way imply that Cromwell was wrongly
condemned. There were other perfectly valid reasons for his punishment,
which, however, it was quite impossible to bring forward against him,
simply because the King had shared his guilt. If the number of innocent
persons, whom the minister’s influence had brought to the block, be not
a sufficient warrant for his conviction and execution, it would be
difficult to find a character in English history who merited the death
penalty. But all these crimes could not be laid to his charge because
the King had supported him in them, and he was arrested instead on the
false accusation of opposition to the master to whose service he had
devoted his life.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account