Copy 1, Volume 1

A topographical history of Surrey / By Edward Wedlake Brayley, assisted by John Britton, and E. W. Brayley, jun. The geological section by Gideon Mantell. The illustrative department under the superintendence of Thomas Allom.

  • Edward William Brayley
Date:
1850
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A topographical history of Surrey / By Edward Wedlake Brayley, assisted by John Britton, and E. W. Brayley, jun. The geological section by Gideon Mantell. The illustrative department under the superintendence of Thomas Allom. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    122/563 page 96
    and his son Henry, earl of Surrey, had rendered to the crown, they, at length, became the victims of the suspicion and jealousy in respect to their ultimate designs upon the throne, which had been infused into the King’s mind by their political enemies. “ Between the Seymours and the House of Howard,” says Lingard, “ there had for some time existed a spirit of acrimonious rivalry. The old Duke of Norfolk had witnessed with indignation their ascendancy in the royal favour, and openly complained that the kingdom was governed by new men, while the ancient nobility was trampled in the dust. His son, Henry, could not forgive the Earl of Hertford for having superseded him in the command of the garrison of Boulogne; and had been heard to foretel, that ‘ the time of revenge was not far distant.’ On the one hand, the father and son were the most powerful subjects in the realm, and allied by descent to the royal family; on the other, though they had strenuously supported the King in his claim of the supremacy, they were, in all other points, the most zealous patrons of the ancient doctrines. Hence the ruin or depression of the Howards became an object of equal importance to the uncles of the Prince [Edward], and the men of the new learning: to those, that they might seize and retain the reins of government during the minority of their nephew; to these, that they might throw from their necks that intolerable yoke, the penal statute of the six articles. “The rapid decline of the King’s health in the month of November, 1546, admonished the Seymours and their associates to provide against his approaching death—and “ while the royal mind, tormented with pain, and anxious for the welfare of the Prince, was alive to every suggestion, their enemies reminded the King of the power and am- bition of the Howards, of their hatred of the Seymours, and of the general belief that Surrey had refused the hand of the daughter of Hertford, because he aspired to that of the Lady Mary,”40 the King’s daughter. Influenced and alarmed by these and similar representations, the King, in the beginning of December, ordered both the Duke and his son to be arrested, and, on the 12th of that month they were conveyed, about the same time, the one by water, the other by land, to separate cells in the Tower. Although there was no individual in the realm, who possessed more powerful claims on the gratitude of Henry than the Duke of Norfolk, he was—upon a submissive confession of having acted ‘treasonably, in respect to bearing the royal arms of England on his own escutcheon, as well as for concealing the treason of his son in 40 Lingard, History of England, 4to. vol. iv. pp. 348-9: from the respective publica- tions of Herbert and Burnet.
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3