2. William Sawtre, or Salter, otherwise Sawtry, Chawtrey and Chatris, and commonly called Sir William Sawtre, &c. it being usual in those days, and long after, to prefix that title to the names of a certain description of ecclesiastics. He is rendered peculiarly memorable as the English proto-martyr; it being generally agreed that he was the first Englishman that was burnt for his religion. We have no authority to say of Sautre, as we did of Nicholas, that he was born here. The place of his birth, as far as we know, has been no where mentioned. It appears that he took up his residence and settled here, as parish priest of St. Margaret’s, in the time of bishop Spencer, of fighting, crusading, and persecuting memory; and that he was afterwards suspected and found to be a Lollard or Wickliffite, [590] which meant pretty much the same with what we call being a protestant, but was then deemed, by the rulers, in church and state, a very grievous offence, and even a most shocking, pestilent, damnable, and insufferable heresy. The defection of Sawtre, from the established or national faith, roused his ecclesiastical superiors, and he was cited to appear before his haughty and furious diocesan, at his palace of south Helingham; which accordingly he did, on the last day of April, and the first of May 1399. In the mean time he appears to have undergone a long and strict examination, in the chapel belonging to the said episcopal palace, before the bishop, the archdeacon of Norwich, and divers others, consisting of doctors, divines, and notaries. It also appears that he was then so far from being ashamed of the opinions he had espoused, or intimidated by the danger to which they might expose him, that he did not at all scruple or hesitate to avow and defend them. This we may be sure, did not please and conciliate his examiners, or promote and facilitate his acquittal and liberation.
We are not particularly informed how he was disposed of immediately after this examination: but it seems pretty certain, that he then became a close prisoner in some place of confinement within the precincts of the said episcopal palace. A prison, for reputed heretics and other delinquents, was formerly considered among the necessary appendages to a prelatical mansion or residence: and it cannot be supposed, considering the character of bishop Spencer, but that a very complete one was then to be found at South Helingham. In a complete episcopal prison there was usually, it seems, a cell, called Little-Ease; which was a small hole, so constructed, that the person there immured could neither stand upright, lie straight, sit comfortably, or enjoy any degree of ease: in short, it was designed as a place of torment, where the sufferer was to be continually tortured, and deprived, as much as possible, of every thing that could render his situation in any degree tolerable or supportable. This diabolically ingenious contrivance could scarcely fail of answering the purpose of its inventors, as it seems to have been most admirably adapted for taming, subduing, and breaking the spirits of reputed heretics and religious free thinkers: few of whom, it is presumed, could stand such an ordeal, or terrible test, for any length of time. The romish hierarchy must have been tremendously formidable, when its prelates had such prisons in their own houses, and were empowered to confine there any that dissented from the church, or objected to its tenets and observances. [592]
That there was such a place of incarceration and torture then attached to the episcopal palace of South Helingham, seems highly probable; and if there were, there can be no doubt but that Sawtre was there confined from the first to the nineteenth day of the month last mentioned.—That he underwent some very severe treatment, in the meantime, seems morally certain, as the remarkable change in his conduct, at the close of that interval, cannot be reasonably or well accounted for on any other ground or supposition. [593] On the first of May he resolutely avowed and defended the obnoxious opinions imputed to him, but on the nineteenth of the same month, the next time he was brought before his judges, he appeared ready to relinquish them all, and pronounce his recantation. There is no reason to think that his opinions had now undergone any change, or that he had become really convinced of their falsity or untenableness; for he appeared, almost immediately after, to be as fully persuaded as ever of their truth and importance. It was evidently the state of his mind that had experienced a change: his fears had got the better of his firmness, and he no longer possessed that fortitude and boldness which he had at first displayed. Torturing severities have often made people deny their principles, and deny, or confess, any thing that their tormentors required. On this ground (and on no other that we know of) can we account for Sawtre’s change and subsequent recantation.
