Advertisement

The Character of Government

  • B. W. Beckingsale

Abstract

The statements of Cromwell’s arch enemies, Pole and Gardiner, might be expected to be hostile to him. To counter Cromwell’s charge of a papal tyranny, Pole represented the assumption of the royal supremacy as a tyrannical act and brought papalist invective up to date by accusing Cromwell of machiavellianism. Gardiner only went so far as to suggest that Cromwell argued for despotic rule, he did not accuse him of having established it. Just as it was natural for Pole with his Italian background to point to Machiavelli as the source of the despotic notions which he ascribed to Cromwell, so it was to be expected that Gardiner, a canonist, believed that Cromwell sought the support of Roman law.

Keywords

Mixed Polity Legislative Power Emergency Power Statutory Authority Special Court 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Van Dyke, Renascence Portraits, 151–3; Foxe, Acts and Monuments, VI, 46; Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, 247; J.A. Muller, Stephen Gardiner and the Tudor Reaction (1926), 298; L.P., VII, 580.Google Scholar
  2. 5.
    S.E. Lehmberg, ‘Early Tudor Parliamentary Procedure: Provisos in the legislation of the Reformation Parliament’, EHR, LXXV (1970), 10; Hall, Chronicle, 774–5, 784–6.Google Scholar
  3. 6.
    J. Hurstfield, ‘Was there a Tudor Despotism after all?’, TRHS, 5th Series, LII, (1967), 83–108.Google Scholar
  4. 10.
    M.L. Bush, The Government Policy of Protector Somerset (1975), 138–39, 140 n.65.Google Scholar
  5. 13.
    S.B. Chrimes, Sir John Fortescue: De Laudibus Angliae (Cambridge 1942), 5–7; Elyot, The Boke called the Governour, 150; Merriman, Life and Letters, I, 437.Google Scholar
  6. 14.
    R. Steele, King’s letters from the early Tudors with letters from Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn (1904), 236; Merriman, Life and Letters, I, 361; Chronicle of King Henry VIII, 61.Google Scholar
  7. 17.
    Elton, Policy and Police, 264, 288–9; J.R. Bellamy, The Law of Treason in England in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge 1970), 119–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 18.
    I.D. Thornley, ‘The Destruction of Sanctuary’, Tudor Studies (1924), ed. R.W. Seton-Watson, 203.Google Scholar
  9. 20.
    S.E. Lehmberg, ‘Parliamentary Attainder in the reign of Henry VIII’, HJ, XVIII (1975), 675, 702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 21.
    Ibid., 684.Google Scholar
  11. 22.
    W.K. Ferguson, The Articulate Citizen and the English Renaissance (Durham N.C. 1965), 133–61;Google Scholar
  12. W.R.D. Jones, The Tudor Commonwealth 1529–1559 (1970), passim.Google Scholar
  13. 26.
    The Agrarian History of England and Wales 1500–1640 (Cambridge 1967), ed. J. Thirsk, IV, 217.Google Scholar
  14. 27.
    Statutes of the Realm, III, 558–62; F.R. Salter, Some Early Tracts on Poor Relief (1926); Elton, Studies, II, 137–54.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© B.W. Beckingsale 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. W. Beckingsale

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations