Thomas Norton's "Devices" for a Godly Realm: An Elizabethan Vision for the Future

Thomas Norton's "Devices" for a Godly Realm: An Elizabethan Vision for the FutureAuthor(s): Barry ShawSource: The Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 22, No. 3 (Autumn, 1991), pp. 495-509Published by: The Sixteenth Century JournalStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2541472 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 00:50

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Sixteenth Century Journal is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheSixteenth Century Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.58 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 00:50:43 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=scj

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2541472?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Sixteenth Century Journal XXII, No. 3, 1991

Thomas Norton's "Devices" for a Godly Realm: An Elizabethan Vision for the Future

Barry Shaw University of Queensland

In January 1582 Thomas Norton, playwright, pamphleteer, and member of parliament, penned his series of political, educational, and religious proposals for reform known as the "Devices." Commissioned by Principal Secretary Sir Francis Wal- singham, Norton's recommendations were of special relevance for England in the 1580s. A further paper also written for Walsingham, "Of the v periodes of 500 yeares," allowed Norton the opportunity to interpret the lessons of English history, speculate upon the realm's future, and thereby justify the immediate implementation of the "Devices."

IN RECENT YEARS THOMAS NORTON,the Elizabethan "parliament man," has undergone a dramatic transformation. Under critical and detailed analysis he has shed the mantle of opposition leader of a "puritan choir"1 and emerged as the veritable champion of privy council policy in the House of Commons. This reassessment, primarily the work of G. R. Elton and M. A. R. Graves, has centered almost exclusively upon Norton's role in the parliament.2 However, other activities undertaken by Norton for the privy council, while less well recorded, were of potentially greater importance. Indeed two papers written in early 1582 represent the definitive and final statement on the reforms Norton believed necessary for the future well- being of the realm and also explain the reasons for their urgent implementation. The first, Norton's "Devices," is a comprehensive program, un- ashamedly Protestant in design, which considers measures for ensuring the queen's safety and the removal of the continuing abuses in church, school, universities, and Inns of Court. The second, "Of the v periodes of 500 yeares," seeks to explain the realm's destiny by examining the patterns and lessons of history. Together, these documents afford a rare opportunity to understand the ideas and ideals of an industrious and ubiquitous official.

1J.E. Neale, Elizabeth I and Her Parliaments, vol. 1 (N.Y.: St. Martins, 1958). 2M.A.R. Graves, "Thomas Norton the Parliament Man: an Elizabethan M.P.,1559-1581"

Historical Journal 23(1980):17-35; Graves, "The Management of the Elizabethan House of Commons: the Council's Men of Business/' Parliamentary History 2(1983):11-38; Graves, The Tudor Parliaments. Crown, Lords and Commons, 1485-1603 (London: Longman, 1985); G.R. Elton, "Parliament in the Sixteenth-Century: Functions and Fortunes," Historical Journal 22(1979): 255-78; Elton, The Parliament of England 1559-1581 (Cambridge, 1986); Barry Shaw, "The Elizabethan Men of Business and the Implementation of Domestic Policy, 1569-1584" (Ph.D. thesis, University of Queensland, 1988). For a survey of recent research on the Elizabethan Parliaments, see Norman L. Jones, "Parliament and the Governance of Elizabethan England: a Review," Albion 19, no. 3 (1987): 327-46.



496 The Sixteenth Century Journal XXII/3 1991

Written within the confines of the Tower, whilst its author was suffering the ignominy of having offended the queen with some injudicious remarks concerning the proposed Alencon marriage,3 the "Devices" were Norton's detailed response to a directive from the Principal Secretary, Sir Francis Walsingham. On 31 December 1581 the secretary wrote to the lieutenant of the Tower, Sir Owen Hopton, ordering that "Master Norton" be furnished "with penne and ink and paper" for the express purpose of commenting upon an "enclosed note conteyning certaine pointes for the reformation of the present corruption in religion. . . ." The note comprised four questions:

1. What order might be taken for the reformation of the Vniuersities 2. What for the publik scholes and priuate scholemasters 3. What for the Innes of court and chancerie 4. How the euell ministers may be remoued, and good and sufficient

men placed in their places, by well bestowing of the benefices by the patrons.4

It was these few points which formed the basic framework for the "Devices." Not content merely to elaborate Walsingham's queries, Norton embarked upon a comprehensive series of political, educational, and religious proposals.