It was determined, by the bishop and his coadjutors, that Sawtre should publicly pronounce his recantation at different places—in order, perhaps, the more effectually to expose and humble him, and so prevent his ever daring again to broach his recanted tenets in these parts. They probably suspected his sincerity, and were resolved to render their triumph over him as complete as possible.—The obnoxious things, or enormities laid to his charge were chiefly and substantially comprised under the following heads—That the Cross on which Christ suffered was not a fit object of worship—That it was more reasonable to worship a temporal prince than that wooden cross—That the worship of angels is unlawful, even more so than the worship of holy or truly good men—That going on pilgrimage is useless, and that vows for that purpose are not binding, and that the money so expended had better be bestowed in alms to the poor—That priests are more bound to preach the word of God than to say their mattins, or observe the canonical hours—and that, after the sacramental words are pronounced, the bread remaineth the same as before, and so does not cease to be bread, or undergo a transubstantiation.—It was a sad time when people held these opinions at the risk of their lives!
On the first two days, as has been already observed, Sawtre openly avowed the said articles, and boldly defended them; but at his next appearance, after eighteen days of close confinement and severe sufferings, as we may reasonably presume, he seemed quite an altered man, ready to retract all he had before affirmed and maintained: which may be easily accounted for on the ground before suggested. How many times, or at how many places the bishop now required and obliged him to publish, or pronounce his recantation, it is not very easy to discover. We find it to have been done at South Helingham, and we are assured that it was also done in the parish churches of Lynn and Tilney, and in other places.—Fox has preserved a curious document relating to this affair, being the bishop’s account of the whole process, drawn up by order of archbishop Arundel, and transmitted to him, when Sawtre was taken up the last time, and tried before him and his clergy, assembled in convocation, at the Chapter House of St. Paul’s, in February, 1400, as they reckoned, but 1401, according to our reckoning.—That account, or document is as follows—
“Memorandum, That upon the last day of Aprill, in the yeere of our Lord 1399, in the 7. indiction, and 10 yeere of the papacie of pope Boniface the 2. in a certain chamber within the manor-house of the said bishop of Norwich at South Helingham (where the register of the said bishop is kept) before the 9. houre, in a certain chapell within the said manor situate, and the first day of May then next and immediately insuing, in the foresaid chamber Sir W. Chawtris, parish priest of the church of S. Margaret in the towne of Lin, appeared before the bishop of Norwich, in the presence of John de Derlington, archdeacon of Norwich, doctor of the decrees, frier Walter Disse, and John Rickinghall, professors in divinity, William Carlton, doctor of both lawes, and William Friseby, with Hugh Bridham, publike notaries, and there publikely affirmed and held the conclusions, as before is specified.—All and singular the premisses the forsaid William affirmeth upon mature deliberation. And afterwards, to wit, the 19. day of May in the yeere, indiction, and papacie aforesaid, in the chappell within the manor-house of the said Henry bishop of Norwich, situate at South Helingham, the foresaid Sir William revoked and renounced all and singular the foresaid his conclusions; abjuring and correcting all such heresies and errors, taking his oath upon a book before the said Henry, the bishop of Norwich, that from that time forward he would never preach, affirm, nor hold privily nor apertly, the foresaid conclusions; and that he would pronounce, according to the appointment of the said bishop, the foresaid conclusions to be erroneous and heresies, in the parish churches of Lin and Tilney, and in other places at the assignment of the said bishop; and further sware, that he would stand to the ordinance of the said bishop touching the premisses, in the presence of the discreet and worshipfull men afore-recited, with divers other moe.—As concerning the first conclusion, that he said he would not worship the cross &c. he confessed himself to have erred, and that the article was erroneous, and submitted himselfe. And as touching the second article, that he said, he would rather worship a king, &c. he confessed himself to have erred, and the article to be erroneous, and submitted himselfe, and soforth of all the rest.—Then next after this, upon the 25. day of May, in the yeere of our Lord aforesaid, in the Church yard of the Chappell of St. James, within the towne of Lin, the foresaid William, in the presence of the foresaid bishop and clergy, and the people of the said towne of Lin standing round about, publikely declared in the English tongue, the foresaid conclusions to be erroneous and heresies, as was contained in a certain scrole. [597] And after this, the 26. day of May, in the yeere above said in the Church of the Hospital of S. John’s, in the towne of Lin, the said Sir William, before the said bishop sitting as judge, sware and took his oath upon the holy Evangelists, that he would never after that time preach openly and publikely the foresaid conclusions, nor would heare the confessions of any of his subjects of his diocesse of Norwich without the speciall license of the said bishop, &c. In the presence of frier John Smermen, M. John Rickinghall doctor of divinity, W. Carlton doctor of both lawes, and Thomas Bulton officer of the liberty of Lin aforesaid, with divers others.” [598]
