In stronger language the Cardinal-Governor of Bologna declared that "he

knew the gyze of England as well as few men did, and if the king should die

without heirs male, he was sure it would cost two hundred thousand men's

lives. Wherefore he thought, supposing his Grace should have no more

children by the queen, and that by taking of another wife he might have

heirs male, the bringing to pass that matter, and by that to avoid the

mischiefs afore written, he thought would deserve Heaven."[137] Whatever

doubt their might be, therefore, whether the original marriage with

Catherine was legal, it was universally admitted that there was none about

the national desirableness of the dissolution of it; and if the pope had

been free to judge only by the merits of the case, it is impossible to

doubt that he would have cut the knot, either by granting a dispensation to

Henry to marry a second wife--his first being formally, though not

judicially, separated from him--or in some other way.[138] But the emperor

was "a lion in his path;" the question of strength between the French and

the Spaniards remained undecided, and Clement would come to no decision

until he was assured of the power of the allies to protect him from the

consequences. Accordingly he said and unsaid, sighed, sobbed, beat his

breast, shuffled, implored, threatened;[139] in all ways he endeavoured to

escape from his dilemma, to say yes and to say no, to do nothing, to offend

no one, and above all to gain time, with the weak man's hope that

"something might happen" to extricate him. Embassy followed embassy from

England, each using language more threatening than its predecessor. The

thing, it was said, must be done, and should be done. If it was not done by

the pope it would be done at home in some other way, and the pope must take

the consequences.[140] Wolsey warned him passionately of the rising

storm,[141] a storm which would be so terrible when it burst "that it would

be better to die than to live." The pope was strangely unable to believe

that the danger could be real, being misled perhaps by other information

from the friends of Queen Catherine, and by an over-confidence in the

attachment of the people to the emperor. He acted throughout in a manner

natural to a timid amiable man, who found himself in circumstances to which

he was unequal; and as long as we look at him merely as a man we can pity

his embarrassment. He forgot, however, that only because he was supposed to

be more than a man had kings and emperors consented to plead at his

judgment seat--a fact of which Stephen Gardiner, then Wolsey's secretary,

thought it well to remind him in the following striking language:--

"Unless," said the future Bishop of Winchester in the council, at the close

of a weary day of unprofitable debating, "unless some other resolution be

taken than I perceive you intend to make, hereupon shall be gathered a

marvellous opinion of your Holiness, of the college of cardinals, and of

the authority of this See. The King's Highness, and the nobles of the realm

who shall be made privy to this, shall needs think that your Holiness and

these most reverend and learned councillors either will not answer in this

cause, or cannot answer. If you will not, if you do not choose to point out

the way to an erring man, the care of whom is by God committed to you, they

will say, 'Oh race of men most ungrateful, and of your proper office most

oblivious! You who should be simple as doves are full of all deceit, and

craft, and dissembling. If the king's cause be good, we require that you

pronounce it good. If it be bad, why will you not say that it is bad, so to

hinder a prince to whom you are so much bounden from longer continuing with

it? We ask nothing of you but justice, which the king so loves and values,

that whatever sinister things others may say or think of him, he will

follow that with all his heart; that, and nothing else, whether it be for

the marriage or against the marriage.'

"But if the King's Majesty," continued Gardiner, hitting the very point of

the difficulty, "if the King's Majesty and the nobility of England, being

persuaded of your good will to answer if you can do so, shall be brought to

doubt of your ability, they will be forced to a harder conclusion

respecting this See--namely, that God has taken from it the key of

knowledge; and they will begin to give better ear to that opinion of some

persons to which they have as yet refused to listen, that those papal laws

which neither the pope himself nor his council can interpret, deserve only

to be committed to the flames." "I desired his Holiness," he adds, "to

ponder well this matter."[142]

Clement was no hero, but in his worst embarrassments his wit never failed

him. He answered that he was not learned, and "to speak truth, albeit there

was a saying in the canon law, that _Pontifex habet omnia jura in scrinio

pectoris_ (the pope has all laws locked within his breast), yet God had

never given him the key to open that lock." He was but "seeking pretexts"

for delay, as Gardiner saw, till the issue of the Italian campaign of the

French in the summer of 1528 was decided. He had been liberated, or had

been allowed to escape from Rome, in the fear that if detained longer he

might nominate a vicegerent; and was residing at an old ruined castle at

Orvieto, waiting upon events, leaving the Holy City still occupied by the

Prince of Orange. In the preceding autumn, immediately after the congress

at Amiens, M. de Lautrec, accompanied by several English noblemen, had led

an army across the Alps. He had defeated the Imperialists in the north of

Italy in several minor engagements; and in January his success appeared so

probable, that the pope took better heart, and told Sir Gregory Cassalis,

that if the French would only approach near enough to enable him to plead

compulsion, he would grant a commission to Wolsey, with plenary power to

conclude the cause.[143] De Lautrec, however, foiled in his desire to bring

the Imperialists to a decisive engagement, wasted his time and strength in

ineffectual petty sieges; and finally, in the summer, on the unhealthy

plains of Naples, a disaster more fatal in its consequences than the battle

of Pavia, closed the prospects of the French to the south of the Alps; and

with them all Wolsey's hopes of realising his dream. Struck down, not by a

visible enemy, but by the silent hand of fever, the French general himself,

his English friends, and all his army melted away from off the earth. The

pope had been wise in time. He had committed himself in words and

intentions; but he had done nothing which he could not recall. He obtained

his pardon from the emperor by promising to offend no more; and from that

moment never again entertained any real thought of concession. Acting under

explicit directions, he made it his object thenceforward to delay and to

procrastinate. Charles had no desire to press matters to extremities. War

had not yet been declared[144] against him by Henry; nor was he anxious

himself to precipitate a quarrel from which, if possible, he would gladly

escape. He had a powerful party in England, which it was unwise to alienate

by hasty, injudicious measures; and he could gain all which he himself

desired by a simple policy of obstruction. His object was merely to

protract the negotiation and prevent a decision, in the hope either that

Henry would be wearied into acquiescence, or that Catherine herself would

retire of her own accord, or, finally, that some happy accident might occur

to terminate the difficulty. It is, indeed, much to the honour of Charles

V. that he resolved to support the queen. She had thrown herself on his

protection; but princes in such matters consider prudence more than

feeling, and he could gain nothing by defending her: while, both for

himself and for the church he risked the loss of much. He over-rated the

strength of his English connection, and mistook the English character; but

he was not blind to the hazard which he was incurring, and would have

welcomed an escape from the dilemma perhaps as warmly as Henry would have

welcomed it himself. The pope, who well knew his feelings, told Gardiner,

"It would be for the wealth of Christendom if the queen were in her

grave; and he thought the emperor would be thereof most glad of all;"

saying, also, "that he thought like as the emperor had destroyed the

temporalities of the church, so should she be the destruction of the

spiritualities."[145]

