The King's Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of Thomas Wolsey (Pimlico) (74 page)

⁹⁸
For all matters relating to Richmond, including transcripts of most of the relevant documents, see Nichols,
Henry Fitzroy Duke of Richmond
.

⁹⁹
Ross, pp.198-203.

¹⁰⁰
See Chrimes,
Henry
VII
, pp.249-51 for the Welsh precedents; the bishops acted as presidents of the council in the Marches of Wales under the titular leadership of the prince of Wales.

¹⁰¹
James,
BP
, 30, pp.10 ff.

¹⁰²
LP
, iv, 2402.

¹⁰³
LP
, iv, 3552.

¹⁰⁴
LP
, iv, 3230, 3244.

¹⁰⁵
LP
, iv, 3383, 3404, 3421.

¹⁰⁶
LP
, iv, 3421, 3501, 3521, 3552.

¹⁰⁷
James BP, pp.10 ff; Hodgson, pp.244 ff.

¹⁰⁸
LP
, iii, 3506, 3531.

¹⁰⁹
LP
, iv, 2402.

¹¹⁰
LP
, iv, 2450.

¹¹¹
LP
, iv, 2450, 3231.

¹¹²
Wolsey was informed of their break-out in a letter from Magnus dated 4 July 1527 while on his way to Amiens, but he knew of their activity well before that; see
LP
, iv, 2450, 3230, 3244. It would appear that Wolsey was on the point of releasing Lisle, in return for good sureties, when he broke out of prison.

¹¹³
On 8 July Wolsey suggested to Henry an approach to Scotland (
LP
, iv, 3244), and from at least 12 Aug. Henry wrote either to James or to Angus at regular intervals until the Lisles surrendered.

¹¹⁴
LP
, iv, 3628, 3629; Fonblanque, i, pp.556-8.

¹¹⁵
LP
, iv, 3849, 3850.

¹¹⁶
This the essence of James’s argument in
BP
, 30, pp.13-14.

¹¹⁷
Ibid, p.14 for the view that the 6th earl sought Sir William’s pardon. That it was only the two sons’ pardon is clear from (1) Tuke’s letter to Wolsey (
LP
, iv, 4204) in which he refers only to the younger son aged about 13; (2) Wolsey’s letter to the 6th earl (
LP
, iv, 4082) in which he refers only to the request for the pardon of the eldest son and ‘for the sparing of putting to execution of Sir William Lisle’s elder son’; (3) the 6th earl’s letter to Wolsey (
LP
, iv, 4093) in which he wrote: ‘I sent unto my Lord of London and wrote to Mr.Tuke to move your Grace and move others to save some of their lives.’ There is nowhere any reference to a pardon for Sir William, which, given his record, is surely not at all surprising.

¹¹⁸
LP
,
iv
, 4093; quoted in James,
BP
, 30, p.14.

¹¹⁹
LP
, iv, 3914.

¹²⁰
LP
, iv, 3924, 4105, 4116.

¹²¹
LP
, iv, 3704, 3705, 3773-6, 3778, 3791, 3794.

¹²²
For Anglo-Scottish relations at this time and Angus’s attitude towards Sir William Lisle, see Rae, pp.157 ff.

¹²³
LP
, iv, 3689, 3816.

¹²⁴
LP
, iv, 3629 [2], 3816.

¹²⁵
LP
, iv, 4133.

¹²⁶
As suggested by James; see his
BP
, 30, pp.12-4, 30-2.

¹²⁷
The animus against the sheriff, Sir William Ellerker, emerges very clearly in Humphrey Lisle’s confession; see
LP
, iv, 4336.

¹²⁸
The easiest source for the 6th earl’s character is Fonblanque, i, pp.378 ff., where many of his letters are quoted at some length.

¹²⁹
LP
, xii, 548; for a modern assessment of his character and its effect on the Percys’ financial affairs see Bean, pp.145ff.

¹³⁰
Bernard,
HJ
, 25, pp.671-85 is good on this.

¹³¹
LP
, iv, 4082; for a transcript see Fonblanque, i, pp.390-2.

¹³²
LP
, iv, 4082.

¹³³
Fonblanque, i, p.404.

¹³⁴
St. P
, iv, p.155 (
LP
, iv, 701).

¹³⁵
St. P
, i, p.548 (
LP
, xii [1], 1118); quoted in Bush,
NH
, 6, p.40.

¹³⁶
Reid, p.286.

¹³⁷
LP
, iv, 220, 279; Hodgson, iv, pp.35-40.

¹³⁸
LP
, xii(2), 186 the essential point being that he had not been put on the Council.

¹³⁹
LP
, iv, 4186.

