CHAPTER XIV

THE REIGN OF HENRY VIII., AND ECONOMIC CHANGES IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY

2

§ 122. Henry VIII's Wastefulness.

HENRY VIII. came to the throne in 1509. He succeeded to a full treasury1 left by his thrifty but grasping father, who had replenished it by exactions from the general prosperity of the country at the close of the fifteenth century. But he soon dissipated the whole of these accumulations. He spent a great deal of money in subsidising the Emperor Maximilian, and in interfering in foreign affairs, in which he was not very successful, in the hope of winning for himself a military reputation and a leading place in the ranks of European powers. His continental wars and alliances cost him dear, or rather they cost the English people dear, for he not only exhausted the patience of Parliament by his requests, but had recourse to other exactions in the shape of benevolences and fines.* His apologists have endeavoured to prove that personally Henry VIII. was not extravagant, and that his personal expenses did not greatly exceed those of his somewhat penurious parent.5 But the 1 See note 3 above, p. 196. 2 Green, History of English People, ii. 109. "It has been pointed out that he realised this ambition and raised England to "the first rank among European nations" (Burrows, Commentaries, p. 253), and that his foreign policy connected England with the Continent to the advantage of commerce and the middle classes (p. 257). But no one can deny that he spent money recklessly in so doing, and it may be doubted whether the ultimate result was worth this vast expenditure.

'He had exhausted the treasury and subsidies very early by his French wars, 1513-1514 A.D., though at the conclusion he got a large sum of money from the French king, Annals of Englund, p. 288. Cf. Green, History, ii. 93. "The millions left by his father were exhausted, his subjects had been drained by repeated subsidies." For the later attempts to obtain money, especially in 1523 and 1525, cf. Green, ii. 116, 117, 121, 122.

5 Cf. Froude, History, i. 39, who says Henry VII.'s expenses were a little over £14,000 a year, out of which were defrayed the whole cost of the king's establishment, expenses of entertaining foreign ambassadors, main

fact remains that he managed to spend all his father's accumulations, over a million and three-quarters sterling, before he had been on the throne many years,1 that he had to repudiate his debts, that he was addicted to gambling in private as well as to spending the nation's money recklessly in public, and that he left to his unfortunate young son Edward VI. a treasury not only exhausted of cash but burdened with unpaid debts. Nor can it be denied that he roused open revolt by his attempts to obtain funds by ordinary methods; and it was probably the difficulties which he found in raising money by taxation that formed a very strong incentive for his spoliation of the monasteries and debasement of the currency. No doubt some excuse is to be found for Henry's enormous expenditure in the necessities of foreign politics and the wars with France and Scotland, but even in time of peace his expenditure seems to have been extravagant. The cost of his household establishments, and those of his children, was simply enormous; for the establishments of Mary, Edward, and even Elizabeth were each more costly than the whole annual charge of his father's household. His extravagance was monumental,

tenance of the Yeomen of the Guard, retinues of servants, and all outlay not connected with public business. Under Henry VIII. these expenses were £19,894, 16s. 8d., equal to some £240,000 of our money. But the question remains, where did all the money go that Henry VIII. obtained by various means? It has never been properly accounted for, and these household accounts evidently do not represent his entire expenditure. 1 Cf. Green, ii. 93, where the reference is to 1514 A.D.

2 By the 35 Henry VIII., c. 12, "all loans made to the king were remitted and released," and the creditors got nothing. Froude, iv. 13, is "unable to see the impropriety of this proceeding," apparently regarding it as only another form of taxation. But the creditors must have thought differently.

3 Cf. the note in Froude, History, i. 30, and the Privy Purse Expenses of Henry VIII.

4 Cf. Froude, History, v. 119-123, who details the exhaustion of the Treasury early in Edward VI.'s reign and Northumberland's desperate attempts to fill it.

5 As in the revolts of 1525 in Suffolk and Kent (Green, History, ii. 122), when a tenth was demanded from all the laity and a fourth from the clergy. The royal demand for money had to be abandoned, Annals of England, p. 293.

