The Pilgrimage of Grace, 1536-1537, and the Exeter Conspiracy, 1538, Volume 2 (of 2) — John Shaqi
The Pilgrimage of Grace, 1536-1537, and the Exeter Conspiracy, 1538, Volume 2 (of 2)Dodds, Madeleine Hope
History
The Pilgrimage of Grace, 1536-1537, and the Exeter Conspiracy, 1538, Volume 2 (of 2)
Dodds, Madeleine Hope
Exeter, Henry Courtenay, Marquis of, 1496?-1538; Great Britain -- History -- Henry VIII, 1509-1547; Pilgrimage of Grace, 1536-1537
On Saturday 2 December Norfolk was at Welbeck writing desperate letters
to the King. On Sunday 3 December he was at Hatfield, and with him were
his half-brother Lord William Howard, Sir William Fitzwilliam and Sir
Anthony Browne[44]. He had summoned Shrewsbury to join them, but
Shrewsbury that day sent word that he was so ill that it would be
impossible for him to reach Doncaster before Wednesday[45]. Probably
Lancaster Herald arranged to defer the meeting when he went to
Pontefract that eventful Sunday. Shrewsbury’s letter was written in the
morning, and after dinner Norfolk mentioned in a letter to the King that
the meeting would not be till Wednesday. The principal object of the
letter was to give warning that William Steward of Scotland was on his
way to France and had passed right through the rebel country. It would
therefore be well to stop him, as he might be carrying messages from the
rebels to the King of Scotland. Norfolk reported that the nobles at
Pontefract were in half captivity to the commons, who were very numerous
and wild, but he was not without hopes of winning over some of the
gentlemen[46]. This no doubt is an allusion to the Archbishop’s sermon
and the tumult in the church. Norfolk must have written on the report of
Lancaster Herald. It is rather difficult to discover exactly what
arrangements the Herald made for the first meeting on Monday. Robert
Aske said afterwards that he delivered the King’s safe-conduct for ten
knights and esquires, each accompanied by three servants[47]. On the
other hand Fitzwilliam, writing on Monday 4 December, told the King that
the gentlemen were coming with only two servants each and “upon our
honours without your Grace’s safe-conduct.”[48] Fitzwilliam would be the
better authority, as Aske may easily have forgotten the exact
particulars, if it were not possible that Fitzwilliam was trying to
soothe the King, whose angry letters of 2 December had just been
received. They seem to have arrived early on Monday morning before the
meeting, and Norfolk and Fitzwilliam answered them at 8 A.M. In these
replies therefore there is no record of what passed. Norfolk wrote to
the King and to the Council. Both his letters are full of protestations
of loyalty; he insisted that he had only spoken the plain truth all
through, as it was his duty to warn the King of the danger in which he
stood. Doubtless he had mismanaged affairs, but that was due to his old
age and feebleness, unfit as he was for the great duties which the King
had forced upon him. He hoped now that they would not send him north, as
he had suggested, because he wanted to go home[49]. The letters are very
picturesque but they contain no information about the negotiations with
the rebels.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account