Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-grvzd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-18T08:45:26.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rood of Boxley, the Blood of Hailes and the Defence of the Henrician Church

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2016

Peter Marshall
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Recent research has rendered untenable the glib characterisation ofthe Henrician Reformation as ‘Catholicism without the Pope’, but the essential nature of the motives and achievements of Henry vra and his ministers in the 1530s and 1540s remains a controversial issue. To J. K. McConica, the polity created in the 1530s was an ‘Erasmian’ one, with the views of the great humanist on such matters as vernacular Scripture, superstitious pilgrimage and religious instruction providing a consensual nexus to bind together all but the most extreme shades of religious opinion. More recently, Glyn Redworth has similarly argued that the Henrician Reform was from the first ‘an intellectually coherent and satisfying movement’, and that it had positive and distinctive religious aspirations, seeking to use the techniques of ‘Protestant’ evangelism to transmit a purged but none the less essentially Catholic doctrine. G. W. Bernard has, by contrast, characterised the direction of religious policy after the break with Rome as ‘deliberately ambiguous’, and sees Henry as a ruler who held together an unwieldy coalition of interests by employing the rhetoric of continental Protestantism while inhibiting the implementation of any fundamental change.

Information

Type
Notes And Documents
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , October 1995 , pp. 689 - 696
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 McConica, J. K., English humanists and Reformation politics. Oxford 1965, ch. vi.Google ScholarScarisbrick, J.J. concurs in regarding the government's policy in the 1530s as ‘what may loosely be described as an Erasmian reform programme’: Henry VIII, London 1968, 398.Google Scholar

2 Redworth, G., ‘Whatever happened to the English Reformation?’, History Today xxxvii (1987), 29–35.Google Scholar

3 Bernard, G. W., ‘The Church of England c. 1529-c. 1642’, History lxxv (1990), 183–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 Duffy, E., The stripping of the altars: traditional religion in England 1400-1580, New Haven-London 1992, 379–447 passim.Google Scholar

5 Rex, R., Henry VIII and the English Reformation, Basingstoke 1993, 3-4, 102-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 On devotion to the Rood of Boxley see Brownbill, J., ‘Boxley Abbey and the Rood of Grace’, The Antiquary VIII (1883), 164Google Scholar; ‘London Chronicle during the reigns of Henry VII and Henry vii’, ed. Hopper, C., Camden Miscellany iv (Camden Society 1859), 11Google Scholar; Lambarde, W., A perambulation of Kent, London 1576, 183Google Scholar; Public Record Office (hereinafter cited as PRO), SP 1/31, fo. 13; Finucane, R. C., Miracles and pilgrims: popular beliefs in medieval England, London 1977, 207-9.Google Scholar On Hailes see Latimer, H., Sermons and remains, ed. Corrie, G. E. (Parker Society [hereinafter cited as PS] 1845), 363-4Google Scholar; Baddeley, S. C., ‘The Holy Blood of Hayles’, Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society xxiii (1900), 276-85Google Scholar; Oates, J. C., ‘Richard Pynson and the Holy Blood of Hayles’, The Library, 5th ser. xiii (1958), 269-77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Wriothesley, C., A chronicle of England during the reigns of the Tudors, ed. Hamilton, W. D. (Camden Soc. n.s. xi, xx, 1875-7), i. 74-6.Google Scholar See also Narratives of the days of the Reformation, ed. Nichols, J. G. (Camden Soc. lxxvii, 1859), 286Google Scholar; ‘London Chronicle during the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VIII’, 11-12; Letters and papers, foreign and domestic, of the reign of Henry VIII, ed. Brewer, J. S., Gairdner, J., and Brodie, R. H., London 1862-1910 (hereinafter cited as LP), xiii (1), 348Google Scholar; Original letters relative to the English Reformation, ed. Robinson, H. (PS 1842-5), ii. 604, 606-7, 609.Google Scholar

8 Four supplications 1529-1553, ed. Cowper, J. M. (Early English Text Society e.s. xiii, 1871), 75Google Scholar; Early writings of John Hooper, ed. Carr, S.(PS 1843), 40Google Scholar; LP xiii (1), 348; Lambarde, Perambulation of Kent, 185-7; Original letters, ii. 604, 606, 609; John, Foxe, Acts and monuments, ed. Cattley, S. R. and Townsend, G., London 1837-41, v. 397Google Scholar; William, Thomas, The pilgrim: a dialogue on the life and actions of King Henry VIII, ed. Froude, J. A., London 1861, 39.Google Scholar

9 Duffy, , Stripping of the altars, 384.Google Scholar

10 The charges against the Rood of Boxley were examined thoroughly, if somewhat tendentiously, in the last century by T. E. Bridgett in ‘The Rood of Boxley; or, how a lie grows’, The Dublin Review, Jan. 1888, 1-33. However, some modern authorities continue to accept rather uncritically the claims made in 1538. See for example Dickens, A. G., The English Reformation, 2nd edn, London 1989, 158Google Scholar; Loades, D., The mid-Tudor crisis, 1545—1565, London 1992, 176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 PRO, SP 1/129, fo. 12.

