Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:25:28.403Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Viscount Scudamore's ‘Laudianism’: the Religious Practices of the First Viscount Scudamore*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Ian Atherton
Ian Atherton
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Viscount Scudamore had three great passions: God, cider and cattle, in that order. He was remembered for cultivating cider apples, breeding cattle, his learning, and most of all for his piety, rebuilding one church, endowing others and aiding distressed divines during the interregnum. Many commended his erudition. He stood on the fringes of that republic of letters which revolved around Mersenne, a friend of the philosophers Hobbes, DuBosc and Grotius, and known to Samuel Hartlib who considered him ‘a great schollar and studying hard continually’. In particular he was a great reader of theology. William Laud had to warn him to ‘Booke it not to much’ while William Higford advised his grandson to ask the viscount, ‘a great lover of learning and very learned’, to guide his own study. The viscount recommended Jeremy Taylor's Holy living and Holy dying to his son, whilst consulting with Laud and Henry Hammond for his own reading. Hammond directed him to Augustine, Aquinas, Peter Lombard, Suarez and Grotius; clearly he was no beginner. In the early eighteenth century Matthew Gibson, Scudamore's first biographer, was astonished at the amount oftheological notes amongst the first viscount's papers. These, however, have all but disappeared. DespiteScudamore's famed ‘affection to Divine knowledge…[and] good proficiencie in it’, it is no longer possible to construct a system of divinity for the viscount, if he did ever work out his theological position comprehensively; perhaps like his friend William Laud he preferred to leave off the deep points of divinity.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 34 , Issue 3 , September 1991 , pp. 567 - 596
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, [F.S.L.], MS V.a.147, fos. 36r–38v.

2 Sir John Scudamore of Holme Lacy, Herefordshire, Viscount Scudamore of Sligo: born 1601; created baronet 1620; elevated to the Irish peerage 1628; ambassador to France 1635–9; died 1671. For Scudamore's career see Atherton, I. J., ‘The political career of John, 1st Viscount Scudamore, 1601–71’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge University, forthcoming)Google Scholar, or the Dictionary of National Biography [D.N.B.] (63 vols., London, 1885–1900), LI, 154–7Google Scholar.

3 Philips, John, Cider, ed. Dunster, C. (London, 1791), I, lines 501–11Google Scholar; Evelyn, J., Sylva… To which is annexed Pomona (London, 1670), pp. 2, 8, 31Google Scholar; ‘Of the Scudamore Crab or Red-strake Cider’, Bodleian Library [Bod.L.], MS Don. f5, fos. 36–7. Bull, H. G., ed., The Herefordshire pomona vol. I (Hereford, 1876–1985), p. 84Google Scholar.Watkyns, Rowland, Flamma sine fumo, ed. Davies, P. C. (Cardiff, 1968, originally published 1662), pp. 24–5Google Scholar.

4 Du Bosc to Scudamore, 2/12 Aug 1640, Public Record Office [P.R.O.], C115/N9/8873; Hobbes to Scudamore, 2/12 April 1641, British Library [B.L.], Add[itional] MS 11044, fos. 180–1, in Zagorin, P., ‘Thomas Hobbes's departure from England in 1640: an unpublished letter’, Historical Journal, XXI, I (1978), 157–60Google Scholar: Zagorin sees Du Boscas ‘a link between English and French philosophic-scientific circles’; correspondence between Scudamore and Grotius, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 96–105, and Grotius, , Epistolae (Amsterdam, 1687), p. 626Google Scholar; Hartlib's ‘Ephemerides’ for 1648, Sheffield University, Hartlib papers. Hartlib also testified to Scudamore's friendship with Sir Kenelm Digby who was another correspondent of Mersenne. For this republic of letters see Skinner, Q., ‘Thomas Hobbes and his disciples in France and England, Comparative studies in society and history, VIII (1965–1966), 153–67Google Scholar. Leicester hada much lower view of Scudamore's learning, castigating him as ‘a formal Pedante… a very simple Man’, but Leicester was doing his best to discredit the viscount: Collins, Arthur, Letters and memorials of state (2 vols., London, 1746), II, 387–6Google Scholar.

5 Laud to Scudamore, 10 July 1624, P.R.O., C115/M24/7768, in Trevor-Roper, H.R., Archbishop Laud 1573–1645 (London, 1940), p. 441Google Scholar. Higford, William, The institution of a gentleman, ed. Barksdale, C. (London, 1660), p. 45Google Scholar. Viscount Scudamore to his son James, 19/29 Jan. 1657, sending two books ‘concerning Liuing Well & Dying Well’, Arundel Castle Archives, ‘Howard Letters & Papers 1636–1822, II, Various’. B.L., Add. MS 11689, fos. 5IV, 52V: ‘1659. March 29 Questions & Answeres D'H.H.’, presumably Dr Henry Hammond, with whom Scudamore did correspond: B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 231–2. Scudamore had already purchased part of Aquinas's works, Hereford City Library [H.C.L.], ‘Scudamore MSS: Accounts 1635–37[8], MS L.C. 647.I, fo. 44.

6 Gibson, Matthew, A view of the ancient and present state of the churches of Door, Home-Lacy, and Hempsted; endow'd by the Right Honourable John, Lord Viscount Scudamore (London, 1727), p. 64Google Scholar.

7 Gibson noted that ‘in the same bundel that I found this Letter, I have all the reason in the World to beleeve there had been several more of the same sort. But assoon as I touched them, they crumbled all to pieces in my hands.’ ‘Of the Viscount Scudamore's Embassy in France: And his sufferings in the Civil War &c’, 1722, Balliol College, Oxford, MS 333, fo. 67r. This tract is anonymous, but from similarities to View it was almost certainly written by Gibson. There are a few theological extracts and notes from Holme Lacy in B.L., Add. MSS 11055 and 45146, but it is difficult to tell which of these belonged to the first viscount.

8 W[all], G[eorge], A sermon at the lord arch–bishop of Canterbury his visitation metro-politicall (London, 1635)Google Scholar, sig. A2V. Scott, William and Bliss, James (ed.), The works of the most reverend father in God, William Laud, D.D. (7 vols., Oxford, 1847–1860), II, p. xviGoogle Scholar. The best account of the importance of externals in Laud's vision of the church is McGee, J. S., ‘William Laud and the outward face of religion’, in Leaders of the reformation, ed. DeMolen, R. L. (Selinsgrove, Pa., 1984), pp. 318–44Google Scholar.

9 Gibson, , View, pp. 47–8Google Scholar, translating Watkyns's, ‘Ad eundem nobilissimum virum Dominum Scudamore’ Flamma sine fumo, p. 25Google Scholar.Laud, W., A relation of the conference betweene William Lawd… and Mr. Fisher the Jesuite (London, 1639)Google Scholar, sig. *3r. Tyacke's, NicholasAnti-calvinists: the rise of English Arminianism c. 1590–1640 (Oxford, 1987)Google Scholar is typical of much recent work which focuses on overtly theological issues of grace and salvation; the nature of the sources mean that this study will adopt a different approach, looking instead rather more at issues of ceremonial and practice, these being, in Laud's words, ‘the Hedge that fence the Substance of Religion from all the Indignities, which Prophanenesse and Sacriledge too Commonly put upon it’, Laud, Relation, sig. *3V.

10 Grant of the site and demesne of Dore to John Scudamore, 4 March 1540, Tenth report of the deputy keeper of the public records (London, 1849), appendix II, no. II, p. 267Google Scholar. Queen Elizabeth's grant of Dore rectory to the earl of Lincoln, 24 Feb. 1578, Northants. R.O., Temple (Stowe) Box 40/11. Deposition of Hugh Powell in the case of William Watts v. parishioners of Dore, P.R.O., E134/4W&M/Easter 16; Gibson, , View, pp. 25–7, 36Google Scholar.

11 Papers relating to the repair of Dore, P.R.O., C115/D19/1907–16, 1924; B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 267–9. Colvin, H. M., ‘The restoration of Abbey Dore church in 1633–4’, Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists’ Field Club [T.W.N.F.C.], XXXII (1946–1948), 235–7Google Scholar; Neville, M., ‘Dore abbey, Herefordshire, 1536–1912’, T.W.N.F.C, XLI (1975), 312–17Google Scholar; Sledmere, E., Abbey Dore, Herefordshire, its building and restoration (Hereford, 1914)Google Scholar.

12 Gibson, , View, p. 126Google Scholar; disbursements at Holme Lacy, 1667–8, H.C.L., ‘Scudamore papers. Farm accounts of Holm Lacy’, MS 631.16, 25 June & 2 July 1668; draft seating plans for Holme Lacy, 4 Dec. 1663, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 270–3. Scudamore's pew, as befitted the patron, was right at the front.

13 Soliciting contributions to the repair of St Paul's from London Charles reminded the lord mayor in June 1631 how he had encouraged his subjects ‘in all places to reedify, repaire, and beautify their Churches’, that ‘respect and outward reuerence being a good effect and Cleere Euidence of true Zeal’: P.R.O., SP 16/195/32, fo. 94. Daybook of receipts and expenditure for St Paul's, 1631–8, Guildhall Library, London, MS 25475/1, fo. 2r. Papers of the Herefordshirecommissioners, B.L., Add. MS 11051, fos. 184–208, and P.R.O., C115/I28/6668–9, 6671–2. William Scudamore to privy council, 20 Jan. 1636, P.R.O., SP16/311/97, fo. 215r.

14 Hereford cathedral's appeal, c. 1664, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 293–4. List of donors, 1664–5, and receipt of £100 from Scudamore, 13 Dec. 1664, Hereford Cathedral Archives [H.C.A.], 2382, and dean and chapter act book, vol. 3, 1600–1712, p. 237; Scudamore's was by far the most generous lay contribution, the next largest being £15 from Sir John Kyrle.

15 Scudamore's speech upon the collection for St Paul's, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 247–9. For King David see II Samuel 7:1–3 and I Chronicles 17:1–2.

16 Order of the consecration of Dore, in Legg, J. W., English orders for consecrating churches in the seventeenth century (London, Henry Bradshaw society, XLI, 1911), pp. 149–51Google Scholar. This is a transcript of B.L., Add. MS 38915, a draft of what was intended to be done on the day. The record of what was actually done (which differs only in a few minor details), is in the bishops’ register, Hereford Record Office [H.R.O.], MS AL19/18, fos. 71r–94r, a certified transcript of which is B.L., Add. MS 15645. This last has been printed, but with many passages missing (largely those borrowed from Lancelot Andrewes‘s consecration of Jesus chapel, Southampton, in 1620): Russell, John F. (ed.), The form and order of the consecration and dedication of the parish church of Abbey Dore (London, 1874)Google Scholar. Scudamore‘s schedule only is printed in Kennett, W., The case of impropriations, and of the augmentation of vicarages and other insufficient cures (London, 1704), appendix XII, pp. 30–5Google Scholar.

17 Stonehouse, Walter, ‘The Vse and Abvse of Temples’, 1636Google Scholar, in Stonehouse, ‘Nineteene sermons’, Magdalen College, Oxford, MS 350, cols. 418–19. There were of course many injunctions against letting churches fall into disrepair, the latest being a proclamation of Dec. 1629: Foster, A., ‘Church policies of the 1630s’ in Cust, R. and Hughes, A. (eds.), Conflict in early Stuart England (Harlow, 1989), p. 202Google Scholar.

18 Thomas, Keith, Religion and the decline of magic (Harmondsworth, 1982), pp. 103–21 (a reference I owe to Rev. James Gardom)Google Scholar. SirSpelman, Henry, De non temerandis ecclesiis (2nd edn, London, 1616)Google Scholar, and his The larger treatise concerning tithes, ed. Stephens, Jeremy (London, 1647)Google Scholar; [Udall, Ephraim], Noli me tangere is a thinge to be thought on (London, 1642)Google Scholar, Walker, William, A sermon preached in St Pavls-church (London, 1629)Google Scholar. Mountagu, Richard, Diatribae upon the first part of the late history of tithes (London, 1621), pp. 388–9Google Scholar.

19 B[rouncker], E[dward], The cvrse of sacriledge (Oxford, 1630), p. IIGoogle Scholar; ‘what is once given vnto god cannot be alienated’, John Blaxton, ‘The English Appropriator, Or Sacriledge condemned’, Bod. L., MS Add. A 40, fo. 21r, also fo. 114r. (This is a very useful compilation of other writings, composed, on the evidence of the works cited, between 1634 and 1641.) Such views were influenced by the Levitical law of the Old Testament.

20 Laud to Scudamore, 13 and 18 Jan 1627, P.R.O., C115/24/7773, 7758. Papers relating to the marriage of Frances Scudamore and John Higford, P.R.O., C115/E12/2359–60, 2362, 23651 2383, 2393. Harry Fletcher has suggested that the viscount may have feared that his family's sacrilege was being punished by the premature deaths of Scudamore heirs: Fletcher, H. L. V., Herefordshire (London, 1948), pp. 172–3Google Scholar, and Portrait of the Wye valley (London, 1968), p. 129Google Scholar. Between 1560 and 1671 the Holme Lacy estate always passed from grandfather to grandson, the son having predeceased his father; of the viscount's nine children only Mary outlived him. There is no evidence that this perturbed Lord Scudamore, but warnings that sacrilege would be punished by premature death and the extinction of family lines were common: Bod. L., MS Add. A 40, fos. 11v, 125r, 131r–2r; Buckeridge, John, A sermon preached at the funeral of…Lancelot late lord bishop of Winchester (London, 1629), p. 21Google Scholar, in Andrewes, Lancelot, XCVI. sermons (London, 1629)Google Scholar.

21 P.R.O., C115/M24/7758. Brouncker, , Cvrse of sacriledge, pp. 19–20Google Scholar, argued similarly that parliament could not dispense with God's law just as it could not make adultery lawful.

22 P.R.O., C115/D19/1901. The statutes of the realm (11 vols. in 12, London, 1963), III, 733–9Google Scholar. Hooker, Richard, Of the lawes of ecclesiastical politie (London, 1622), book 5, chapter 79, p. 431Google Scholar. Brouncker, , Cvrse of sacriledge, p. 21Google Scholar, called the act of 31 Henry VIII ‘that vaine fig-leafe excuse’ which none should cite in their defence.

23 Despite the campaign of the 1630s to realize the full value of church land (for which see Foster, , ‘Church policies’, pp. 198–201)Google Scholar, Scudamore leased tithes from clergy at low and static rents. He paid the bishop of Hereford only £13 3s. 4d. p.a. for the tithes of Leominster (valued at £114 10s. 4½d. annually in 1647) and then sublet them for £ 100 a year; in 1664 he renewed his lease at the old rent of 1624: P.R.O., C115/G25/3922–3, 3925, 3927, and C115/D13/1724. The tithes of Sellack were a similar case: H.C.A., 4681 (v) and dean and chapter ac book, vol. 3, 1600–1712, p. 516.

24 Few tried to put into practice the more radical demands, though Charles I's act of restitution in Scotland and Emperor Ferdinand II' edict of restitution were both partial attempts; neither met with much success. Among others who returned impropriations were viscount Campden, SirDodington, William and SirTownsend, Roger: Spelman, Larger treatise sig.(C3); Gaule, John, A defiance to death (London, 1630)Google Scholar.

25 The story of Jehoram is from II Chronicles 21:12–19, repeated in SirSpelman, Henry, The history and fate of sacrilege (London, 1698), p. 14Google Scholar. This was originally written in 1632 and widely circulated in manuscript. According to Hearne, in 1725 the library at Holme Lacy had a manuscript copy of this in Jeremy Stephens' hand; almost certainly this had been acquired by the first viscount: Remarks and collections of Thomas Hearne, ed. Doble, C. E. et al. (II vols., Oxford history society, 1885–1921), VIII, 353Google Scholar.

26 [Carpender, William], Jura cleri: or an apology for the rights of the long-despised clergy (Oxford, 1661), p. 11Google Scholar. Leonard Wastell, rector of Hurworth-on-Tees, Co. Durham, approvingly quoted this passage from Carpender in his own notes: Ross-Lwein, G. H., Lord Scudamore a loyal churchman and a faithful steward of God‘s bounty 1601–1671 (Edinburgh, 1900), p. 3Google Scholar.

27 Wall, Sermon, sig. A3r.

28 Mortmain licence, P.R.O., E371/818/256, with copy in Gibson, , View, pp. 190–7Google Scholar; docket book of warrants for the great seal, 1631–8, P.R.O., IND1/4224, fo. 17V, a reference I owe toDrSmith, David, Newton, John, The compleat arithmetician (London, 1691)Google Scholar, sigs. A2v–A4r. For all Scudamore‘ gifts to the church see: docquets of a licence to endow several churches, P.R.O., IND1/6747, Nov. 1631, and SO3/10, Nov.1631; Gibson, , View, pp. 123–5, 131–4, 169–72, 206–24, 229–30, 235–8Google Scholar; ‘The Donations of Iohn Ld Viscount Scudamore’, Bishop Kennett‘ collections, B.L., Landsdowne MS 989, fo. 31.

29 Copy of Scudamore's endowment, 1 Oct. 1632, of Holme Lacy and Bolstone, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 265–6, and ofBosbury, H.R.O., Bosbury register, 1558–1708, MS AT24/1, p. 101, and photocopy, MS AO28. Gibson, , View, pp. 132–4, 229–30Google Scholar. Endowment of Dore, 1 July. 1635, P.R.O., C115/D21/1921, 1962, C115/I13/6055; see also P.R.O., C115/A2/29, c115/I1/5587, and H.R.O., MS AL19/18, fos. 191v–2r.

30 Gibson, , View, pp. 1169–72, 235–6Google Scholar. Bigland, R., Historical, monumental and genealogical collections, relative to the county of Gloucester (3 vols., London, 1786–1838), II, 65–6Google Scholar, P.R.O., C115/M24/7783, Hempsted register, 1558–1710, Gloucester R.O., microfilm PMF 173, sub 1662, copied in Dawson, B. S., ‘Notes on the manor and church of Hempsted’, Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire archaeological society, XIII (1888–1889), 150–1Google Scholar The George Wall presented to Hempsted was the youngest son of the George Wall who had praised Scudamore in his Sermon: H.R.O., probate records, microfilm AA20/X/010/A, 1641 no. 101. Scudamore's endowment transformed the annual value of the living of Hempsted from £9 10s. to £80: Herbert, N. M. (ed.), A History of the county of Gloucester, vol. IV: the city of Gloucester (Victoria county history of Gloucestershire, Oxford, 1988), p. 427Google Scholar; Abel Wantner, ‘The History of Gloucester’, Bod.L., MS Top. Glouc. c 3, fo. 197v.

31 13 & 14 Car. II c. 12 in Statutes of the realm, V, 434; the engrossed copy, House of Lords R.O., 13 & 14 Car. II no. 44, shows some of the amendments made at the committee stage but it is incomplete. The full text is in Gibson, , View, pp. 206–24Google Scholar, and the Bosbury register, H.R.O., MS AT24/1, pp. 127–135. For the passage of the bill, see the Commons' journals, VIII, 304, 308, 313, 315365. 371. and Lords' journals, XI, 325, 354, 359, 377–8, 383–4, 395, 472.

32 Stephens to Scudamore, 25 July 1653, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 233–4.

33 Three questions about the tithes of Lanthony, undated, P.R.O., C115/119/6232.

34 Scudamore‘s will, 4 July 1670, P.R.O., PROB 11/336/96, fo. 330r.

35 Wall,Sermon, sig. A3r; Gibson, , View, pp. 166–7Google Scholar.

36 Gibson, , View, pp. 110–12, 166–8, 179Google Scholar. Gibson gives a list of seventy-two clerics to whom Scudamore gave money. A few other names can be added from the following: accounts of the arrears of tithe paid, 1652–8 & 1658–61, P.R.O., C 115 /N9/8877, 8879; accounts of the payment of the annual tithe, P.R.O., C115/E5/2206–39, C115/110/5879 and C115/N9/8878. For some of these ministers see Matthews, A. G., Walker revised, being a revision of John Walker's Sufferings of the clergy (Oxford, 1948)Google Scholar. Many of these identifications are tentative, as Scudamore usually gave nothing more than the cleric's surname.

37 O'Day, R. and Heal, F. (eds.), Continuity and change: personnel and administration of the church in England 1500–1642 (Leicester, 1976), pp. 68–73Google Scholar.

38 Rowland Scudamore‘s will, 17 Aug. 1630, witnessed by Turner and with a legacy to him as a servant of Viscount Scudamore, P.R.O., PROB11/159/21, fo. I6IV. Docket of dispensation to Turner to enjoy the parsonages of Dore and Dinedor notwithstanding his service in Paris: signet office docket book,1634–8, P.R.O., SO3/11, 10 July 1635. Commonwealth survey of Hereford, c. 1658, Lambeth PalaceLibrary [L.P.L.], COMM.XIIa/10, fo. I76r. Turner also supervised the education of the viscount' son James in Paris: Scudamore to Turner and Dupont, 1639, Arundel Castle Archives, ‘Howard Letters & Papers 1636–1822, II, Various’, and P.R.O., C115/ M24/7780.

39 Information supplied to Walker by Taylor's eldest son in 1704, Bod.L., MS J. Walker c. 2, fo. 177V. Matthews, , Walker revised, p. 196Google Scholar. P.R.O., PROB 11/336/96, fo. 331V. Taylor, however, predeceased his patron by about a month.

40 Appointment of John Scudamore senior and John Scudamore junior as seneschal, 8 Aug. 1563, typescript digest of Hereford dean and chapter act book, vol. 1, 1512/1566, Bod.L., MS Top. Herefs. d 2, p. 137, no. 1148; Sir John Scudamore to dean and chapter for renewal of patent of stewardship to himself and son Sir James, 12 Feb. 1601, and appointment of deputy stewards, 26 March 1619, H.C.A., 2761–2; appointment of William Scudamore as deputy steward, 12 Oct. 1622, P.R.O., C115/F9/2985; re-appointment of first viscount, 30 Aug. 1660, and appointment of second viscount as chief steward, 6 June 1671, P.R.O., C115/14/5690 and 5706. See also H.C.A., dean and chapter act book, vol. 3, 1600–1712, pp. 1, 24–5, 188, 320. The first viscount fulfilled his duties by means of various deputies: court rolls of the dean and chapter's manors of Canon Pyon and Woolhope, H.C.A., R820, R1042, R1045/6.

41 Morgan, F. C., ‘Hereford cathedral vicars choral library’, T.W.N.F.C., XXXV (1955–1958), 238Google Scholar, and Rawlinson, R., The history and antiquities of the city and cathedral-church of Hereford (London, 1717), p. 57Google Scholar. F.S.L., MS V.a.147, fos. 36r–38v.

42 H.C.A., 2382. John Clerke‘s acquittance for the return of the chapter act book, 23 Dec. 1660, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fo. 295r This volume has since been lost, and there are no entries in the extant books for 1624–59.

43 Boughen attacked Calvinism, stressed the universality of atonement, and defended bowing and the beauty of holiness: Tyacke, , Anti–Calvinists, pp. 184, 197–8, 263–5Google Scholar; Boughen, E.,A sermon concerning decencie and order in the church (London, 1638), pp. 6–9Google Scholar. Heywood was one of Laud's chaplains. For his alleged innovations, including urging private confession, setting up images and hanging the altar with rich cloth, see The petition and articles exhibited in parliament against Doctor Heywood (London, 1641)Google Scholar. Fuller was accused of denying the differences between the churches of England and Rome ‘in matter of substance’, of commending the canons of 1640, and of bowing to the altar: The petition and articles exhibited in parliament against Dr Fuller (London, 1641)Google Scholar. Sterne, another of Laud's chaplains and master of Jesus College, Cambridge, was sequestered for, inter alia, bowing to and railing in the communion table, and adorning the chapel at Jesus with gilded cherubims and blue altar hangings, with silver basin and candlesticks on the altar: D.N.B., LIV, 221–3; B.L., Loan 29/50/74. For the context of these changes at jesus see Hoyle, D., ‘A commons investigation of Arminianism and popery in Cambridge on the eve of the civil war’, Historical Journal, XXIV, 2 (1986), 419–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 [Prynne, William], Newes from Ipswich (Ipswich, [London], 1636)Google Scholar. For Wren's unpopularity see also, The wrens-nest defiled, or, Bishop Wren anatomized (1641), Articles of impreachment… against Matthew Wren (London, 1641)Google Scholar, The charge voted against Bishop Wren on Munday 5 of July, 1641 (London, 1641)Google Scholarand the petition of Cambridgeshire and the diocese of Ely against Wren and episcopacy [1640–1], B.L., Egerton MS 1048, fos. 24–5.

