No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 July 2014
In the summer of 1536 several officials and other residents of the Devonshire town of Axminster brought suit in the Court of Star Chamber against a shoemaker named Philip Gammon. They alleged in their Bill of Complaint that Gammon was infected with diverse points and articles of heresy. Chief among these was that Gammon, on a number of occasions, had rejected the Real Presence in the Sacrament of the Altar, saying that “It is not the very body of Christ, but it is a sign and in itself a very piece of bread.”
The case is unique in its time. It is the only action for heresy taken up by the Henrician Court of Star Chamber, a tribunal which normally heard matters touching the enforcement of statute law or breaches of the peace. Familiar with the legal terrain, the plaintiffs also accused Gammon of resisting arrest, threatening a crown officer with a knife, and disobeying royal warrants and commands. Lastly, they asserted that the defendant had been maintained in his illegal activities by the politically potent Carew family, thereby raising before members of the court the specter of the overmighty subject, a haunting prospect to loyal Henrician councillors.
1 Public Record Office, London: Star Chamber Proceedings, Henry VIII (hereafter cited as St. Ch. 2), bundle 29, file III, document 1.
2 See below and n. 18.
3 St. Ch. 2/29/111/doc. 1. A consideration of the Carew's interest in the matter can be found in Whiting, R., “The History of the Reformation in the Southwest of England,” (Ph.D. thesis, University of Exeter), 1978.Google Scholar
4 These criteria have been established by ProfessorElton, Geoffrey R. in his Star Chamber Stories (London, 1974), p. 10Google Scholar: “They were to be good stories in their own right, but they should also have some light to throw on the history of their day.”
5 Close to the border with Dorset, Axminster then, as now, was a quiet little market town. For the centrality of London in the development of ecclesiastical policy see Brigden, Susan, “Popular Disturbances and the Fall of Thomas Cromwell and the Reformers, 1539-1540,” Historical Journal 24 (1981):257–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 St. Ch. 2/volume2/folio 269.
7 Ibid., fos. 269-72.
8 St. Ch. 2/29/111/doc. 2.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid.
12 George Carew, probably an uncle of Sir William.
13 St. Ch. 2/29/111/doc. 1.
14 Ibid.
15 Ibid., doc. 2.
16 St. Ch. 2/2/fo. 271.
17 Ibid.
18 See the following for discussion of composition and concerns of the Court of Star Chamber: Giuseppi, Montague S., Guide to the Contents of the Public Record Office, 2 vols. (London, 1963), 1:149Google Scholar; Elton, G.R., The Tudor Constitution (Cambridge, 1965), pp. 159–71Google Scholar; idem., Star Chamber Stories, pp. 15-16. For a consideration of the vast increase of business on the common law side in Star Chamber see Guy, John A., The Public Career of Sir Thomas More (New Haven, 1980), pp. 50–79.Google Scholar
19 Elton, , The Tudor Constitution, pp. 170–1.Google Scholar
20 St. Ch. 2/2fo. 267r.
21 Ibid., fo.267r-v.
22 See Thomson, John A.F., The Later Lollards (London, 1965), pp. 20–52Google Scholar; Elton, G.R., Policy and Police (Cambridge, 1972), pp. 83–170.Google Scholar
23 St. Ch. 2/29/111/doc. 1.
24 Ibid., doc. 2.
25 Ibid., doc. 3.
26 Elton, , The Tudor Constitution, p. 169Google Scholar. Not only did local magistrates or local commissioners often administer interrogatories and take testimony, they were frequently empowered to reach decisions in Star Chamber cases.
27 St. Ch. 2/2/fo. 268.
28 Ibid., fos. 269-70.
29 Ibid., fo. 269.
30 Ibid., fos. 271-2.
31 Ibid., fos. 269-71.
32 Ibid., fos. 271-2.
33 Ibid., fo. 273.
34 St. Ch. 2/29/111/doc. 4.
35 See, for example, Fish, Simon, A Supplicacyon for the Beggars, ed. by Furnivall, Frederick J., in Four Supplications, A.D. 1527-1553 (London, 1871)Google Scholar; Henry, Walter, ed. Exposition and Notes on Sunday Portions of the Holy Scriptures, Together with the Practice of Prelates, by William Tyndale, Martyr 1536 (for the Parker Society; Cambridge, 1849)Google Scholar. For discussions of the content of these and similar attacks see Slavin, Arthur J., ed., Humanism, Reform and Reformation in England (New York, 1969)Google Scholar; McConica, James K., English Humanists and Reformation Politics (Oxford, 1965)Google Scholar; Dickens, Arthur G., The English Reformation (London, 1964), pp. 59–102.Google Scholar
36 Had this action taken place either five years earlier or five years later the results might have been quite different.
37 Dictionary of National Biography, 3:959.Google Scholar
38 In addition Cromwell recognized the Carews' contributions to the cause of reform by bestowing his ecclesiastical patronage on George Carew, William's younger brother. George, active throughout the Henrician and Edwardian years was deprived of his offices during the Marian reaction. Restored by Elizabeth, George Carew served as Dean of Windsor from 1561-1577. See Oilard, Sidney L., Fasti Wyndsorienses (Windsor, 1950), pp. 43–4.Google Scholar
39 St. Ch. 2/fol.23/fo. 273.
40 Ibid.
41 Ibid.
42 Ibid.
43 Ibid. Emphasis mine.