



Produced by David Clarke and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)






########################################################################

                        Transcriber’s Notes


Hyphenation and punctuation have been corrected and standardised.
Cromwell’s letters, however, have been fully retained according to the
original text; no changes in spelling have been applied here.

Numbered ranges have been expanded in full, i.e. 1595-6 is now
1595-1596. Dittoes in the Table of Contents have been eliminated by
insertion of appropriate text. Internal references have been adapted
to match the numbering scheme used in this electronic version.

The following passages have been changed:

  p. 28: 'England and Francis' → 'England and France'
  Footnote 240: 'Harl. MSS 6, 148' → 'Harl. MSS 6,148'

Underscores have been used to highlight _italic_ text. The caret symbol
(^) represents superscript characters; multiple characters have been
grouped using a pair of curly brackets (^{text}).

########################################################################




[Illustration: THOMAS CROMWELL

FROM A PICTURE IN THE BODLEIAN LIBRARY]




                        LIFE AND LETTERS OF
                          THOMAS CROMWELL

                                 BY
                       ROGER BIGELOW MERRIMAN
                     A.M. HARV., B.LITT. OXON.


                   WITH A PORTRAIT AND FACSIMILE


                               VOL. I
                       LIFE, LETTERS TO 1535


                               OXFORD
                       AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
                                1902

                         HENRY FROWDE, M.A.
              _PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD_
                         LONDON, EDINBURGH
                              NEW YORK




                              PREFACE


This book is an attempt to present the life of Thomas Cromwell as a
statesman, and to estimate his work without religious bias. Though it
would certainly be difficult to overrate his importance in the history
of the Church of England, I maintain that the motives that inspired his
actions were invariably political, and that the many ecclesiastical
changes carried through under his guidance were but incidents of his
administration, not ends in themselves. Consequently any attempt to
judge him from a distinctively religious standpoint, whether Catholic or
Protestant, can hardly fail, it seems to me, to mislead the student and
obscure the truth. I cannot agree, on the other hand, with those who
have represented Cromwell as a purely selfish political adventurer, the
subservient instrument of a wicked master, bent only on his own gain. It
seems to me as idle to disparage his patriotism and statesmanship, as it
is to try to make him out a hero of the Reformation. He merits a place
far higher than that of most men of his type, a type essentially
characteristic of the sixteenth century, a type of which the Earl of
Warwick in England and Maurice of Saxony on the Continent are striking
examples, a type that profoundly influenced the destinies of
Protestantism, but to which theological issues were either a mere
nothing, or else totally subordinate to political considerations.

It has been justly said that Cromwell’s correspondence is our chief
source of information for the period immediately following the breach
with Rome. To transcribe _in extenso_ the letters he received would be
almost the task of a lifetime; for they form the bulk of the enormous
mass of material with which the editors of the Calendars of State Papers
for the years 1533-1540 have had to deal. But the number of extant
letters he wrote is, comparatively speaking, extremely small; it has
therefore been possible to make full copies of them in every case, and I
trust that the many advantages--linguistic as well as historical--that
can only be secured by complete, and as far as possible accurate
transcriptions of the originals, will be accepted as sufficient reason
for editing this collection of documents, twenty-one of which have
neither been printed nor calendared before. The rules that have been
observed in transcription will be found in the Prefatory Note (vol. i.
p. 311). The Calendar references to the more important letters received
by Cromwell, where they bear directly on those he wrote, are given in
the notes at the end of the second volume.

My warmest thanks are due to Mr. F. York Powell, Regius Professor of
Modern History in the University of Oxford, who has guided me throughout
in matter, form, and style; and to my friend and master Mr. A. L. Smith,
Fellow of Balliol College, whose advice and encouragement have been an
inspiration from first to last. It is not easy for me to express how
much I have depended on their suggestions and criticism. I am indebted
to Mr. Owen Edwards, Fellow of Lincoln College, for indispensable help
in the early stages of my work. The main plan of this book is in many
respects similar to that of his Lothian Essay for the year 1887, which I
regret that he has never published. My grateful acknowledgements are
also due to Mr. James Gairdner of the Public Record Office for
information about Cromwell’s early life; to Professor Dr. Max Lenz, of
the University of Berlin, for helpful suggestions in connexion with the
Anglo-German negotiations in the years 1537-1540; and to Mr. G. T.
Lapsley, of the University of California, for similar services in regard
to the Pilgrimage of Grace, and the reorganization of the North after
the suppression of the rebellion.

