Page:Church and State under the Tudors.djvu/312

 11.

Norfolk to Benet. February 28, 1532. &hellip; I spoke this day with his (the Pope's) ambassador here, who I doubt not will advertise him plainly of our conference, which the Pope must ponder if he wishes to retain the obedience of England to the See Apostolic. &hellip; Notwithstanding the infinite clamour of the temporality here in Parliament against the misuse of the spiritual jurisdiction, the King will stop all evil effects if the Pope does not handle him unkindly. This realm did never grudge the tenth part against the abuses of the Church at no Parliament in my day as they do now. I hope we may before Easter finish our Parliament in good sort, but it must depend upon the good news from you. &hellip;

P. 72.

State Papers, July 17, 1533.—Cranmer to Hawkins.

Giving an account of the Dunstable judgment and Anne Boleyn's coronation, he says: 'This coronation was not before her marriage, which took place about St. Paul's Day last.'

Mr. Pocock, reviewing Hamilton's edition of Wriothesley's Chronicle in the 'Academy,' July 10, 1875, quotes Nicholas Sanders as having given November 14 as the date of Anne Boleyn's marriage, and explains it by stating that the festival of St. Erkenwald's (November 14) was kept with great solemnity at St. Paul's in London, and was sometimes called Paul's Day. It was the day on which the remains of St. Erkenwald were removed from the centre of the church to the high altar in 1148; and, as he says, if the marriage took place on that day nothing can be more proper than the birth of Elizabeth in the following November. As neither Mr. Pocock himself nor Nicholas Sanders can be represented as partisans of Anne Boleyn, this testimony is of some value; though, to my own mind, the probabilities as stated in the text are sufficient without it.

P. 116.

Mr. Pocock has some further remarks on Edward's Prayerbook in the 'English History Review,' No. 4, October 1886, in