Lisle.—Sir Arthur Plantagenet, son of Edward the Fourth and Elizabeth Lucy, born at Lille, circa 1462, created Viscount Lisle at Bridewell Palace, April 26, 1523; Governor of Calais, March 24, 1533; arrested May 17, 1540; died in the Tower, March 3, 1542; buried in the Tower. Married (1) Elizabeth, eleventh Viscountess Lisle, eldest daughter of Elizabeth Talbot, eighth Viscountess, and Sir Edward Grey of Groby; born circa 1480, married circa 1515, died 1527:—(2) Honor, youngest daughter of Sir Thomas Grenville of Stow, and Isabel Gilbert; born circa 1498, married circa 1530, died circa 1548. (See Basset, above.) His issue:—a. 1. Frances, born circa 1516, married (1) at Calais, February 17-22, 1538, John Basset of Umberleigh; (2) circa 1547, Thomas Monke of Potheridge; died circa 1560. Issue: (1) see Basset, above; (2) 1. Anthony, died May 9, 1620, married Mary, daughter of Richard Arscott, and left issue; 2. Katherine, married Jeremy Meo of Borrington; 3. Margaret, died unmarried; 4. John; 5. Francis or Frances; 6. Mary, (died unmarried). 2. Elizabeth, born circa 1518, married Sir Francis Jobson, of Monkwich, county Essex, who died June 11, 1573; she was living in 1560 (issue, 1. John, married Ellen, daughter of Sir Richard Pepsall, and left female issue; 2. Edward, of West Doniland, married Mary Boade, and left female issue; 3. Henry; 4. Thomas; 5. Mary). 3. Bridget, born circa 1520, married Sir William Carden, of Cawarden, Cheshire; living January 1, 1558 (issue, 1. Thomas, who left issue; 2. John), (b) 4. Infant, still-born or died soon after birth, at Calais, September 1537.
Protestants.
The Protestants in England, as on the Continent, were early divided into two great parties, known as Lutherans and Gospellers, or Consubstantiaries and Sacramentaries. These were nearly equivalent to the modern High Church (not Ritualistic) and Evangelical parties. There was yet a further division, at a later period, by the formation of a third sect known as Hot Gospellers, the direct ancestors of the Puritans. Without bearing these facts in mind, it is scarcely possible to enter into the politics of the period. Many who began as Lutherans ended as Gospellers: e.g., Cranmer, Somerset, Katherine Duchess of Suffolk. Some remained Lutherans for life, e.g., Queen Katherine Parr, Queen Elizabeth. And there were a few who never were Lutherans at all, of whom the representative is Latimer. The enmity between Somerset and Northumberland had a religious origin, Somerset being a Gospeller, and Northumberland professedly a Lutheran. It may be added that the Gospellers were as a rule Calvinists, the Lutherans Arminians.
Rose, Reverend Thomas.
I do not think it needful to recapitulate the history of Rose, which may be found at length in Foxe’s Acts and Monuments, eight, 581 et seq; and I only propose to add a few particulars and explanations which are not to be found in Foxe. It is only probable, not certain, that Mrs Rose was a foreigner, her name not being on record; and the age and existence of their only child are the sole historical data for the character of Thekla. I must in honesty own that it is not even proved that Rose’s wife and child were living at the time of his arrest; but the contrary is not proved either. The accusation brought against him is extant among Foxe’s Mss. (Harl. Ms. 421, folio 188); from which we find that he was detained at the Cross, in the Green Yard, near the Cathedral, Norwich; and that he was accused of having publicly held and taught “that in the eucharist, or sacrament of the altar, the true, natural, and real body and blood of Christ, under the forms of bread and wine, are not; but that after consecration the substance of bread and wine remaineth; and that whosoever shall adore that substance committeth idolatry, and giveth divine honour to a creature.” (Foxe’s Mss., Harl. Ms. 421, folio 188.) “Sir Thomas Rose, clerk, saith that he hath so preached, and will so preach” (Ibidem folio 146). On the 12th of May 1555, “Mr Thomas Rosse, preacher, was by the counsailles letters delyvered from the tower to the shrief of Norfolk, to be convayed and delyvered to the Bishop of Norwiche, and he either to reduce hym to recante or elles to precede against hym accordinge the lawe.” (Diary of the Council’s Proceedings, ibidem, Harl. Ms. 419, page 153.) And four days later,—“16 May. A letter to the Lord Treasourer, signifyinge what the 11 (Lords) had done for Rosse, and that order should be given according his Ls (Lordship’s) request for letters to the Busshopps.” (ibidem) Rose is by many of his contemporaries called Ross or Rosse, but he appears to have spelt his own name Rose. I say appears, because his autograph has been searched for in vain; the narrative of his sufferings, written by himself, and printed in the Acts and Monuments, is not extant among Foxe’s papers. When Rose returned to England after the accession of Elizabeth, he took possession again of his old vicarage, West Ham; but resigned it when he was presented by the Crown to the vicarage of Luton in Bedfordshire. This was on November 4, 1562; and the living was vacant by the death of the Reverend — Mason. It formed a quiet retreat for the old age of the persecuted preacher. At Luton he spent nearly thirteen years, dying there in 1574; for on the 18th of June in that year, William Home was presented to the vacant living. (Rot. Parl. 5 Elizabeth, part 4; 16 Elizabeth; Bibl. Topogr. British Antiquities, volume four.) Foxe, therefore, was apparently mistaken when he spoke of Rose as still living, in his edition of 1576; he had in all probability not yet heard of his death. As Rose was born at Exmouth in or about 1500, his age was about seventy-four when he died—probably rather more than less. For such further details of his life as can be found in Foxe’s volumes, I must refer my readers to his familiar and accessible work.