In the summer of 1528, before the disaster at Naples, Cardinal Campeggio

had left Rome on his way to England, where he was to hear the cause in

conjunction with Wolsey. An initial measure of this obvious kind it had

been impossible to refuse; and the pretexts under which it was for many

months delayed, were exhausted before the pope's ultimate course had been

made clear to him. But Campeggio was instructed to protract his journey to

its utmost length, giving time for the campaign to decide itself. He

loitered into the autumn, under the excuse of gout and other convenient

accidents, until the news reached him of De Lautrec's death, which took

place on the 21st of August; and then at length proceeding, he betrayed to

Francis I., on passing through Paris, that he had no intention of allowing

judgment to be passed upon the cause.[146] Even Wolsey was beginning to

tremble at what he had attempted, and was doubtful of success.[147] The

seeming relief came in time, for Henry's patience was fast running out. He

had been over-persuaded into a course which he had never cordially

approved. The majority of the council, especially the Duke of Norfolk and

the Duke of Suffolk, were traditionally imperial, and he himself might well

doubt whether he might not have found a nearer road out of his difficulties

by adhering to Charles. Charles, after all, was not ruining the papacy, and

had no intention of ruining it; and his lightest word weighed more at the

court of Rome than the dubious threats and prayers of France. The Bishop of

Bayonne, resident French ambassador in London, whose remarkable letters

transport us back into the very midst of that unquiet and stormy scene,

tells us plainly that the French alliance was hated by the country, that

the nobility were all for the emperor, and that among the commons the

loudest discontent was openly expressed against Wolsey from the danger of

the interruption of the trade with Flanders. Flemish ships had been

detained in London, and English ships in retaliation had been arrested in

the Zealand ports; corn was unusually dear, and the expected supplies from

Spain and Germany were cut off;[148] while the derangement of the woollen

trade, from the reluctance of the merchants to venture purchases, was

causing distress all over the country, and Wolsey had been driven to the

most arbitrary measures to prevent open disturbance.[149] He had set his

hopes upon the chance of a single cast which he would not believe could

fail him, but on each fresh delay he was compelled to feel his declining

credit, and the Bishop of Bayonne wrote, on the 20th of August, 1528, that

the cardinal was in bad spirits, and had told him in confidence, that "if

he could only see the divorce arranged, the king remarried, the succession

settled, and the laws and the manners and customs of the country reformed,

he would retire from the world and would serve God the remainder of his

days."[150] To these few trifles he would be contented to confine

himself--only to these; he was past sixty, he was weary of the world, and

his health was breaking, and he would limit his hopes to the execution of a

work for which centuries imperfectly sufficed. It seemed as if he measured

his stature by the lengthening shadow, as his sun made haste to its

setting. Symptoms of misgiving may be observed in the many anxious letters

which he wrote while Campeggio was so long upon his road; and the Bishop of

Bayonne, whose less interested eyes could see more deeply into the game,

warned him throughout that the pope was playing him false.[151] Only in a

revulsion from violent despondency could such a man as Wolsey have allowed

himself, on the mere arrival of the legate, and after a few soft words from

him, to write in the following strain to Sir Gregory Cassalis:--

"You cannot believe the exultation with which at length I find myself

successful in the object for which these many years, with all my industry,

I have laboured. At length I have found means to bind my most excellent

sovereign and this glorious realm to the holy Roman see in faith and

obedience for ever. Henceforth will this people become the most sure pillar

of support to bear up the sacred fabric of the church. Henceforth, in

recompense for that enduring felicity which he has secured to it, our most

Holy Lord has all England at his devotion. In brief time will this noble

land make its grateful acknowledgments to his clemency at once for the

preservation of the most just, most wise, most excellent of princes, and

for the secure establishment of the realm and the protection of the royal

succession."[152]

This letter was dated on the fourth of October, and was written in the hope

that the pope had collected his courage, and that the legate had brought

powers to proceed to judgment. In a few days the prospect was again

clouded, and Wolsey was once more in despair.[153] Campeggio had brought

with him instructions if possible to arrange a compromise,--if a compromise

was impossible, to make the best use of his ingenuity, and do nothing and

allow nothing to be done. In one of two ways, however, it was hoped that he

might effect a peaceful solution. He urged the king to give way and to

proceed no further; and this failing, as he was prepared to find, he urged

the same thing upon the queen.[154] He invited Catherine, or he was

directed to invite her, in the pope's name,[155] for the sake of the

general interests of Christendom, to take the vows and enter what was

called _religio laxa_, a state in which she might live unincumbered by

obligations except the easy one of chastity, and free from all other

restrictions either of habit, diet, or order. The proposal was Wolsey's,

and was formed when he found the limited nature of Campeggio's

instructions;[156] but it was adopted by the latter; and I cannot but think

(though I have no proof of it) that it was not adopted without the

knowledge of the emperor. Whatever were his own interests, Charles V. gave

Catherine his unwavering support: he made it his duty to maintain her in

the ignominious position in which she was placed, and submitted his own

conduct to be guided by her wishes. It cannot be doubted, however, from the

pope's words, and also from the circumstances of the case, that if she

could have prevailed upon herself to yield, it would have relieved him from

a painful embarrassment. As a prince, he must have felt the substantial

justice of Henry's demand, and in refusing to allow the pope to pass a

judicial sentence of divorce, he could not but have known that he was

compromising the position of the Holy See: while Catherine herself, on the

other hand, if she had yielded, would have retired without a stain; no

opinion would have been pronounced upon her marriage; the legitimacy of the

Princess Mary would have been left without impeachment; and her right to

the succession, in the event of no male heir following from any new

connection which the king might form, would have been readily secured to

her by act of parliament. It may be asked why she did not yield, and it is

difficult to answer the question. She was not a person who would have been

disturbed by the loss of a few court vanities. Her situation as Henry's

wife could not have had many charms for her, nor can it be thought that she

retained a personal affection for him. If she had loved him, she would have

suffered too deeply in the struggle to have continued to resist, and the

cloister would have seemed a paradise. Or if the cloister had appeared too

sad a shelter for her, she might have gone back to the gardens of the

Alhambra, where she had played as a child, carrying with her the

affectionate remembrance of every English heart, and welcomed by her own

people as an injured saint. Nor again can we suppose that the possible

injury of her daughter's prospects from the birth of a prince by another

marriage could have seemed of so vast moment to her. Those prospects were

already more than endangered, and would have been rather improved than

brought into further peril.

