NOTE TO USERS This reproduction is the best copy available. National Library Bibliothèque nationale 1*1 ofCanada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, nie Wellington OMW~ON K1A ON4 Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Canada Canada Yw#e votm rf5mrDnœ Our hLB NMe référence The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Libraty of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distriiute or sell reproduire, prêter, distriiuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la fonne de microfiche/fllml de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts from it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être impximés reproduceà without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. English Historians' Treatments of Sir Thomas More and Bishop John Fisher in the Sixteenth and Nineteenth Gmhmies by John C. R Taylor-Hood A thesis submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in partial fullillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. Deparfment of History Mernorial University of Newf'oundland St. John's nie siuteenth-oentury personages of Sir Th011185 More and Bishop John Fiiher have repeatedy appeanxî as signiticant figures in historical works. Thek was a . didacfic de,with sixteenth-century authors uskg them as examples of Christian condwct, either virtuow or immoral. Nineteenth-century histonanS prefed to address the wisdom of More's and Fisher's decisions to oppose the wiU of the state. In both cases, the religious affiliations of the authors intluenced the way in which they perceiveci More's and Fisher's moral roles. This thesis provides an historiographid analysis of the ways in which the two groups of writers diverged and corresportded in their assessments of More's and Fisher's respective functions as historical figmzs. It ahtakes into account two major historical trends, the changes in the art of biography felt in the sixteenth century and the whig interpretation of history dominant in the nineteenth. The increased secularization of the biographical literary form led to the creation of Roman Catholic hagiographies of More and Fisher which were distinctive in their wmbination of mundane factual matenal with religiously-inspired interpretations. Protestant writers were also affected in that they were obliged to acknowledge More's and Fisher's learning and intellectual gifts, and were no longer able to dismiss then as superstitious papists. The images of More and Fisher, as created by these biographies, were used by nineteenth-century historians to persuasively convey ii moral lessons. Although the images rernained constant, the functiom were altend to include the teaching of honourable condud as weil as dramatic illustrations of the tyrannid power of the monarch. Although differllig hmone another in certain sspects, these writers all convergedin their didactic treafment of More and Fisher. Regardless of political or religious persuasion, they al1 employed the two as examples in an attempt to pmvoke rneritorious conduct in their readers. In their appraaches to and uses of Thomas More and John Fisher, historians of the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries, despite their disparate agenda, remained rernarkably close in their basic attitudes towards fhe two men. iii 1 would Iike to take this oppomutity to thank everyone in the Department of History for their guidance and advice, especialty Dr. Stuart Pierçon, whose wonts of wisdom frequently put me hack on track aRer I'd been derailed I owe an extremely large debt to Mr. Thomas Evans for his dkztion, supervision, great conversation, and cofiect use of wmmas over the past two years and more. His instruction has been invaluable and much appreciated throughout bbh my undergraduate and graduate programmes. 1am grateful to the Schd of Graduate Studies and the Department of History for all their hancial support during rny programme. I would also like to thank the staff of the Queen Elizabeth II library for their dedication to organization, and especially the interlibrary Loans folk, for their seemingly rnagical ability to pull ancient, obscure books out of the ether. Thank you; I t.Rre rehuned everything... No small thanks axe due to my family and fnends whose continual support and pride have been a wonderful motivation. Special thanks belong to Fergusson, our black Lab, and Wikket, Our Border Collie, whose sitting on my desk, leashes in mouths, often remindecl me of the world outsilie. FWy, it is with gt~atlove and affection that 1 dedicate this work to my wife, Vicky, whose love, proof-reading, and unshakeable faith in me were essential Uigredients to its completion. Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................ i --. Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... iu ........ Table of Contents .......................te................ ......................... iv Introduction .................................. .. ...........................................................................1 Chapter One ....................... ... ................................................................................. -8 1 .1 Sir Thomas More ............................. ... ........................................................ -8 1.2 BishopJohn Fisher ........................................................................................ 19 Chapter Two ................................................................................................................ -29 Chapter Three .............................................................................................................. 76 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 120 Bibliography .................................................................................................................. 126 Introduction Among the colourfül figures of Tudor history, few loom larger than Sir Thomas More and Bishop John Fisher. These two, executed for treason in 1535, were influentid during their fives and their legacies remained long after their deaths. Thomas More was, in his tirne, a successful lawyer, humanist scholar, politician, Lord Chanceilor, and fkiend to King Henry Vm, while John Fisher, a humanist scholar as well, was also Chancellor of Cambridge University for most of his adult life, chaplain to Lady Margaret Beaufort, and Bishop of Rochester. Their productive lives were cut short by their convictions for treason upon their refusal to take the Oath of Supremacy and acknowledge Henry VIII as the rightful head of the English Church. Through the centuries since their deaths, More and Fisher have been the subjects of much controversy. Many historians simply did not know what to rnake of two extraordinarily learned men who suffered beheading rather than swear an oath which the rest of the country had largely accepted. In general, the reactions to More's and Fisher's intransigence were divided along religious fines, with Catholic writers upholding them as martyrs, while Protestant authors deplored the bad decisions made by otherwise intelligent men. In the sixteenth century, while More and Fisher becarne direct examples of conduct and behaviour, either good or bad, depending on one's denomination, many writers, rising above religion, adrnired these intelligent men who preferred death to a 2 cornpromiskg of their beliefs. As such, their stories had moral value and were thus worth recording. Some three hundred years later, nineteenth-century English historians took a very sirnilar view of the issue, judging the two on the political aspects of their decision to stand against a process that played a large role in the establishment of their own nation-state. Overall, an exploration of the attitudes of writers towards More and Fisher in both the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries reveals the constancy of their reputations despite the changes wrought in the study and use of history. The choice of these two periods dernands explanation. The sixteenth century saw the genesis of the legends of More and Fisher, for the books written about them in this period established the base upon which al1 subsequent research was done. Furthemore, the images of More and Fisher created in these first works affected to a very great degree the work of later centuries. The nineteenth century was an equally formative period in English historiography. In this case, the nineteenth century shall be extended up to the eve of the First World War, for many books written in those fourteen years owed much to the old century. With the boundless confidence of the whig historians, the influence of Ranke, and the ongoing tension between Protestant and Catholic, history 1li the 1800s was a dynarnic, significant study, in which More and Fisher played no small part. The discipline of history, from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries carried as one of its primary qualities a powerful didacticisrn. The study of the past