I beg to express my appreciation of the kindness of the Duke of Rutland,
the Marquess of Salisbury, Earl Spencer, Lord Calthorpe, William
Berington, Esq., and Alfred Henry Huth, Esq., in giving me access to the
manuscripts in their private collections.

In conclusion, I wish to thank the officials of the Public Record
Office, British Museum, Heralds’ College of Arms, and Bodleian Library,
for facilitating my work in every way; more especially Messrs. Hubert
Hall, R. H. Brodie, E. Salisbury, and F. B. Bickley, who have repeatedly
aided me in my search for uncalendared letters and continental
documents, and in deciphering the most difficult manuscripts I have had
to consult.

                                                            R. B. M.

  BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD.
            _February, 1902._




                              CONTENTS


                              VOLUME I

  CHAPTER                                                          PAGE
     I.  THE ANCESTRY AND EARLY LIFE OF THOMAS
           CROMWELL                                                    1

         APPENDIX. PASSAGES FROM CHAPUYS, POLE,
           BANDELLO, AND FOXE                                         17

    II.  THE PARLIAMENT OF 1523                                       27

   III. WOLSEY’S SERVANT                                              47

         APPENDIX. THE WILL OF THOMAS CROMWELL                        56

    IV.  THE FALL OF THE CARDINAL                                     64

     V.  THE CHARACTER AND OPPORTUNITY OF
           THOMAS CROMWELL                                            77

    VI.  IN THE KING’S SERVICE                                        89

         APPENDIX. THE SUPPLICATION OF THE
           COMMONS AGAINST THE ORDINARIES                            104

   VII.  INTERNAL POLICY                                             112

  VIII.  IRELAND, WALES, SCOTLAND, CALAIS                            147

    IX.  THE MONASTERIES                                             165

     X.  THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE, 1536                               180

    XI.  CARDINAL POLE                                               202

   XII.  THE FOREIGN POLICY                                          213

  XIII.  THE CATHOLIC REACTION AND THE ALLIANCE
           WITH CLEVES                                               242

         APPENDIX. REPORTS OF THE LUTHERAN
           AMBASSADORS TO ENGLAND IN 1539 AND
           1540                                                      272

   XIV. THE FALL OF THOMAS CROMWELL                                  281

         APPENDIX. PASSAGES FROM FOXE: CROMWELL’S
           SPEECH AND PRAYER ON THE
           SCAFFOLD                                                  303

    XV. THE WORK OF THOMAS CROMWELL                                  305

  PREFATORY NOTE TO CROMWELL’S LETTERS                               311

  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1523-1530                                      313
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1531                                           335
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1532                                           343
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1533                                           352
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1534                                           372
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1535                                           396


                             VOLUME II

  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1536                                             1
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1537                                            50
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1538                                           111
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1539                                           166
  CROMWELL’S LETTERS: 1540                                           244

  AN ITINERARY OF THOMAS CROMWELL, 1523-1540                         279

  A LIST OF THE MINOR PREFERMENTS OF THOMAS
    CROMWELL, AND A DESCRIPTION OF HIS ARMS
    AND CREST                                                        283

  NOTES TO LETTERS                                                   285

  LIST OF AUTHORITIES                                                313

  INDEX                                                              319




                           ILLUSTRATIONS


  PORTRAIT OF THOMAS CROMWELL                  _Frontispiece to_ vol. i

  FACSIMILE OF A LETTER FROM THOMAS CROMWELL
    TO LORD LISLE, AUG. 30, 1538              _Frontispiece to_ vol. ii




                      LIFE OF THOMAS CROMWELL




                             CHAPTER I

           THE ANCESTRY AND EARLY LIFE OF THOMAS CROMWELL


The manor of Wimbledon comprises the parishes of Wimbledon, Putney,
Roehampton, Mortlake, and East Sheen, and parts of Wandsworth and
Barnes[1]. In West Saxon times it was one of the estates of the see of
Canterbury, but after the Conquest it was seized by Odo, the high-handed
Bishop of Bayeux: in 1071, however, it was recovered by Lanfranc, and
with one trifling interruption in the reign of Richard II., it remained
in the possession of the archbishopric until 1535. In that year Cranmer
surrendered it to Henry VIII. in exchange for the priory of St.
Rhadegund in Dover, and a little later the King granted it to Thomas
Cromwell[2], who was born there some fifty years before, the son of a
well-to-do blacksmith, brewer, and fuller. The early history of the
manor of Wimbledon is almost unknown, for we do not possess its Court
Rolls prior to the year 1461: they were probably lost or destroyed
during the Wars of the Roses. After 1461, however, they are continuous,
with the exception of the years 1473 and 1474.

An entry in these rolls, written in the year 1475, states that ‘Walter
Smyth and his father keep thirty sheep on Putney Common, where they have
no common[3].’ A number of subsequent mentions of this same Walter Smyth
shows that he was also called Walter Cromwell. The name Walter Cromwell
occurs more than ninety times in the rolls, and the name Walter Smyth at
least forty times. That both these names stand for the same person is
proved by one entry written, ‘Walter Cromwell alias Walter Smyth,’ by
two written, ‘Walter Smyth alias Cromwell,’ and by five written, ‘Walter
Cromwell alias Smyth.’ Who then was this Walter Cromwell, whence did he
come, and how did he acquire this double name?

The Cromwell family did not originate in Wimbledon. An entry in the
Close Roll of Edward IV. states that in the year 1461 John Cromwell, son
of William Cromwell, late of Norwell in Nottinghamshire, surrendered his
right in Parkersplace, Kendalsland and other property there to Master
John Porter, prebendary of Palishall[4]. Mr. John Phillips of Putney
further informs us that nine years before John Cromwell gave up his
lands in Norwell, he was granted the twenty-one years’ lease of a
fulling-mill and house in Wimbledon by Archbishop Kempe, lord of the
manor, and had moved there with his family[5]. It would be interesting
to know what Mr. Phillips’ authority for this statement is:
unfortunately he has given no reference for it. But whatever the precise
date and circumstances of their change of home, there can be little
doubt that the Cromwells migrated to Wimbledon from Norwell some time
before 1461. There is plenty of evidence in the Court Rolls to show that
Walter Smyth alias Cromwell was the son of John Cromwell, and the entry
of 1475 proves that they were both in Wimbledon in that year. The family
in Nottinghamshire from which they sprung was well-known and well-off;
both John Cromwell’s father William and his grandfather Ralph were
persons of wealth and position there[6].

Several entries in the Court Rolls indicate that John Cromwell’s wife
was the sister of a certain William Smyth, who is often mentioned as
‘William Smyth armourer,’ and sometimes as ‘William Armourer.’ It seems
probable that this William Smyth came with John Cromwell to Wimbledon
from Norwell, and the entries in the manorial records show that he lived
there with his brother-in-law. There is also reason to believe that the
latter’s son Walter was apprenticed to him during his younger days, and
so acquired the name Smyth.

Walter Cromwell grew up as a brewer, smith, and fuller in Putney. He had
an elder brother named John, who moved to Lambeth and settled down there
to a quiet and prosperous life as a brewer, later, according to Chapuys,
becoming cook to the Archbishop of Canterbury[7]. Walter, however,
remained in Wimbledon, and appears to have been a most quarrelsome and
riotous character. Most of the entries in the Court Rolls concerning him
are records of small fines incurred for petty offences. Forty-eight
times between 1475 and 1501 was he forced to pay sixpence for breaking
the assize of ale. In order to prevent the sale of bad beer in those
days, an ale-taster was appointed to pass, or condemn as unfit, all
brewing in the parish. Walter Cromwell did not go to the ale-taster
before he drew and sold his beer, and for failing so to do was fined as
aforesaid. There is also record that he was not seldom drunk. In 1477 a
penalty of twenty pence was inflicted on him for assaulting and drawing
blood from William Michell, and he and his father were very often
brought before the court on the charge of ‘overburthening’ the public
land in Putney with their cattle, and cutting more than their share of
the furze and thorns there[8]. But in spite of all these petty
misdemeanours, Walter Cromwell appears to have been a man of property
and influence in Wimbledon, and the Court Rolls in 1480 show that he
then possessed two virgates of land in Putney parish. To these were
added six more virgates in 1500 by grant of Archbishop Morton[9]. Walter
Cromwell was also made Constable of Putney in 1495[10], and his name
constantly occurs in the Court Rolls as decenarius and juryman[11].
Towards the end of his life, however, his character appears to have
become so bad that he forfeited all his position and property in
Wimbledon. In 1514 he ‘falsely and fraudulently erased the evidences and
terrures of the lord,’ so that the bedell was commanded ‘to seize into
the lord’s hands all his copyholds held of the lord and to answer the
lord of the issue[12].’ This is the last mention of the name of Walter
Cromwell in the Wimbledon Manor Rolls.