It is not for us to dictate the conduct which a woman smarting under

injuries so cruel ought to have pursued. She had a right to choose the

course which seemed the best to herself, and England especially could not

claim of a stranger that readiness to sacrifice herself which it might have

demanded and exacted of one of its own children. We may regret, however,

what we are unable to censure; and the most refined ingenuity could

scarcely have invented a more unfortunate answer than that which the Queen

returned to the legate's request. She seems to have said that she was ready

to take vows of chastity if the king would do the same. It does not appear

whether the request was _formally_ made, or whether it was merely suggested

to her in private conversation. That she told the legates, however, what

her answer would be, appears certain from the following passage, sadly

indicating the "devices of policy" to which in this unhappy business

honourable men allowed themselves to be driven:--

"Forasmuch as it is like that the queen shall make marvellous difficulty,

and in nowise be conformable to enter religion[157] or take vows of

chastity, but that to induce her thereunto, there must be ways and means of

high policy used, and all things possible devised to encourage her to the

same; wherein percase she shall resolve that she in no wise will condescend

so to do, unless that the King's Highness also do the semblable for his

part; the king's said orators shall therefore in like wise ripe and

instruct themselves by their secret learned council in the court of Rome,

if, for so great a benefit to ensue unto the king's succession, realm, and

subjects, with the quiet of his conscience, his Grace should promise so to

enter religion on vows of chastity for his part, only thereby to conduce

the queen thereunto, whether in that case the Pope's Holiness may dispense

with the King's Highness for the same promise, oath, or vow, discharging

his Grace clearly of the same."[158]

The explanation of the queen's conduct lies probably in regions into which

it is neither easy nor well to penetrate; in regions of outraged delicacy

and wounded pride, in a vast drama of passion which had been enacted behind

the scenes. From the significant hints which are let fall of the original

cause of the estrangement, it was of a kind more difficult to endure than

the ordinary trial of married women, the transfer of a husband's affection

to some fairer face; and a wife whom so painful a misfortune had failed to

crush would be likely to have been moved by it to a deeper and more bitter

indignation even, because while she could not blame herself, she knew not

whom she might rightly allow herself to blame. And if this were so, the

king is not likely to have allayed the storm when at length, putting faith

in Wolsey's promises, he allowed himself openly to regard another person as

his future wife, establishing her in the palace at Greenwich under the same

roof with the queen, with reception rooms, and royal state, and a position

openly acknowledged,[159] the gay court and courtiers forsaking the gloomy

dignity of the actual wife for the gaudy splendour of her brilliant rival.

Tamer blood than that which flowed in the veins of a princess of Castile

would have boiled under these indignities; and we have little reason to be

surprised if policy and prudence were alike forgotten by Catherine in the

bitterness of the draught which was forced upon her, and if her own

personal wrongs outweighed the interests of the world. Henry had proceeded

to the last unjustifiable extremity as soon as the character of Campeggio's

mission had been made clear to him, as if to demonstrate to all the world

that he was determined to persevere at all costs and hazards.[160] Taking

the management of the negotiation into his own keeping, he sent Sir Francis

Bryan, the cousin of Anne Boleyn, to the pope, to announce that what he

required must be done, and to declare peremptorily, no more with covert

hints, but with open menace, that in default of help from Rome, he would

lay the matter before parliament, to be settled at home by the laws of his

own country.

Meanwhile, the emperor, who had hitherto conducted himself with the

greatest address, had fallen into his first error. He had retreated

skilfully out of the embarrassment in which the pope's imprisonment

involved him, and mingling authority and dictation with kindness and

deference, he had won over the Holy See to his devotion, and neutralised

the danger to which the alliance of France and England threatened to expose

him. His correspondence with the latter country assured him of the

unpopularity of the course which had been pursued by the cardinal; he was

aware of the obstruction of trade which it had caused, and of the general

displeasure felt by the people at the breach of an old friendship; while

the league with France in behalf of the Roman church had been barren of

results, and was made ridiculous by the obvious preference of the pope for

the enemy from whom it was formed to deliver him. If Charles had understood

the English temper, therefore, and had known how to avail himself of the

opportunity, events might have run in a very different channel. But he was

not aware of the earnestness with which the people were bent upon securing

the succession, nor of their loyal attachment to Henry. He supposed that

disapproval of the course followed by Wolsey to obtain the divorce implied

an aversion to it altogether; and trusting to his interest in the privy

council, and to his commercial connection with the city, he had attempted

to meet menace with menace; he had replied to the language addressed by

Henry to the pope with an attempt to feel the pulse of English

disaffection, and he opened a correspondence with the Earl of Desmond for

an Irish revolt.[161]

The opportunity for a movement of this kind had not yet arrived. There was,

in England at least, as yet no wide disaffection; but there was a chance of

serious outbreaks; and Henry instantly threw himself upon the nation. He

summoned the peers by circular to London, and calling a general meeting,

composed of the nobility, the privy council, the lord mayor, and the great

merchants of the city, he laid before them a specific detail of his objects

in desiring the divorce;[162] and informed them of the nature of the

measures which had been taken.[163] This, the French ambassador informs us,

gave wide satisfaction and served much to allay the disquiet; but so great

was the indignation against Wolsey, that disturbances in London were every

day anticipated; and at one time the danger appeared so threatening, that

an order of council was issued, commanding all strangers to leave the city,

and a general search was instituted for arms.[164] The strangers aimed at

were the Flemings, whose numbers made them formidable, and who were,

perhaps, supposed to be ready to act under instruction from abroad. The

cloud, however, cleared away; the order was not enforced; and the

propitious moment for treason had not yet arrived. The emperor had felt so

confident that, in the autumn of 1528, he had boasted that, "before the

winter was over, he would fling Henry from his throne by the hands of his

own Subjects." The words had been repeated to Wolsey, who mentioned them

openly at his table before more than a hundred gentlemen. A person present

exclaimed, "That speech has lost the emperor more than a hundred thousand

hearts among us;"[165] an expression which reveals at once the strength and

the weakness of the imperial party. England might have its own opinions of

the policy of the government, but it was in no humour to tolerate treason,

and the first hint of revolt was followed by an instant recoil. The

discovery of more successful intrigues in Scotland and Ireland completed

the destruction of Charles's influence;[166] and the result of these

ill-judged and premature efforts was merely to unite the nation in their

determination to prosecute the divorce.