Such was the account, or statement of his former process against Sawtre, which bishop Spencer delivered to his metropolitan, Arundel. Not the least hint is here given, how the reputed heretic had been treated, or was disposed of, during the interval between his first and last examination. Had his renunciation of his obnoxious tenets been brought about by mere argument, or rational persuasion, it would, doubtless, have been mentioned by way of triumph, or boasting: but having been the effect of extreme severity or cruel treatment (as was above suggested) it was very natural to pass it over in silence, for it was not capable of yielding any manner of credit to the parties concerned, or give them a plausible pretence to make a merit of it. This silence therefore evidently and strongly corroborates, if it do not also satisfactorily establish, what was before advanced or suggested on this head.
After Sawtre had gone quite through this irksome and humiliating process of recantation, it might be expected that he would not think of tarrying much longer in these parts: he, accordingly, appears to have quitted Lynn shortly after, and obtained the situation of parish-priest, or minister of St. Osith, in London. [599] This would seem to indicate, that his character was still deemed respectable, and had not suffered so much by the late event as some might expect. He had also, probably, some good and powerful friends, who now interested themselves very warmly and effectually in his behalf. However that was, he really did, as far as we can discover, obtain the said situation without opposition or difficulty. But he soon appeared to be so far from having abandoned his former principles, that he was still, in fact, as much a Lollard and heretic as ever: and his late miscarriage seems to have operated so as both to confirm him in those principles and also to arm him with boldness and courage to maintain them against all gainsayers, and in the face of every future danger or opposition.
Like that of the rest of his party, (the Lollards,) Sawtre’s heresy seems to have been of a twofold nature; partly religious, and partly political; which must have rendered him doubly odious to the ruling powers: and as he proved a relapsed, confirmed, and irreclaimable heretic, we need not wonder that he should be made to feel the whole and overwhelming weight of their indignation and vengeance. The affairs of this country were then, as at some subsequent periods, most wretchedly situated. Every thing, both in church and state, might be said to be lamentably in the wrong: and Sawtre appears to have been earnestly desirous of having them thoroughly reformed and rectified. He may therefore be considered, if not as the Sir William Jones, [600] the Sir Francis Burdett, or the Major Cartwright, yet, at least, or rather, as the Christopher Wyvill of that time. Men of that sort, though ever so honest, virtuous, enlightened, or respectable, are always viewed with an evil eye, and deemed to be dangerous characters by the interested and unprincipled agents and abettors of ecclesiastical and political corruption. It is no wonder, therefore, that a most horrible outcry was raised against this man throughout the whole camp and borders of those philistines.
Sawtre had formed an important plan for the benefit of his oppressed country, and intended to lay it immediately before parliament. The design got wind, and the high priests, in particular, with archbishop Arundel at their head, were instantly alarmed, as the project, had it succeeded, would have deeply affected them: and in order effectually to frustrate the reformer’s object, they so managed, that the affair should not go before parliament, but be referred to the convocation, which was then sitting. From that assembly no good could be expected to result. Patriots and reformers were there objects of utter aversion; and any one might see that poor Sawtre had no longer any chance of bringing his project to a successful issue, or even of escaping with his life. He was accordingly brought before that ecclesiastical tribunal, and the result will be seen by the sequel. This was about the middle of February 1401, or 1400, according to their reckoning; for they placed that month near the close of the year, which, with them, ended on the 25th of March.