Michael O’Malley
Oral Presentation: The Suppression of Glastonbury Abbey, 1539
Introduction
Hey everyone,
Today I’ll be talking to you about the suppression of Glastonbury Abbey, an event which
occurred during the dissolution of the monasteries under Henry VIII. This event forms the
subject of my primary documents, which are two contemporary letters describing the event.
The focus question I’ll be seeking to answer is:
What motivated the dissolution of the monasteries?
Was it due to political or religious reasons? Were the monasteries in decline, or was it just greed
on the part of Henry, attempting a land grab? I’ll begin by putting the document into context and
then I’ll be looking at the event itself through the documents. I’ll then analyse these documents
and other primary and secondary sources to determine what they can tell us about my focus
question (i.e. what motivated the dissolution?)
Context: the dissolution of the monasteries (1536-1541)
As I’ve mentioned, the suppression of Glastonbury Abbey was one of the most significant
events during the dissolution of the monasteries. In a wider context, the dissolution was a key
part of the English Reformation, which occurred during the 16th century. As we’ve looked at in
class, the protestant reformation was essentially Henry VIII (and the Church of England)
breaking away from the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. This consolidated
his power as King and also allowed him to divorce Catherine of Aragon and remarry Anne
Boleyn.
The official split from Rome came with the Act of Supremacy in 1534, which made Henry
VIII the supreme head of the church in England. Later that year, Henry passed another Act in
Parliament authorising ‘visits’ to most of the monasteries in England from his representatives.
These visitations were designed to ensure that the monasteries were conducting their affairs
properly, rejecting papal authority and remaining loyal to the King. At the same time, a huge
manifesto known as the Valor Ecclesiasticus was being undertaken, which recorded all of the
assets and incomes of the monasteries in England (cover page pictured). This document is
considered a huge administrative achievement by historians, and it gives us a comprehensive
record of this period.
In charge of all these activities was Thomas Cromwell, Henry’s chief minister and righthand man (pictured in a contemporary portrait). Cromwell hand-picked his most trusted
servants to carry out the visitations. Like Cromwell himself, the visitors were shrewd and
ambitious workers, who could be ruthless when they needed to be. A number of complaints
were made by monks about their bullying tactics. These visitors spent a few hours at each
monastery, asking questions and taking note of any transgressions occurring within the
monasteries. These offences were recorded in a huge document known as the Comperta
Monastica.
Michael O’Malley
Even though the records of impropriety were exaggerated, they gave Henry VIII the premise
that he needed to dissolve the monasteries. Using the information gained from the Valor
Ecclesiasticus and the alleged offences contained in the Comperta Monastica, Henry passed
another act in parliament, ordering all monasteries with an income under 200 pounds to be
dissolved. The first round of closures was met with resistance, particularly in the northern
counties (for instance, the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536, which Rosie discussed). Despite this
opposition, the remaining monasteries were eventually closed under a second act of
suppression. It is in this context that the Suppression of Glastonbury Abbey occurred.
At the beginning of the dissolution of the monasteries in 1536, there were over 800 religious
houses in England. By 1541, there were none. More than 15,000 monks and nuns were
dispersed and the buildings and assets had been seized by the Crown to be resold. This handed
Henry VIII huge wealth, some of which was subsequently redistributed to members of the
aristocracy to maintain political support.
The Suppression of Glastonbury Abbey (1539)
Glastonbury Abbey (in Somerset) was one of the largest and richest monasteries in England
(pictured, now in ruins). It was very famous and was even reputed to be the home of the Holy
Grail. In 1539, the abbey was one of the few that had so far avoided closure. However, this was
soon to change. In September of 1539, the abbey was visited without warning by Richard
Layton, Richard Pollard and Thomas Moyle on the orders of Thomas Cromwell. The abbey was
searched and stripped of valuables and the abbot, Richard Whiting, was questioned. When he
resisted the interrogation, he was sent to be imprisoned in the tower of London to be examined
by Cromwell himself. Whiting received the spurious charge of treason and several months later
he was hung, drawn and quartered at Glastonbury Tor (a nearby hill).