Thus were the various parties in the vast struggle which was about to

commence gravitating into their places; and mistake combined with policy to

place them in their true positions. Wolsey, in submitting "the king's

matter" to the pope, had brought to issue the question whether the papal

authority should be any longer recognised in England; and he had secured

the ruin of that authority by the steps through which he hoped to establish

it; while Charles, by his unwise endeavours to foment a rebellion, severed

with his own hand the links of a friendship which would have been seriously

embarrassing if it had continued. By him, also, was dealt the concluding

stroke in this first act of the drama; and though we may grant him credit

for the ingenuity of his contrivance, he can claim it only at the expense

of his probity. The pope, when the commission was appointed for the trial

of the cause in England, had given a promise in writing that the commission

should not be revoked. It seemed, therefore, that the legates would be

compelled, in spite of themselves, to pronounce sentence; and that the

settlement of the question, in one form or other, could not long be

delayed. At the pressure of the crisis in the winter of 1528-9, a document

was produced alleged to have been found in Spain, which furnished a pretext

for a recall of the engagement, and opening now questions, indefinite and

inexhaustible, rendered the passing of a sentence in England impossible.

Unhappily, the weight of the king's claim (however it had been rested on

its true merits in conversation and in letters) had, by the perverse

ingenuity of the lawyers, been laid on certain informalities and defects in

the original bull of dispensation, which had been granted by Julius II. for

the marriage of Henry and Catherine. At the moment when the legates' court

was about to be opened, a copy of a brief was brought forward, bearing the

same date as the bull, exactly meeting the objection. The authenticity of

this brief was open, on its own merits, to grave doubt; and suspicion

becomes certainty when we find it was dropped out of the controversy so

soon as the immediate object was gained for which it was produced. But the

legates' hands were instantly tied by it. The "previous question" of

authenticity had necessarily to be tried before they could take another

step; and the "original" of the brief being in the hands of the emperor,

who refused to send it into England, but offered to send it to Rome, the

cause was virtually transferred to Rome, where Henry, as he knew, was

unlikely to consent to plead, or where he could himself rule the decision.

He had made a stroke of political finesse, which answered not only the

purpose that he immediately intended, but answered, also, the purpose that

he did not intend--of dealing the hardest blow which it had yet received to

the supremacy of the Holy See.

The spring of 1529 was wasted in fruitless efforts to obtain the brief. At

length, in May, the proceedings were commenced; but they were commenced

only in form, and were never more than an illusion. Catherine had been

instructed in the course which she was to pursue. She appealed from the

judgment of the legates to that of the pope; and the pope, with the plea of

the new feature which had arisen in the case, declared that he could not

refuse to revoke his promise. Having consented to the production of the

brief, he had in fact no alternative; nor does it appear what he could have

urged in excuse of himself. He may have suspected the forgery; nay, it is

certain that in England he was believed to be privy to it; but he could not

ignore an important feature of necessary evidence, especially when pressed

upon him by the emperor; and it was in fact no more than an absurdity to

admit the authority of a papal commission, and to refuse to permit an

appeal from it to the pope in person. We may thank Clement for dispelling a

chimera by a simple act of consistency. The power of the See of Rome in

England was a constitutional fiction, acknowledged only on condition that

it would consent to be inert. So long as a legate's court sat in London,

men were able to conceal from themselves the fact of a foreign

jurisdiction, and to feel that, substantially, their national independence

was respected; when the fiction aspired to become a reality, but one

consequence was possible. If Henry himself would have stooped to plead at a

foreign tribunal, the spirit of the nation would not have permitted him to

inflict so great a dishonour on the free majesty of England.

So fell Wolsey's great scheme, and with it fell the last real chance of

maintaining the pope's authority in England under any form. The people were

smarting under the long humiliation of the delay, and ill-endured to see

the interests of England submitted, as they virtually were, to the

arbitration of a foreign prince. The emperor, not the pope, was the true

judge who sat to decide the quarrel; and their angry jealousy refused to

tolerate longer a national dishonour.

"The great men of the realm," wrote the legates, "are storming in bitter

wrath at our procrastination. Lords and commons alike complain that they

are made to expect at the hands of strangers things of vital moment to

themselves and their fortunes. And many persons here who would desire to

see the pope's authority in this country diminished or annulled, are

speaking in language which we cannot repeat without horror."[167]

And when, being in such a mood, they were mocked, after two weary years of

negotiation, by the opening of a fresh vista of difficulties, when they

were informed that the further hearing of the cause was transferred to

Italy, even Wolsey, with certain ruin before him, rose in protest before

such a dream of shame. He was no more the Roman legate, but the English

minister.

"If the advocation be passed," he wrote to Cassalis,[168] "or shall now at

any time hereafter pass, with citation of the king in person, or by

proctor, to the court of Rome, or with any clause of interdiction or

excommunication, _vel cum invocatione brachii sæcularis_, whereby the king

should be precluded from taking his advantage otherwise, the dignity and

prerogative royal of the king's crown, whereunto all the nobles and

subjects of this realm will adhere and stick unto the death, may not

tolerate nor suffer that the same be obeyed. And to say the truth, in so

doing the pope should not only show himself the king's enemy, but also as

much as in him is, provoke all other princes and people to be the

semblable. Nor shall it ever be seen that the king's cause shall be

ventilated or decided in any place out of his own realm; _but that if his

Grace should come at any time to the Court of Rome, he would do the same

with such a main and army royal as should be formidable to the pope and all

Italy_."[169]

Wolsey, however, failed in his protest; the advocation was passed,

Campeggio left England, and he was lost. A crisis had arrived, and a

revolution of policy was inevitable. From the accession of Henry VII., the

country had been governed by a succession of ecclesiastical ministers, who

being priests as well as statesmen, were essentially conservative; and

whose efforts in a position of constantly increasing difficulty had been

directed towards resisting the changing tendencies of the age, and either

evading a reformation of the church while they admitted its necessity, or

retaining the conduct of it in their own hands, while they were giving

evidence of their inability to accomplish the work. It was now over; the

ablest representative of this party, in a last desperate effort to retain

power, had decisively failed. Writs were issued for a parliament when the

legate's departure was determined, and the consequences were inevitable.

Wolsey had known too well the unpopularity of his foreign policy, to

venture on calling a parliament himself. He relied on success as an

ultimate justification; and inasmuch as success had not followed, he was

obliged to bear the necessary fate of a minister who, in a free country,

had thwarted the popular will and whom fortune deserted in the struggle.

