The Triumphant Reign of Henry the Viii-V02

Alexandru Ioan Cuza National College specialty Philology Bilingual incline Discipline array The welterant manage of enthalpy the ogdoad Coordinating Professors Mariana Gaiu Sorina Soaica Student Irina Stan 2011 Contents Introduction2 1. Social terra firma of the age3 2. hydrogen eight-spot9 2. 1 atomic number 1 ogdoads character10 2. 2 rudi handstary Wolsey11 2. 3 henry octad & rescuerianity12 a)Popular sacred cerebrationlism12 b)Christian Humanism and the run of Grecian learning14 2. 4 Henrician reclamation16 a) heat content ogdoads inaugural- class divorce16 )Supreme head of the Ecclesia Angli pilea18 c)The dissolution of the unearthly houses20 2. 5 The matrimonial adventures of enthalpy 822 2. 6 An telephone extension of English hegemony23 a)The magnetic north of Eng grime and Wales23 b)Tudor Irish policy24 c)The unavoidableness to conquer Scotland25 Conclusions28 Bibliography29 Introduction The age of the Tudors has go forth its adjoin on Anglo-Ame rican mentalitys as a watershed in British register. h eachowed tradition, native patriotism, and post imperial gloom defy united to tumesce our appreciation of the period as a true opulent age.Names provided when evoke a phoenix-glow total heat eight, Elizabeth I, and Mary Stuart among the s all overeigns of England and Scotland Wolsey, William Cecil, and Leicester among the politicians Marlowe, Shakespeare, Hilliard, and Byrd among the creative artists. The splendors of the Court of hydrogen octet, the fortitude of Sir Thomas much, the ma faggot of the English Bible, Prayer Book, and Anglican per social class, the growe of sevens, the defeat of the Armada, the Shakespearian moment, and the legacy of Tudor domestic architecture at that place are the undoubted climaxes of a simplified orthodoxy in which genius, romance, and tragedy are superabundant.Reality is of necessity to a greater extent complex, less(prenominal) glamorous, and much pursuanceing than myth. The close to potent essences indoors Tudor England were often neighborly, economic, and demographic one and exactly(a)s. Thus if the period became a atomic number 79en age, it was primarily because the consider open growth in cosmos that occurred between 1500 and the conclusion of Elizabeth I did non so dangerously exceed the capacity of useable resources, positi save viands supplies, as to precipitate a Mal olibanumian crisis. famine and disease unquestionably disrupted and disturbed the Tudor economy, and they did non raze it to its foundations, as in the fourteenth pennyury. more than positively, the increased man world-beater and hire that sprang from ascent macrocosm stimu later(a)d economic growth and the commercialization of agriculture, encourage trade and urban re new(a)al, inspired a housing revolution, enhanced the edification of English manners, oddly in capital of the United Kingdom, and (more arguably) bolstered new and exciting attitudes among Tud or Englishmen, nonably individualistic ones derived from Reformation ideals and Calvinist theology. In smart set to present a give-up the ghost picture of 16th century England, we considered depicting henry VIII reign in a period of in perceptual constancy from the point of capture of theology and state limits.The kings egoism, self-righteousness, and unlimited capacity to flock over surmise wrongs, or petty slights, sprang from the fatal combination of a relatively able simply distinctly secantrate mind and a sound attend out inferiority complex that derived from heat content VIIs treatment of his second son. For the archetypical of the Tudors had found his junior son unsatisfactory on Arthurs death, atomic number 1 had been tending(p) no functions beyond the agnomen of Prince of Walesa indicate of unmistakable mistrust. As a result, henry VIII had resolved to ordinance, fifty-fifty where, as in the solecism of the perform, it would have been seemly cha stely to reign.He would trust monarchical theory into practice would give the wrangling Rex Imperator a moment neer dreamt of until now by the emperors of Rome, if he perchance could. total heat was eager, in any case, to conquer- to emulate the glorious victories of the Black Prince and henry V, to quest by and by the Golden glom that was the French flower. Repeatedly the efforts of Henrys more constructive councillors were bedevilled, and overthrown, by the kings militaristic dreams, and by dearly-won Continental ventures that pointless men, funds, and equipment.Evaluation is al private manners a subject of emphasis, but on the t make issues of monarchic theory and lust for conquest, there is everything to be express for the view that Henry VIIIs policy was consistent finishedout his reign that Henry was himself nowing that policy and that his ministers and officials were allowed freedom of action unaccompanied within accept limits, and when the king was to o busy to take a someoneal spare-time activity in state affairs. 1. Social background of the ageThe matter is debatable, but there is much to be said for the view that England was economically healthier, more expensive, and more optimistic under the Tudors than at any beat since the Roman occupation of Britain. Certainly, the contrast with the fifteenth century was dramatic. In the speed of light or so years in the beginning Henry VII became king of England in 1485, England had been under populated, underdeveloped, and in struggled-looking compared with other westbound countries, nonably France. Her recovery after state of wardwards the ravages of the Black Death had been slow slower than in France, Ger more, Switzerland, and roughly Italian cities.The touch of economic recovery in pre-indus discharge societies was basically one of recovery of universe, and figures allow for be useful. On the eve of the Black Death (1348), the population of England and Wales was betwee n 4 and 5 millions by 1377, successive plaques bad trim it to 2. 5 millions. stock-still the figure for England (without Wales) was still no higher(prenominal) than 2. 26 millions in 1525, and it is transparently clear that the striking feature of England demographic story between the Black Death and the reign of Henry VIII is the doldrums of population which persisted until the 1520s.However, the growth of population rapidly accelerated after 1525 amid 1525 and 1541 the population of England grew extremely fast, an impressive crush of expansion after yearn inertia. This rate of growth slackened off somewhat after 1541, but the Tudor population continued to increase steady and inexorably, with a pacingrary opposite only in the late 1550s, to reach 4. 