PATRONAGE, PERFORMANCE, AND REPUTATION IN THE EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY CHURCH DANIEL REED OXFORD BROOKES UNIVERSITY Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the award of Doctor of Philosophy in History SEPTEMBER 2019 1 Lancelot Blackburne, Archbishop of York. After unknown artist. Mezzotint, sold by Thomas Bakewell. 1724 or after. Private collection of Daniel Reed. 2 For Freya 3 Abstract The perceived success of the revisionist programme in dissipating the ‘longest shadow in modern historiography’ calls into question the ongoing relevance of ‘optimistic’ versus ‘pessimistic’ interpretations of the Church of England in the long eighteenth century. And yet, the case of Lancelot Blackburne, Archbishop of York (1724-1743), has not benefitted from the ‘revisionist turn’ and represents an unparalleled problem in accounts of the Georgian episcopate. Whilst Benjamin Hoadly has been the most maligned bishop of the period for his theology, Blackburne is the most derided for his personal imperfections and supposed negligence of his episcopal duties. These references are often pernicious and euphemistic, manifesting in several quasi-apocryphal tales. The most regularly occurring being accounts of Blackburne’s lasciviousness, speculation over the paternity of his chaplain Thomas Hayter, and the Archbishop’s association with piracy. As long as these bastions of resistance to revisionism remain, negative assumptions will linger on in contemporary studies of the Church, regardless of whether they are reframed by current trends. As such, this thesis utilises under-explored archival sources to reorient Blackburne’s case to its historical context. This is achieved through an exploration of the inter-connected themes of patronage, performance, and reputation. First, this thesis delineates Blackburne’s distribution of episcopal patronage across the various administrative strata of his diocese, exploring how these appointments contributed to the task of ‘turning’ the diocese toward the Whig ministry. It also investigates the reciprocal obligations of the patronage bargain, elucidating the correlation between spiritual services and temporal rewards. Second, this thesis challenges the claims of neglect that underpin pessimistic accounts of Blackburne’s archiepiscopacy, positing that supposed marks of poor performance are mis-reading of the Archbishop’s changing approach to diocesan management occasioned by his declining health. Finally, this thesis investigates under-analysed afterlives of patronage relationships, and the long shadow cast by a patron over their clients’ subsequent careers. Finally, Blackburne’s status as a mythologised patron is considered, exploring the intertwining of contemporary, politically-motivated scandal and the mythologisation of an historical figure. 4 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 6 List of Abbreviations 7 Lists of Tables 8 Introduction 9 1 ‘Our Worthy Friend in ye West’ 28 2 Establishing an Episcopal Administration 38 3 Managing Patronage: York Diocese Books, 1691-1761 83 4 Ill Health and Episcopal Performance 96 5 Patronage in Action: Visitation 114 6 The Absent Archbishop: Confirmation 142 7 The Shadow of Patronage 156 8 Lewis Stephens and ‘The Ecclesiastical Climbers’ 170 9 The Mythologised Patron 188 Conclusion 202 Appendices 204 Bibliography 236 5 Acknowledgements My gratitude for the encouragement I’ve received during my doctoral programme can barely be summarised in a few short lines, but I will make some attempt here. All financial support has helped to lighten the burden of pursuing research. I thank the Dobson Theological Fund, Institute of Historical Research, Oxford Brookes Research Fund, Royal Historical Society, Sir Philip Reckitt Education Trust, Sir Richard Stapley Foundation, and Westminster College Oxford Trust for their contributions towards my studies. I am grateful to King’s College London and the Georgian Papers Programme for providing a rare opportunity to work with the Royal Archives. I am also humbled to have received generous assistance from the Leonard Chamberlain Trust of Hull. Finally, renewed thanks to those who offered support through Gofundme.com; Dawn Bryant, Lynne Carter, James Cox, Anna Keylock, and Amy Talbot. To the staff of every archival service, library, local history society, and museum who have assisted me either in person or by correspondence (too many to name individually), I offer my sincere thanks. I also take this opportunity to acknowledge Professor Glenn Burgess, whose calm and patient encouragement first enlivened my interest in archival research at the University of Hull. I will always be indebted to Blake Gerard for graciously accepting a stranger’s invitation to a Yorkshire pub; an encounter which set me on a hobby-horsical path with a digression of International Laurence Sterne Foundation friends and colleagues. Crucially, this thesis has been made possible by the constant support, insight, and good nature of my supervisors at Oxford Brookes University. I thank Professor Joanne Begiato for her compassion and for keeping me on track, and Professor William Gibson for taking a chance on my work. I am fortunate to have experienced a model of supervisory excellence, and am grateful for their friendship, good humour, and latterly, patience. All errors that remain in this work are my own. Finally, I must make some more personal acknowledgements. This course of study has been interwoven into every aspect of my life for the past seven years, so it would be impracticable to acknowledge everyone who has supported me – but be certain that I owe you a pint. I thank Mohiyeddin for his unselfish desire to see me succeed in my academic pursuits. I honour his friendship by writing less, rather than more. To all who provide care and comfort to my beautiful daughter, and to dear Erica who has tolerated me bathed in laptop-blue for countless nights – make that three pints. And to my parents, who I love dearly; domestic holidays tramping around castles and repeat viewings of Blackadder have a lot to answer for. 6 List of Abbreviations Audley Letters Osborn c195. Letters of John Audley, Yale University, USA BIA Borthwick Institute for Archives, University of York BL British Library CCEd Clergy of the Church of England Database CRO Cornwall Record Office CRS Catholic Record Society ERYAS East Riding of Yorkshire Archives & Local Studies Service GA Gloucestershire Archives HHC Hull History Centre HMC Historical Manuscripts Commission HMSO Her Majesty’s Stationary Office LPL Lambeth Palace Library ODNB Oxford Dictionary of National Biography N&Q Notes & Queries NA Nottinghamshire Archives RA Royal Archives SA Gibson Edmund Gibson MS, University of St. Andrews SPCK Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge Stephens Letters CRO. G/1968, letter book from Lewis Stephens to Francis Gregor TNA The National Archives UDSC University of Durham Special Collections ULSC University of Leeds Special Collections UNSC University of Nottingham Special Collections WYJS West Yorkshire Joint Service (Archives) YCA York City Archives YML York Minster Library Note on Dates Before 1752 all dates are given in Old Style, eleven days behind the New Style or Gregorian calendar. The year is taken to begin on 1 January. 7 List of Tables Table 1: Lancelot Blackburne’s episcopal chaplains, 1717-1743 Table 2. Clergy with preferments in York totalling £500 and over, 1742 Table 3: York diocese books, 1693-1743 Table 4: Visitations conducted by the Archbishops of York, 1691-1761 Table 5: Preachers selected for Lancelot Blackburne’s primary visitation of York, 1726-1728 (with visitation centre and benefice of preacher) Table 6: Dates, confirmation centres, and numbers confirmed by Bishop Martin Benson of Gloucester in the Diocese of York, 1737 8 INTRODUCTION In 2001, Gareth Walker stated that historians who persisted in opening their studies of the eighteenth-century Church with apologia were at danger of ‘protesting too much’.1 The inference being that at the turn of the Millennium the revisionist programme which was set on foot by Norman Sykes (with notable forerunners), and gathered pace through the 1980s and 1990s, had succeeded in dissipating the ‘longest shadow in modern historiography’ over what was once considered a ‘lifeless and least interesting’ period in the Church’s history.2 And yet, the ‘optimistic’ versus ‘pessimistic’ debate is one that refuses to stay down. The ongoing relevance of this dichotomy was exemplified by a heated exchange over opposing views of Anglican life in industrialising Lancashire in the long eighteenth century.3 Whilst acknowledging the merits of his study, Mark Smith stated that Michael Snape had taken up an out-dated, polemicist agenda that amounted to little more than a refurbishment of the pessimistic case.4 In retort, Snape claimed Smith was no less entrenched in a position that was beholden to anachronistic, comparative analysis with the nineteenth-century Church.5 Despite the authors’ intentions, their attempts to dismiss the historiographical relevance of the ‘optimistic’ versus ‘pessimistic’ debate inadvertently demonstrated its vitality and contributed to its continuance. Rather than repeat the debate’s long history here, it is more fruitful to acknowledge that this thesis benefits greatly from the 2017 publication of the second volume of the Oxford History of Anglicanism, and its crystallisation of the current historiography of the Church in the long eighteenth century.6 This landmark series takes on the heavyweight agenda of producing a history