The barriers which his single hand had upheld suddenly gave way, the

torrent had free course, and he himself was the first to be swept away. In

modern language, we should describe what took place as a change of

ministry, the government being transferred to an opposition, who had been

irritated by long depression under the hands of men whom they despised, and

who were borne into power by an irresistible force in a moment of

excitement and danger. The king, who had been persuaded against his better

judgment to accept Wolsey's schemes, admitted the rising spirit without

reluctance, contented to moderate its action, but no longer obstructing or

permitting it to be obstructed. Like all great English statesmen, he was

constitutionally conservative, but he had the tact to perceive the

conditions under which, in critical times, conservatism is possible; and

although he continued to endure for himself the trifling of the papacy, he

would not, for the sake of the pope's interest, delay further the

investigation of the complaints of the people against the church; while in

the future prosecution of his own cause, he resolved to take no steps

except with the consent of the legislature, and in a question of national

moment, to consult only the nation's wishes.

The new ministry held a middle place between the moving party in the

commons and the expelled ecclesiastics, the principal members of it being

the chief representatives of the old aristocracy, who had been Wolsey's

fiercest opponents, but who were disinclined by constitution and sympathy

from sweeping measures. An attempt was made, indeed, to conciliate the more

old-fashioned of the churchmen, by an offer of the seals to Warham,

Archbishop of Canterbury, probably because he originally opposed the

marriage between the king and his sister-in-law, and because it was hoped

that his objections remained unaltered. Warham, however, as we shall see,

had changed his mind: he declined, on the plea of age, and the office of

chancellor was given to Sir Thomas More, perhaps the person least

disaffected to the clergy who could have been found among the leading

laymen. The substance of power was vested in the Dukes of Norfolk and

Suffolk, the great soldier-nobles of the age, and Sir William Fitz-William,

lord admiral; to all of whom the ecclesiastical domination had been most

intolerable, while they had each of them brilliantly distinguished

themselves in the wars with France and Scotland. According to the French

ambassador, we must add one more minister, supreme, if we may trust him,

above them all. "The Duke of Norfolk," he writes, "is made president of the

council, the Duke of Suffolk vice-president, and above them both is

Mistress Anne;"[170] this last addition to the council being one which

boded little good to the interests of the See that had so long detained her

in expectation. So confident were the destructive party of the temper of

the approaching parliament, and of the irresistible pressure of the times,

that the general burden of conversation of the dinner-tables in the great

houses in London was an exulting expectation of a dissolution of the church

establishment, and a confiscation of ecclesiastical property; the king

himself being the only obstacle which was feared by them. "These noble

lords imagine," continues the same writer, "that the cardinal once dead of

ruined, they will incontinently plunder the church, and strip it of all its

wealth," adding that there was no occasion for him to write this in cipher,

for it was everywhere openly spoken of.[171]

Movements, nevertheless, which are pregnant with vital change, are slow in

assuming their essential direction, even after the stir has commenced.

Circumstances do not immediately open themselves; the point of vision

alters gradually; and fragments of old opinions, and prepossessions, and

prejudices remain interfused with the new, even in the clearest minds, and

cannot at a moment be shaken off. Only the unwise change suddenly; and we

can never too often remind ourselves, when we see men stepping forward with

uncertainty and hesitation over a road, where to us, we know the actual

future, all seems so plain, that the road looked different to the actors

themselves, who were beset with imaginations of the past, and to whom the

gloom of the future appeared thronged with phantoms of possible

contingencies. The hasty expectations of the noble lords were checked by

Henry's prudence; and though parties were rapidly arranging themselves,

there was still confusion. The city, though disinclined to the pope and the

church, continued to retain an inclination for the emperor; and the pope

had friends among Wolsey's enemies, who, by his overthrow, were pressed

forward into prominence, and divided the victory with the reformers. The

presence of Sir Thomas More in the council was a guarantee that no

exaggerated measures against the church would be permitted so long as he

held the seals; and Henry, perhaps, was anxious to leave room for

conciliation, which he hoped that the pope would desire as much as himself,

so soon as the meeting of parliament had convinced him that the mutinous

disposition of the nation had not been overstated by his own and Wolsey's

letters.

The impression conceived two years before of the hostile relations between

the pope and Charles had not yet been wholly effaced; and even as late as

September, 1529, after the closing of the legates' court, in the very heat

of the public irritation, there were persons who believed that when Clement

met his imperial captor face to face, and the interview had taken place

which had been arranged for the ensuing January, his eyes would be opened,

and that he would fall back upon England.[172] At the same time, the

incongruities in the constitution of the council became so early apparent,

that their agreement was thought impossible, and Wolsey's return to power

was discussed openly as a probability[173]--a result which Anne Boleyn,

who, better than any other person, knew the king's feelings, never ceased

to fear, till, a year after his disgrace, the welcome news were brought to

her that he had sunk into his long rest, where the sick load of office and

of obloquy would gall his back no more.

There was a third party in the country, unconsidered as yet, who had a part

to play in the historical drama: a party which, indeed, if any one had

known it, was the most important of all; the only one which, in a true,

high sense, was of importance at all; and for the sake of which, little as

it then appeared to be so, the whole work was to be done--composed at that

time merely of poor men, poor cobblers, weavers, carpenters, trade

apprentices, and humble artisans, men of low birth and low estate, who

might be seen at night stealing along the lanes and alleys of London,

carrying with them some precious load of books which it was death to

possess; and giving their lives gladly, if it must be so, for the brief

tenure of so dear a treasure. These men, for the present, were likely to

fare ill from the new ministry. They were the disturbers of order, the

anarchists, the men disfigured _pravitate hereticâ_, by monstrous

doctrines, and consequently by monstrous lives--who railed at authorities,

and dared to read New Testaments with their own eyes--who, consequently, by

their excesses and extravagances, brought discredit upon liberal opinions,

and whom moderate liberals (as they always have done, and always will do

while human nature remains itself) held it necessary for their credit's

sake to persecute, that a censorious world might learn to make no confusion

between true wisdom and the folly which seemed to resemble it. The

Protestants had not loved Wolsey, and they had no reason to love him; but

it was better to bear a fagot of dry sticks in a procession when the

punishment was symbolic, than, lashed fast to a stake in Smithfield, amidst

piles of the same fagots kindled into actual flames, to sink into a heap of

blackened dust and ashes; and before a year had passed, they would gladly

have accepted again the hated cardinal, to escape from the philosophic

mercies of Sir Thomas More. The number of English Protestants at this time

it is difficult to conjecture. The importance of such men is not to be

measured by counting heads. In 1526, they were organised into a society,

calling themselves "the Christian brotherhood,"[174] with a central

committee sitting in London; with subscribed funds, regularly audited, for

the purchase of Testaments and tracts; and with paid agents, who travelled

up and down the country to distribute them. Some of the poorer clergy

belonged to the society;[175] and among the city merchants there were many

well inclined to it, and who, perhaps, attended its meetings "by night,

secretly, for fear of the Jews." But, as a rule, "property and influence"