Walter Cromwell’s wife was the aunt of a man named Nicholas Glossop, of
Wirksworth in Derbyshire[13]. Mr. Phillips gives no reference for his
statements that she was the daughter of a yeoman named Glossop, and that
she was residing in Putney at the house of an attorney named John
Welbeck, at the time of her marriage with Walter Cromwell in 1474[14];
but we have no evidence that these assertions are incorrect. At least
two daughters and one son were born to Walter Cromwell. He may have had
other children, but as there was no registration of births, marriages,
or deaths in England until 1538, we can only be certain of these three,
of whom there are mentions in the Court Rolls and in other contemporary
records. The eldest daughter Katherine, who was probably born about the
year 1477, grew up and married a young Welshman named Morgan
Williams[15], whose family had come to Putney from Llanishen in
Glamorganshire. The Williamses were a very important family in Putney,
and John, the eldest of them, was a successful lawyer and accountant,
and steward to Lord Scales, who was then in possession of a residence
and some land in Putney parish. The youngest daughter of Walter Cromwell
was named Elizabeth. She married a sheep-farmer named Wellyfed, who
later joined his business to that of his father-in-law[16]. Christopher,
the son of Elizabeth Cromwell and Wellyfed, grew up and was later sent
to school with his cousin Gregory, son of his mother’s brother
Thomas[17]. We are now in a position to examine the many conflicting
statements concerning the son of Walter Cromwell, the subject of this
essay.

The traditional sources of information about Thomas Cromwell’s early
life are the characteristic but somewhat confusing stories of the
martyrologist Foxe, founded to some extent upon a novel of the Italian
author Bandello, the meagre though probably trustworthy accounts
contained in Cardinal Pole’s ‘Apologia ad Carolum Quintum,’ a letter of
Chapuys to Granvelle written November 21, 1535, and a few scattered
statements in the chroniclers of the period. To these were added in 1880
and 1882 the results of the researches of Mr. John Phillips in the
Wimbledon Manor Rolls[18]. Mr. Phillips has certainly brought to light a
large number of interesting facts about the ancestry and family of
Thomas Cromwell: it is the more unfortunate that he should have gone so
far astray in some of his statements concerning the man himself. He is
surely correct in assuming Thomas to be the son of Walter Cromwell; the
evidence afforded by the State Papers leaves no doubt of this. He is
also right in stating that the name Thomas Cromwell does not occur in
the Court Rolls. But it is more difficult to believe the theory which
Mr. Phillips has evolved from these data. As he finds no entry
concerning Thomas Cromwell in the manorial records, he seeks for some
mention of him under another appellation, and hits upon that of Thomas
Smyth as the most likely, owing to the fact that his father was called
by both surnames. He finds two entries in the Court Rolls concerning
Thomas Smyth, and assumes that they refer to Thomas Cromwell. These
entries occur in the records of Feb. 26, 1504, and of May 20 in the same
year. The first states that ‘Richard Williams came to the court and
surrendered into the hands of the lord two whole virgates of land in
‹Roe›hampton, one called Purycroft and the other called Williams, to the
use of Thomas Smyth, his heirs and assigns’; the second, that ‘Richard
Williams assaulted Thomas [Smyth] and beat the same Thomas against the
peace of the lord the King,’ and further that ‘Thomas Smyth came to the
court and surrendered into the hands of the lord two whole virgates of
land in Roehampton, one called Purycroft and the other called Williams,
to the use of David Doby, his heirs and assigns[19].’ Mr. Phillips has
made these entries the basis for an attack on the veracity of many of
the best-known stories of Bandello and Foxe concerning the early life of
our subject, but his whole case hangs on the assumption that Thomas
Smyth and Thomas Cromwell were one and the same man, and until he can
prove this ingenious but somewhat improbable theory his arguments cannot
be supported. He discusses at length the two entries in the Court Rolls,
adducing them as a proof of the falsity of the accounts which assert
Cromwell to have been in Italy previous to 1504, but concluding that the
record that Thomas Smyth disposed of his lands in Putney in May of that
year indicates that Thomas Cromwell left England at that time. To
corroborate this last theory he refers to the story of Chapuys that
Cromwell was ill-behaved when young, and was forced after an
imprisonment to leave the country, and also asserts, in order still
further to strengthen his case, that ‘the Court Rolls contain nothing
more respecting Thomas Cromwell than what we have already stated[20].’