There are three extant versions of Norton's "Devices," but only one is written in the author's hand. This is located within the folios of his "Letterbook," a bound manuscript book which Norton used for drafting letters and other documents. The "Letterbook" covers the period from 15 December 1581 to 13January 1582 and probably includes the majority of his outgoing correspondence whilst in the Tower. There are several letters to his wife, his eldest son, and William Fleetwood, the Recorder of London, but the more important are those to Walsingham and Lord Treasurer Burghley. Because the letters are drafts and not subject to endorsement by the addressee, identification of the recipients is occasionally difficult. However, Norton normally varied the mode of address as befitted the status of the person to whom he was writing. Thus "honorable Sir" or "Your honour" referred to councillors of Walsingham's standing, while "Right honorable and Christian good lord" or "Mercifull and euen therin honorable lord" were reserved for men of the lord treasurer's eminence. Further clarification is usually provided by contextual evidence.

The "Devices," consisting of installments, are in draft form and interspersed with letters to Walsingham and Burghley. After each com-

3Roger Manners to the Earl of Rutland, 5 December 1581, Belvoir Castle, Lincolnshire, Rutland MS. 5, fol. 53.

4Thomas Norton's "Letterbook" and Drafts of "Devices" [1582], British Library (BL), Additional MS. 48023 (Yelverton), fol. 41v. Hereafter referred to as "Letterbook." Elton, The Parliament of England, 353 misdates the "Devices" to early 1570s.



Norton's Godly Realm 497

pleted section there is usually an accompanying note for the secretary. Immediately following Norton's survey of the Inns of Court, there is an apology: "Yow shold haue had this soner but that I was all the day yesterday verie sick." An earlier letter indicates something of the format Walsingham required. Norton wrote:

I haue here sent yow the part concerning scholes and scholemasters in such maner of articles as yow require. If yow send me back that which yow had before of the vniuersities, I will abridge that also into short articles and send it yow.5

Understandably these drafts, as they appear in the "Letterbook," are not in their final form. Presumably this task was undertaken by Walsingham after he had received all the installments.

The drafting of such a lengthy document, and the rewriting and revising of each section so that the installments sent to the secretary were in a presentable format, was no mean feat. Norton early recognized the enormity of the task and made his position abundantly clear:

. yow haue sent me a work which in truthe for diuersitie of partes is a work ofworkes and as it were a bundel of burdens layed vpon a poore feble asses back, who for his lowly seruile condition of state and minde, lacketh not endeuour to goe on, but for weight and weaknesse is forced to lye downe and groane and the rather for this that though he haue a Dryuer to make him goe, yet he lacketh a lifter to help him vp. . ..

Norton's plea was to little avail, and he certainly labored alone on the "Devices" as a further letter to Walsingham confirmed: "I humbly beseche yow to beare with me, a poore man not quiet in witt nor hart, full ofsorow and trobles, without bokes or helpes, and so vnable to do do [sic] anything to your liking or with any spede."6

These were the despondent words which followed the section on the church. Thus the "Devices" were not only penned by Norton but written without the assistance of either secretary or reference material.

The survival of Norton's "Letterbook" and the drafts of his "Devices" is largely due to its preservation among the Yelverton manuscripts, a collection originally compiled by the clerk of the council, Robert Beale.7 Not only was Beale an avid collector, he was also a friend and colleague of Norton. The crown's interest in Norton's works was apparent shortly after his death in 1584. Another of Norton's friends, clerk of the council Thomas Wilkes, was ordered to take charge of"all the Bookes papers and matters of State" found in his study. Among the seventy-three items were: "A plotte to

511 January 1582; 9 January 1582, "Letterbook7" fol. 53; fol. 51. 61 January 1582; 12 January 1582, "Letterbook, fol. 42; fol. 56v. 7See Roger S. Schofield, "The Yelverton Manuscripts,' British Museum Quarterly 19(1954):

3-9.




keepe Iesuites and Seminaries from infecting the churche" and "A plotte for the refourmeing of the vniuersities and sondrie disorders of the ministrie. "8

Although the titles are slightly different, these were probably installments which Walsingham returned after having them copied out.

In contrast to the fragmented nature of the "Letterbook Devices," the two other versions, written in neat, regular secretary hands, are carefully ordered. The two sections on the university are brought together and some minor rearrangement of other sections is apparent. Although both versions are formally set out with italicized marginal headings, the State Paper "Devices" is the earlier and more important of the two.9 Almost certainly, this was the version copied from Norton's installments and retained by Walsingham. In 1588 an inventory of state papers located at the "study and the court" was compiled by Thomas Lake, one of Walsingham's secretaries. Under the heading "Books of Home Matters," there appears the entry "A book of Nortons Deuices."10

The remaining version of the "Devices" formed part of the vast collection of manuscripts amassed by the lawyer, Sir Julius Caesar.11 The document is evidently copied from the State Paper "Devices." It repeats word for word the latter, but corrects the few minor errors. Although undated, it is immediately followed by "Orders to be obserued in the Innes of the Court and Chauncerie," August 1586.12 The similarity of certain of the recommendations with those of Norton suggest that both papers were deliberately placed together.