Primary Documents: Letters of the Visitors Sent to Examine the Abbot of Glastonbury,
1539
These events are recorded in my primary documents, which are two letters written by
the visitors sent to examine the Abbot of Glastonbury. I’ll now quickly read the documents:
Letter 1: From Richard Layton to Thomas Cromwell, 22nd September, 1539
Please it your lordship to be advertised, that we came to Glastonbury on Friday last past,
about ten o'clock in the forenoon; and [because]…the abbot was then at Sharpham, a place of his, a
mile and somewhat more form the abbey, we, without any delay, went into the same place, and
there…examined him upon certain articles. And [because]…his answer was not then to our
purpose, we advised him to call to his remembrance that which he had as then forgotten, and so
declare the truth, and then came to him the same day to the abbey; and there of new proceeded
that night to search his study for letters and books; and found in his study…a written book of
arguments against the divorce of his king's majesty and the lady dowager, as also divers pardons,
copies of bulls, and the counterfeit life of Thomas Becket in print; but we could not find any letter
that was material. And so we proceeded again to his examination concerning the articles we
received from your Lordship, in the answers whereof, as we take it, shall appear his cankered and
traitorous heart and mind against the king's majesty and his succession; as by the same answers,
Michael O’Malley
signed with his hand, and sent to your lordship by this bearer, more plainly shall appear. And so,
with as fair words as we could, we have conveyed from him hence into the tower, being but a very
weak man and sickly…We have in the money £300 and above; but certainty of plate and other stuff
there as we know not, for we have not had the opportunity for the same, but shortly we intend (God
willing) to proceed to the same; whereof we shall ascertain your lordship so shortly as we may.
This is also to advertise your lordship that we have found a fair chalice of gold, and divers other
parcels of plat, which the abbot had secretly hid from all such commissioners as have been there in
times past;…It may please your lordship to advertise us of the king's pleasure by this bearer, to
whom we shall deliver the custody and the keeping of the house, with such stuff as we intend to
leave there convenient to the king's use. We assure your lordship it is the goodliest house of that
sort that we have ever see. We would that your lordship did know it as we do; then we doubt your
lordship would judge it a house meet for the king's majesty, and for no man else: which is to our
great comfort; and we trust verily that there shall never come any double hood within that house
again. Also this is to advertise your lordship, that there is never a one doctor within that house; but
there be there baschelors of divinity which be but meanly learned, as we can perceive. And thuse
our Lord preserve your good Lordship.
Letter 2: From Richard Pollard to Thomas Cromwell, 16th November, 1539
Pleaseth it your Lordship to be advertised that..[On November 15] the late abbot of
Glastonbury went from Wells to Glastonbury, and there was drawn through the town upon a
hurdle to the hill called the Torre, where he was put to execution; at which time he asked God for
mercy and the king for his great offences towards his highness…Afore his execution [he] was
examined upon divers articles and interrogatories to him ministered by me, but he could accuse no
man of himself of any offence against the king's highness, nor would he confess no more gold nor
silver nor any other thing more than he did before your Lordship in the Tower…I suppose it will be
near Christmas before I shall have surveyed the lands at Glastonbury, and take the audit there….
Analysis of both letters
The first letter is written by Richard Layton, one of the more notorious visitors working
under Cromwell. Layton is even listed as one of Cromwell’s “evil men” in the 24 articles
presented during the Pilgrimage of Grace. The letter describes the visit to Glastonbury Abbey in
September of 1539, when the Abbey was searched and stripped and the Abbot questioned. The
second letter is much shorter and is written several months later by a second visitor, Richard
Pollard. It describes the interrogation and execution of the Abbot.
As both letters are addressed to Thomas Cromwell, they have a clear audience and thus bias.
Both men could be trusted to deliver exactly what their superior wanted to hear and list as
many transgressions as possible. Many of the facts and opinions presented in the letter are
questionable when compared with other contemporary sources.
Most of these inconsistencies concern the abbot, Richard Whiting, who is described in the
first letter as having a “cankered and traitorous heart and mind”. This is inconsistent with other
contemporary descriptions of the Abbot, which overwhelmingly portray him as an upright man.
For instance, a letter written by Cardinal Wolsey several years earlier describes Whiting as “an
upright and religious monk, a provident and discreet man, and a priest commendable for his life,
virtues and learning.”
Michael O’Malley
The charges presented to the Abbot also quite feeble. Upon a search of his study, the visitors
discovered:
“a written book of arguments against the divorce of his king’s majesty and the lady dowager,
as also divers pardons, copies of bulls, and the counterfeit life of Thomas Beckett in print.”