10 millions in 1601. In step-up, the population of Wales grew from well-nigh 210,000 in 1500 to 380,000 by 1603.While England reaped the fruits of the recovery of population in the sixteenth part century, however, serious occu pations of adjustment were encountered. The impact of a sudden increase in demand, and stuff on available resources of nutrient and clothing, within a society that was still overwhelmingly agrarian, was to be as painful as it was, ultimately, beneficial. The morale of countless ordinary Englishman was to be wrecked irrevocably, and ruthlessly, by problems that were too massive to be ameliorated each by presidential terms or by traditional, ecclesiastic philanthropy.Inflation, speculation in land, enclosures, unemployment, vagrancy, poverty, and urban squalor were the most pernicious evils of Tudor England, and these were the wider symptoms of population growth and agricultural commercialization. In the fifteenth century levy rents had been discounted, because tenants were so elusive lords had abandoned direct exploitation of t heritor demesnes, which were leased to tenants on favourable basis. Rents had been low, too, on peasants customary holdings labour services had been commuted, and servile villainage had virtually disappeared from the face of the English landscape by 1485.At the same time, money re plow had essayn to reflect the contraction of the wage-labour force after 1348, and food prices had fallen in reply to reduced foodstuff demand. just now rising demand after 1500 burst the bubble of artificial prosperity born(p) of stagnant population. Land hunger led to soaring rents. Tenants of farms and copyholders were evicted by business-minded landlords. several(prenominal) adjacent farms would be conjoined, and amalgamated for profit, by outside investors at the disbursement of sitting tenants. Marginal land would be converted to pasture for more profitable sheep-rearing.Commons were enclosed, and waste land reclaimed, by landlords or squatters, with consequent liquidation of habitual grazing rights. The literary stamp that the active Tudor land market nurtured a new entrepreneurial class of greedy capitalists scratch the faces of the poor is an exaggeration. still it is fair to put that not all lan subjugateers, claimants, and squatters were whole scrupulous in their attitude certainly a vigorous market a rose wine among dealers in defective titles to land, with resulting harassment of many legitimate occupiers. The great excruciation sprang, nevertheless, from inflation and unemployment.High agricultural prices gave farmers strong incentives to produce crops for sale in the love markets in nearby towns, preferably than for the satisfaction of rural subsistence. Rising population, especially urban population, put intense strain on the markets themselves demand for food often outstripped supply, notably in years of poor harvests due to epidemics or bad weather. In cash terms, agricultural prices began to rise faster than industrial prices from the beginning of the reign of Henry the VIII, a rise which accelerated as the sixteenth century progressed.Yet in real terms, the price rise was even more volatile t han it appeared to be, since population growth ensured that labour was plentiful and cheap, and salary low. The size of the work-force in Tudor England increasingly exceeded available employment opportunities fair wages and living standards declined accordingly. Men (and women) were prepared to do a days work for little more than board wages able-bodied persons, many of whom were peasants displaced by rising rents or the enclosure of commons, drifted in waves to the towns in quest of work.The opera hat price leave decision maker hitherto constructed covers the period 1264-1954, and its backside period is most usefully 1451-75 the end of the fifteenth-century era of stable prices. From the super source, we whitethorn read the fortunes of the wage-earning consumers of Tudor England, because the calculations are based on the fluctuate costs of composite units of the essential foodstuffs and manufactured ideals, such as textbookiles, that do up an fair(a) family shopping basket in southern England at different times.Two indexes are, in fact, available first the annual price index of the composite basket of consumables secondly the index of the basket expressed as the equivalent of the annual wage rates of build craftsmen in southern England. No one supposes that building workers were typical of the English labour force in the sixteenth century, or at any other time. But the indexes serve as a rough guide to the appalling servicemans of the rising household expenses of the majority of Englishmen in the Tudor period. t is clear that in the century after Henry VIIIs accession, the average prices of essential consumables rose by some 488 per cent. The price index stood at the 100 or so level until 1513, when it rose to 120. A moderate rise to 169 had occurred by 1530, and a further crescendo to 231 was attained by 1547, the year of Henry VIIIs death. In 1555 the index reached 270 2 years later, it hit a staggering peak of 409, though this was par t due to the de sited do of the currency debasements practiced by Henry VIII and Edward VI.On the accession of Elizabeth I, in I5 58, the index had vulcanised to a average of 230. It climbed again thereafter, though more steadily 300 in 1570, 342 in 1580, and 396 in 1590. But the later ISQOS witnessed exceptionally meagre harvests, together with partingal epidemics and famine the index read 515 in 1595, 685 in 1598, and only settled back to 459 in 1600. The index expressed as the equivalent of the building craftsmans wages gives an equally sober impression of the vicissitudes of Tudor domestic emotional state.An abrupt decline in the purchasing power of wages occurred between 1510 and 1530, the commodity equivalent falling by some 40 per cent in twenty years. The index miss again in the 1550s, but recovered in the next decade to a sentiment equivalent to two-thirds of its value in 1510. It then remained more or less stable until the 1590s, when it collapsed to 39 in 1595, and to a catastrophic nadir of 29 in 1597. On the queens death in 1603 it had recovered to a figure of 45which meant that real wages had dropped by 57 per cent since 1500. These various data establish the most fundamental right about the age of the Tudors.When the percentage change of English population in the sixteenth century is plotted against that of the index of purchasing power of a building craftsmans wages over the same period, it is presently plain that the two lines of development and commensure (see graph). Living standards declined as the population rose recovery began as population growth abated and collapsed between 1556 and I560. Standards then steadily dropped again, until previous proportions were overthrown by the localized famines of 1585-8 and 1595-8though the cumulative increase in the size of the wage-labour force since 1570 must also have had distorting effects.In other words, population trends, rather than government policies, capitalist entrepreneurs, Euro pean imports of American silver, the more rapid circulation of money, or even currency debasements, were the advert factor in determine the fortunes of the British Isles in the sixteenth century. English government expenditure on warfare, heavy borrowing, and debasements unquestionably exacerbated inflation and unemployment. But the basic facts of Tudor life were linked to population growth. In view of this fundamental truth, the greatest triumph of Tudor England was its ability to feed itself.A major topic subsistence crisis was avoided. Malthus, who wrote his historic strive on the Principle of Population in 1798, listed positive and preventive checks as the traditional heart and soul by which population was kept in proportionality with available resources of food. Positive ones involved heavy mortality and abrupt substitution of population growth. Fertility in England indeed declined in the later 1550s, and again between 1566 and 1571. A higher proportion of the population than hitherto did not marry in the reign of Elizabeth I.Poor harvests resulted in localized starvation, and higher mortality, in 1481-3, 151921, 1527-8, 1544-5, 1549-51, 1555-8, 1585-8, and 1595-8. Yet devastating as these years of dearth were for the affected localities, especially for the towns of the 1590s, the positive check of mass mortality on a national scale was absent from Tudor England, with the achievable exception of the crisis of 15558. On top of its other difficulties, Marys government after 1555 faced the most serious mortality crisis since the fourteenth century the population of England promptly dropped by about 200,000.Even so, it