45 Wren's will, 22 Sept. 1665, P.R.O., PROB11/324/80, fo. 179 and Cambridge University Library, Add. MS 2956, fo. 65r. None of Wren's notes were in fact published.

46 Bosher, R. S., The making of the Restoration settlement (London, 1951), p. 30Google Scholar. Bosher's views have been extensively criticized.

47 Fell, John, The life of the most learned, reverend, and pious Dr Henry Hammond, in The miscellaneous theological works of Henry Hammond, D.D. ed. Pocock, N. (3 vols., Oxford, 1847),I, pp. xlvii, liGoogle Scholar.

48 Lee-Warner, E., The life of John Warner bishop of Rochester 1637–1666 (London, 1901), pp. 56, 58–9Google Scholar. The roll he kept of his beneficiaries seems to have disappeared, but the names of some can be recovered from his papers, Bod. L., MS Eng. hist, b 205, fos. 3–12, 15–20, 25V. Like Scudamore, Warner was concerned to return impropriations and gave money to repair several churches; he also wrote that the alienation of church lands and tithes to the laity was sacrilege punishable by God: copy of Warner's will, Bod. L., MS Eng. hist, b 205, fo. 30r; Warner to Augustine Skinner, 11 March 1648, Bod.L., MSS Eng. misc. b 193, fos. 22–29 and Eng. misc. b 194, fos. 30–34 (copy); Warner, J., Church-lands not to be sold (1648), especially pp. 6–29, 72–81Google Scholar. Scudamore knew Warner, but there is no evidence that they co–ordinated their giving: Warner to Scudamore, 28 Aug. 1655, F.S.L., MS V.b.2 (26).

49 Cox, Nicholas G., Bridging the gap: a history of the Corporation of the Sons of the Clergy (Oxford, 1978), pp. 3–4, 9–11, 13 n. 44Google Scholar.

50 Bod.L., MS Clarendon 50, fos. 105–6.

51 Hammond, , Works, I, lvii, lxiiGoogle Scholar. Hammond's correspondence with Gilbert Sheldon, B.L., Harleian MS 6942, especially fos. 18r, 31r, 35r, 36r, 83r, 88r, 91r, 93r–93*r.

52 Hammond to Scudamore thanking him for his donation, undated, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 231–2. The letter is badly damaged and the exact figure illegible; it was no easier to read when Gibson attempted a transcription: Balliol College, MS 333, fos. 66r–67r.

53 Foster, Joseph, Alumni Oxonienses: the members of the university of Oxford, 1500–1714 (4 vols., Oxford, 1891–1892), IV, 1573Google Scholar. Warmestry, T., A convocation speech (London, 1641)Google Scholar. Scudamore rented ahouse in Petty France in the parish and a pew in the church, which may account for his charity to Warmestry: StMargaret's churchwardens’ accounts, 1640–1, and overseers’ accounts, 1637–72, Westminster City Libraries Dept, Victoria Library, MSS E23 (sub 1641 receipts), E154–184.

54 Lockey to Laud, 16/26 Aug. 1638, P.R.O., SP16/397/57. Reckoned the best classicist in Oxford, Lockey was Bodley's Librarian, 1660–5: D. N.B., xxxiv, 43–4; Wood, Anthony, Fasti Oxonienses, ed. Bliss, P. (2 parts in one, London, 1815–1820), II, 242Google Scholar.

55 P.R.O., SP16/397/57, PC2/49, fo. 182/p. 367 and Bishops‘ institution books, series A, (1556–1660), vol.I (round room press mark 6/90), fo. 99r, and series B (1660–1721), vol. I (round room press mark 6/95), pp. 137, 141; L.P.L., COMM.XIIa/10, fo. I75r; H.R.O., MS AL19/18, fos. 186–7,: 98r, 223Ar; Bannister, A. T., Diocese of Hereford. Institutions (Hereford, 1923), pp. 31, 33, 37Google Scholar, Survey of the Herefordshire ministry, 1640/1, Corpus Christi College, Oxford [C.C.C.], MS C206, fos. 3–4 (I would like to thank the president and scholars of C.C.C. for permission to see this, and also Chris Butler for her help and patience); Gibson, , View, pp. 170–2Google Scholar; Bigland, , Collections, II, 66Google Scholar; Bod.L., MS J. Walker c. 2, fo. 177V. The four livings in his gift were Hempsted in Gloucestershire and Holme Lacy, Brobury and Dore in Herefordshire, though the last two advowsons were later given to his son James. Newton Key seriously underestimates the viscount's patronage in counting only two livings in his gift: Harris, Tim et al. , The politics of religion in restoration England (Oxford, 1990), p. 211Google Scholar, n. 36. He has misread his source (Bod. L., MS Willis 72, fos. 82–3, 119–21, 134–7) ahd ignored patronage outside Hereford. Pace Williams, W. R., The parliamentary history of the county of Hereford (Brecknock, 1896), p. 43Google Scholar, Scudamore never presented to Brinsop, which was in the gift of the bishopof Hereford.

56 The exception was Julius Spinula, archbishop of Laodicea, who received £10 in May 1659: P.R.O., C115/N9/8879.

57 George Durant, ejected in 1647 from Blockley, Worcestershire, received £10 in May1656. He had been a member of the county committee but was suspected of royalism: Matthews, , Walker revised, p. 384Google Scholar.

58 Tombes, J., Christs commination against scandalizers (London 1641)Google Scholar, sig. *4r, dedication to Scudamore: there is nothing in this to offend the orthodox, it even prescribes non-resistance to an evil magistrate (p. 248). Leases of Leominster tithe, P.R.O., C115/G25/3922–3, 3925. Tombes was involved in a long-running dispute with the bishop to increase his income, P.R.O., C115/D13/1723. Committee for plundered ministers minute book, May–Nov. 1646, Bod.L., MS Bodley 323, fos. 140V, 141V.

59 Before the civil war Sir William Croft was another great admirer of Tombes's preaching, yet in 1642 he too was a zealous supporter of episcopacy and the prayer book and an opponent of sectaries:Dick, O. L. (ed.), Aubrey's Brief lives (Harmondsworth, 1976), p.455Google Scholar, Brilliana Harley to Sir Robert Harley, 15 Jan. 1642, and Croft and other J.P.s to their M.P.s, 5 March 1642, B.L., Loan 29/173, fos. 195V, 229r. In May 1641 Tombes wrote to Harley that in Dec. 1640, after hearing of the commons' proceedings against altars and the canons, he moved the communion table from its altarwise position and discontinued using the surplice and the sign of the cross in baptisms. At the same time he was also involved in moves against the bishops in Herefordshire and began preaching against ceremonies: B.L., Loan 29/173, fo. 9gr, and Stanley Gower to Harley, 23Jan. 1641, Loan 29/119, Tombes, , Fermentumpharisaeorum (London, 1643). D.N.B., LVII, 2–4Google Scholar.

60 Eales, J., ‘Sir Robert Harley, K. B., (1579–1656) and the ”character” of a puritan’, British Library Journal, 15, 2 (1989), 134–57.Google ScholarVaughan, Rowland, Most approved, and long experienced water-works (London, 1610)Google Scholar, sigs. Fv, F2V–F4T. C.C.C., MS C206.

