Geoffrey Gibbons. The Political Career of Thomas Wriothesley, First Earl of Southampton 1501-1550, Henry VIII's Last Chancellor.

(Studies in British History, 64.) Lewiston, NY and Queenston, ON: The Edwin Mellon Press, 2001. xviii + 334 pp. + 1 color pl. index, illus, bibl. $99.95. ISBN: 0-7734-7415-3.

Although Thomas Wriothesley was centrally involved in Tudor governance and high politics from the early 1530s until shortly before his death in 1550, he has received only sporadic attention from historians. The present work, a revised Ph.D. thesis by a retired lawyer, seeks to fill this gap. It will not fundamentally alter our views of the period, but it does supply new information and a fresh perspective on important detailed topics, such as the operation of court faction and administration of wartime taxation.

The son and grandson of royal heralds, Wriothesley began his career in the household of Stephen Gardiner, before transferring to that of Cardinal Wolsey, where he worked under the immediate supervision of Thomas Cromwell. In the 1530s he became Cromwell's indispensable assistant, handling correspondence, drafting reports on government business, playing an active role in diplomacy, and generally serving as "an understudy in every clerical office controlled by his master" (26). He rapidly distanced himself from Cromwell when the latter fell from power in 1540, however, and was soon appointed to the new office of Secretary of State. Four years later he became Lord Chancellor. A tireless administrator, he emerged in this period as the main workhorse of royal governance and arguably the leading personality on the council. In addition to his role as chancellor--which involved presiding over the Court of Chancery and supervising the drafting of proclamations--he was effectively the chief financial manager of the wars against Scotland and France that dominated Henry's last years. He oversaw the disastrous debasement of the coinage of 1544-46 and supervised the collection of increasingly heavy taxation. He remained active in diplomacy and the formulation of foreign policy, normally as a supporter of pro-imperial policies. In alliance with Gardiner and Edmund Bonner, he also fought actively against further religious reform. Gibbons believes this reflected a change in attitude, since he had previously appeared sympathetic to Cromwell's religious policies. In 1546 the chancellor spearheaded a campaign to discredit Queen Catherine Parr and other reformers at court by convicting their proteges of heresy. Although the heresy hunt claimed several victims, it collapsed when a court headed by Wriothesley rashly condemned a privy chamber servant and close companion of the king named George Blagge without obtaining Henry's prior consent. Blagge appealed to the king and Wriothesley was humiliatingly instructed to draft and seal his pardon.

After Henry's death in 1547 Wriothesley quickly found himself isolated in a government dominated by committed reformers. An open clash with Protector Somerset led to his dismissal as chancellor and removal from the council. But he continued to maneuver behind the scenes, while cultivating a closer relationship with the government's second leading personality, John Dudley, Earl of Warwick. Having rejoined the council in 1548, he participated in the suppression of unrest that erupted across much of England the next year and the conciliar coup under Warwick's leadership that removed Somerset from power. In return for his support, Wriothesley expected a halt to religious reform and the rehabilitation of his conservative allies, Gardiner and Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk.

But Warwick decided to block this conservative resurgence, which would have compromised his own position, precipitating a bitter struggle over power. Wriothesley attempted to use the investigations into Somerset's abuses of power to implicate Warwick and destroy both men. But he was outmaneuvered by his rival. By this time his health had deteriorated and he was allowed to slip into retirement for the few remaining months of his life.

As Gibbons remarks, the sources provide few glimpses into Wriothesley's personality, although he was plainly a tough politician, capable of ruthlessness and vindictiveness. The documentation may yet permit a more thorough reconstruction of the administrative methods and political crosscurrents of the 1540s, especially involving relationships between diplomacy, conciliar faction, and the conduct of war. The reader sometimes wishes for a bolder and more expansive approach that would shed more light on some of the larger developments in which Wriothesley participated. But this remains a workmanlike and useful study.

R. MALCOLM SMUTS

University of Massachusetts, Boston