Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Professor Ives has demonstrated the weakness of some of the grounds for thinking that Henry VIII's will was tampered with after 30 December 1546. But he has not mentioned Paget's later testimony suggesting that the ‘unfulfilled gifts clause’ was inserted in the will after 12 January 1547. Even if it was part of the will by 30 December, the gifts implemented by its authority resulted from later skilful and ruthless manipulation of the king. Henry's ‘unwritten will’ greatly strengthened Edward Seymour and his allies and gave William Paget, who was largely responsible for its final shape, the means of buying off potential objectors to Seymour's elevation to the protectorship.
1 Ives, E. W., ‘Henry VIII's will – a forensic conundrum’, Historical Journal, XXXV, 4 (1992), 779–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Miller, H., ‘Henry VIII's unwritten will: grants of lands and honours in 1547’, in Wealth and power in Tudor England, ed. Ives, E. W. et al. (London, 1978), pp. 87–105.Google Scholar
3 Redworth, G., In defence of the church catholic (Oxford, 1990), pp. 239–47.Google Scholar
4 Letters and papers…of the reign of Henry VIII, XXI (2), 533, 541 [hereafter L. & P.]; Scarisbrick, J. J., Henry VIII (London, 1968), pp. 482–3Google Scholar; The history of parliament: the house of commons, 1509–1558, ed. Bindoff, S. T. (London, 1982), III, 353.Google Scholar
5 Foxe, John, Acts and monuments, ed. Pratt, J., with introduction by Stoughton, J. (London, 1870), V, 691–2, VI, 163–4Google Scholar; Gardiner to Somerset, 28 Feb. 1547: The letters of Stephen Gardiner, ed. Muller, J. A. (Cambridge, 1933), p. 267.Google Scholar
6 Acts of the privy council, 1547–50, p. 18 [hereafter APC].Google Scholar
7 Rymer, T., Foedera (The Hague, 1739–1745), VI (3), 142–3Google Scholar; Starkey, D., The reign of Henry VIII, personalities and politics (London, 1985), p. 159Google Scholar. Foxe, , in Acts and monuments, v, 692Google Scholar, claimed that Henry intended to carry out further reform, his will notwithstanding. But his evidence does not relate to the period immediately before the king's death.
8 Jordan, W. K. thought that the executors' decision ‘violated not only the spirit but the letter of the will’, Edward VI: the young king (London, 1968), pp. 57–8Google Scholar; Hoak, D. E. that it ‘overthrew the provisions of Henry's will’, The king's council in the reign of Edward VI (Cambridge, 1976), p. 231Google Scholar; Slavin, A. J., ‘The fall of Lord Chancellor Wriothesley: a study in the politics of conspiracy’, Albion, VII, 4 (1975), 283, agreedGoogle Scholar. But Pollard, A. F., England under Protector Somerset (London, 1900), pp. 27–8Google Scholar, Scarisbrick, , Henry VIII, p. 494Google Scholar and Elton, G. R., Reform and Reformation (London, 1977), p. 333Google Scholar did not believe that Henry's wishes were flouted in this regard.
9 APC, 1547–50, p. 5; Rymer, Foedera, VI (3), 144.
10 Van der Delft to Charles V, 12 Feb. 1547; Calendar of state papers Spanish 1547–49 [hereafter CSPS], p. 31. See comment in Scarisbrick, , Henry VIII, pp. 494–5Google Scholar. But APC, 1547–9, p. 14, recording the proceedings which van der Delft described, show that the ambassador was almost certainly mistaken. The letters patent there specified had been issued in Edward's, not Henry's, name.
11 Ives, , ‘Henry VIII's will’, pp. 794, 802–3.Google Scholar
12 Rymer, , Foedera, VI (3), 144Google Scholar; APC, 1547–50, pp. 15–20; Miller, , ‘Henry VIII's unwritten will’, p. 91Google Scholar; L. & P., XXI (2), 540, 696.
13 Starkey, , Reign of Henry VIII, p. 160Google Scholar. Paget later assured van der Delft that Henry ‘three or four days before his death insisted upon having him (Paget) with him alone, they passing entire nights in conversation together’: van der Delft to Charles V, 12 Feb. 1547: CSPS, 1547–9, p. 30.
14 Cf. Ives, , ‘Henry VIII's will’, pp. 788–9Google Scholar, commenting on CSPS, 1547–9, pp. 340–1; see also Ibid. n. 45.
15 Ives, , ‘Henry VIII's will’, pp. 790–1Google Scholar; Miller, , ‘Henry VIII's unwritten will’, p. 105.Google Scholar
16 Ives, , ‘Henry VIII's will’, pp. 791–4.Google Scholar
17 APC, 1547–50, p. 19.
18 Ibid. pp. 16–19.
19 Miller, , ‘Henry VIII's unwritten will’, p. 91Google Scholar, discussing draft list of grants in Public Record Office, SP 10/1/11.
20 Ives, , ‘Henry VIII's will’, p. 802Google Scholar, perhaps makes these promotions seem more deliberate and carefully planned than they really were.
21 British Library, Add. MS 48126, fos. 6–7. Compare the account in Add. MS 48023, fo. 350 (Dr G. Bernard kindly gave me a copy of his transcript of this latter document).
22 Hoak, D. E., King's council, pp. 97, 226–7.Google Scholar
23 House of commons, 1509–1558, III, 74–5, 235; Jehan Scheyfve to Charles V, 4 July 1553: CSPS, 1553 p. 70; Willen, D., John Russell, first earl of Bedford (London, 1981), pp. 51–7, 93–5.Google Scholar
24 Foxe, , Acts and monuments, v, 691–2Google Scholar; Ives, , ‘Henry VIII's will’, p. 793.Google Scholar
25 British Library, Add. MS 48126, fo. 6v; APC, 1547–50, pp. 248, 259.
26 British Library, Add. MS 48126, fo. 15r; Grafton's chronicle; or history of England (London, 1809), II, 499–500Google Scholar; Hoak, , King's council, 43, 235.Google Scholar
27 Ives, , ‘Henry VIII's will’, p. 803.Google Scholar
28 APC, 1547–50, pp. 5–7.
29 Ives, , ‘Henry VIII's will’, p. 801.Google Scholar
30 Ponet, J., A short treatise of politike power (Paris?, 1639), p. 63.Google Scholar