61 P.R.O., E134/4/V&M/Easter 16. Scudamore presented Robert Tetlow to Brobury in 1637; the following year he was presented to Much Dewchurch by Sir Walter Pye, and he also served as curate at Much Birch. According to the Herefordshire survey, compiled by those around the Harleys to show the evils of episcopacy, Tetlow ‘seldome or neuer Preacheth, & is of an ill life’ and was ‘a great nonresident’: C.C.C., MS C206, fos. 1r, 4r; P.R.O., Bishops' institution books, series A (1556–1660) vol. 1 (round room press mark 6/90), fos. 87r, 99r. Laud wrote that he wished for an act ‘that no man, of what degree soever, should hold above two benefices with cure, and those within a limited distance, that they may the take care of them’ Laud to Wentworth, 11 March 1634, Laud, , works VI 354Google Scholar.

62 ogstone Scudamore 24 June and 23 July 1659, P.R.O., C115/M13/7231–2. ‘some account of Bp: Gunning from his own Papers’, B.L., Harleian MS 7039, fo. 199, and Baker, Thomas, History of the College of St John the Evangelist, Cambridge, ed. Mayor, J. E. B. (Cambridge, 1869), pp. 235–6Google Scholar. This John Fork was perhaps John Ford, fellow of Exeter College 1656–64, and vicar of Totnes 1664–71: Foster, , Alumni Oxonienses, II, 515Google Scholar.

63 Wood, , Fasti, I, 407Google Scholar; Pierce, T., The new discoverer discovere'd (London, 1659), p. 12Google Scholar.

64 Bigland, , Collections, II, 66Google Scholar. Notes on education made by John Shipman, Bod. L., M S Rawlinson D.191, fo. 8r. See also Gregory, J., Hκαινη διθηκη [New testament]. Novum Testamentum una aim scholiis Graecis (Oxford, 1703)Google Scholar.

65 Godwyn, F., Annales of England, trs. Godwyn, M. (London, 1630)Google Scholar, sig. A3V. Scudamore to Laud, 29 Dec./8 Jan. 1637/8, P.R.O., C115/M12/7223, fo. 66r. See alsoFarnaby, T., Florilegium epigrammatum Graecorum (London, 1629)Google Scholar, dedicated to Viscount Scudamore.

66 Scudamore, James, trs., The sixty sixe admonitory chapters of Basilius, king of the Romans, to his sonne Leo, in acrostick manner (Paris, 1638)Google Scholar.

67 Gregory, J., Hμɛρα αναπανσɛως [Day of rest]. Or, a discourse of the morality of the sabbath (London, 1681)Google Scholar, sig. A2. In 1632 Laud presented Scudamore with a copy of ‘Bryerwoods Saboths’, either A learned treatise of the sabbath (Oxford, 1631)Google Scholar or A second treatise of the sabbath (Oxford, 1632)Google Scholar, both by Edward Brerewood: ‘The Steward's Accounts of John, Viscount Scudamore, 1632’, H.C.A., MS 6 B iv, fo. 27r. ‘sacrilege of time’ in profaning the sabbath was a common topic in works on sacrilege: Spelman, , Sacrilege, pp. 15–16Google Scholar.

68 Gibson, , View, p. 167Google Scholar.

69 B.L., Lansdowne MS 989, fo. 31r; Hill, C., Economic problems of the church from Archbishop Whitgift to the long parliament (Oxford, 1956), pp. 271–2Google Scholar. Gibson, , View, 180Google Scholar. On another occasion Kennett estimated that Scudamore's bounty ‘amounted at a moderate computation to at least 10000‘, Kennett's own interleavedcopy of his Case of impropriations with his MS additions, Bod. L., Gough Eccl. Top. 47–48, II, appendix, facing p. 31. Collins, Arthur, The baronetage of England (2 vols., London, 1720), II, 176Google Scholar, gives this same figure of over £10,000.

70 Gibson, , View, pp. 42–3, 128–9, 73–5Google Scholar; see also PRO., C115/D19/1917–18, 1923, H.C.L., disbursements at Holme Lacy, 1667–8, MS 631.16, 28 May–17 Sept. 1668.

71 Legg, , English orders, p. 152Google Scholar.

72 Petition of the parishioners of Dore to Scudamore, 10 Oct. 1661, P.R.O., C115/D19/1922. ‘The care about the Taxes upon the Parson of Doore deliuered by mr Peter Smyth’, 1663, P.R.O., C115/D19/1919.

73 Opinions of Palmer and Turner about the taxes of Dore, 22 June 1664, P.R.O., C115/D19/1920, C115/D21/1964.

74 Hill, , Economic problems, pp. 134Google Scholar, 197.

75 Scudamore's resolution of the dispute at Dore, 15 Aug. 1664, P.R.O., C115/D19/1921.

76 Wall, , Sermon. Bishop Coke to Laud, 26 12 1637Google Scholar, P.R.O., SP16/374/51, fo. 102r, and Bishop Coke to Secretary Coke, 16 Jan. 1638, H.M.C., , Twelfth report, appendix, parts I–III. The manuscripts of the Earl Cowper (3 vols., London, 1888–1889), II, 172–3Google Scholar. ‘scudamore to Harley, 18 Nov. 1624, B.L., Loan 29/202, fo. 156r. Harley had supported the feofees for impropriations and wanted to augment clergy stipends. He was not opposed to episcopacy until about 1641 and even after that Coke hoped that Harley would be friendly to him. The question of relations between Scudamore and Harley is complicated, and it should not be presumed that their differing religious views made them enemies: Scudamore was a trustee to Harley marriage and land settlements in 1623 and 1627. When the viscount appeared as a royalist prisoner before the commons in 1643 Harley and Pym were appointed to treat with him for his composition. They were too lenient for the likings of other M.P.s, and the sum they accepted from the viscount was rejected by the house as too small: Eales, J., Puritans and roundheads: the Harleys of Brampton Bryan (Cambridge, 1990), pp. 12–13, 37–9, 47, 53, 66, 111–16, 180–4Google Scholar. Bishop Coke to Harley, 27 Feb. 1642, B.L., Loan 29/173, fo. 224r Scudamore's unpresented petition to the commons, Harley's certificate, 28 Jan. 1647, and report of Scudamore's composition, 1647, P.R.O., C115/M14/7287, 7292, and SP23/I98, p. 759.

77 Williams, Gryffith, The true church (London, 1629), p. 436Google Scholar, Spelman, , Sacrilege, p. 16Google Scholar. Wall, Sermon, sigs. A2v–A3r. Nehemiah was an Old Testament leader who reformed Jewish religious practice, including payment of the tithe: see especially Nehemiah 13.

78 B.L., Add. M S 11689, fos. 51–2. Hammond, , Works, I, 386–8, 399Google Scholar; Andrewes, L., Ninety-six sermons (5 vols., Oxford, 1851–1853), v, 67Google Scholar; The works of the right reverend father in God John Cosin (5 vols., Oxford, 1843–1855), v, 94, 124, 130, 132–4Google Scholar. I Corinthians 11:27–9. Dyke, J., A worthy communicant (London, 1667, 1st published 1636), especially pp. 34–55Google Scholar.

79 B.L., Add. MS 11689, fos. 51–2, Dyke, warned that although a man could come to the eucharist with doubts, ‘eating with such doubtings, must needs be prejudicial to a mans comfortable eating’: Worthy communicant, p. 167Google Scholar. See Spaeth, D. A., ‘Common prayer? Popular observance of the Anglican liturgy in restoration Wiltshire’, in Wright, Susan J., ed., Parish, church and people: local studies in lay religion 1330–1750 (London, 1988), pp. 131–2, 135–6Google Scholar, for evidence of Wiltshire laity frequently refusing the sacrament for fear of receiving unworthily.

80 Porter, H. B., Jeremy Taylor, liturgist (Alcuin club collections, LXI, London, 1979), pp. 97–100Google Scholar, a reference I owe to Liz Carnelley; Taylor, J., The whole works, ed. Heber, R. (15 vols., London, 1828), XIV, 503–4Google Scholar; Mountagu, R., A gagg for the new gospell? (London, 1624), pp. 83–7Google Scholar, and Appello caesarem (London, 1625), pp. 297–302Google Scholar, (unlike others who encouraged auricular confession for those troubled, Mountagu seemed to require it of all communicants); Cosin, , Works, v, 163–4Google Scholar; Thorndike, H., The theological works (6 vols., Oxford, 1844–1856), IV, 258–9, v, 610Google Scholar; Wren, M., Articles to be inquired of within the diocesse of Hereford (London, 1635)Google Scholar, sig. Br; B.L., Loan 29/50/74 (for Sterne's encouragement of private confession); Tyacke, , Anti Calvinists, pp. 116, 222Google Scholar. Legg, , English orders, pp. lvi, 172–3Google Scholar. B.L., Add. MS 11689, fos. 51–2.

