The castles and abbeys of England; Vol. 2 of 2: from the national records, early chronicles, and other standard authorsBeattie, William
History
The castles and abbeys of England; Vol. 2 of 2: from the national records, early chronicles, and other standard authors
Beattie, William
Abbeys -- England; Castles -- England
Without waiting for a “needless act of parliament, the king suppressed
many other houses; and soon after, with the full consent of Lords and
Commons, finished the business, by seizing all the <g>abbeys</g> without
exception, with all the other religious houses, except a very few,
which, at the earnest petition of the people, were spared or given up to
the representatives of their original founders.” Before proceeding to
the “final suppression, under the pretence of checking the superstitious
worshipping of images, he had laid bare their altars, and stripped their
shrines of everything that was valuable; nor did he spare the rich
coffins and the crumbling bones of the dead.” At the distance of four
hundred years--exasperated at that extraordinary man’s opposition to
the royal prerogative--he determined to execute vengeance on the bones
and relics of
<g>Thomas a Becket.</g>--The Martyr’s tomb was broken open; and by an insane
process, worthy of a Nero or a Caligula, a criminal information was
filed against him as “Thomas Becket, some time Archbishop of
Canterbury;” and he was formally cited to appear in court, and answer to
the charges. Thirty days were allowed the saint; but we need hardly
inform our readers that his dishonoured relics rested quietly at
Canterbury, and did not appear to plead in Westminster Hall. With due
solemnity the court opened its proceedings.[123] The attorney-general
eloquently exposed the case for the prosecution, and the advocates of
the saint--who no doubt spoke less boldly--were heard in defence; and
that being over, sentence was pronounced, that “Becket” had been guilty
of rebellion, treason, and contumacy; that his bones should be burnt as
a lesson to the living not to oppose the royal will; and that the rich
offerings with which many generations of men, native and foreign, had
enriched his shrine, should be forfeited to the crown as the personal
property of the traitor. “In the month of August,” continues the
historian, “Cromwell, who must have smiled at the course pursued, sent
down some of his commissioners to Canterbury, who executed their task so
well, that they filled two immense coffers with gold and jewels, each of
them so heavy that it required eight strong men to lift it.” “Among the
rest,” says Godwin, “was a stone of especial lustre, called the _Royal_
of France, offered by King Louis VII., in the year 1179; together with a
great massive cup of gold, at what time he also bestowed an annuity on
the monks of that church of an hundred tuns of wine. This stone was
afterwards highly prized by the king, who did continually wear it on his
thumb.” A few months after, the king, by proclamation, stated to his
people, that forasmuch as it now clearly appears Thomas Becket had been
killed in a riot provoked by his own obstinacy and insolence, and had
been canonized by the Bishop of Rome merely because he was champion of
that usurped authority, he now deemed it proper to declare that he was
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