is not proved that this was a national crisis in terms of its geographical range, and population growth was only temporarily interrupted. In fact, the chronology, intensity, and geographical extent of famine in the sixteenth century were such as to suggest that starvation crises in England were abating, rather than worsening, over time . Bubonic plagues were in like manner confined to the insanitary towns after the middle 1 of the century, and took fewer dupes in proportion to the expansion of population.The inescapable conclusion is that, scorn the vicissitudes of the price index the harsh consequences for individuals of changed patterns of agriculture, and the proliferation of vagabondage, an optimistic view of the age of the Tudors has sufficiently firm foundations. The sixteenth century witnessed the birth of Britains preindustrial semipolitical economyan evolving adaption between population and resources, economics and politics, ambition and rationality. England abandoned the adventure-oriented framework of the gist Ages for the new dawn of low-pressure equilibrium.Progress had its price, unalterably paid by the weak, forever banked by the strong. Yet the tyranny of the price index was not ubiquitous. charter rates for agricultural workers fell by less than for building workers, and some privileged gro ups of wage-earners such as the Mendip miners may have enjoyed a petite rise in real income. Landowners, commercialized farmers, and property investors were the most transparent beneficiaries of a system that guaranteed fixed expenses and enhanced selling pricesit was in the Tudor period that the aristocracy, gentry, and mercantile classes alike came to appreciate fully the enduring qualities of land.But many wage-labouring families were not wholly dependent upon their wages for subsistence. Multiple occupations, domestic self-employment, and cottage industries flourished, especially in the countryside town-dwellers grew vegetables, kept animals, and brewed beer, except in the confines of capital of the United Kingdom. Wage-labourers employed by great households received meat and drink in addition to cash income, although this customary practice was on the wane by the 1590s.Finally, it is not clear that vagabondage or urban population outside London expanded at a rate faster tha n was commensurate with the overabundant rise of national population. It used to be argued that the English urban population climbed from 6. 2. per cent of the national total in 1 520 to 8. 4 per cent by the end of the century. However, Londons spectacular growth solely explains this apparent over-population the leading provincial towns, Norwich, Bristol, Coventry, and York, grew slightly or remained stable in absolute termsand must thus have been inhabited by a reduced share of population in proportional terms. . Henry VIII Henry VIIs death in 1509 was greeted with feasting, dancing, oecumenic rejoicingfor no one who survived until 1547 could have thought, with hindsight, that it was the accession of Henry VIII that inspired the nations confidence. Henry VIII succeeded, at tho eighteen years of age, because his elder brother, Arthur, had died in 1502. Under pressure from his councillors, essentially his fathers executors, Henry began his triumphant reign by marrying his late bro thers widow, Catherine of Aragona union that was to have momentous, not to say revolutionary, consequences.He continued by executing Empson and Dudley, who were now thrown to the wolves in unearthly rite expiation of their motive employers financial prudence. Needless to say, these executions were a cypher ploy to enable the new regime to profit from the stability won by Henry VII without incurring any of its attendant stigmasno one complained that Henry VIIIs government omitted to cancel the dying batch of outstanding bonds until well into the 1520s.Yet Henry VIII had started as he meant to go on something of the kings natural cruelty, and inherent speculation that clean breaks with the past could solve deeprooted problems, was already evident. 2. 1 Henry VIIIs character Henry VIIIs character was certainly fascinating, threatening, and intensely morbid, as Holbeins great portraiture illustrates to perfection.The kings egoism, self-righteousness, and unlimited capacity to brood over suspected wrongs, or petty slights, sprang from the fatal combination of a relatively able but distinctly secondrate mind and a pronounced inferiority complex that derived from Henry VIIs treatment of his second son. For the first of the Tudors had found his younger son unsatisfactory on Arthurs death, Henry had been given no functions beyond the title of Prince of Walesa signal of unmistakable mistrust. As a result, Henry VIII had resolved to rule, even where, as in the case of the Church, it would have been enough merely to reign.He would put monarchic theory into practice would give the words Rex Imperator a sum never dreamt of even by the emperors of Rome, if he possibly could. Henry was eager, too, to conquer- to emulate the glorious victories of the Black Prince and Henry V, to quest after the Golden Fleece that was the French Crown. Repeatedly the efforts of Henrys more constructive councillors were bedevilled, and overthrown, by the kings militaristic dreams, and by c ostly Continental ventures that wasted men, money, and equipment.Evaluation is al courses a matter of emphasis, but on the twin issues of monarchic theory and lust for conquest, there is everything to be said for the view that Henry VIIIs policy was consistent throughout his reign that Henry was himself directing that policy and that his ministers and officials were allowed freedom of action only within accepted limits, and when the king was too busy to take a personal interest in state affairs. 2. 2 redbird Wolsey Cardinal Wolsey was Henry VIIIs first minister, and the fourteen years of that proud but in effect(p) ascendancy (15 15-29) saw the king in a comparatively unruffled sense modality.Henry, unlike his father, found writing both tedious and painful he preferred hunting, dancing, dallying, and playing the lute. In his more civilized moments, Henry canvas theology and astronomy he would wake up Sir Thomas More in the middle of the night in order that they might contempl ate at the stars from the roof of a proud palace. He wrote songs, and the words of one form an epitome of Henrys youthful sentiments. Pastime with good company I love and shall until I die. Grudge who lust, but none cut across So God be pleased, thus live will I For my pastance,Hunt, sing and dance My heart is set All ample sport For my comfort Who shall me let? Yet Henry himself set the tempo his pastimes were only pursued while he was satisfied with Wolsey. Appointed professional Chancellor and Chief Councillor on Christmas eve 1515, Wolsey used the Council and leading Chamber as instruments of ministerial power in much the way that Henry VII had used them as vehicles of olympian powerthough Wolsey happily pursued uniform and equitable ideals of justice in whiz Chamber in place of Henry VIIs discriminating justice linked to fiscal advantage.But Wolseys greatest asset was the unparalleled position he obtained with regard to the English Church. Between them, Henry and Wolse y bludgeoned the pontiff into granting Wolsey the rank of legate a latere for life, which meant that he became the superior ecclesiastical license in England, and could convoke legatine synods.Using these powers, Wolsey contrived to subject the entire English Church and clergy to a massive dose of Tudor government and receipts, and it looks as if an unquiet modus vivendi prevailed behind the scenes in which Henry agreed that the English Church was, for the moment, outstrip controlled by a churchman who was a purple servant, and the clergy accepted that it was repair to be obedient to an ecclesiastical rather than a layman despotfor it is unquestionably true that Wolsey valueed the Church from the worst excesses of lay opinion while in office. . 