Somerset, Edward Seymour, Duke.
This very eminent man was the second son of Sir John Seymour of Wolf Hall, and Margaret Wentworth of Nettlestead, and owed his first rise to notice entirely to the elevation of his sister, Queen Jane Seymour. He married, at some period previous to this, Katherine, daughter and co-heir of Sir William Folliott, whom he repudiated when he reached a rather higher position, in order to marry Anne Stanhope, a great heiress. This was probably in 1537. On the 6th of June in that year he was created Viscount Beauchamp, and on the 18th of October following was advanced to the dignity of Earl of Hertford. So late as the accession of Edward the Sixth, he was still a Lutheran; for had he been then a Gospeller, we should not have found his signature to a letter written to the Council recommending a pardon at the Coronation, because “the late King, being in Heaven, has no need of the merit of it.” He was created by his royal nephew, February 16, 1547, Duke of Somerset, and Lord Protector of England during the King’s minority. It was very soon after this that he became a Gospeller; and immediately the Lords of the Council, headed by Northumberland, conspired to ruin him. The fullest, and the saddest, account of the plot against Somerset will be found in that Diary of Edward the Sixth, which records only facts, not opinions, much less feelings. Edward never enters anything in his Diary but events; and he did not see that the affair was a plot. Among Somerset’s judges were his rival Northumberland, his daughter-in-law’s father Suffolk, the Gospeller Sussex, his enemy Pembroke, and his cousin Wentworth. The Duke was acquitted of high treason, and condemned to death for felony, i.e., for devising the death of Northumberland. Somerset rose and owned honestly so much of the accusation as was true. He had considered whether it were advisable to impeach Northumberland and others; and had decided not to do so. He might have added that for his rival, a simple member of the Council, to depose and afterwards to impeach the Lord Protector, was at last as felonious or treasonable as any act of his. But words were vain, however true or eloquent. Northumberland had resolved upon his death, and thirsted for his blood. Somerset died upon Tower Hill, January 22, 1552. His Duchess survived him, but she was not released from the Tower until the accession of Mary. He left behind him twelve children; three by Katherine Folliott, nine by Anne Stanhope. The present Duke of Somerset is the representative of the former; the Duke of Northumberland, by the female line, of the latter. Lady Jane, the proposed Queen of Edward the Sixth, was afterwards Maid of Honour to Queen Elizabeth, and died unmarried, March 19, 1560, aged only nineteen. Somerset’s failings were pride and ambition; and he suffered in having married a woman whose faults were similar to his own. The character delineated in the text is not that attributed to him by modern historians. I must beg my readers to remember, that the necessities of the story oblige me to paint the historical persons who enter into it, not as modern writers regard them, nor indeed as I myself regard them, but as they were regarded by the Gospellers of their day. And the feelings of the Gospellers towards Somerset were those of deep tenderness and veneration. Whether the Gospellers or the historians were in the right, is one of those questions on which men will probably differ to the end of the world. I believe that his last days, the worst from a worldly point of view, were the best from a religious one, and that he was chastened of the Lord that he should not be condemned with the world.
Titles.
But a very short time had elapsed, at the date of this story, since the titles of Lord and Lady had been restricted to members of the Royal Family alone, when used with the Christian name only. A great deal of this feeling was still left; and it will be commonly found (I do not say universally) that when persons of the sixteenth century used the definite article instead of the possessive pronoun, before a title and a Christian name, they meant to indicate that they regarded him of whom they spoke as a royal person. Let me instance Lord Guilford Dudley. Those who called him “the Lord Guilford” were partisans of Lady Jane Grey: those from whose lips he was “my Lord Guilford Dudley” were against her. This is perhaps still more remarkable in the case of Arthur Lord Lisle, whom many persons looked upon as the legitimate son of Edward the Fourth. As a Viscount, his daughters of course had no claim to the title of Lady; those who gave it regarded him as a Prince. Oddly enough, his friends generally give the higher title, his servants the lower. From his agent Husee it is always Mrs Frances, never Lady; but from Sir Francis Lovell her sister is the “Lady Elyzabeth Plantagenet.”