No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Broken Angels: the Response of English Parishes to the Turkish Threat to Christendom, 1543–4
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 March 2016
Extract
After several years’ prevarication, for diplomatic and matrimonial reasons, Henry VIII finally promised the Queen of Hungary, Regent of the Netherlands, in July 1543 (just two days before his marriage to Catherine Parr) that he would send 40,000 ducats to assist the Emperor in his fight against the Turks. It was a drop in the ocean as far as Charles V was concerned; his yearly revenue was averaging about 2¼ million ducats at this time. But that was insufficient to meet his expenses, and another 40,000 ducats was by no means to be spurned. In truth, it was modest enough too on the part of the English King as a contribution to so high a cause as the defence of Christendom, being equivalent to £10,000 sterling. But it was £10,000 which Henry could ill afford given his other commitments particularly on fortifications and military expenditure, and it seems to have been intended only as a loan, to be financed, when the logistics had been worked out, by bills drawn on London bankers and on the merchants of the staple at Calais.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1987
References
1 See, for example, The Letters of King Henry VIII, ed. Clare Byrne, M. St (New York, 1068), pp. 188 Google Scholar, 191 and CalSP Spanish 6, pt 2, pp. 39, 241.
2 CalSP Spanish 6, pt 2, no 177.
3 Brandi, K., The Emperor Charles V (London, 1965), pp. 463, 465 Google Scholar.
4 There were as yet no standing arrangements for this kind of transaction on England’s behalf at Antwerp. For subsequent developments see Richardson, W. C., ‘Some Financial Expedients of Henry VIII’, EcHR, ser. 2, 7 (1954-5), p. 33 Google Scholar and Outhwaite, R. B., ‘The Trials of Foreign Borrowing: the English Crown and the Antwerp Money Market in the mid sixteenth century’, ibid., 19 (1966), p. 289 Google Scholar. But it was not unknown for cash to be sent overseas, see Challis, C. E., The Tudor Coinage (Manchester, 1978), p. 189 Google Scholar.
5 CalSP Spanish 6, pt 2, nos 189, 190, 204, 206, 213–15.
6 Ibid., 190, 206. The two accounts vary slightly in detail.
7 APC 1542–7, p. 15.
8 Visitation Articles and Injunctions, ed. W. H. Frere and W. M. Kennedy, 3 vols, Alcuin Club (1910) 2, p. 37.
9 Firth, K. R., The Apocalyptic Tradition in Reformation Britain 1530–1645 (Oxford, 1979), pp. 12, 17–19. 55, 64 Google Scholar.
10 For Simon Fish’s view see Dickens, A. G., The English Reformation (London, 1964), p. 100 Google Scholar.
11 Tudor Royal Proclamations, ed. P. L. Hughes and J. F. Larkin, 3 vols (1964) I, no 220. See also Wriothesley’s Chronicle, ed. W. D. Hamilton, CSer, ns 11 (1875) 1. p. 143.
12 BL, press mark C.32a.38.
13 Ibid., p. lxvi.
14 CalSP Spanish 6, pt 2, no 190.
15 On the theory and practice of indulgences see, for example, Lea, H. C., A History of Auricular Confession and Indulgences in the Latin Church, 3 vols (London, 1896), esp. vol. 3 Google Scholar; Paulus, N., Indulgences as a Social Factor in the Middle Ages, tr. Ross, J. Elliot (New York, 1922 Google Scholar); Lindsay, T. M., ‘Luther’ in CModH 2, p. 123 Google Scholar and C. Wordsworth, ‘On some pardons or indulgences preserved in Yorkshire 1412–1527’, YAJ 16 (1902), p. 369.
16 Wordsworth, p. 399.
17 For some published references to indulgences for the ransom of captives see Wilkins 3, p. 626; Bewes, W. A., Church Briefs (London, 1896), p. 11 Google Scholar; Paulus, p. 53; Wordsworth, p. 393.
18 Lea, 3, p. 154.
19 Wordsworth, pp. 399, 403; Paulus, p. 54.
20 BL, press mark C.34C.44 (1569 edition).
21 Strype, Memorials, 1, pt 1, p. 368.
22 Hughes and Larkin, 1, no 161, p. 236.
23 PRO, Exchequer LTR and Pipe Office Miscellaneous Rolls, E370/2/23.
24 CalLP 18, pt 2, no 315.
25 Freewill offerings towards a religious purpose were commonly referred to as ‘devotions’ in the later Middle Ages. Many pre-Reformation gilds and religious houses had depended upon them for some of their regular income.
26 For example, Exchequer King’s Remembrancer Accounts Various, E101/631/36 for the city of Salisbury.
27 Chapuys expected it to be a house-to-house collection, CalSP Spanish 6, pt 2, no 190.
28 Respectively PRO E179 nos 6/1–1c; 60/17a; 279/4, 62/58a.
29 Respectively E179 nos 278/21; 278/25–6; 109/290.
30 E179/278/20.
31 E179/278/46, and another copy/64/306.
32 Statutes of the Realm 14 & 15 Henry VIII, c.16, s.19; 34 & 35 Henry VIII, c.27, s.25. Challis, p. 67.
33 E179/64/307.
34 E179/60/17a.
35 E179/278/22.
36 E179/109/289. On dandyprats, see Challis, pp. 52–4. They were valued throughout these accounts at 2d.
37 E370/2/23.
38 E179/278/20.
39 E179/43/275i.
40 E179/200/161.
41 E179/62/58a.
42 E179/278/44 (spelling modernized).
43 Quoted by Rupp, G., ‘Luther against’ The Turk, The Pope and The Devil”’, in Brooks, P. N., ed., Seven-Headed Luther (Oxford, 1983), p. 260 Google Scholar.
44 In 1542 a forced loan had been levied on those who, as the King put it, would ‘gladly strain themselves to bear with him for a time’, HMC Portland 1, p. 6. Peckham had gathered in that contribution also, recording receipts of over £112, 000, E370/2/23. For the subsidies and benevolence see, for example, HMC House of Lords, ns 11, pp. 1–2, HMC Bath 2, pp. 10–11. Wriothesley’s Chronicle, 1, pp. 143–4.