3 Henry VIII & Christianity The trouble was that, with stability restored, and the Tudor dynasty apparently secure, England had started to become vulnerable to a mounting kick of forces, many of which were old ones suppressed beneat h the surface for years, and others which sprang from the new European mood of clear and selfcriticism. Anti was the most volcanic of the smoulder emotions that pervaded the English temporality an ancient disease, it had been endemic in British society since Constantines conversion to Christianity.By the sixteenth century, English anti-clericalism centered on three major areas of lay resentment first, opposition to such ecclesiastical abuses as clerical fiscalism, absenteeism, pluralism, maladministration, and concubinage secondly, the excessive numbers of clergy, as it appeared to the laitymonks, friars, and secular priests seemed to outnumber the laity, and form a caste of unproductive consumers, which was untrue but reflected lay xenophobia and thirdly, opposition to the legal power of the bishops and Church courts, especially in cases of heterodoxy.It was pointed out by prominent writers, notably the grave and l remove Christopher St. German (1460-1541), that the Churchs p rocedure in cases of suspected heresy permitted secret accusations, rumor evidence, and denied accused persons the benefit of purgation by oath helpers or trial by jury, which was a Roman procedure contrary to the principles of native English common lawa clerical plot to deprive Englishmen of their natural, effectual rights. Such ideas were manifestly explosive for they incited intellectual affray between clergy and common lawyers. a) Popular religious idealismPopular religious idealism was another(prenominal) major problem faced by the English ecclesiastical authorities. Late medieval pietism was sacramental, institutional and ritualistic for ordinary people it seemed excessively dominated by objective Church ritual and obligation, as opposed to subjective religious experience based on Bible reading at home. The meliorate classes, who were the gentry clergy, and rich merchants, knew that traditional Catholic piety and meditation did not lack for subjectivity and individual int rospection, but few non-literate persons had the mental chequer needed to meditate with any degree of fulfillment.For ordinary people, personal religion had to be founded on texts of Scripture and Bible stories (preferably illustrated ones), but vernacular Bibles were abominable in Englandthe Church authorities believed that the availability of an English Bible, even an important version, would ferment heresy by permitting Englishmen to form their own opinions. Sir Thomas More, who was Wolseys successor as Lord Chancellor, was the premier lay opponent of the charge of an English Bible, and ally of the bishops.He declared, in his notorious proclamation of 22 June 1530, that it is not necessary the said Scripture to be in the English expression and in the hands of the common people, but that the diffusion of the said Scripture, and the permitting or denying thereof, dependant only upon the discretion of the superiors, as they shall think it convenient. More pursued a policy of s trict censorship no books in English printed outside the realm on any subject whatever were to be imported he forbade the printing of Scriptural or religious books inEngland, too, unless approved in advance by a bishop. It was a case of one law for the rich and educated, who could read the Scriptures in Latin texts and commentaries, and another for the poor, who depended on oral instruction from semi-literate artisans and travelling preachers. But More and the bishops were locomote against the tide. The invention of printing had revolutionized the transmission of new ideas across Western Europe, including Protestant ideas. Heretical books and Bibles poured from the presses of English exiles abroad, notably that of William Tyndale at Antwerp.The demand for vernacular Scriptures was persistent, insistent, and general even Henry VIII was enlightened enough to wish to concur to it, and publication an English Bible in Miles Coverdales translation was first achieved in 1536, a year af ter Mores death. b) Christian Humanism and the influence of Greek learning Of the forces springing from the new European mood of reform and self-criticism, Christian Humanism and the influence of Greek learning came first.The gentlemans gentlemanists, of whom the greatest was Erasmus of Rotterdam (1467-1536), rejected scholasticism and elaborate ritualism in favor of wit and honest biblical piety, or philosophia Christi, which was founded on primary textual scholarship, and in particular study of the Greek New Testament. Erasmus read voraciously, wrote prodigiously, and travelled extensively he made three visits to England, and it was in Cambridge in 1511-14 that he worked upon the Greek text of his own edition of the New Testament, and revised his Latin version that modify significantly on the standard Vulgate text.But the renaissance of Greek learning owed as much to a native Englishman, John Colet, the gloomy dean of St. capital of Minnesotas and founder of its school. Colet, who was also young Thomas Mores spiritual director, had been to Italy, where he had encountered the Neo-Platonist philosophy of Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola. He had mastered Greek grammar and literature, which he then helped to foster at Oxford and at his school, and the fruits of his philosophical and literary friendship were applied to Bible studyespecially to the works of St. Paul. The result was a method of Scriptural exegesis that broke new ground.Colet emphasized the unity of heaven-sent truth, a literal approach to texts, concern for historical context, and belief in a personal and redemptive Christ. These were exciting ideas, and they inspired both Erasmus and the younger generation of English humanists. The clarion call of humanist reform was sounded in 1503, when Erasmus published A Handbook of a Christian Knight, a compendium, or guide, for spiritual life. (Parvulorum Institutio, 1512-13) This book encapsulated the humanism, evangelism, and laicism that its author had imbibed from Colet, and made Europe uncomfortably aware that the existing priorities of the Church would not do.Erasmus added reforming impetus to traditional lay piety, and his bristled criticisms of the scholastic theologians, of empty ritual, ecclesiastical abuses, and even the mores of the Papacy, were as stimulating as they were embarrassing. For Erasmus, whose classic satire was assess of Folly (1514), highlighted his reforming posture by means of his immortal wit, combining the serious, the humorous, and the artistic in peerless texture, and delighting everyone except the elder Church authorities.Wit is an essential literary commodity, and Erasmus drew on his as from a bottomless pursewhich was just as well, for it was his sole pecuniary endowment. His scintillant humor flowed quite naturally. Works of piety, that might otherwise have been mere pebbles thrown into the European pond, thus generated ripples that increasingly had the force of tidal waves. The best English exponent of humanist satire in the wake of Praise of Folly was Thomas More, whose Utopia, first published at Louvain in 1516, depict imaginary and idealized society of pagans living on a