I’ll just briefly explain some of the terms referred to in the passage. ‘Bulls’ are essentially
communications sent from the pope, while ‘pardons’ is another term for indulgences, which
allowed people to ‘buy’ forgiveness for their sins. The reference to the “divorce of the king’s
majesty and the lady dowager” obviously relates to Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon. Lastly,
“the counterfeit life of Thomas Becket” refers to the former Archbishop of Canterbury during
Henry II’s reign. Becket had fallen out of favour with Henry II and been murdered. During the
reformation, Henry VIII ordered that Becket’s tomb be desecrated and his bones and all record
of his name be destroyed. Although each of these items seem quite trivial to us, they would
probably have been considered treason by Henry VIII.
Apart from this, the abbot’s greatest crime appears to have been hiding the church’s silver so
that the visitors could not seize it. Ironically, the Abbot was actually charged with robbery as
well as treason, for hiding the valuables. This portrayal of the abbey as treasonous and corrupt
even contradicts what Layton himself (the author of the first letter) had written a few years
earlier on a visit. He declared that “there is nothing notable; the brethren be so straight that they
cannot offend.” These conflicting statements call into question the veracity of the later claims;
such a rapid decline would be surprising.
As Whiting was a member of the House of Lords, an Act of Attainder from parliament should
have been required by Cromwell to prosecute him. But this never happened, and by the time
parliament met the Abbot had already been executed. The fact that Cromwell ignored normal
legal procedures, interrogating the Abbot in secret and conducting a mock trial casts doubt over
the Abbot’s guilt.
Motivation for dissolution
Due to the extensive records kept during the dissolution of the monasteries, historians
have largely been able to establish what happened when. But exactly why the monasteries were
dissolved has remained a source of contention over the years. For hundreds of years after the
event, most historians had either a Catholic or Protestant bias in their views.
One of the most common reasons put forward for the dissolution is that the monasteries
were in severe decline already. This perception is supported by historians such as Elton (1955),
who argue that monasticism was:
“...on its last legs. Riddled by worldliness and deadened by routine, the institution had lost
all or nearly all meaning...”
This view that the monasteries had become ‘morally depraved’ was greatly influenced by the
claims perpetuated by Cromwell and his men. But as we’ve seen through the primary
documents, these claims were often exaggerated by the visitors, who were inclined to ‘dig up as
Michael O’Malley
much dirt as possible’. For instance, the visitors recorded 38 cases of nuns bearing children and
181 cases of sodomy. However, upon closer inspection most of the births happened before the
women had become nuns and taken their vows of chastity. Of the confessions of sodomy, all but
12 were cases of ‘solitary vice’ (i.e. masturbation). These examples demonstrate the visitors’
tendencies to mislead and exaggerate in their records. Although there were undoubtedly
indiscretions occurring within the monasteries, the reality is that they were not nearly as bad as
they were portrayed.
Another interesting point is that during the early stages of the dissolution, the smaller
monasteries could pay to be exempt from closure, at the King’s discretion. This indicates that
the true motive for the dissolution was not related to the religious purity of the monasteries, but
rather what they could pay. Also, the fact that the smaller monasteries (those with incomes
under £200) were dissolved before the larger ones does not seem logical. Why would
monasteries above this threshold be any less corrupt?
The belief that there was little public support for the monasteries seems equally
unlikely. During the dissolution, Cromwell commissioned preachers to travel around the
country, in an effort to turn public opinion against the monks. Despite this, public opinion seems
to have been generally indifferent or even supportive of the monasteries. Indeed, the huge
opposition that the dissolution met through rebellions like the Pilgrimage of Grace suggest that
there was significant public support for the monasteries. As Rosie discussed, the northern
monasteries played a large role in public life and the community.
Other writers have asserted that Henry VIII closed the monasteries due to religious
reasons; that he was fundamentally opposed to monasticism. However, there is no evidence to
suggest this. Unlike with European Protestantism, the Church of England was fundamentally
very similar to Catholicism and subscribed to many of the same ideals. In fact, Henry seems to
have believed quite strongly in the values of monasticism. After the first round of dissolutions,
Henry went to great length to reopen two monasteries, so that prayers could be said for him and
his wife.