6 Rogers, Six Centuries, p. 321; Hist. Agric., iv. 28. The accounts are preserved in the Record Office.

though where his money went he could not himself discover. Wolsey said of him, "Rather than miss any part of his will, he will endanger one half of his kingdom."1 As a matter of fact he succeeded in impoverishing the whole of it.2

Nevertheless, it is curious to notice that Henry VIII. did not by any means entirely lose the popularity of his subjects. He was certainly feared, but he was also loved, and even remained popular in spite of his treatment of his wives and the debasement of the currency. It has shrewdly been remarked that this was because he understood his people thoroughly, knowing exactly how far he could go and how much they would bear. But even without this, though it is probably a very true explanation of the matter, his popularity need cause no surprise to any one who understands the relations of king and people and realises the combined ignorance and superficiality of the mass of mankind. A very cursory glance at history shows us that the best rulers have not always been the most popular; that even Nero had his supporters; and that during a prince's lifetime the outside populace have only the very faintest knowledge of what goes on inside a court, while they base their fluctuating affections or dislikes upon the casual public appearances of a monarch and the untrustworthy rumours which, even in the most democratic country, are the utmost that is allowed to penetrate beyond a privileged Court circle. Moreover, after he had seen how his exactions had angered his people in 1525, Henry took care in future to obtain money by means quite as effectual, but more underhand, and thus avoided another popular outbreak. But the fact of his popularity need not detain us. It does not alter the other facts of his cruelty, selfishness, and robbery.

1 Quoted by Green, History, i. 88.

2 Even Froude admits this, for he records "the general distress" at beginning of Edward VI.'s reign (iv. 352) owing to the base money and other causes. He admits that Henry's household expenses had doubled since the beginning of his reign (iv. 251).

* Burrows, Commentaries on the History of England, p. 276.

4 Ib.

E.g. William III. of England; cf. Macaulay's History, ch. xi., passim.

and

§ 123. The Dissolution of the Monasteries.

Having wasted the carefully accumulated treasures of his father, Henry sought for further supplies. They were gained at first by increased taxation, but as this money was spent in the French wars, Henry was soon in difficulties again. Then a great temptation came upon him. The monasteries 2 suggested themselves to him as an easy prey, and he knew that an attack upon them would not displease the growing Protestant party in the country. It is possible that he was even animated by reforming zeal, and, if so, it was fortunate that he was able to satisfy his conscience and to fill his purse at the same moment. The religious houses were in many cases certainly not fulfilling their ancient functions properly,3 and were often far from being the homes of religious virtue. Excuses and even reasons were easily found; in 1536 the smaller monasteries with an income below £200 a year were suppressed, and in 1539 the larger ones were similarly treated." In all, about a thousand houses were suppressed,' the annual income of which was some £160,000, equivalent to more than two millions sterling of our present money. Half a dozen bishoprics and a few grammar schools were founded, some fortifications built, and temporary work found for the unemployed out of the proceeds of this spoliation, in order to blind the eyes of the people at large. But with these

1 Green, History, ii. 93.

* Reforms had been instituted among the clergy before this, even in Henry VII.'s reign. Cf. Froude, History, i. 97-99

3 E.g. The duty of relieving the poor is said to have been neglected. Froude, i. 76. For other charges see ib. ii. 302, sqq.

Cf. the state of things at the Lichfield Nunnery, Froude, ii. 319; at Fountains Abbey, where the Abbot kept six women, ib. p. 321, and c. x. generally. "By the Act 27 Henry VIII. c. 28. 6 Act 31 Henry VIII. c. 13.

7 Green, History, ii. 101 gives 1021 altogether. Bishop Creighton (Dict. Eng. History, s. v. Monasticism) gives only 616 as the total. "There were 186 Benedictines, 173 Augustinians, 101 Cistercians, 33 of the four orders of friars, 32 Premonstratensians, 28 of the Knights Hospitallers, 25 Gilbertines, 20 Cluniacs, 9 Carthusians, and a few other orders. The total number of monasteries was 616, and their revenues were approximately valued at £142,914 yearly."

8 Rogers, Six Centuries, p. 322, Hist. Agric. iv. 29.

'Green, History, ii. 201; Froude, History, ii, 345, iii. 207-10.