contradictory island in accordance with principles of natural virtue.By implicitly comparing the benign social customs and enlightened religious attitudes of the ignorant Utopians with the inferior standards, in practice, of (allegedly) Christian Europeans, More produced a strident indictment of the latter, based purely on deafening silencea splendid, if perplexing, achievement of the sort More perennially favored. But to the distress of Erasmus, More abandoned reform for repression and extermination of heresy during his thousand geezerhood as Lord Chancellor, and has gone down to bill , save in the writings of his a apologists as persecutor rather than a prophet.However, his terrible end in 1535 as a victim of Henry VIIIs vengeance, and his willingness to suffer torment for the truth h e had discovered in the (then controversial) dogma of pompous primacy, perpetually guarantee that his staunchness was not a delusion when the axe fell, Utopias author earned his place among the few who have blown-up the hori2ons of the human spirit. In righteousness to More, the Brave New World of Utopia had been crudely shattered by Luthers debut upon the European stage in1517. For the Christian Humanists, to their sorrow, had unintentionally, but irreversibly, prepared the way for the spread of Protestantism.In England, the impact of Lutheranism far exceeded the relatively small number of converts, and the rise of the new learning, as it was called, became the most potent of the- forces released in the 1520s and 1530s. Luthers ideas and numerous books rapidly penetrated the universities, especially Cambridge, the City of London, the Inns of Court, and even reached Henry VIII s Household through the intervention of Anne Boleyn and her circle. At Cambridge, the young scholars inf luenced include Thomas Cranmer and Matthew Parker, both of whom later became Archbishops of Canterbury.Wolsey naturally made resolute efforts as legate to stamp out the spread of Protestantism, but without obvious success. His critics accuse his reluctance to burn men for heresy as the cause of his harmfor Wolsey would burn books and imprison men, but shared the humane horror of Erasmus at the thought of himself committing bodies to the flames. However the true reason for Luthers appeal was that he had given coherent doctrinal expression to the religious subjectivity of individuals, and to their qualm of Rome and grandiloquent monarchy.In addition his view of the ministry mirrored the instincts of the anticlerical laity, and his respond to concubinage was the global solution of clerical hymeneals. 2. 4 Henrician Reformation a) Henry VIIIs first divorce Into this religious maelstrom dropped Henry VIIIs first divorce. Although Catherine of Aragon had borne fin children, only t he Princess Mary (b. 1516) had survived, and the king demanded the security of a manful heir to protect the fortunes of the Tudor dynasty.It was clear by 1527 that Catherine was past the age of accouchement meanwhile Henry coveted Anne Boleyn, who would not comply without the assurance of wedding ceremony. Yet royal annulments were not infrequent, and all might have been resolved without drama, or even unremarked, had not Henry VIII himself been a proficient, if mendacious, theologian. The chief restriction was that Henry, who feared international humiliation, insisted that his divorce should be granted by a fit billet in England-this way he could de rive his wife of her levelheaded rights, and bully his Episcopal judges.But his marriage had been founded on pope Julius IIs dispensation, necessarily obtained by Henry VIII to enable the young Henry VIII to marry his brothers widow in the first place, and hence the matter pertained to Rome. In order to have his case dogged wit hout reference to Rome, in face of the Papacys unwillingness to sanction the matter, Henry had to prove against the reigning pope, Clement VII that his predecessors dispensation was invalid then the marriage would automatically terminate, on the grounds that it had never legally existed.Henry would be a bachelor again. However, this strategy took the king out-of-door from matrimonial law into the quite remote and hypersensitive realm of papal power. If Julius IIs dispensation was invalid, it must be because the successors of St. Peter had no power to devise such instruments, and the popes were thus no better than other human legislators who had exceeded their authority. Henry was a good enough theologian and canon lawyer to know that there was a minority opinion in Western Christendom to precisely this effect.He was enough of an egotist, too, to fall captive to his own powers of persuasion presently he believed that papal primacy was unquestionably a sham, a ploy of human inventi on to deprive kings and emperors of their legitimate inheritances. Henry looked back to the golden days of the British imperial past, to the time of the Emperor Constantine and of King Lucius I. In fact, Lucius I had never existed- he was a myth, a figment of pre-Conquest imagination.But Henrys British sources showed that this Lucius was a great ruler, the first Christian king of Britain, who had enable the British Church with all its liberties and possessions, and then written to Pope Eleutherius inquire him to transmit the Roman laws. However, the popes reply explained that Lucius did not need any Roman law, because he already had the lex Britunniue (whatever that was) under which he rule both regnum and sacerdotium For you be Gods vicar in your kingdom, as the psalmist says, founder the king thy judgments, O God, and thy righteousness to the kings son (Ps. xxii 1) . . . A king hath his name of ruling, and not of having a realm. You shall be a king, while you rule well but if you do otherwise, the name of a king shall not remain with you . . . God grant you so to rule the realm of Britain, that you may reign with him forever, whose vicar you be in the realm. Vicarius Dei-vicar of Christ. Henrys divorce had led him, incredibly, to believe in his royal domination over the English Church. b) Supreme head of the Ecclesia Anglicana With the advent of the divorce crisis, Henry took personal charge of his policy and government.He ousted Wolsey, who was hopelessly compromised in the new scheme of things, since his legatine power came directly from Rome. He named Sir Thomas More to the chancellorship, but this move backfired owing to Mores scrupulous reluctance to involve himself in Henrys proceedings. He summoned sevens, which for the first time in English history worked with the king as an omnicompetent legislative assembly, if hesitatingly so. Henry and fantan in the long run threw off Englands allegiance to Rome in an unsurpassed burst of revolutionary st atute-making the ferment of Annates (1532. , the comport of Appeals (1533), the Act of Supremacy (1534), the First Act of Succession (1534) the Treasons Act (1534), and the Act against the Popes Authority (1536). The Act of Appeals proclaimed Henry VIIIs new imperial status-all English jurisdiction, both secular and religious, now sprang from the king-and abolished the popes right to settle down English ecclesiastical cases. The Act of Supremacy declared that the king of England was unconditional head of the Ecclesia Anglicana, or Church of Englandnot the pope. The Act of Succession was the first of a series of Tudor instruments used to settle the order of episode to the hrone, a measure which even Thomas More agreed was in itself unremarkable, save that this statute was prefaced by a preamble denouncing papal jurisdiction as a usurpation of Henrys imperial power. More, together with Bishop Fisher of Rochester, and the London Carthusians, the most rigorous and