81 Hammond, , Works, I, 387Google Scholar; Dyke, , Worthy communicant, pp. 124–36Google Scholar. H.C.L., MSS 647.1, ‘scudamore MSS: Accounts 1640–42’, fo. 76r, ‘scudamore MSS: Accounts 1641–2’, fo. 3r, and ‘scudamore MSS: Accounts 1635–37[8]’, MS L.C.647.1, fo.98r: ‘Cakebreade on Palme Sondaye for 3 parishes’. Simpson, J. M.. The folklore of the Welsh border (London, 1976), p. 142Google Scholar, a reference I owe to Rev. Maurice Woodward of Sellack. The tradition, said by some to have been begun by Lady Scudamore in the 1570s but probably pre-reformation in practice, still continues at Sellack.

82 Gibson, , View, p. 114Google Scholar. Petition of poor for continuance of Scudamore's dole of corn and money despite his sequestration, P.R.O., C115/M14/7281. The story of the viscount's charity to royalist prisoners is told by Gibson in Balliol College MS 333, fo. 57r; there is no further evidence to corroborate it, but see H.C.A., MS 6 B iv, fo. 19r for Scudamore's charity to the prisoners in Hereford gaol in 1632. P.R.O., PROB 11/336/96, fo. 332r and H.C.L., MS L.C.929.2, ‘Webb MSS: Pengelly and Scudamore papers’, p. 100: the money thus left was allowed to be used for educating poor children by the acts 14 Geo. III. c. 38 and 3 and 4 Viet. c. 125, and there is still a primary school in Hereford named ‘Lord Scudamore's School’.

83 Gibson, , View, p. 41Google Scholar. Stanhope, B. S. and Moffatt, H. C., The church plate of the county of Hereford (London, 1903), p. IGoogle Scholar.

84 Laud to Scudamore, 18 and 25 March 1626, P.R.O., C115/M24/7765, 7760. Holme Lacy register, 1561–1727, H.R.O., MS AL17/1. Gibson, , View, pp. 128–9Google Scholar. P.R.O., PROB11/336/96, fo. 332r.

85 List of donations of St Tysilio's, Sellack, recorded in the church on a board of 1825. Stanhope and Moffatt, , Church plate of Hereford, pp. 154–5Google Scholar. I would like to thank Rev. Maurice Woodward for letting me see the remaining plate of Sellack.

86 H.R.O., MS AL17/1. Sellack donations.

87 Lee, Frederick G., A glossary of liturgical and ecclesiastical terms (London, 1877), pp. 98, 258–9Google Scholar. Dearmer, P., Linen ornaments of the church (Alcuin club tracts no. 17, Oxford and London, 1929), pp. 7–8, 14–20Google Scholar. Staley, V., The ceremonial of the English church (Oxford and London, 1899), pp. 129–31Google Scholar. Houseling cloths are still used at Sellack.

88 Gibson, , View, pp. 40–1Google Scholar. Scudamore's note to Wren about Dore, 12 March 1635, P.R.O., C115/N9/8875. Topographical notebook of J. C. Brooke, c. 1784, Bod. L., MS Top. gen. e III, fo. 2r. ‘Judgement vpon ye Enemyes of Religion’ in ‘The great hodge-podge’, Blundell of Crosby papers, 1560–1857, Lancashire R.O., MS DDBI, fo. 55V. I would like to thank Joe Whitlock Blundell for allowing me to see his photocopy of this MS, and also to DrAdamson, John, Davidson, Peter and Hall, K.. Gibson, T. E. (ed.), A cavalier's note book being notes, anecdotes and observations of William Blundell (London, 1880), pp. 170–1Google Scholar. The altar rail at Dore has been described as the best genuine Laudian example which has never been moved: Addleshaw, G. W. O. and Etchells, F., The architectural setting of Anglican worship (London, 1948), p. 129 n. 1Google Scholar.

89 Nonetheless, Holme Lacy had a wooden communion table: ‘Rowland Andrews Bill’, 1 Oct. 1668 (for repairing the communion table etc.), P.R.O., C115/R1. To some, stone altars were 'schismaticall Novelties’ suggesting a move Rome-wards; to others the material was unimportant. Compare Ley, John, A letter (against the erection of an altar.) (London, 1641), pp. 14–16Google Scholar: ‘Altars be made of stone, and Tables but of wood’, and Harvey's verses on the communion table, ‘And for the matter whereof it is made,/The matter is not much’ in The complete poems of Christopher Harvey, ed. Grosart, A. B. (Fuller worthies' library, privately printed, 1874), p. 24Google Scholar.

90 P.R.O., C115/N9/8875. Addleshaw, and Etchells, , Architectural setting, p. 131Google Scholarand plan 33. The pews were moved into the chancel at the beginning of this century. Laud, , Works, IV, 284Google Scholar, also Laud, , A speech delivered in the starr-chamber (London, 1637), p. 47Google Scholar. The conflicting statements in Addleshaw and Etchells, ibid. that there is no evidence for the site of the reading desk (p. 131), or that it was situated in the nave, (p. 48), are both wrong, for it was clearly stated by the viscount that it stood in the chancel: P.R.O., C115/N9/8875. The placing of the reading desk in the chancel rather than the nave was rare. George Herbert, for example, insisted that neither pulpit nor reading pew should have a precedency or priority: Addleshaw and Etchells, ibid. pp. 32, 79.

91 Gibson, , View, p. 38Google Scholar.

92 Addleshaw, and Etchells, , Architectural setting, pp. 139 n. 3, 157–62Google Scholar.

93 Gibson, , View, p. 41Google Scholar. Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, England [R.C.H.M.], An inventory of the historical monuments in Herefordshire, vol. I, South-west (London, 1931), p. 7Google Scholarand plate 79. Tyacke, , Anti-Calvinists, p. 219Google Scholar. For a contemporary measured plan of the east window and a draft of the design of the glass, differing slightly from the finished article, see H.C.L., pLC 7267, ‘Abbeydore plan & drawing of the great window’.

94 R.C.H.M., Herefordshire, I, 8Google Scholar.

95 Legg, , English orders, pp. xxxiii, 164, 166–7, 175–9, 188Google Scholar.

96 B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 247–9.

97 Trevor-Roper, , Archbishop Laud, pp. 197–204Google Scholar, and Laud, , Works, III, 323, 331–2, 337, VI, 22–7Google Scholar. On 1 Oct. 1633 the privy council ordered the English churches and regiments in the United Provinces to observe the liturgy and rites of the Church of England. Heylyn claimed that the ‘like [was] done also for regulating the Divine Service in the Families of all Ambassadours, residing in the Courts of Foreign Princes for his Majesties Service’, but I have been unable to corroborate this: Heylyn, P., Cyprianus Anglicus (London, 1668), pp. 274–6Google Scholar. Laud was certainly Scudamore's most powerful friend at court, suggesting that he was behind the viscount's appointment.

98 Boughton to Thomas Manfeild, 29 June 1635, enclosing Andrewes's proceedings in chapel, P.R.O., C115/N9/8848–9.

99 Henry de Vic to [Windebanke], with enclosure, 25 Sept./5 Oct. 1635, P.R.O., SP78/98, fos. 307r, 308r. Windebanke to Charles I, draft, 6 Oct. 1635, Bod.L., MS Clarendon 7, no. 541, fo. 145r, and final copy, 7 Oct., in The Gentleman's Magazine, XXV (1755), 70–71Google Scholar. H.M.C., , Report on the manuscripts of the late Reginald Rawdon Hastings, vol. IV, ed. Bickley, F. (London, 1947), 291–2Google Scholar. See also Hyde, Edward, earl of Clarendon, The history of the rebellion and civil wars, ed. Macray, W. D. (6 vols., Oxford, 1888), II, 418–19Google Scholar. For Laud and bowing to the altar, described by one hostile witness as ‘his fryar-like ducking’, see Seddon, P. R., Letters of John Holles (3 vols., Thoroton society record series, XXXI, XXXV–VI, 1975, 1983, 1986), II, 339Google Scholar, and Laud, , Speech, pp. 43–7Google Scholar.