continued to hold aloof in the usual haughty style, and the pioneers of the

new opinions had yet to win their way along a scorched and blackened path

of suffering, before the State would consent to acknowledge them. We think

bitterly of these things, and yet we are but quarrelling with what is

inevitable from the constitution of the world. New doctrines ever gain

readiest hearing among the common people; not only because the interests of

the higher classes are usually in some degree connected with the

maintenance of existing institutions; but because ignorance is itself a

protection against the many considerations which embarrass the judgment of

the educated. The value of a doctrine cannot be determined on its own

apparent merits by men whose habits of mind are settled in other forms;

while men of experience know well that out of the thousands of theories

which rise in the fertile soil below them, it is but one here and one there

which grows to maturity; and the precarious chances of possible vitality,

where the opposite probabilities are so enormous, oblige them to discourage

and repress opinions which threaten to disturb established order, or which,

by the rules of existing beliefs, imperil the souls of those who entertain

them. Persecution has ceased among ourselves, because we do not any more

believe that want of theoretic orthodoxy in matters of faith is necessarily

fraught with the tremendous consequences which once were supposed to be

attached to it. If, however, a school of Thugs were to rise among us,

making murder a religious service; if they gained proselytes, and the

proselytes put their teaching in execution, we should speedily begin again

to persecute opinion. What teachers of Thuggism would appear to ourselves,

the teachers of heresy actually appeared to Sir Thomas More, only being as

much more hateful as the eternal death of the soul is more terrible than

the single and momentary separation of it from the body. There is, I think,

no just ground on which to condemn conscientious Catholics on the score of

persecution, except only this: that as we are now convinced of the

injustice of the persecuting laws, so among those who believed them to be

just, there were some who were led by an instinctive protest of human

feeling to be lenient in the execution of those laws; while others of

harder nature and more narrow sympathies enforced them without reluctance,

and even with exultation. The heart, when it is rightly constituted,

corrects the folly of the head; and wise good men, even though they

entertain no conscious misgiving as to the soundness of their theories, may

be delivered from the worst consequences of those theories, by trusting

their more genial instincts. And thus, and thus only, are we justified in

censuring those whose names figure largely in the persecuting lists. Their

defence is impregnable to logic. We blame them for the absence of that

humanity which is deeper than logic, and which should have taught them to

refuse the conclusions of their speculative creed.

Such, then, was the state of parties in the autumn of 1529. The old

conservatives, the political ecclesiastics, had ceased to exist, and the

clergy as a body were paralysed by corruption. There remained--

The English party who had succeeded to power, and who were bent upon a

secular revolt.

The papal party, composed of theoretic theologians, like Fisher, Bishop of

Rochester, and represented on the council by Sir Thomas More.

And both of these were united in their aversion to the third party, that of

the doctrinal Protestants, who were still called heretics.

These three substantially divided what was sound in England; the first

composed of the mass of the people, representing the principles of

prudence, justice, good sense, and the working faculties of social life:

the two last sharing between them the higher qualities of nobleness,

enthusiasm, self-devotion; but in their faith being without discretion, and

in their piety without understanding. The problem of the Reformation was to

reunite virtues which could be separated only to their mutual confusion;

and to work out among them such inadequate reconciliation as the wilfulness

of human nature would allow.

Before I close this chapter, which is intended as a general introduction, I

have to say something of two prominent persons whose character antecedent

to the actions in which we are to find them engaged it is desirable that we

should understand; I mean Henry VIII. himself, and the lady whom he had

selected to fill the place from which Catherine of Arragon was to be

deposed.

If Henry VIII. had died previous to the first agitation of the divorce, his

loss would have been deplored as one of the heaviest misfortunes which had

ever befallen the country; and he would have left a name which would have

taken its place in history by the side of that of the Black Prince or of

the conqueror of Agincourt. Left at the most trying age, with his character

unformed, with the means at his disposal of gratifying every inclination,

and married by his ministers when a boy to an unattractive woman far his

senior, he had lived for thirty-six years almost without blame, and bore

through England the reputation of an upright and virtuous king. Nature had

been prodigal to him of her rarest gifts. In person he is said to have

resembled his grandfather, Edward IV., who was the handsomest man in

Europe. His form and bearing were princely; and amidst the easy freedom of

his address, his manner remained majestic. No knight in England could match

him in the tournament except the Duke of Suffolk: he drew with ease as

strong a bow as was borne by any yeoman of his guard; and these powers were

sustained in unfailing vigour by a temperate habit and by constant

exercise. Of his intellectual ability we are not left to judge from the

suspicious panegyrics of his contemporaries. His state papers and letters

may be placed by the side of those of Wolsey or of Cromwell, and they lose

nothing in the comparison. Though they are broadly different, the

perception is equally clear, the expression equally powerful, and they

breathe throughout an irresistible vigour of purpose. In addition to this

he had a fine musical taste, carefully cultivated; he spoke and wrote in

four languages; and his knowledge of a multitude of other subjects, with

which his versatile ability made him conversant, would have formed the

reputation of any ordinary man. He was among the best physicians of his

age; he was his own engineer, inventing improvements in artillery, and new

constructions in ship-building; and this not with the condescending

incapacity of a royal amateur, but with thorough workmanlike understanding.

His reading was vast, especially in theology, which has been ridiculously

ascribed by Lord Herbert to his father's intention of educating him for the

Archbishopric of Canterbury; as if the scientific mastery of such a subject

could have been acquired by a boy of twelve years of age, for he was no

more when he became Prince of Wales. He must have studied theology with the

full maturity of his intellect; and he had a fixed and perhaps unfortunate

interest in the subject itself.[176]

In all directions of human activity Henry displayed natural powers of the

highest order, at the highest stretch of industrious culture. He was

"attentive," as it is called, "to his religious duties," being present at

the services in chapel two or three times a day with unfailing regularity,

and showing to outward appearance a real sense of religious obligation in

the energy and purity of his life. In private he was good-humoured and

good-natured. His letters to his secretaries, though never undignified, are

simple, easy, and unrestrained; and the letters written by them to him are

similarly plain and businesslike, as if the writers knew that the person

whom they were addressing disliked compliments, and chose to be treated as

a man. Again, from their correspondence with one another, when they

describe interviews with him, we gather the same pleasant impression. He

seems to have been always kind, always considerate; inquiring into their

private concerns with genuine interest, and winning, as a consequence,

their warm and unaffected attachment.