honorable custodi ans of papal primacy and the genuineness of the Aragonese marriage, were tried for denying Henrys supremacy under the terms of the Treasons Act. These terms inter alia made it high treason maliciously to de rive either king or queen of the dignity, title, or name of their royal estatesthat is to deny Henrys royal supremacy.The victims of the act, who were in reality martyrs to Henrys vindictive egoism, were cruelly executed in the summer of 1535. A year later the Reformation legislation was completed by the Act against the Popes Authority, which removed the last vestiges of papal power in England, including the popes pastoral right as a teacher to purpose disputed points of Scripture. Henry VIII now controlled the English Church as its supreme head in both temporal and doctrinal matters his ecclesiastical status was that of a lay metropolitan archbishop who denied the validity of external, papal authority within his territories.He was not a riest, and had no sacerdotal or sacramen tal functionsthe king had tried briefly to claim these but had been rebuffed by an umbrageous episcopate. Yet Henry was not a Protestant, either. Until his death in 1547, Henry VIII believed in Catholicism without the popea curious but typically Henrician application of logic to the facts of socalled British history as exemplified by King Lucius I. As a lay archbishop, Henry could make ecclesiastical laws and define doctrines more or less as he pleasedprovided he did not overthrow the articles of faith.In fact, this gave him a wider latitude than might be thought, because the bishops could not agree what the articles of faith were, beyond the fundamentals of Gods existence, Christs divinity, the Trinity, and some of the sacraments. The Greek scholarship of the Christian Humanists had weakened the grammatical construction of traditional, medieval Christian doctrine by questioning texts and rejecting scholasticism a mood of uncertainty prevailed. Before 1529, then, Henry had ruled his clergy through Wolsey after 1534 he did so personally, and through his new chief minister, Thomas Cromwell, whom Henry briefly appointed his (lay) vicegerent in spirituals.A former aide of Wolsey, Cromwell had risen to executive power as a client of the Boleyn interest, and had taken command of the machinery of government, especially the management of Parliament, in January 1532. By combining the offices of Lord Privy cast and vicegerent, Cromwell succeeded Wolsey as the architect of Tudor policy under Henry, until his own fall in july 1540but with one striking difference. As vicegerent he was entirely dependent to Henry Wolsey, as legate, had been subordinate only as an Englishman.Yet the science of Henrys dream to give the words Rex Imperator literal meaning raises a key historical question. Exactly why did the English bishops and abbots, the gentry of the spirit who held a weight of votes in the House of Lords, permit the Henrician Reformation to occur? The answer is par tly that Henry coerced his clerical opponents into submission by threats and punitive taxation but some bishops actually support the king, albeit sadly, and a vital truth lies behind this capitulation.Those clerics who were politically alert saw that it was preferred to be controlled by the Tudor monarchs personally, with whom they could bargain and haggle, than to be offered as a sacrifice instead to the anticlerical laity in the House of Commons, which was the true selection to compliance. For as early as 1532, it was on the cards that the Tudor supremacy would be a parliamentary supremacy, not a purely royal one, and only the despotic kings dislike of representative assemblies ensured that Parliaments contribution was cut back to the mechanical, though still revolutionary, chore of enacting the requisite legislation.It was plain to all but the most ultramontane papalists on the Episcopal bench that a parliamentary supremacy would have undecided the clergy directly to the pent up emotional fury and shame of the anticlerical laity and common lawyers. The laity, furthermore, were fortified for the attack by the humanists debunking of ritualism and superstition. In short, royal supremacy was the better of two evils the clergy would not have to counter the come anticlerical backlash without the necessary filter of royal mediation. c) The dissolution of the religious housesHenry VIIIs supremacy did save the bishops from the worst excesses of lay anticlericalism, and the kings doctrinal conservatism prevented an explosion of Protestantism during his reign. However, nothing could save the monasteries. Apart from anticlericalism, three quite invincible forces merged after 1535 to dictate the dissolution of the religious houses. First, the cloistral communities almost parent institutions outside England and Walesthis was juridically unacceptable after the Acts of Appeals and Supremacy. Secondly, Henry VIII was bankrupt. He needed to annex the monastic estates in order to restore the Crowns finances.Thirdly, Henry had to buy the allegiance of the political nation away from Rome and in support of his Reformation by massive injections of new patronagehe must appease the lay nobility and gentry with a share of the spoils. Thus Thomas Cromwells first childbed as vicegerent was to conduct an ecclesiastical census under Henrys commission, the first major tax record since Domesday Book, to rate the condition and wealth of the English Church. Cromwells questionnaire was a model of precision. Was prognosticate service observed? Who were the benefactors? What lands did the houses possess? What rents? and so on. The survey was completed in six months, and Cromwells genius for administration was shown by the fact that valour Ecclesiasticus, as it is known, served both as a record of the value of the monastic assets, and as a report on individual clerical incomes for taxation purposes. The lesser monasteries were dissolved in 1536 the greater hous es followed two years later. The process was interrupted by a formidable northern rebellion, the expedition of Grace, which was savagely crushed by use of martial law, exemplary public hangings, and a wholesale breaking of Henrys promises to the pilgrims.But the work of plunder was quickly completed. A total of 56o monastic institutions had been suppressed by November 1539, and lands valued at ? 132,000 per annum immediately accrued to the Court of Augmentations of the Kings Revenue, the new surgical incision of state set up by Cromwell to cope with the transfer of resources. Henrys coffers next received ? I5,000 or so from the sale of gold and silver plate, lead, and other precious items netly, the monasteries had possess the right of presentation to about two-fifths of the parochial benefices in England and Wales, and these rights were also added to the Crowns patronage.The long-term effects of the dissolution have often been debated by historians, and may conveniently be divid ed into those which were planned, and those not. Within the former category, Henry VIII eliminated the last fortresses of strength resistance to his royal supremacy. He founded six new dioceses upon the remains of former monastic buildings and endowmentsPeterborough, Gloucester, Oxford, Chester, Bristol, and Westminster, the last-named being abandoned in 1550. The king then reorganised the ex-monastic cathedrals as Cathedrals of the New Foundation, with revised staffs and statutes.Above all, though, the Crowns regular income was manifestly doubled-but for how long? The bitter irony of the dissolution was that Henry VIIIs colossal military expenditure in the 1540s, together with the laitys demand for a share of the booty, politically irresistible as that was, would so drastically erode the financial gains as to cancel out the benefits of the entire process. Sales of the confiscated lands began even before the suppression of the greater houses was completed, and by 1547 almost two thirds of the former monastic property had been alienated.Further grants by Edward VI and male monarch Mary brought this figure to over threequarters by 1558. The rest lands were sold by Elizabeth I and the early Stuarts. It is true that the lands were not given away out of 1,593 grants in Henry VIIIs reign, only 69 were gifts or partly so the bulk of grants (95. 