As finally arranged in the State Papers, the "Devices" are prefaced with a brief but important statement on the queen's safety. Walsingham had made no specific request for this item, but its contemporaneous relevance was patent in that it dealt with the threat posed to the realm by the continuing infiltration of missionary priests. To facilitate their detection and also that of the allegiance of recusants, a carefully worded oath is provided. This embodies the bloody questions, which Norton had already used to advantage in his interrogations of seminary priests, set within the framework of the 1559 oath of supremacy. The widespread adoption of the oath might have ensnared more seminarists but it would also have placed Catholics, loyal to the crown, in an invidious position: refusing the oath

8"The Catalogue of all the Bookes papers and matters of State founde in Thomas Nortons studie and committed by her Maiestie to the charge of Thomas Wilkes Clarke of the Counsell," 1584, Hatfield House, Cecil Papers 140, fols. 51-51v.

9Thomas Norton's "Devices" [1582], Public Record Office (PRO), State Papers (SP) 12/157, fols. 157v-178. Hereafter referred to as "Devices." Unless stated otherwise all citations are from this copy of the "Devices"

10"A repertory of such state papers as were in the Paper House... ,' BL, Stowe MS. 162, fol. 6.

1'A booke of Master Nortons deuises," BL, Lansdowne MS. 155, fols. 87-110v. 12BL, Lansdowne MS. 155, fols. 110v-113v.




would brand them as potential traitors; subscribing and thereby denying papal supremacy would condemn them to eternal damnation.13

The oath is followed by a lengthy preamble to the section on the universities in which Norton evaluated the alternative methods of imple- menting his proposals, and argued forcefully that reform was urgently required. The universities themselves are examined in considerable detail, although the findings and recommendations are summarized in under four folio pages.

Norton's proposals included a visitation, to be headed by two stern Protestant colleagues, Henry Knollys and Dr. John Hammond, to ascertain the conformity of all members of the universities. "The knott is," Norton explained, "that hir maiestie be made well assured of the zeale . .. oftheise to true relligion and their sufficiencie and their industrie in their places to further it." For these purposes Norton insisted upon a confession of conformity with the 1571 articles and a condemnation of "the Romish Church where it varieth from that doctrine." Thereafter such confession was to be repeated annually. In addition, similar espousals of faith were ordered at degree ceremonies and at initial meetings between tutors and pupils. To ensure that religion was correctly taught "speciall zelous per- sons" were to "be appoynted opposers" and "monethly at the least" examine the tutors. The diligence of the opposers would in turn be assessed by "speciall zelous censors."

These checks and balances were, of course, accompanied by a series of stringent penalties. Tutors neglecting to teach true religion would be dismissed after one warning, while "favourers of suspect papists" or those "teaching of anie Romish false Doctrine" would suffer expulsion and imprisonment. Residents at university possessing ecclesiastical cures were not to be tolerated and those who failed to progress in learning were to be removed. Any expelled or "departing without testimonie of the vniuersitie that he is knowen sound in relligion" would render themselves ineligible for "anie benefice or place of curate or teacher anie where."

Norton was also concerned about the plight of poor students. Univer- sity places, he argued, should not be filled by the children of wealthy parents "vnlesse such give bond for his sonnes serving the church or mainteine a student in divinitie. ..." Similarly the "vaine charges in

apparell in sumptuous proceadinges at taking of degrees and other idle expenses" drove many from the university. It was therefore necessary to reduce "both rich and poore . . . to vniformitie and frugalitie. "14

In dealing with the church, Norton reiterated the perennial complaints against nonresidence, plurality, simony, and an unlearned ministry, and

13"Devices" fols. 157-157v. 14Ibid., 158-165v.




outlined a variety of remedial action. He proposed that the queen "send owt hir commission of visitation as in the first yere of hir raigne and that to be renewed everie vijth yere." The legitimacy of licenses granted for plurality and non-residence was to be assessed and future licenses forbidden. Minis- ters were required to subscribe to the 1571 articles and those unfit removed. "For the examination, ordring, and admitting of ministers," he recom- mended his friend, Dr. Hammond, who had "made a verie good collection owt of the lawes and canons of our church."