Another justification for the dissolution is that the monasteries were closed for political
reasons; that they posed a threat to Henry VIII’s leadership. However, this hypothesis also
seems unlikely. Few monasteries showed any resistance to the royal supremacy, and signed the
submission of the clergy in 1534 readily enough.
Although it is likely that all of these factors played a role in the dissolution of the
monasteries, the prime motive seems to have been their considerable wealth. This is where my
primary documents come into importance. Despite their obvious bias and inaccuracies, the
letters reveal much about the true motive of the dissolution. From a reading of the documents,
the purpose of the visits is clear:
“we have in the money £300 and above… We have found a fair chalice of gold, and divers
other parcels of plate, which the abbot had secretly hid.”
Michael O’Malley
The wealth of Glastonbury Abbey is the clear focus of the visit; the “traitorous” letters found in
the abbot’s study are only discovered while searching for valuables. Most of the other reasons
given for the dissolution can be seen as a pretext for Henry VIII’s true motive- greed.
Having learned of the wealth contained within the monasteries through the visitations,
Henry was undoubtedly interested. At the time of the dissolution, an estimated one third of all
land in England was owned by the monasteries. Their dissolution handed the Crown a huge
amount of wealth- an estimated £150,000 in cash and more than £1,400,000 in land-value
(which equates to more than £545,000,000 in current sums). Most modern historians now
accept that it was greed, more than anything else that motivated Henry VIII. This is well
summarised by the historian Keith Randell (1993), who writes:
“It is clear that there was no popular demand for the destruction of the religious houses,
that they were not in a terminal state of collapse through decadence and moral laxity, and that
they posed no political or religious threat to the king or his policies. However, they did possess
enormous wealth, and it was the desire to gain control of this that motivated Henry to allow or to
insist that Cromwell and his assistants destroyed the monasteries and transferred their possessions
to the Crown.”
Prior to the dissolution, the Crown had been having severe financial difficulties, so the decision
to dissolve the monasteries seemed almost inevitable.
Conclusion
To sum up, the dissolution of the monasteries was one of the most significant events of the
Protestant Reformation in England. In a five-year process, monasticism was all but eradicated in
England, the wealth being seized by the crown. It was this background which led to the
suppression of Glastonbury Abbey in 1539, one of the largest abbeys in the country. These
events are recorded in my primary documents- two letters describing what occurred. Despite
their bias, these documents tell us much about the real motive for the dissolution- the huge
wealth contained in the monasteries. It was this wealth gave Henry VIII and the subsequent
Tudor monarchs a platform to consolidate their power over England and overseas.
Thank you for listening. Are there any questions?
Bibliography
Castelli, J. H. 2011, The Suppression of English Monasteries, accessed September 2011
http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Documents/suppression_of_english_monasteri.htm
Elton, G. R. 1965, England under the Tudors, The Camelot Press Ltd., London
Gasquet, F.A. 1911, Suppression of English Monasteries under Henry VIII, Catholic Encyclopedia,
Robert Appleton Company, New York. Accessed September 2011 at:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10455a.htm
Michael O’Malley
Gasquet, F. A. 2003, The Last Abbot of Glastonbury and other essays, Kessinger Publishing, U.S.A.
accessed September 2011 at:
<http://books.google.com.au/books?id=eCAqH9tUuFYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+last+ab
bot+of+glastonbury&hl=en&ei=ZRV_TvLgJ4ZmQXW16SjBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&r
esnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=the%20last%20abbot%20of%20glastonbury&f
=false >
Halsall, P. 1997, Medieval Sourcebook: The Suppression of Glastonbury Abbey 1539, accessed
September 2011
< http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/h8-glastonbury.asp >
Huddleston, G. 1909, Glastonbury Abbey. In The Catholic Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton
Company, New York, accessed September 2011 at:
< http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06579a.htm >
The J. Paul Getty Trust, The Martyrdom of Saint Thomas Becket, accessed September 2011
< http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=3927 >
Loades, David 2002, Chronicles of the Tudor Kings, Greenwich Editions, London
Randell, Keith 1993, Henry VIII and the Reformation in England, Hodder and Stoughton Ltd.,
England
Robinson, B. 2011, An overview of the Reformation, accessed September 2011
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/tudors/reformation_overview_01.shtml