As a ruler he had been eminently popular. All his wars had been successful.

He had the splendid tastes in which the English people most delighted, and

he had substantially acted out his own theory of his duty which was

expressed in the following words:--

"Scripture taketh princes to be, as it were, fathers and nurses to their

subjects, and by Scripture it appeareth that it appertaineth unto the

office of princes to see that right religion and true doctrine be

maintained and taught, and that their subjects may be well ruled and

governed by good and just laws; and to provide and care for them that all

things necessary for them may be plenteous; and that the people and

commonweal may increase; and to defend them from oppression and invasion,

as well within the realm as without; and to see that justice be

administered unto them indifferently; and to hear benignly all their

complaints; and to show towards them, although they offend, fatherly pity.

And, finally, so to correct them that be evil, that they had yet rather

save them than lose them if it were not for respect of justice, and

maintenance of peace and good order in the commonweal."[177]

These principles do really appear to have determined Henry's conduct in his

earlier years. His social administration we have partially seen in the

previous chapter. He had more than once been tried with insurrection, which

he had soothed down without bloodshed, and extinguished in forgiveness; and

London long recollected the great scene which followed "evil May-day,"

1517, when the apprentices were brought down to Westminster Hall to receive

their pardons. There had been a dangerous riot in the streets, which might

have provoked a mild government to severity; but the king contented himself

with punishing the five ringleaders, and four hundred other prisoners,

after being paraded down the streets in white shirts with halters round

their necks, were dismissed with an admonition, Wolsey weeping as he

pronounced it.[178]

It is certain that if, as I said, he had died before the divorce was

mooted, Henry VIII., like that Roman Emperor said by Tacitus to have been

_consensu omnium dignus imperii nisi imperasset_, would have been

considered by posterity as formed by Providence for the conduct of the

Reformation, and his loss would have been deplored as a perpetual calamity.

We must allow him, therefore, the benefit of his past career, and be

careful to remember it, when interpreting his later actions. Not many men

would have borne themselves through the same trials with the same

integrity; but the circumstances of those trials had not tested the true

defects in his moral constitution. Like all princes of the Plantagenet

blood, he was a person of a most intense and imperious will. His impulses,

in general nobly directed, had never known contradiction; and late in life,

when his character was formed, he was forced into collision with

difficulties with which the experience of discipline had not fitted him to

contend. Education had done much for him, but his nature required more

correction than his position had permitted, whilst unbroken prosperity and

early independence of control had been his most serious misfortune. He had

capacity, if his training had been equal to it, to be one of the greatest

of men. With all his faults about him, he was still perhaps the greatest of

his contemporaries; and the man best able of all living Englishmen to

govern England, had been set to do it by the conditions of his birth.

The other person whose previous history we have to ascertain is one, the

tragedy of whose fate has blotted the remembrance of her sins--if her sins

were, indeed, and in reality, more than imaginary. Forgetting all else in

shame and sorrow, posterity has made piteous reparation for her death in

the tenderness with which it has touched her reputation; and with the

general instincts of justice, we have refused to qualify our indignation at

the wrong which she experienced, by admitting either stain or shadow on her

fame. It has been with Anne Boleyn as it has been with Catherine of

Arragon--both are regarded as the victims of a tyranny which catholics and

protestants unite to remember with horror; and each has taken the place of

a martyred saint in the hagiology of the respective creeds. Catholic

writers have, indeed, ill repaid, in their treatment of Anne, the

admiration with which the mother of Queen Mary has been remembered in the

Church of England; but the invectives which they have heaped upon her have

defeated their object by their extravagance. It has been believed that

matter failed them to sustain a just accusation, when they condescended to

outrageous slander. Inasmuch, however, as some natural explanation can

usually be given of the actions of human beings in this world without

supposing them to have been possessed by extraordinary wickedness, and if

we are to hold Anne Boleyn entirely free from fault, we place not the king

only, but the privy council, the judges, the Lords and Commons, and the two

Houses of Convocation, in a position fatal to their honour and degrading to

ordinary humanity; we cannot without inquiry acquiesce in so painful a

conclusion. The English nation also, as well as she, deserves justice at

our hands; and it must not be thought uncharitable if we look with some

scrutiny at the career of a person who, except for the catastrophe with

which it was closed, would not so readily have obtained forgiveness for

having admitted the addresses of the king, or for having received the

homage of the court as its future sovereign, while the king's wife, her

mistress, as yet resided under the same roof, with the title and the

position of queen, and while the question was still undecided of the

validity of the first marriage. If in that alone she was to blame, her

fault was, indeed, revenged a thousandfold,--and yet no lady of true

delicacy would have accepted such a position; and feeling for Queen

Catherine should have restrained her, if she was careless of respect for

herself. It must, therefore, be permitted me, out of such few hints and

scattered notices as remain, to collect such information as may be trusted

respecting her early life before her appearance upon the great stage. These

hints are but slight, since I shall not even mention the scandals of

Sanders, any more than I shall mention the panegyrics of Foxe; stories

which, as far as I can learn, have no support in evidence, and rest on no

stronger foundation than the credulity of passion.

Anne Boleyn was the second daughter of Sir Thomas Boleyn, a gentleman of

noble family, though moderate fortune;[179] who, by a marriage with the

daughter of the Duke of Norfolk, was brought into connection with the

highest blood in the realm. The year of her birth has not been certainly

ascertained, but she is supposed to have been seven years old[180] in 1514,

when she accompanied the Princess Mary into France, on the marriage of that

lady with Louis XII. Louis dying a few months subsequently, the princess

married Sir Charles Brandon, afterwards created Duke of Suffolk, and

returned to England. Anne Boleyn did not return with her; she remained in

Paris to become accomplished with the graces and elegancies, if she was not

contaminated by the vices, of that court, which, even in those days of

loyal licentiousness, enjoyed an undesirable pre-eminence in profligacy. In

the French capital she could not have failed to see, to hear, and to become

familiar with occurrences with which no young girl can be brought in

contact with impunity, and this poisonous atmosphere she continued to

breathe for nine years. She came back to England in 1525, to be maid of

honour to Queen Catherine, and to be distinguished at the court, by general

consent, for her talents, her accomplishments, and her beauty. Her

portraits, though all professedly by Holbein, or copied from pictures by

him, are singularly unlike each other. The profile in the picture which is

best known is pretty, innocent, and piquant, though rather insignificant:

