MarginaliaAn. 1555. Iune.neyther speake for hym selfe, nor did (as they sayd) sufficiently aunswer them by the other, to auoid the name of an heretick: first witnesses
In the 1563 edition, Foxe published these depositions; in all subsequent editions he simply listed the witnesses. This was another case where documents were elimated from the 1570 edition due to a shortage of paper.
This is Foxe's mistake; Tooley was (posthumously) condemned for heresy on 4 May 1555 (PRO, C/85/127, fol. 7r).
The Rerum contains an acccount of Haukes's background and life (p. 445), which is reprinted in all editions of the Acts and Monuments. The Rerum continues with a relatively brief account of Haukes's final examination by Bonner, his condemnation and his journey back to Essex to be burned (Rerum, pp. 445-46). This material was reprinted in the 1563 edition (on p. 1162) but dropped thereafter to be replaced by a more detailed account. The Rerum also contains an account of Haukes's execution, which was reprinted in all versions of the Acts and Monuments and his two 'private' examinations by Bonner (Rerum, pp. 446-62). All of this was fairly typical of the material Grindal assembled for the Rerum: a collection of documents, usually written by the martyr, supplemented with biographical material from oral sources. Two copies of Haukes's account of his 'private' examinations remain in Foxe's papers: BL, Lansdowne 389, fos. 13r-27r and 171r-182v.[Back to Top]
The account of Haukes in the 1563 edition was essentially a reprinting of the material in the Rerum, although the arrangement of this material was different and rather unusual: Haukes's examinations were printed before the details of Haukes's life and martyrdom were given. In the 1570 edition, Foxe rearranged the order of material, placing it in chronological order, with Haukes's life now followed by his examination and then by the details of his martyrdom. Foxe also replaced the public examinations of Haukes by Bonner, and the martyr's condemnation, with material drawn from Bonner's official record. (This material, probably kept in a court book, is now lost).[Back to Top]
Foxe reprinted the 1570 account of Haukes without any significant alteration in the third and fourth editions of the Acts and Monuments.
Many of the glosses draw attention to stages in the narrative and also matters under discussion; indeed Hawkes' is one of the more disputational lives, and the margins reflect this fact. Some of the glosses take specific points made by Hawkes in arguments with his interrogators and draw out the general principles inherent in them ('Fecknam maketh euery act spoken of in the new Testament to be a ceremony'; 'The wordes of Christ are to be vnderstand, not as he spake , but as he ment thē'). The gloss 'Other doctrine taught in the Church of Rome then euer Paule taught' makes Hawkes' point clearer for the reader, and there are also glosses highlighting poor attempts at exegesis by Bonner and Fecknam ('See how Boner proueth holy water by the scripture'; 'Elizeus put salt in the water, not to washe away sinne, but onely to make the water sweete'; 'Boner proueth holy bread by the 5. loaues and 3. fishes'; 'Fecknams reason lyeth in Paules Breches'). In short, Foxe's margins are in some respects similar to those we find in the Oxford disputations sections; he also includes a comment of his own about the sacrament that is not indicated by the text ('It is his sacramentall body, or the Sacramēt of his body, but not his true body'). Bonner gets his usual criticism, his pride and anger both drawing marginal comments ('Boner looked to be curtised'; 'Boner in a fume with Thomas Haukes'), while another gloss uses the disparaging term 'coniure' in relation to his persuasion of Baget ('Boner taketh Baget with him aside to coniure him'). A gloss emphasises his assertion that he is no preacher ('B. Boner iudgeth other men by his own sore'). The limitations of papist debating skills are highlighted ('Boner whē he can not ouercome by doctrine, goeth about to oppresse by authoritie'; 'Fecknam falleth out of his matter to rayling'). The solidity of Hawkes' profession is emphasised in the use twice of the gloss 'Thomas Haukes builded his fayth vpon no man'. The gloss 'Thomas Haukes standing at the stake reasoneth with the Lord Rich' uses the surprising term 'reasoneth' to describe Hawkes' mode of speaking at the stake: a more biblical term might have been expected. There are various errors of placing, with 1570 (as is usual) more accurate in comparison to later editions.[Back to Top]