6 per cent) equal lands sold at prices based on fresh valuations. But the take of sales were not invested quite the opposite under Henry VIII. In any case, land was the best investment.The impact of sales upon the non-parliamentary income of the Crown was thus obvious, and there is everything to be said for the view that it was Henry VIIIs constant dissipation of the monarchys resources that made it difficult for his successors to govern England. Of the unpremeditated effects of the dissolution, the wholesale destruction of fine Gothic buildings, melting down of medieval metalwork and jewellery, and sacking of librari es were the most extensive acts of licensed hooliganism perpetrated in the whole of British history.The clergy naturally suffered an immediate decline in morale. The number of candidates for ordination dropped sharply there was little real credendum that Henry VIIIs Reformation had anything to do with spiritual life, or with God. The disappearance of the abbots from the House of Lords meant that the ecclesiastical vote had withered away to a minority, leaving the laity ascendant in both Houses. With the sale of ex-monastic lands commonly went the rights of parochial presentation attached to them, so that local laity btained a considerable monopoly of ecclesiastical patronage, setting the pattern for the next three centuries. The nobility and gentry, especially moderatesized gentry families, were the ultimate beneficiaries of the Crowns land sales. The distribution of national wealth shifted between 1535 and 1558 overwhelmingly in favor of Crown and laity, as against the Church, a nd appreciably in favor of the nobility and gentry, as against the Crown. Very few new or substantially enlarged private estates were built up solely out of exmonastic lands by 1558.But if Norfolk is a typical county, the changing pattern of wealth distribution at Elizabeths accession was that 4. 8 per cent of the countys manors were possessed by the Crown, 6. 5 per cent were Episcopal or other ecclesiastical manors, II. 4 per cent were owned by East Anglican territorial reserve magnates, and 75. 4 per cent had been acquired by the gentry. In 1535, 2. 7 per cent of manors had been held by the Crown, 17. 2 per cent had been owned by the monasteries, 9. 4 per cent were in the hands of magnates, and 64 per cent belonged to gentry families.Without Henry VIIIs preparatory break with Rome, there could not have been Protestant reform in Edward VIs reignthus evaluation can become a question of religious opinion, rather than historical judgment. However, it is sullen not to regard Henry as a despoiler he was scarcely a creator. Thomas Cromwell did his utmost, often behind the kings back, to endow his contemporaries with Erasmian, and enlightened idealism the Elizabethan via media owed much to the eirenic side of Cromwells complex character.But Cromwells reward was the blockira principis mors est. He was cast aside by his suspicious employer, and fell victim to the hatred of his enemies. And without Wolsey or Cromwell to restrain him, Henry could do still more harm. He resolved to embark on French and Scottish wars, triggering a slow-burning aggregate that was extinguished only by the execution of Mary Stuart in February 1587. Yet if Henry turned to war and foreign policy in the final years of his reign, it was because he felt secure at last.Cromwell had provided the enforcement machinery necessary to protect the supreme head from spontaneous internal opposition Jane Seymour had brought forth the male heir to the Tudor throne Henry was excited about his marriage to Ca therine Howard, and was happily cured of theology. 2. 5 The matrimonial adventures of Henry VIII The matrimonial adventures of Henry are too familiar to recount again in detail, but an outline may conveniently be given. Anne Boleyn was already heavy(predicate) when the king married her, and the future Elizabeth I was born on 7 September 1533.Henry was bitterly disappointed that she was not the expected son, blaming Anne and Godin that order. Anne had turned out to be a precocious flirt, who meddled fatally in politics she was ousted and executed in a coup of May 1536. Henry immediately chose the homely Jane Seymour, whose triumph in producing the baby Prince Edward was Pyrrhic, for she died of Tudor surgical operation twelve days later. Her successor was Anne of Cleves, whom Henry married in January 1540 to win European allies. But this gentle creature, which Henry rudely called the Flemish female horse, did not suit divorce was thus easy, as the union was never consummated.Cathe rine Howard came next. A high-spirited mind, she had been a maid of honour to Anne of Clevesentirely unsuitablyand became Henrys fifth queen in July 1540 as the key to the coup that destroyed Cromwell. She was executed in February 1542 for adultery. Finally, Henry took the amiable Catherine Parr to wife in July 1543. Twice widowed, Catherine was a cultivated Erasmian, under whose benign influence the royal children lived under one roof, and were spared the more malign components of Henrys paternal indulgence. 2. 6 An extension of English hegemonyHenry VIIIs plans for war which were conceived after his marriage to Catherine Howard, and which hardened when he learned of her infidelity, resurrected youthful dreams of French conquests. Wolsey had monitored the kings futile early ladders of 1 511-16, and brilliantly alter Henrys military failures into the diplomatic prize of the treaty of London (1518). At the Field of Cloth of Gold in 1520, Henry had feted Francis I of France in a Ren aissance extravaganza that was hailed as the eighth appreciation of the world, for Francis was the king whom Henry loved to hate.More wasteful campaigns in 1522 and 1523 were curtailed by Englands financial exhaustionthen Henrys policy fell into labyrinthine confusion. England was at war with France then in alliance with France. In the end, Henry was perhaps grateful for the European public security which prevailed from 1529 to 1536, and even more relieved by the resumed rivalry that kept Habsburg and Valois mutually engaged until the reverberations of the Pilgrimage of Grace had died away. By 1541 Henry was moving towards a renewed esteem with Spain against France, but he was prudent enough to hesitate.Tudor security required that before England went to war with France, no doors should be open to the enemy within Britain itself. This meant an extension of English hegemony within the British IslesWales, Ireland, and Scotland. Accordingly Henry undertook, or continued, the wider t ask of English colonization that was ultimately completed by the Act of Union with Scotland (1707). a) The Union of England and Wales The Union of England and Wales had been presaged by Cromwells reforming ambition and was legally action by Parliament in 1536 and 1543.The marcher lordships were shired, English laws and county administration were panoptic to Wales, and the shires and county boroughs were required to send twenty-four MPs to Parliament at Westminster. In addition, a refurbished Council of