A major role was assigned to the bishops, and one they would not have found entirely comforting. They were ordered to keep accurate records of all ministerial admissions, monitor the diligence of the clergy, and allow none to enter the church who were unworthy. Failure to observe the last clause would incur a pecuniary penalty or even "deprivation for contempt. "15

The deplorable quality of schoolmasters was also attributed to the bishops. Norton required that they should personally examine all schoolmasters, particularly regarding their conformity in religion, and report their findings to the council. At the same time justices of the peace were to conduct their own inquiries and forward a similar certificate in order to ensure the bishops' diligence. As a positive step to promoting sound education, Norton proposed that all schools adopt a standardized curricu- lum and use the Catechism written by Alexander Nowell, the Dean of St. Paul's.

The Inns of Court were considered in the same manner. Admission was to be restricted to those of sound religion, and those failing to attend church suspended and removed if unable to explain that the "default was not for misliking of relligion." Advancement of "protestantes knowen to be well learned" was to be encouraged.16

Norton concluded his "Devices" with a lengthy series of articles "to bee certified by the Bushoppes" and the draft of a letter to be sent to them. The articles summarized the many tasks Norton had already allocated to the bishops, while the letter, written in the form of a reprimand from the council, was obviously intended to compel lax high ecclesiastics into undertaking more vigorous inquiries.17

Norton's message was loud and clear. He demanded the eradication of all erroneous religious thinking, especially Catholicism, and the removal, forcibly if necessary, of those who perpetuated it.

Yet it is too easy to dismiss the "Devices" as the outpourings of a rabid anti-Catholic. Certainly Norton's public career appears to corroborate this view, but the insistency, even urgency, with which he argued his proposals

15Ibid., 166v-170v. 16Ibid., 171-175v. 17Ibid., 176v-178v.




implies a motivation greater than sheer bigotry. There was a positive aspect, and in this regard the "Devices" should be considered in conjunc- tion with his "v periodes." This document reveals that Norton's program for reform was also influenced by his personal view of England's destiny in historic terms.

Norton's "Of the v periodes of 500 yeares" was, like the "Devices," written early in 1582.18 The only copy of the work is in the Cotton collection where it follows on from Norton's "For discovery of vnsownd subiects," an expanded version of the "Devices"' oath, which also appears in draft form at the end of the "Letterbook."19 He probably did not commence writing the "v periodes" until after 14 January when he des- patched "For discovery of vnsownd Subiects" to Walsingham.20 However, the work was almost certainly composed within the next few days, either in the Tower or at Norton's home-prison, to which he may have been moved at this time.

It is significant that the "v periodes" was Norton's response to another request from Walsingham. On 4 January 1582 the secretary wrote to Norton, again via Hopton, and enumerated several points he wished to be gathered from English chronicles. First he desired to know the cause and effect of the "warres eche prince hath had since the Conquest," secondly an examination of the "good Lawes" made during that time and lastly the result of rebellions which "haue growen in eche princes time ...."21 Although Norton promised to complete this assignment "in a shorter maner of notes and articles," the document has not come to light. However, he did compose a preamble, describing in five-hundred-year periods, "the alteracion or reuolution" which had punctuated British history up to and including the Norman invasion. He also forecast the revolution still to come. 22

Preparatory to commencing the "v periodes," Norton wrote from the Tower on 6 January itemizing the books he required. These were not immediately forthcoming. Six days later Norton bluntly informed Wal- singham, "If yow will haue the other work procede I must haue bokes of English histories as I wrote, which if yow procure or geue Master Lieutenant order to send to Master Barker for them, yow shal haue my trauaile .. ."23

The list of books Norton required was illuminating, for it explained the nature of the apocalyptic thought which pervades the work. In the

18"Of the v periodes of 500 yeares," BL, Cottonian MS. Titus F3, fols. 271-75. 19BL, Cottonian MS. Titus F3, fols. 270-71; 13? January 1582, "Letterbook," fols. 58-58v. 20Norton to Walsingham, 13 January 1582, "Letterbook," fol. 57v. 21Walsingham to Norton, 4 January 1582, "Letterbook," fol. 44v. 22"v periodes," fols. 271-75. For use of the term revolution, see Vernon F Snow, "The

Concept of Revolution in Seventeenth Century England," Historical Journal 5 (1962): 167-90. 23"Letterbook" fol. 56v.




postscript of a letter to Walsingham, Norton wrote: "I lack bokes to begine, I wold haue Stowes last breffe cronicle [sic], Graftons chronicle, All the statutes at large, the abridgement of statutes, master Foxes boke of martyrs. "24 Norton was a good friend of the renowned martyrologist, John Foxe, and may well have assisted in the compilation of that voluminous work, the Acts and Monuments;25 but it was his association with Richard Grafton's book which best reveals the beginnings of Norton's concept of history.

