ereth upon, _i.e._, that he
take none of the pope's right nor patrimony from him; the second that he
destroy all these new folks of opinion and the works of their new learning;
the third, that if he married and took Anne to wife, the vengeance of God
should plague him; and as she sayth she shewed this unto the king."--Paper
on the Nun of Kent: _MS. Cotton, Cleopatra_, E 4.
[328] ELLIS, third series, vol. ii. p. 137. Warham had promised to marry
Henry to Anne Boleyn. The Nun frightened him into a refusal by a pretended
message from an angel.--_MS._ ibid.
[329] The Nun hath practised with two of the pope's ambassadors within this
realm, and hath sent to the pope that if he did not do his duty in
reformation of kings, God would destroy him at a certain day which he had
appointed. By reason whereof it is supposed that the pope hath showed
himself so double and so deceivable to the King's Grace in his great cause
of marriage as he hath done, contrary to all truth, justice, and equity. As
likewise the late cardinal of England, and the Archbishop of Canterbury,
being very well-minded to further and set at an end the marriage which the
King's Grace now enjoyeth, according to their spiritual duty, were
prevented by the false revelations of the said Nun. And that the said
Bishop of Canterbury was so minded may be proved by divers which knew then
his towardness.--Narrative of the Proceedings of Elizabeth Barton: _Rolls
House MS._
[330] Note of the Revelations of Elizabeth Barton: _Rolls House MS._
[331] HALL, p. 780.
[332] RYMER, vol. vi. p. 160. We are left to collateral evidence to fix the
place of this petition, the official transcriber having contented himself
with the substance, and omitted the date. The original, as appears from the
pope's reply (LORD HERBERT, p. 145), bore the date of July 13; and unless a
mistake was made in transcribing the papal brief, this was July, 1530. I
have ventured to assume a mistake, and to place the petition in the
following year, because the judgment of the universities, to which it
refers, was not completed till the winter of 1530; they were not read in
parliament till March 30, 1531; and it seems unlikely that a petition of so
great moment would have been presented on an incomplete case, or before the
additional support of the House of Commons had been secured. I am far from
satisfied, however, that I am right in making the change. The petition must
have been drawn up (though it nee
|