12 LP xiii (I), 348.

13 Clearly, the mechanisms in the Rood had at some time served a purpose, quite possibly in connection with the liturgical celebrations at Easter. It was common in English churches for a crucifix to be placed in the Easter sepulchre on Good Friday, and to be carried in procession on Easter Sunday. The movements of eyes and jaw to which Chamber and Wriothesley refer could simply and effectively simulate death and life restored. On these rites see A.Heales, , ‘Easter sepulchres: their object, nature and history’, Archaeologia xlii (1869), 263–308Google Scholar; Scheingorn, P., ‘“No sepulchre on Good Friday”: the impact of the Reformation on the Easter rites in England’, in Davidson, C. and Nichols, A. E. (eds), Iconoclasm vs. art and drama, Kalamazoo, Mich. 1989, 145-53Google Scholar; Duffy, , Stripping of the altars, 30-1Google Scholar. A jointed image of the resurrected Christ is known to have been employed in St Paul’s: Gairdner, J., Lollardy and the Reformation, London 1908-13, ii. 133.Google Scholar

14 LP xiii (1), 348.

15 The Lisle letters, ed. Byrne, M. S., Chicago-London 1981, v. 45.Google Scholar

16 Hudson, A., The premature Reformation: Wycliffite texts and Lollard history, Oxford 1988, 304n.Google Scholar; Thomson, J. A. F., The later Lollards 1414-1520,Oxford 1965, 70-1Google Scholar; Baddeley, , ‘The Holy Blood of Hayles’, 281.Google Scholar

17 PRO, SP 1/138, fo. 49; Latimer, Sermons and remains, 407.

18 Wriothesley, Chronicle, i. 90. The relic seems subsequently to have been disposed of quietly.

19 Thomas, , The pilgrim, 39Google Scholar. Predictably, the more memorable story that the relic was duck's blood seems to have stuck, and was confidently repeated by later commentators: ibid. 38-9; Four supplications, 75; Foxe, , Acts and monuments, v. 397.Google Scholar

20 The suggestion can be advanced very tentatively that the substance originally placed inside the reliquary may have been consecrated wine. Though the container could not have been hermetically sealed, its rate of oxidisation and evaporation could have been slow, and a stable, sugary wine such as Malmsey or Madeira might have reduced to the colour and tacky consistency described by Latimer. Use of such a substance would have had an obvious theological rationale, and might have eased the consciences of the monks if the relic had been tampered with at any time. I am grateful to Dom Cuthbert Madden and Dom Jeremy Sierla for suggestions and references on these points.

21 Brigden, S., London and the Reformation, Oxford 1989, 277-8Google Scholar; Duffy, , Stripping of the altars, 403Google Scholar; Finucane, , Miracles and pilgrims, 205-7Google Scholar

22 Aston, M., England's iconoclasts, Oxford 1988, 234-5Google Scholar; Duffy, , Stripping of the altars, 403-4Google Scholar; Rex, , Henry VIII and the English Reformation, 97-8.Google Scholar

23 Original letters, ii. 604.

24 PRO, SP 1/139, fo. 164.

25 PRO, SP 1/143, fos 198-206. The document is printed in Collier, J., An ecclesiastical history of Great Britain, London 1708-14 ii, doc. 47Google Scholar, and is discussed by Elton, G. R., Policy and police: the enforcement of the Reformation in the age of Thomas Cromwell, Cambridge 1972, 195-8Google Scholar, and Redworth, G., ‘A study in the formulation of policy: the genesis and evolution of the Act of Six Articles’, this Journal. xxxvii(1986), 42-67 at p. 49.Google Scholar

26 PRO, SP 1/143, fo. 203.

27 Foxe, , Acts and monuments, v. 403-9.Google Scholar

28 On this theme see Scarisbrick, , Henry VIII, 267-81, 287-95Google Scholar; Elton, G. R., Reform and Reformation: England 1509-1558, London 1977, 132-8Google Scholar; Guy, J., Tudor England, Oxford 1988, 128-38Google Scholar; Rex, , Henry VIII and the English Reformation, 6–37Google Scholar; Lockwood, S., ‘Marsilius of Padua and the case for the Royal Ecclesiastical Supremacy’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 6th ser. 1 (1991), 89–119.Google Scholar

29 Formularies of faith put forth by authority during the reign of Henry VIII, ed. Lloyd, C., Oxford 1825, 14Google Scholar; English historical documents V 1485-1558, ed. Williams, C. H., London 1967, 806.Google Scholar

30 Miscellaneous writings and letters of Thomas Cranmer, ed. Cox, J. E. (PS 1846), 469.Google Scholar

31 Statutes of the realm, ed. Luders, A. and others, London 1810-28, iii. 663.Google Scholar

32 On Forest, see Smith, H. M., Henry VIII and the Reformation, London 1948, 442-6Google Scholar; Aston, M., ‘Iconoclasm in England: official and clandestine’, in Davidson, and Nichols, , Iconoclasm, 47–91 at pp. 65-6Google Scholar; Aston, M., ‘Iconoclasm in England: rites of destruction by fire‘, in Scribner, R. W. (ed.), Bilder und Bildersturm im Spätmittelalter und in der frühen Neuzeit, Wiesbaden 1990, 175–202 at pp. 185-6Google Scholar; Wriothesley, , Chronicle, i. 79-80.Google Scholar

33 A change is marked by Henry's proclamation of 16 Nov. 1538, which defended traditional ceremonies and outlawed unauthorised vernacular scriptures: Tudor royal proclamations, ed. Hughes, P. L. and Larkin, J. F., New Haven-London 1964, i. 270-6.Google Scholar

34 Ibid. 284.

35 Aston, , England's iconoclasts, 238.Google Scholar

36 Formularies of faith, 215.

37 Lambarde, , Perambulation of Kent, 185.Google Scholar

38 Calfhill, J., An answer to John Martiall's Treatise of the Cross, ed. Gibbings, R. (PS 1846), 274Google Scholar;Pilkington, J., Works, ed. Scholefield, J. (PS 1842), 551–602Google Scholar; Jewel, J., Works, ed. Ayre, J. (PS 1847), ii. 652Google Scholar; Davidson, C., ‘“The devil's guts”: allegations of superstition and fraud in religious drama and art during the Reformation’, in Davidson, and Nichols, , Iconoclasm, 92–144 at p. 97.Google Scholar