For the 1569 edition of Grafton's A Chronicle at Large, Norton had written a commendatory epistle. He praised the immense efforts of the author in producing such a valuable history, and then emphasized its religious potential. There were many who could benefit from reading the work:

Kings maye learne to depende vpon God, and acknowlege his gouer- naunce in their protection. . . . The Ecclesiasticall state maye learne to abhorre trayterous practises and indignities done against kings by the Popishe vsurping Clergie . .. we all may be warned to thanke God for the most vertuous, wise and peaceable gouernement that we now enioye in comparison of terrible times heretofore.

The advantages of living under Elizabeth's rule far outweighed the turmoils of the past. As the "Devices" had made abundantly clear, there still remained many evils which threatened to disrupt the realm's stability. However, by studying the harsh lessons of history, the true path to salvation might be more clearly revealed. Norton expressed the hope that, through an understanding of the chronicles,

all men in seing the course of Gods doings, may learne to dread his iudgementes and loue his prouidence: maye see how good doings be defended, euill doings and wrongs reuenged, bloud with bloud, violence with violence, iniuries with miseries, and so growe into an affection to geue to eache matter his right iudgement, to eche superi- our his right duetie, to eche other that which iustice or charitie wylleth, and to all well doers . . . such thankfull acceptation as his whole life employed to common benefite hath deserued.26

Here was a glimpse of the peaceable, ordered commonwealth which Norton envisaged; one bereft of evil influences, with all members of the populace loyal to their sovereign and, above all, striving to pursue a Christian way of life.

246 January 1582, "Letterbook," fol. 48. 25Dictionary of National Biography, ed. Leslie Stephen and Sydney Lee (Oxford, 1917) 14,

666; Athenae Cantabrigienses, ed. Charles Henry Cooper and Thompson Cooper (Cambridge, 1858) 1: 485.

26Norton's epistle, in Richard Grafton, A chronicle at large and meere history of the affayres of Englande and Kinges of the same (London: Henry Denham for R. Tottle and H. Toye, 1569), STC 12147.




It was the advancement of such a godly commonwealth, founded upon stability and discipline, which Norton sought in his "v periodes." Again, the emphasis was upon interpreting the errors of the past in order to reveal the true course for Elizabeth's realm.

Perhaps, because he was not an ecclesiastic, Norton composed what may be described as a largely secular eschatology. He dispensed with bulky supportive evidence from biblical references, and instead relied almost wholly upon the Elizabethan chroniclers and Foxe's description of early Britain. In borrowing from the works ofJohn Stow and Grafton, Norton incorporated the legendary figures which the fifteenth-century monastic chroniclers had unearthed. As a result, his "v periodes" had a decidedly nationalistic trait.

Norton examined four "alteracions" in his five-hundred-year period- ization. The first concerned the collapse of the kingdom following Gor- boduc's death, the second and third were the successive conquests of England by the Romans and Saxons, and the last was the Norman invasion. Even before he commenced writing, Norton had anticipated some of the conclusions he expected to find:

Surely in the title of rebellions and ciuile warres, there will fall out a notable consideracion, that the princepal cause of them all hath ben the want of the reuerence and holly estimacion of the princes persone, which want hath stood vpon three thinges: the want of knowlege of true religion to tye the subiectes conscience to the king, the vsurped authoritie of the clergie, and the excessiue power of special subiectes.27

Norton's exposition of the Norman conquest exemplified many of these characteristics. He attributed the collapse of Harold Godwinson's short-lived kingdom to "the Sinnes of the Princes and people provoking God to send a needie popelus nation that were burdenous to their owne contrie to come and seeke habitacion conquest glorie and riches." When- ever men turned from God and indulged in "the Sinnes of excesse and vanitie in pride ryot surfetting lust and apparell" they could only expect bitter and violent retribution. Thus, the wrath of God descended upon the sinful Harold, his supporters, and the whole realm.

There were certain unfortunate parallels between the Saxon king's demise and the present situation, which men like Walsingham and Burgh- ley could not have failed to appreciate. The pope had lent his assistance to William of Normandy, which predisposed the clergy to accept the foreign duke. Further, the Roman pontiff had "sent with him a banner to the conquest of England and an excommunication of king Harrald (I thinke by bull) and an absolution of all his subiects from their allegience." Elizabeth

27Norton to Walsingham, 9 January 1582, "Letterbook,' fol. 51.




had similarly been excommunicated by papal bull, and the papal banner had flown aloft English territory, if not soil, with Nicholas Sander's Irish "invasion" of 1579.

Having warned of the potential dangers to Elizabeth's realm, Norton looked to the alternatives presented by a future revolution: ". . . either the prolonged stroke must be verie heavie if we cease not to synne, which stroke cannot fall whille God suffereth his blessing our Queene to remaine amoung vs, or rather (which I trust more true) that his alteracion hath been is and will be most gracious and ioyfull contrarie to all the rest."