It seems very extraordinary that Mr. Phillips should make this last
statement in view of his readiness to jump at the conclusion that Thomas
Smyth and Thomas Cromwell are identical. ‘Thomas Smyth,’ as a very
cursory examination of the Court Rolls will show, is mentioned therein
every year from 1493 to 1529 (inclusive), except in 1494 and 1516. As
there is certain evidence that Thomas Cromwell was in other places
during many of the years that Thomas Smyth was in Wimbledon, it is clear
that the two names cannot always stand for the same man. The question
which now arises is this: were there two Thomas Smyths, one of them
Thomas Cromwell and the other some other member of the Smyth family,
perhaps a descendant of William Smyth, armourer? Or is the Thomas Smyth
mentioned in the Court Rolls one man, and not Thomas Cromwell at all?

The second theory seems on the whole more probable than the first. There
are no contradictory statements about Thomas Smyth in the rolls, nor is
the name mentioned twice in any of the lists of the Homage or Frank
Pledge. Moreover had there been two Thomas Smyths, one of whom was
entitled to the name Cromwell, he would almost certainly have been
called so, in order to avoid confusion. On the other hand, it scarcely
seems likely that the son of Walter Cromwell should not be mentioned at
all in the Court Rolls. But this may be partially explained by Chapuys’
account of his youthful wildness and early imprisonment; it seems quite
probable that he was a mere boy when he left his home. The evidence
which we possess certainly seems to strengthen the conclusion that there
was but one Thomas Smyth: the man mentioned in the Court Rolls by that
name was probably a descendant of William Smyth, armourer[21]. Surely
none of the entries in the manorial records concerning Thomas Smyth can
be said to prove anything conclusive concerning the early life of the
subject of this essay. It has been the fashion to decry Bandello and
Foxe and to disbelieve all their stories, because of the undoubted
confusion of dates which vitiates their testimony. But if no reliance
can be placed on them, or on Pole, Chapuys, and the chronicles of the
period, must we not confess that our knowledge of the early years of our
subject’s life must reduce itself to an interrogation point? Let us
guard ourselves against accepting with implicit faith the statements of
these authors, but let us not cast them aside as utterly worthless. Let
us rather recognize that they still remain our most trustworthy sources
of information concerning the early life of Thomas Cromwell, and
therefore make a careful attempt to glean from their very confusing
statements the more probable facts concerning him.