¹⁴⁰
LP
, iv, 5070.

¹⁴¹
LP
, iv, 5289.

¹⁴²
This account relies heavily on two important articles: S.G. Ellis,
IHS
, xx, pp.235-71; Quinn, pp.318-44. Since I wrote this both have produced important reworkings of their original research; see Quinn’s chapters in Cosgrove, pp.638-87 and S.G. Ellis,
Tudor Ireland
and
Reform and Revival
.

¹⁴³
Lydon, passim; Otway-Ruthven, p.174.

¹⁴⁴
Lydon, p.132.

¹⁴⁵
Ellis,
IHS
, xx, 239, n.12.

¹⁴⁶
St. P
, ii, p.9. The dating is tentative.

¹⁴⁷
Lydon, pp.260ff.

¹⁴⁸
LP
, iv, 5501 [2] a paper prepared by Desmond for Charles and carried to him by the Imperial envoy.

¹⁴⁹
LP
, iii, 670.

¹⁵⁰
St. P
, ii, p.6.

¹⁵¹
LP
, iv, 5501 [1].

¹⁵²
St. P
, ii, pp.1-7.

¹⁵³
St. P
, ii, p.5. For an agreement between a ‘chief-captain’ and ‘petty captain’ see O’Faolain, pp.23-4.

¹⁵⁴
Taken from the four Irish Reform programmes of about the period; see Carew MSS, 1-2;
LP
, iv, 2405;
St. P
,ii, pp.1-31. For a detailed discussion see Bradshaw, pp.32 ff. My own view is that Bradshaw exaggerates their importance while minimizing the difficulties in governing Ireland.

¹⁵⁵
For contemporary comment see
inter alia St. P
, ii, pp.9-10, 14.

¹⁵⁶
St. P
, ii, p.9.

¹⁵⁷
St. P
, ii, pp.127, 129.

¹⁵⁸
For black rents paid to Kildare see Lydon, pp.275-6.

¹⁵⁹
St. P
, ii, p.11.

¹⁶⁰
Libelle of Englyshe Polycye
, pp.34-40; also Lydon, p.242.

¹⁶¹
Inter alia
Lydon, pp.272 ff.

¹⁶²
S.G. Ellis,
IHS
, p.240, n.14.

¹⁶³
Bush,
NH
, 6, pp.40 ff; James,
BP
, 27, pp.26 ff.

¹⁶⁴
St. P
ii, p.13. The average income of the nobility was £1,000; Buckingham’s was in excess of £5,000 and Northumberland’s £3,900.

¹⁶⁵
Ellis,
IHS
, xx, pp.246-8.

¹⁶⁶
Ibid.

¹⁶⁷
Ibid, p.248.

¹⁶⁸
Carew MSS
, i, p.6.

¹⁶⁹
Quinn, p.322.

¹⁷⁰
Carew MSS
, i, 126.

¹⁷¹
For this sequence of events see Quinn, pp.333 ff.

¹⁷²
St. P
, ii, pp.66-70 (
LP
, iii, 1252).

¹⁷³
St. P
, ii, pp.135-6. In the same letter he advised that money should be given to the Butlers to help them in their fight with Desmond, while two months earlier he had urged Wolsey not to abolish coyne and livery in the diocese of Cashel on the grounds that this would seriously weaken the Butler’s military strength (
LP
, iv, 4277. Quinn’s suggestion (Quinn, pp.333-5) that Norfolk switched from support of Ormond to support of Kildare to further his factional struggles at the English court does not seem convincing. There is no evidence that he was ever anti-Butler. His reasons for preferring Kildare as deputy were entirely pragmatic.

¹⁷⁴
St. P
, ii, pp.136-40 (
LP
, iv.4541).

¹⁷⁵
St. P
, ii, p.138 (
LP
, iv, 454).

¹⁷⁶
Vergil, p.265.

¹⁷⁷
Quinn, pp.324-5.

¹⁷⁸
Holinshed, iv, pp.280ff. quoted extensively in Fitzgerald, pp.176-9 where Stonyhurst’s account seems to be accepted. Both Ellis and Quinn are more sceptical.

¹⁷⁹
St. P
, i, p.73 (
LP
, iii, 1675).

¹⁸⁰
St. P
, ii, pp-136-40 (
LP
, iv, 4541). For Butler being in Wolsey’s household see
St. P
, ii, pp.49-51 (
LP
, iii, 1011, 1628); also Ives,
Anne Boleyn
, p.44, who makes no qualification. For the Butlers being preferred see
inter alia
LP
, iii, 1011, 1628; iv, 81, 4422, 4562.

¹⁸¹
Quinn, pp.329-30.