Footnote 544: Narrative of the Execution of Thomas Cranmer: MS. Harleian, 422. Another account gives among the causes which Cole mentioned, that "it seemed meet, according to the law of equality, that, as the death of the Duke of Northumberland of late made even with Sir Thomas More, Chancellor, that died for the Church, so there should be one that should make even with Fisher, Bishop of Rochester; and because that Ridley, Hooper, and Ferrars were not able to make even with that man, it seemed that Cranmer should be joined with them to fill up their part of equality."—Foxe, vol. viii. p. 85. Jenkins, vol. iv. p. 133.[(Back to Main Text)]
Footnote 545: MS. Harleian, 422.[(Back to Main Text)]
Footnote 546: Shakspeare was perhaps thinking of this speech of Cranmer when he wrote the magnificent lines which he placed in the mouth of the dying Gaunt:—
"O, but they say, the tongues of dying men
Enforce attention, like deep harmony:
Where words are scarce, they are seldom spent in vain:
For they breathe truth, that breathe their words in pain.
He, that no more must say, is listened more
Than they whom youth and ease have taught to gloze;
More are men's ends marked, than their lives before:
The setting sun, and music at the close,
As the last taste of sweets, is sweetest last;
Writ in remembrance more than things long past."[(Back to Main Text)]
Footnote 547: There are two original contemporary accounts of Cranmer's words—Harleian MSS., 417 and 422—and they agree so far almost word for word with "The Prayer and Saying of Thomas Cranmer a little before his Death," which was published immediately after by Bonner. But we now encounter the singular difficulty, that the conclusion given by Bonner is altogether different. The archbishop is made to repeat his recantation, and express especial grief for the books which he had written upon the Sacrament.
There is no uncertainty as to what Cranmer really said; but, inasmuch is Bonner at the head of his version of the speech has described it as "written with his own hand," it has been inferred that he was required to make a copy of what he intended to say—that he actually wrote what Bonner printed, hoping to the end that his life would be spared; and that he would have repeated it publicly, had he seen that there was a chance of his escape. Finding, however, that his execution had been irrevocably determined on, he made the substitution at the last moment.
There are many difficulties in this view, chiefly from the character of the speech itself, which has the stamp upon it of too evident sincerity to have been composed with any underhand intentions. The tone is in harmony throughout, and the beginning leads naturally to the conclusion which Cranmer really spoke.
There is another explanation, which is to me more credible. The Catholics were furious at their expected triumph being snatched from them. Whether Cranmer did or did not write what Bonner says he wrote, Bonner knew that he had not spoken it, and yet was dishonest enough to print it as having been spoken by him, evidently hoping that the truth could be suppressed, and that the Catholic cause might escape the injury which the archbishop's recovered constancy must inflict upon it. A man who was capable of so considerable a falsehood would not have hesitated for the same good purpose to alter a few sentences. Pious frauds have been committed by more religious men than Edmund Bonner. See the Recantation of Thomas Cranmer, reprinted from Bonner's original pamphlet: Jenkins, vol. iv. p. 393.[(Back to Main Text)]
Footnote 548: Harleian MS., 422. Strype has misread the word into "run," losing the point of the expression.[(Back to Main Text)]
Footnote 549: Saying of Sir Nicholas Arnold: MS. Mary, Domestic, vol. vii.[(Back to Main Text)]