As touching therefore hys education and order of lyfe, MarginaliaThe lyfe and conuersation of Tho. Haukes.fyrst he was of the countrey of Essex, borne of an honest stocke, in callyng and profession a Courtier, brought vp daintely from hys chyldhoode, and lyke a Gentleman. Besides that, he was of such comelynes and stature, so well endued wyth excellent qualities, that he myght seeme on euery side a man (as it were) made for the purpose. But hys gentle behauiour toward other, and especially hys feruent study and singular loue vnto true religion and godlynes dyd surmount all þe reast. Wherin as God did singularly adorne hym: euen so he beyng such a valiant Martyr of God, may seeme to nobilitate þe whole cōpany of other holy Martyrs, and as a bright starre, to make the church of God and hys truth, of them selues bright and cleare, more gloriously to shyne by hys example. For if MarginaliaThe victory of Martyrs, is the triumph of Christ. Ambrose.þe conquests of Martyrs are the triūphes of Christ (as S. Ambrose doth notably and truely wryte) vndoubtedly Christ in few men hath eyther conquered more notably, or triumphed more gloriously, then in thys yong man: hee stoode so wysely in hys cause, so godly in hys lyfe, and so constantly in hys death.[Back to Top]
But to the declaration of the matter: first thys Haukes, following the guise of the Court, as he grew in yeares, MarginaliaTho. Haukes first in seruice with the Earle of Oxford.entred seruice wyth the Lord of Oxforde, where he remayned a good space, beyng ther ryght wel esteemed and loued of all the houshold, so long as Edward the sixt lyued. But he dying, al thinges began to go backward, religion to decay, godlynes not onely to waxe colde, but also to bee in daunger euerywhere, and chiefly in the houses of great men. Haukes mysliking the state of thinges, and especially in such mens houses, rather then he would chaunge the profession of[Back to Top]
true godlynes which he had tasted, thought to chaūge the place: and so MarginaliaHaukes compelled to leaue the the Earle of Oxfords house.forsaking the noble mans house, departed home to hys own home, where more freely hee might geue him self to God, & vse hys own conscience.
I.e., the Devil.
This sentence marks the beginning of Haukes's own account of his 'private' examinations. In the 1570 edition, Foxe rewrote this material slightly by changing the narrative from the first person to the third.
This letter was part of Haukes's narrative does not come from any official archive.
MarginaliaThe Earles letter to Boner.MOst reuerēd father in God, be it knowen vnto you that I haue sent you one Thomas Haukes, dwelling in the Countie of Essex, who hath a child that hath remained vnchristined more thē three weekes, who beyng vppon the same examined, hath denyed to haue it Baptised, as it is now vsed in the Church: wherupon I haue sent him to your good Lordship to vse as ye thinke best, by your good discretion.[Back to Top]
When the Byshop had perused this letter, and afterward read it to M. Haukes, he hearyng the same, thought with hym selfe that he should not be very well vsed, seyng he was put to his discretion. Then wrote the Byshop a letter agayne to him that sent the prisoner, with many great thankes for his diligence in settyng forth the Queenes proceedynges. Then began the Bishop to enter communication with M. Haukes, first askyng what should moue hym to leaue his child vnchristened so long. To whom M. Haukes aunswered thus agayne as foloweth.[Back to Top]
MarginaliaPriuate talke or conference betwene Maister Haukes and Bish. Boner.Haukes. Because we be bound to do nothyng contrary to the word of God.
Boner. Why? Baptisme is commaunded by the word of God.
Haukes. His institution therin I do not deny.
Boner. What deny ye then?
Haukes. I deny all thynges inuented and deuised by man.
Boner. What thynges be those that be deuised by man, that ye be so offended withall?
Haukes. Your MarginaliaMans inuentions added to Baptisme.Oyle, Creame, Salt, Spettle, Candle, and coniuryng of water. &c.
Boner. Wil ye deny that, which all þe whole world, and MarginaliaThe forfathers.your father hath bene contented withall?
Haukes. What my father and all the whole world haue done, I haue nothyng to do withall: but what God hath commaunded me to do, to that stand I.
Boner. The Catholicke Church hath taught it.
Haukes. What is the Catholicke Church?
Boner. MarginaliaThe Catholicke Church.It is the faythfull congregation where soeuer it be dispersed throughout the whole world.
Haukes. Who is the head therof?
Boner. Christ is the head therof.
Haukes. Are we taught in Christ, or in the Church now.
Boner. Haue ye not read in the. viij. of Ioh. where he sayd, he would send his cōforter which should teach you all thynges?
Haukes. I graunt you it is so, that he would send his comforter, but to what end? forsooth to this ende,