Hitherto, the series of revolutions Norton described had followed a cyclical pattern of history. After each five-hundred-year segment, the realm, because it lacked order and godliness, was plunged into chaos and mayhem. But Norton was more optimistic about the future. For several reasons he was hopeful that this time the realm would not revert to the pattern of sudden and violent change which had characterized each preced- ing revolution.

Since the Norman conquest, five hundred years had already elapsed without the usual cycle being repeated. Moreover Norton detected definite signs of improvement. "A most blessed beginninge" had been made when Elizabeth's father, Henry VIII, had "betiden the change of relligion." This new religion had been continued by Elizabeth's "brother interrupted a little for our synne and for our excercise [sic] by hir sister but bountefullye restored by hirsellfe." There were, of course, still challenges to the realm from the "Antichristian Romaines" but with "the most peaciable most vertious most gracious and most christlike Christian Queene that euer was" firmly at the helm, the country could steer clear of these perils.28 If England could overcome the forces of Antichrist, Norton saw no reason why Elizabeth should not still be queen at the Second Advent. Thus, in the "Devices," Norton prayed God to ensure that Elizabeth

. . . if she have not issue never to have after hir heire nor Successor in this kingdome but, (according to our daily prayer, "Thy kingdome come") let hir continue the rule therofin earth, till shee render it vppe in ioyfull conscience into the hands of Iesus the king of kinges, that he at his commyng in his last iudgement to take all kingdomes and power into his hand may find hir possessing and governing this Crowne and realme to his vse and honor, and still doyng the office of the nurse of his church; that shee may without other death than the change of such as then living shall meet the lambe, receave the eternall kingdome in his mercie who hath sent hir to vs in his blessing Amen.29

28"v periodes/, fols. 273-75. 29"Devices" fol. 159.




A similar prayer to the "Devices" is intoned at the end of the "v periodes." The wording is slightly different but the import is identical. Norton expressed the hope that the queen would

live and continue the rule and possession . . . till the last iudgement when she may rennder vppe hir kingdome with no other death then transmutacion at his commynge into the hand of Iesus the king of kinges And this is the greate alteracion.30

Under the guidance of Elizabeth, "the nursing mother of Israel," as she termed herself on one occasion, the realm had the opportunity of attaining salvation. If, on the other hand, men squandered this opportunity through their "sinnes," "wicked contempt," and "abuse of religion," Norton foresaw only despair and destruction.

In several respects Norton's "v periodes" was rather different from contemporary apocalyptic and chronological speculations. His adoption of five-hundred-year cycles was not common among English writers. In addition, Norton's exclusive use of English historical patterns and his linking of these to the End, implies an important and positive role for Elizabeth's realm. This was an interpretation more prevalent after 1600,31 and certainly the "v periodes" survived into the next century. In 1615 it appeared in printed, although slightly amended, form in Edmund Howes' preface to Stowe's Chronicles.

Howes followed Norton's "v periodes" almost word for word until he reached the fifth revolution, which he divided into two parts: the reformation in religion begun by Henry VIII and the accession of James I. The effects of this last alteration were "cleane different from all former chaunges . .. the English Nation .. . in a moment hadde their Kingdome setled, the Crowne rightly established, the Clergie cherished, the Nobilitie advanced. ..." Yet Howes added a pessimistic tone when he noted that the

populace "who were no sooner sensible, of what high blessinges they possest. . . became sencelesse, forgetfull, and, vnthankfull of Gods abun- dant grace and mercie.. ,"32

30"v periodes, fol. 275. 31See Richard Bauckham, ed., Tudor Apocalypse: Sixteenth Century Apocalypticism, Millen-

narianism, and the English Reformation: From John Bale to John Foxe and Thomas Brightman (Oxford: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1978); V Norskov Olsen, John Foxe and the Elizabethan Church (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973); K.R. Firth, The Apocalyptic Tradition in Reformation Britain 1530-1695 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979); Avihu Zakai, "Reforma- tion, History and Eschatology in English Protestantism, History and Theory 26, no. 3 (1987): 300-18. For a different view, see William Haller, Foxe's Book of Martyrs and the Elect Nation (London, 1963).

32Edmund Howes, The annales or generall chronicle of England begun first by maister John Stow. .continued. . by Edmund Howes (Thomas Adams: London, 1615), 8. STC 23338. See also G.J.R. Parry, "John Stow's Unpublished 'Historie of this Iland': Amity and Enmity amongst English Scholars/, English Historical Review 102 (1987): 633-47.




