Footnote 761: Ibid., v., 148, 850.[(back)]
Footnote 762: Ibid., v., 129, 148.[(back)]
Footnote 763: Ibid., iv., 6546.[(back)]
Footnote 764: L. and P., v., 326.[(back)]
Footnote 765: Ibid., vi., 235.[(back)]
Footnote 766: Cf. A. Zimmermann, "Zur kirchlichen Politik Heinrichs VIII., nach den Trennung vom Rom," in Römische Quartalschrift, xiii., 263-283.[(back)]
Footnote 767: L. and P., iv., 6043-44.[(back)]
Footnote 768: Hall, Chronicle, p. 764.[(back)]
Footnote 769: L. and P., iv., 6075.[(back)]
Footnote 770: That it passed at all is often considered proof of parliamentary servility; it is rather an illustration of the typical Tudor policy of burdening the wealthy few in order to spare the general public. If repayment of the loan were exacted, fresh taxation would be necessary, which would fall on many more than had lent the King money. It was very irregular, but the burden was thus placed on the shoulders of those individuals who benefited most by Henry's ecclesiastical and general policy and were rapidly accumulating wealth. Taxation on the whole was remarkably light during Tudor times; the tenths, fifteenths and subsidies had become fixed sums which did not increase with the national wealth, and indeed brought in less and less to the royal exchequer (see L. and P., vii., 344, "considerations why subsidies in diverse shires were not so good in Henry's seventh year as in his fifth"; cf. vii., 1490, and xix., ii., 689, where Paget says that benevolences did not "grieve the common people").[(back)]