100 Staley, V. (ed.), Hierurgia Anglicana (3 parts, London, 1902–1904), I, 56–7, 69–107Google Scholar. Dendy, D. R., The use of lights in Christian worship (Alcuin club collections, XLI, London, 1959), pp. 152–163Google Scholar.

101 ‘Memorandum to this present Parlement for settling the corruptions of the Church’, undated, in Worth, R. N. (ed.), The Buller papers (privately printed, 1895), p. 128Google Scholar.

102 Balliol College, MS 333, fo. IIr.

103 Clarendon, , Rebellion, II, 418Google Scholar. English ambassadors before Scudamore had attended the services at Charenton, and the registers show several of them, including Sir Thomas Edmondes and the earl of Carlisle, standing as godfathers at baptisms there: Delaborde, J., ‘Copie de fragments des registres de l'état civil des protestants détruits par l'incendie du palais de justice de Paris, en 1871’, Bulletin de la société de l'histoire du protestantisme François (1872), 268, 273–5, 323–4Google Scholar. As late as 1679 there was still a seat at Charenton inscribed ‘pour les ambassadeurs de la Grande Bretagne’: Pannier, J., L'eglise réformée de Paris sous Louis XIII (2 vols., Paris, 1922–1932), II, ii, 81Google Scholar. Grotius also refused to go to Charenton: Nellen, H. J. M., ‘Grotius' relations with the Huguenot community of Charenton (1621–1635)’, Lias, XII, 2 (1985), 147–77Google Scholar.

104 Blencowe, R. W. (ed.), Sydney papers, consisting of a journal of the earl of Leicester (London, 1825), pp. 261–2Google Scholar.

105 Clarendon, , Rebellion, II, 418–19Google Scholar.

106 Scudamore's record of his conversation with Condé in early 1639, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fo. 83r. White Kennett described a Huguenot eucharist in 1682, the communicants gathered around the table ‘without any genuflexion’: Lough, J., France observed in the seventeenth century by British travellers (Stocksfield, 1985), p. 245Google Scholar. For the importance placed by Laud on kneeling to receive communion see Laud, , Works, v, 388, 416, 424, 449, VI, 350, 479nGoogle Scholar.

107 Conversation with Jean Daillé, pastor at Charenton, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fo. 83V. Scudamore was defending his translation of Laud's speech at the trial of Burton, Bastwick and Prynne: Laud, William, Harangve prononcee en la chambre de l'estoille, le mercredy XIV. de Ivin, de l'année M.DC. XXXVII. a la censvre, de Man BastWick Henry Burton, & Guillaume Prinn, touchant les pretenduës innouations en l'eglise ([Paris], 1637[1638]), p. 6Google Scholar. There is a copy in Canterbury Cathedral Library, press mark W/H-4-16. For the viscount as the translator see his letters to Windebank, Dec. 1637–March 1638, P.R.O., SP78/104, fos. 403r, 430r, 464V; SP78/105, fos. 81r, 115r, 134r, 178r.

108 Brilliana Harley to Sir Robert Harley, 15 Jan. 1642, B.L., Loan 29/173, fo. 195V; Hereford episcopacy petition, 1642, in [ SirAston, Thomas], A collection of svndty petitions … in behalfe of episcopacie (London, 1642), pp. 39–40Google Scholar. Scudamore's queries concerning taking the convenant and the negative oath, P.R.O., C115/M14/7312–14. Certificate that Scudamore had finally taken the covenant, 1 Jan. 1647, P.R.O., SP23/198, P. 771. For Laud's own belief in iure divino episcopacy see Laud, , Works, III, 262Google Scholar.

109 Sykes, Norman, ‘The Church of England and non-episcopal churches in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: an essay towards an historical understanding of the Anglican tradition from Whitgift to Wake’, Theology occasional papers, new series, no. II (London, 1948)Google Scholar, and Tighe, W. J., ‘William Laud and the reunion of the churches: some evidence from 1637 and 1638’, Historical Journal, XXX, 3 (1987), 717–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar. I would like to thank Dr Tighe for allowing me to see a pre-publication copy of his article.

110 Recounted to Robert Harley, 31 May 1697, H.M.C., , Fourteenth report, appendix, part II. The manuscripts of his grace the duke of Portland, preserved at Welbeck Abbey (Portland III, London, 1894), p. 584Google Scholar. I owe this reference to Dr Ian Ward. I have not been able to identify who these English divines were.

111 Scudamore to Laud, 22 Sept./2 Oct. and 24 Nov./4 Dec. 1637, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fos. 92–5, and more especially the letter of 29 Dec./8 Jan. 1637/8, P.R.O., C115/M12/7223, printed in Tighe, ‘Laud and reunion’. Scudamore recounted the views of Grotius at length but added very little comment of his own.

112 B.L., Add. MS 11044, fo. 83. At the same time as Scudamore was talking with Dupuy's, Condé PierreTraité des droits et des libertés de l'eglise gallicane (Paris, 1639)Google Scholarwas published and Richelieu was toying with a plan to reunite the catholics and protestants of France: Bots, H. and Leroy, P., ‘Hugo Grotius et la réunion des Chrétiens: entre le savoir et l'inquiétude’, XVIIe siècle, XXXV (1983), 451–69, especially p. 458Google Scholar.

113 Milton, Anthony, ‘The Laudians and the Church of Rome c. 1625–1640’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge University, 1989), pp. 109, 118, 258, 260, 273, 292Google Scholar.

114 Panzani to Barberini, 4/14 Nov. 1635, P.R.O., PRO31/9/17B, a reference I owe to Dr Anthony Milton; I am indebted to Dr Jane Tillier for help with Panzani's Italian. Lassels, Richard, ‘An apologie for the Roman Catholicks’, quoted in Chaney, E., The grand tour and the great rebellion (Geneva, 1985), p. 98Google Scholar. For Panzani's boundless gullibility about English sympathy for Rome see Berington, J.. The memoirs of Gregorio Panzani, ed. Birrell, T. A. (Farnborough, 1970Google Scholar, originally published 1793), introduction. Richard Smith, bishop of Chalcedon, wrote from Paris that he had visited Scudamore, ‘who rec me very kind as he doth al Cath: and also preists’, but Leicester, the extraordinary ambassador, was just as hospitable: Smith to Clerk (i.e. John Southcott), 9 Jan. 1636, Westminister Diocesan Archives, MS XXVIII, no. 81, p. 325; compare no. 206, p. 643, and MS XXIX, nos. 3, 9, 15, pp. 5, 19, 31.

115 Notes on Gunning's life, Cambridge University Library, Add. MS 41, fo. 127.

116 Rogers, Henry, The protestant church existent, and their faith professed in all ages (London, 1638)Google Scholar, sig. Av. P.R.O., C115/M14/7313. Scudamore, who had helped Rogers in a law suit in 1623, allowed him a pension of £10 a year, 1653–7: Rogers to Scudamore, 23 July 1623, B.L., Add. MS 11043, fos. 67–8, P.R.O., C115/N9/8878.

117 Scudamore's speech proposing Sir John Kyrle as knight of the shire, c. April 1660, B.L., Add. MS 11044, fo. 250V. See Morrill, J. S., ‘The church in England, 1642–9’, in Reactions to the English civil war, ed. Morrill, (London, 1982), pp. 89–114Google Scholar.