It was to avoid eventualities such as these that Norton had written his "v periodes" and "Devices." In the former he had dared to speculate upon the creation of an ordered, moral, peaceable, and godly commonwealth; in the latter he had provided the practical measures necessary to attain this idyllic state. As Norton saw it, there was still much to be done. The situation demanded the urgent and rigorous implementation of the "De- vices." Reforms in the ministry were long overdue, false doctrine still infected the youth of the realm at the various Elizabethan educational institutions, and missionary priests not only evaded the law but also managed to sow the seeds of future perdition. If, as Norton believed, the "Devices" were essential in preparing England for its salvation at the awesome fifth and final revolution, it was imperative that they be introduced without delay.

It is clear from the content of the "Devices" and the "v periodes" that Norton was well versed in the problems confronting the realm, and believed that time was limited. In the completion of these two documents he had more than justified Walsingham's confident prediction about his fitness for the task. The secretary had, before the commencement of the "Devices," described Norton "as a man whome I know to haue a godly care that the chirch of God may be well ordered and that is ofiugement to deuise the meanes the meanes [sic] how the same may be performed."

Norton was the obvious choice for Walsingham's assignment. He possessed the necessary abilities, the relevant experiences, and he was, as Walsingham quaintly put it, "presently at leysure by reason of the restraint of his libertie."33 Moreover, his close connections with the privy council made him eminently acceptable.

By the 1580s Norton had become the council's workhorse in the city of London, the parliament, and those areas where seemingly intractable problems arose. It was not surprising, therefore, that in the 1581 parliament he took charge of drafting the important bills of religion.34 His "Letter- book" confirms that he worked closely with the Chancellor of the Exche- quer, Sir Walter Mildmay, the Vice Chamberlain, Sir Christopher Hatton, and the Treasurer of the Chamber, Sir Thomas Heneage, but also maintained his connections with Walsingham and Burghley. Clearly the council recognized that through Norton policy could be effectively promoted and expedited.

This close liaison with the privy council, especially Walsingham and Burghley, and his familiarity with the major bills of 1581 easily qualified Norton for the task of devising measures which would prove effective in

33Walsingham to Hopton, 31 December 1581, "Letterbook," fol. 41v. 34For Norton's bill drafting activities in this and earlier parliaments, see Graves, "Thomas

Norton the Parliament Man," 17-35; Elton, Parliament of England.




protecting the realm from the Catholic resurgence. The subject matter of the first and second drafts of the bill of religion was markedly similar to that encompassed by Norton's "Devices." This was only to be expected as the "Devices" were written within a year of the parliamentary drafts to which Norton had so substantially contributed. In the longer second bill there were statements concerning allegiance to the queen, the dangers posed by theJesuits and seminary priests, and provisions regarding the enforcement of religious conformity in the legal profession and among schoolmasters and tutors. All these points figure prominently in the "Devices."

Taken individually the ideas Norton expressed in the "Devices" were not original. Protestant critics had, since the opening years of Elizabeth's reign, actively striven for the reforms Norton proposed. What was distinc- tive, certainly during this period, was the expansive nature of the program. Indeed, among Tudor treatises, the "Devices" might only bear comparison with Thomas Starkey's Dialogue of the mid-1530s.

Unlike Norton's work, Starkey's Dialogue was written over a period of years. In practical terms it was far more comprehensive, proposing a vast variety of reforms designed to improve English society. The topics considered ranged from the pursuit of meaningful pastimes to the insanitary conditions of towns, but there were also attacks on the clergy, including the bishops, and educational institutions. Regarding the clergy, it was stated: "... .hyt ys not convenyent men wythout lernyng to occupy the place of them wych schold prech the word of god & tech the pepul the lawys of relygyon, of the wych commynly they are most ignorant themselfe. .. ." As to the establishments of higher learning, Starkey maintained that "the ordur ofstudys in unyversytes must brevely be amendyd orels al letturys & lernyng wyl fayle. ..."35 Fifty years later Norton reached similar conclusions.

A further parallel between the two men may be drawn. Starkey was in the employ of Henry VIII's short-lived but extremely active adviser, Thomas Cromwell. Because the amount of legislation introduced by Cromwell was prodigious, men of ideas were in constant demand. Starkey, one of the most important of the so-called commonweal men who gathered around Henry's secretary, was able to provide sound and positive advice which Cromwell utilized in the formulation of new policies. Norton was similarly well equipped to provide such a service for a latergeneration of