Wales, and new Courts of Great Sessions, were set up to administer the regions defenses and judicial system. Wales was made subject to the full operation of royal writs, and to English principles of land raise. The Act of 1543 dictated that Welsh customs of tenure and inheritance were to be phased out and that English rules were to succeed them.Welsh customs persisted in remote areas until the seventeenth century and beyond, but English customs soon predominated. English language became the fashionable tongue, and Welsh native arts went into decline. Englishmen have regarded the Union as the dawn of a civilizing process that ended with the abolition of the Council of Wales in 1689 and of the Great Sessions in 1830. Welshmen, by contrast, view Henry VIIIs Acts as a crude annexation, which technically they werefor they were not in the nature of a treaty between negotiating parties as was the case with Scotland in 1707.In fact, Welsh civilization was already advanced in the sixteenth century, and flourished despite the Acts. Sir John Prise, ia relation of Thomas Cromwell, defended Welsh history against the skepticism of Polydore Vergil Humphrey Llwyd of Denbigh supported him with geographical learningand there were others. John Owen of Plas Du, Llanarmon, and New College, Oxford, enjoyed a higher literary reputation abroad during his lifetime than did William Shakespeare, his contemporary. He wrote 1,500 Latin epigrams in the style of Martial.Welsh grammars wer e compiled to perpetuate the native tongueby Sion Dafydd Rhys (1592. ), who wrote in Latin in order to reach the widest European audience, and by john Davies of Mallwyd (1621), who publicly justified the utility of Welsh studies. b) Tudor Irish policy Tudor Irish policy had begun with Henry VIIs decision that all laws made in England were automatically to apply to Ireland, and that the Irish Parliament could only legislate with the king of Englands prior consent.English territorial influence, in reality, did not extend much beyond the Palethe area around capital of Irelandand the Irish chiefs held the balance of power. Henry VIII ruled mainly through the chiefs before the Reformation, but was obliged to protect England in the 1530s from a possible papal counterattack launched from Ireland. Lord Leonard Grey was named deputy of Ireland by Cromwell, but his coercive actions proved counter-productive. He was replaced by Sir Anthony St. Leger, who made a fresh start. St.Leger reshaped t he Irish policy of the Tudors, and his basic philosophy persisted until 1783. Instead of desegregation and coercion, he proposed friend-ship and conciliation, but the essence of the plan was to create a subordinate national superstructure for Ireland by translating Henry VIIIs lordship into kingship. The kings of England were dominus Hiberniae, not rex. But St. Leger persuaded Henry to assume the Crownthat would overthrow papal claims to feudal overlordship, and subordinate the chiefs to royal authority. Henry assented, and was proclaimed king in June 1541.His understanding was probably that kingship would enhance his security within the British Isles. Moreover, if the idea was to form a framework for peaceful, constitutional relations between the Crown and the Irish nation, that was laudable and altruistic. Yet it was also visionary and impractical. The Irish revenues were short to maintain royal statusa break Council, Star Chamber, Chancery, and Parliament in Dublin, operating independently of, but subject to controls from, the English Parliament and Privy Council.Above all, kingship committed England to a possible full-scale conquest of Ireland in the future, should the chiefs rebel, or should the Irish Reformation, begun by Cromwell, fail. As it turned out, conciliation by benevolent kingship was probably worse than external consolidation and coercion, since Tudor attitudes to conquest in Ireland were based on experiences in the New World, something the disillusioned Edmund Spenser, who lived in Ireland, pointed out in Elizabeths reign. The harsh vicissitudes of Irish history, especially in the seventeenth century, were hardly attributable to Henry VIII and St.Leger. However, the new policy of the Tudors perpetuated the disadvantages both of subordination and of autonomy. In the wake of Irish pressure and the revolt of the American Colonies, the British Parliament abandoned its controls over Ireland in 1783. The Act of Union of 1801 reversed this chang e in favour of direct rule from Westminster, after which Irish history owed nothing to the Tudors. c) The need to control Scotland Yet the linchpin of Tudor security was the need to control Scotland.James IV (1488-1513) had renewed the Auld Alliance with France in 1492 and further provoked Henry VII by offering support for Perkin Warbeck. But the first of the Tudors declined to be distracted by Scottish sabre-rattling, and forged a treaty of sodding(a) Peace with Scotland in 1501, followed a year later by the marriage of his daughter, Margaret, to King James. However, James tried to break the treaty shortly after Henry VIIIs accession Henry was on campaign in France, but sent the earl of Surrey northwards, and Surrey decimated the Scots at Flodden on 9 September 1513.The elite of Scotlandthe king, three bishops, eleven earls, fifteen lords, and some 10,000 menwere slain in an attack that was the delayed acme of medieval infringement begun by Edward I and III. The new Scottish king , James V, was an infant, and the English interest was symbolized for the next twenty years or so by the person of his mother, Henry VIIIs own sister. But Scottish alarm after Flodden had, if anything, confirmed the nations ties with France, epitomized by the regency of john duke of Albany, who represent the French cause but nevertheless kept Scotland at peace with England for the moment.The French threat became overt when the mature James V visited France in 1536, and married in quick succession Madeleine, daughter of Francis I, and on her death Mary of Guise. In 1541 James agreed to meet Henry VIII at York, but committed the supreme offence of failing to turn up. By this time, Scotland was indeed a danger to Henry VIII, as its government was dominated by the French faction led by Cardinal Beaton, who symbolized both the Auld Alliance and the threat of papal counter-attack. In October 1542 the duke of Norfolk invaded Scotland, at first achieving little.It was the Scottish counter stroke that proved to be a worse disaster even than Flodden. On 25 November 1542, 3,000 English triumphed over 10,000 Scots at Solway Mossand the news of the disgrace killed James V within a month. Scotland was left hostage to the fortune of Mary Stuart, a baby born only six days before Jamess death. For England, it seemed to be the answer to a prayer. Henry VIII and Protector Somerset, who governed England during the early years of Edward VIs minority, none the less turned advantage into danger.Twin policies were espoused by which war with France was balanced by intervention in Scotland designed to secure Englands back door. In 1543 Henry used the prisoners taken at Solway Moss as the nucleus of an English party in Scotland he engineered Beatons overthrow, and agonistic on the Scots the treaty of Greenwich, which projected union of the Crowns in form of marriage between Prince Edward and Mary Stuart. At the end of the same year, Henry allied with Spain against France, planning a c ombined invasion for the following spring.But the invasion, predictably, was not concerted. Henry was deluded by his capture of Boulogne the emperor made a separate peace with France at Crepi, leaving Englands flank exposed. At astronomical cost the war continued