118 Welsby, P. A., Lancelot Andrewes 1555–1626 (London, 1964), pp. 129–32, 193, 255, 263, 274Google Scholar. Laud, , Works, III, 160, 196Google Scholar. Laud to Scudamore, 30 Sept. 1626, P.R.O., C115/M24/7772. Andrewes, XCVI. sermons, title page. Trevor-Roper, , Archbishop Laud, pp. 30, 45, 449Google Scholar. Wren too was influenced by Andrewes, having been his protégé at Pembroke and his chaplain. Wren was also close to Laud, and to Charles, who made him dean of the chapel royal in 1636. Their interrelationship is neatly reflected in the scene in 1623 when Laud, Andrewes and Neile summoned Wren to report on the religious views of Prince Charles, to whom he was chaplain: D.N.B., LXIII, 94–6; Laud, , Works, VI, 456, 575–8Google Scholar; Trevor-Roper, , Archbishop Laud, pp. 67, 172, 313, 343Google Scholar; Tyacke, , Anti-Calvinists, pp. 113–14Google Scholar.

119 Oman, C., English church plate 597–1830 (Oxford, 1957), pp. 145–7Google Scholar.

120 P.R.O., C115/N9/8849. H.R.O., MS AL17/1, sub 1626. Laud had another account of Andrewes's chapel: Prynne, W., Canterburies doome (London, 1646), pp. 120–4Google Scholar.

121 Buckeridge, , Sermon, p. 21Google Scholar. The viscount's papers include copies of Andrewes's will and two of his letters: B.L., Add. MS 11055, fos. 9–12.

122 For the relationship between Laud and Scudamore see especially their letters, P.R.O., C115/M24/7758–63, 7765–7776, printed with several mistakes in Trevor-Roper, , Archbishop Laud, pp. 437–56Google Scholar.

123 Laud, , Works, III, 175, VI, 366–8Google Scholar.

124 P.R.O., SP16/397/57.

125 Laud to Scudamore, 14 July 1626 and 29 March 1634, P.R.O., C115/M24/7771, Laud, , Works, VI, 367Google Scholar. Parry to Scudamore, 28 May 1634, P.R.O., C115/M35/8421.

126 Prynne, , Canterburies doome, pp. 59–62, 466Google Scholar. Laud himself claimed that some at least of the windows had been erected by Archbishop Morton: Laud, , Works, IV, 198–200, 209–10Google Scholar. Some of the bills for work done in Laud's chapel at Lambeth, including painting, glass (some of it painted) and repairing the organ, are P.R.O., SP16/288/25, fo. 64; SP16/301/68, fo. 154, SP16/302/8–9; SP16/325/56, fo. 161.

127 P.R.O., C115/M12/7223, fo. 65; B.L., Add. MS 11044, fo. 93r. Hezekiah was a pious Old Testament king who purged Judaism of many corruptions: II Kings 18: 1–6, II Chronicles 29–31.

128 Hill, , Economic problems, p. 197Google Scholar. Legg, , English orders, p. 152Google Scholar.

129 Laud, , Works, III, 188Google Scholar. Hill, , Economic problems, p. 318Google Scholar. Noël d'Argonne (under the pseudonym M. de Vigneul-Marville), Mélanges d'histoire et de litterature (3 vols., Rotterdam, 1700–1702), I, 152–3Google Scholar, which refers to ‘les biens Ecclesiastiques’. Oldmixon translated this as ‘the Revenues of the Ecclesiasticks’: [Oldmixon, John], The critical history of England, ecclesiastical and civil (2 vols., London, 1724–1726), II, 73Google Scholar.

130 ‘Inducements for generall Colleccons to redeeme Impropriacons to the Church: 1629’, miscellaneous papers of William Trumbull I, 1612–34, Berkshire R.O., Trumbell Add. MS 31, (unnumbered). For the feofees for impropriations see Calder, I. M., Activities of the puritan faction of the Church of England, 1625–33 (London, 1957)Google Scholar. Two bills were considered by parliament in 1628 which would have augmented clergy stipends, the one by buying in impropriations, (this had also been considered in 1626), the other by making it easier to return impropriate tithes to ministers; neither made it to the statute book. Keeler, M. F. et al. (eds.), Proceedings in parliament 1628 (6 vols., New Haven, 1977–1983), II, 47–8, III, 4, 7–8, 10, 17–19, 122, 135, 301–2, 310, 557, IV, 331–2, 334–5, 338, 342, v, 95, 112–17, 264, 344–6, 349–51Google Scholar, also Bod.L., MS Carte 125, fo. 263r. In parliament in 1610 the archbishop of Canterbury had suggested that a subsidy be granted for the redeeming of impropriations: Bod.L., MS Carte 77, fos. 125–8, 133–4.

131 Laud, , Works, III, 255Google Scholar, Rodes, R. E., Lay authority and the reformation in the English church (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1982), pp. 221–2Google Scholar.

132 Hill, , Economic problems, p. 318Google Scholarand n. 2; Bod.L., MS Carte 103, no. 166, fo. 396r. Cardinal Richelieu allegedly said that England's problems with Scotland were her punishment for sacrilege. In a letter to Scudamore Jeremy Stephens agreed, (‘we are now vnder the rod’ for our sacrilege), remembering a story of Richard Mountagu, ‘excellently learned, & much wised in this argument’, who would often say that ‘our kingdome had not yet paid for their sacrilege’: B.L., Add. MS 11044, fo. 233V.

133 Laud to Bramhall, 16 Jan, 1635, , H.M.C., Hastings MSS, IV, 64Google Scholar.

134 Hill, , Economic problems, p. 332Google Scholar.

135 See the correspondence between Laud and Bramhall in , H.M.C., Hastings MSS, IV, 55–78Google Scholar, and Laud, , Works, VI, 307–9, VII, 35–6, 53–4Google Scholar.

136 Prynne, , Canterburies doome, pp. 62–3Google Scholar. P.R.O., SP78/98, fos. 307r, 308r.

137 According to Prynne, a n English doctor told Panzani's friend that Charles approved of auricular confession: Canterburies doome, p. 189. Gentleman's Magazine, XXV (1755), 70Google Scholar.

138 P.R.O., C115/M14/7312.

139 Sharpe, K., ‘The image of virtue: the court and household of Charles I, 1625–1642’, in Starkey, D. et al. , The English court: from the wars of the roses to the civil war (Harlow, 1987), p. 241Google Scholar n. 88, and Sharpe, ‘The personal rule of Charles I’, in Tomlinson, H. (ed.), Before the English civil war (London 1983), pp. 62–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

140 Prynne, , Canterburies doome, pp. 62–3Google Scholar; Laud, , The history of the troubles and tryal (London, 1695), p. 313Google Scholar, Rimbault, E. F. (ed.), The old cheque-book, or book of remembrance, of the chapel royal (Camden society, new series III, 1872), p. 126Google ScholarPubMed.

141 The window is a collection of glass from the fifteenth to the seventeenth centuries assembled in 1630. It is inscribed with the initials R.S., usually interpreted as Richard Scudamore but in fact Rowland Scudamore of Caradoc Court, Sellack: , R.C.H.M., Herefordshire, I, 23Google Scholar.

142 Foster, , Alumni Oxonienses, IV, 1327Google Scholar. Macray, W. D., Register of the members of St. Mary Magdalen College, Oxford (new series, 8 vols., London, 1894–1915), III, 112–16Google Scholar. Bloxam, J. R., A register of presidents, fellows … and other members of Saint Mary Magdalen College (8 vols., Oxford, 1853–1885), II, lxxxixGoogle Scholar. Stonehouse's sermon at Langton's funeral (Magdalen College, MS 350, cols. 123–50) makes no reference to any beautifying of the chapel, but it was adorned by Langton's successor, Accepted Frewen. For Cecil's views see Pauline Croft, ‘The religion of Robert Cecil’, Historical Journal, forthcoming; I am very grateful to Dr Croft for help and references, and for bringing Langton to my attention.

143 B.L., Add. MS 11055, fos. 182v–183r. For a similar exposition of the law of patronage see Babington, Gervase, A verie frvitevill exposition of the commandements (London, 1615)Google Scholar, sigs. A3 ff., in his Workes (London, 1615)Google ScholarPubMed.

144 Wall, Sermon, sigs. A2V–A3V.

145 P.R.O., C115/M14/7313, C115/M12/7223. Scudamore was consciously echoing Laud's claim that he was endeavouring to settle the church ‘to the Rules of its first Reformation’: Laud, , Speech, p. 4Google Scholar, in Laud, , Works, VI, 42Google Scholar.

146 Gibson, , View, pp. 173–4Google Scholar.