35Thomas Starkey, A Dialogue between Pole and Lupset, ed. Thomas E Mayer, Camden Fourth Series, 37 (London: Royal Historical Society, 1989), 88, 135. See also G.R. Elton, "Reform by Statute: Thomas Starkey's Dialogue and Thomas Cromwell's Policy"' Studies in Tudor and Stuart Politics and Government. Papers and Reviews 1946-1972. 2 vols (London: Cambridge University Press, 1974) 2: 236-58; W. Gordon Zeeveld, Foundations of Tudor Policy (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1948); Thomas F Mayer, "An Unknown Conciliarist at the Court of Henry VIII,' Journal of the History of Ideas 49, no. 2 (1988): 207-27.




advisers of commonwealth intent, though less liberal in application. In- deed, Norton's proposals, which in effect amounted to the vigorous repression of Catholicism, were quite at odds with Starkey's espousal of religious unity. Moreover, the godly commonwealth for which Norton labored stressed order and stability; Starkey's humanist idealism was no longer appropriate.36

Like Norton, there was an almost visionary aspect to Starkey's thought. He envisaged a society where it was recognized that "the armonie of this hole worlde is conteyned in ... natural order & beautie . .. and . all trewe religion . . . is stablysshed and sette forthe to goddis honour and glorye. . . . "37 Norton's position was similar, although the emphasis was upon conformity. He wished to free Elizabeth's realm from evil and corruption and thereby create an ordered society which revered true religion. However, to achieve this end, Protestantism had to permeate the whole realm, regardless of Catholic sensibilities, for only then could England, untainted by heresy, error, or evil, anticipate the future with optimism.

Elizabethans at that time were acutely aware of the eschatological predictions being made. Foxe, for example, speculated that the End might occur on any one of the following years: 1564, 1570, 1586, 1596. Thomas Becon, the preacher and spiritual writer, was positive that the End was imminent: "We are not certain of the day and hour; yet we may plainly perceive that it is not far off. "38 A sense of expectancy was further injected when, in the late 1570s, Thomas Rogers, a chaplain to Hatton, translated the work of the German lawyer, Shetco a Geveren, under the title, Of the Ende of this Worlde, and Second Comming of Christ. An indication of its impact may be gauged by the fact that there were four editions in 1577, an enlarged edition in 1578, and two more in 1582.39 In this atmosphere of heightened eschatological tension, Norton's "v periodes" provided further confirma- tion that the "Devices" or similar reformative measures should be rapidly introduced.

Norton's "Devices" presented Walsingham with a comprehensive plan, encapsulating many of the reforms for which Protestants had agitated since the opening years of the reign. He addressed the problems confronting the fledgling Elizabethan church; the deplorable state of the clergy, and the continuing abuses within the ministry. He also recognized the impor-

36For the changing concept of the Tudor commonwealth, see Brendan Bradshaw, "The Tudor Commonwealth: Reform and Revision" Historical Journal 22 (1979): 455-76.

37Thomas Starkey, An exhortation to the people instructynge theym to unitie and obedience (1535) in Zeeveld, Foundations of Tudor Policy, 154-55.

38Thomas Becon, Prayers and other pieces, ed. John Ayre (Cambridge, 1844), 624. 39Bauckham, Tudor Apocalypse, 163.




tance of education at all levels-school, university, and Inns of Court-in ensuring the inculcation of sound Protestant doctrine. In addition, the "Devices" were Norton's response to the challenges of the 1580s with its numerous Catholic plots, real and imaginary, the escalation in missionary activity, and the threat of invasion. Finally, these ominous contemporary events fueled Norton's apocalyptic predictions and intensified his demand for an immediate cleansing of the realm.

The reforms Norton believed essential were unlikely to be achieved in the parliament. As Norton knew from bitter experience, there was a world of difference between recommendation and implementation. Indeed he had told Hopton in December 1581 that there were "thinges . . . aduised by aucthoritie in England which it hath greatly greued me for my contreys sake and for my reuerence to the power of her maiestie and her Counsell to see not followed or not to proceade to the gracious effectes required." Norton had further considered how such matters could be best imple- mented:

I confesse I haue busied my self to thinke of some meanes ofremedie to be offred secritly to some such personage of her maiesties counsel as might by power do somewhat toward reformation and could by wisdome choose out what were good to that purpose refusing the rest, and with correcting the same and taking it to him self might deliuer the proceding of the mater.40

In 1582 Norton was given the opportunity of devising "some meanes of remedie" for one of the council's most senior members. In the "v periodes" he offered historical justification for his proposals. In the "De- vices" he underlined the immensity of the problems and provided a program of reformation which, if adopted, would have resulted in the complete overhaul of not only the institutions he examined but also the very fabric of Elizabethan society.

40December 1581, "Letterbook," fol. 28v.



Thomas Norton's "Devices" for a Godly Realm: An Elizabethan Vision for the Future

Documents

Transcript of Thomas Norton's "Devices" for a Godly Realm: An Elizabethan Vision for the Future