there are other pictures, however, in which we see a face more powerful,

though less prepossessing. In these the features are full and languid. The

eyes are large; but the expression, though remarkable, is not pleasing, and

indicates cunning more than thought, passion more than feeling; while the

heavy lips and massive chin wear a look of sensuality which is not to be

mistaken. Possibly all are like the original, but represented her under

different circumstances, or at different periods of her life. Previous to

her engagement with the king, she was the object of fleeting attentions

from the young noblemen about the court. Lord Percy, eldest son of Lord

Northumberland, as we all know, was said to have been engaged to her. He

was in the household of Cardinal Wolsey; and Cavendish, who was with him

there, tells a long romantic story of the affair, which, if his account be

true, was ultimately interrupted by Lord Northumberland himself. The story

is not without its difficulties, since Lord Percy had been contracted,

several years previously, to a daughter of the Earl of Shrewsbury,[181]

whom he afterwards married, and by the law he could not have formed a

second engagement so long as the first was undissolved. And again, he

himself, when subsequently examined before the privy council, denied

solemnly on his oath that any contract of the kind had existed.[182] At the

same time, we cannot suppose Cavendish to have invented so circumstantial a

narrative, and Percy would not have been examined if there had been no

reason for suspicion. Something, therefore, probably had passed between him

and the young maid of honour, though we cannot now conjecture of what

nature; and we can infer only that it was not openly to her discredit, or

she would not have obtained the position which cost her so dear. She

herself confessed subsequently, before Archbishop Cranmer, to a connection

of some kind into which she had entered before her acquaintance with Henry.

No evidence survives which will explain to what she referred, for the act

of parliament which mentions the fact furnishes no details.[183] But it was

of a kind which made her marriage with the king illegal, and

illegitimatised the offspring of it; and it has been supposed, therefore,

that, in spite of Lord Percy's denial, he had really engaged himself to

her, and was afraid to acknowledge it.[184] This supposition, however, is

not easy to reconcile with the language of the act, which speaks of the

circumstance, whatever it was, as only "recently known;" nor could a

contract with Percy have invalidated her marriage with the king, when Percy

having been pre-contracted to another person, it would have been itself

invalid. A light is thrown upon the subject by a letter found among

Cromwell's papers, addressed by some unknown person to a Mr. Melton, also

unknown, but written obviously when "Mistress Anne" was a young lady about

the court, and before she had been the object of any open attention from

Henry.

"MR. MELTON.--This shall be to advertise you that Mistress Anne is changed

from that she was at when we three were last together. Wherefore I pray you

that ye be no devil's sakke, but according to the truth ever justify, as ye

shall make answer before God; and do not suffer her in my absence to be

married to any other man. I must go to my master, wheresoever he be, for

the Lord Privy Seal desireth much to speak with me, whom if I should speak

with in my master's absence, it would cause me to lose my head; and yet I

know myself as true a man to my prince as liveth, whom (as my friend

informeth me) I have offended grievously in my words. No more to you, but

to have me commended unto Mistress Anne, and bid her remember her promise,

which none can loose, but God only, to whom I shall daily during my life

commend her."[185]

The letter must furnish its own interpretation; for it receives little from

any other quarter. Being in the possession of Cromwell, however, it had

perhaps been forwarded to him at the time of Queen Anne's trial, and may

have thus occasioned the investigation which led to the annulling of her

marriage.

From the account which was written of her by the grandson of Sir Thomas

Wyatt the poet, we still gather the impression (in spite of the admiring

sympathy with which Wyatt writes) of a person with whom young men took

liberties,[186] however she might seem to forbid them. In her diet she was

an epicure, fond of dainty and delicate eating, and not always contented if

she did not obtain what she desired. When the king's attentions towards her

became first marked, Thomas Heneage, afterwards lord chamberlain, wrote to

Wolsey, that he had one night been "commanded down with a dish for Mistress

Anne for supper"; adding that she caused him "to sup with her, and she

wished she had some of Wolsey's good meat, as carps, shrimps, and

others."[187] And this was not said in jest, since Heneage related it as a

hint to Wolsey, that he might know what to do, if he wished to please her.

In the same letter he suggested to the cardinal that she was a little

displeased at not having received a token or present from him; she was

afraid she was forgotten, he said, and "the lady, her mother, desired him

to send unto his Grace, and desire his Grace to bestow a morsel of tunny

upon her." Wolsey made her presents also at times of a more valuable

character, as we find her acknowledging in language of exaggerated

gratitude;[188] and, perhaps the most painful feature in all her earlier

history lies in the contrast between the servility with which she addressed

the cardinal so long as he was in power, and the bitterness with which the

Bishop of Bayonne (and, in fact, all contemporary witnesses) tells us, that

she pressed upon his decline. Wolsey himself spoke of her under the title

of "the night-crow,"[189] as the person to whom he owed all which was most

cruel in his treatment; as "the enemy that never slept, but studied and

continually imagined, both sleeping and waking, his utter

destruction."[190]

Taking these things together, and there is nothing to be placed beside them

of a definitely pleasing kind, except beauty and accomplishments, we form,

with the assistance of her pictures, a tolerable conception of this lady; a

conception of her as a woman not indeed questionable, but as one whose

antecedents might lead consistently to a future either of evil or of good;

and whose character removes the surprise which we might be inclined to feel

at the position with respect to Queen Catherine in which she consented to

be placed. A harsh critic would describe her, on this evidence, as a

self-indulgent coquette, indifferent to the obligations of gratitude, and

something careless of the truth. From the letter referring to her,

preserved by Cromwell, it appears that she had broken a definite promise at

a time when such promises were legally binding, and that she had really

done so was confirmed by her subsequent confession. The breach of such

promises by a woman who could not be expected to understand the grounds on

which the law held them to be sacred, implies no more than levity, and

levity of this kind has been found compatible with many high qualities.

Levity, however, it does undoubtedly imply, and the symptom, if a light

one, must be allowed the weight which is due to it.

It is a miserable duty to be compelled to search for these indications of

human infirmities; above all when they are the infirmities of a lady whose

faults, let them have been what they would, were so fearfully and terribly

expiated; and, if there were nothing else at issue but poor questions of

petty scandal, it were better far that they perished in forgetfulness, and

passed away out of mind and memory for ever. The fortunes of Anne Boleyn

were unhappily linked with those of men to whom the greatest work ever yet

accomplished in this country was committed; and the characters of a king of

England, and of the three estates of the realm, are compromised in the

treatment which she received from them.

The Reign of Henry the Eighth, Volume 1 (of 3) · 第 3 / 14 章