None of the different accounts sheds any light upon the date of
Cromwell’s birth, but it is doubtful if it occurred later than 1485, in
view of his probable age at the time of his sojourn abroad. That he had
a quarrel with his father seems very likely: Bandello’s statement that
he came to Italy, ‘fleeing from his father,’ and Chapuys’ assertion that
he was ill-behaved when young, together with the many entries in the
rolls concerning the tempestuous and disorderly conduct of Walter
Cromwell, all point to the truth of this story[22]. Foxe moreover
asserts that Cromwell told Cranmer in later years ‘what a ruffian he was
in his younger days.’ Pole informs us that he soon became a roving
soldier in Italy, a statement which is borne out by the tales of
Bandello and Foxe that he was at the battle on the Garigliano (Dec.
28-29, 1503), in the service of the French army[23]. The well-known
story of the Italian novelist about Cromwell and Frescobaldo the
Florentine merchant, may well have some foundation in fact: there are
several mentions of Frescobaldo in the State Papers of the years
1530-1540, which prove that Cromwell was intimate with an Italian of
that name[24]. Some scholars have gone so far as to refuse to believe
that Cromwell ever went to Italy at all; but this must be the
incredulity of madness in face of the fact that all our contemporary
witnesses agree that he went there, and of the evidence afforded by his
wide acquaintance with Italians, and by his knowledge of their language
and literature.

From the date of the tale of Bandello up to 1512, the most probable
story concerning Cromwell’s life is that contained in Pole’s Apologia.
It is there stated that after his brief military career he became a
merchant, but did not remain a merchant long; and that he later attached
himself as accountant to a Venetian, whom Pole knew very well. Bandello
informs us that Cromwell returned to England after his stay in Florence;
it seems more probable, however, that he first went to Antwerp and
engaged in trade there; for Foxe and Chapuys both agree that he was in
Flanders, and the former asserts that he was in the service of English
dealers in the Flemish marts. Another singular but characteristic and
not improbable story of the martyrologist strengthens the theory that
Cromwell was in Antwerp some time after the battle on the Garigliano.
One Geoffrey Chambers was sent to Rome as a representative of the Gild
of Our Lady in St. Botolph’s Church in Boston, to obtain from the Pope
certain pardons or indulgences by which the severe rules concerning
Lenten observances might be relaxed; and passing through Antwerp he fell
in with Cromwell, whom he persuaded to accompany him. The latter entered
into the spirit of the enterprise; arrived at Rome, he procured some
choice sweetmeats and jellies, and armed with these lay in wait for the
Pope on his return from hunting. The delicacies were offered, Julius was
delighted with them, and granted the desired indulgences without delay.
Foxe states that this episode took place about the year 1510[25].

This story seems to indicate that Cromwell went to Italy a second time.
It fits in well with Pole’s statement that after his military experience
he became first a merchant, and then a clerk to a Venetian trader. The
absence of any trustworthy chronology, however, prevents us from
regarding any of the accounts of these different writers as really
historical; and when at last we meet with a date on which we can rely,
it is most tantalizing to find that the evidence which is afforded us in
connexion with it is of such a nature as to leave us almost as much in
the dark as before. In a letter written in June, 1536, a certain mercer,
by name George Elyot, addresses Cromwell as follows[26]: ‘Ryght
onourabyll sir my dewty Consethered as to youre Masterscheppe
apertayneth that hyt may plece your Masterscheppe For the love off god
to Exceppe my Rewd Maneres in thes behalf of wrytyng vnto you butt hyt
ys onely to schowe yowre Masterscheppe my pore mynd furste for the onour
of god & secondly For the god love & trew hartt that ‹I› have howtt vnto
you sensse the syngsson Martt at medelborow in anno 1512.’ This
quotation does not prove that Cromwell was at the Syngsson Mart at
Middelburg in 1512, nor does it shed much light on the position he
occupied at that time; still the probabilities strongly favour the
conclusion that he was either a merchant or a clerk to a merchant in the
Low Countries in 1512: the accounts of Foxe and Chapuys agree that he
was in the Netherlands in his younger days, and the letter of the mercer
seems to fix the date. We have also reason to believe that he was in
London soon after this practising as a solicitor. There exists in the
Record Office a document dated November, 1512, and endorsed, in a hand
which certainly resembles that of Cromwell’s later correspondence, ‘The
tytle of the manour Whityngham for Mr. Empson[27].’ The endorsement may
of course be of a very different date from that of the document itself;
still the evidence which it affords is not utterly valueless, especially
as another reason for supposing that Cromwell returned to England in
1512, or soon after, is afforded by the fact that his marriage must have
taken place about this time: the age of his son Gregory being such that
it could scarcely have occurred much later. The State Papers of 1512
give us more information concerning the early life of Thomas Cromwell
than those of any other year up to 1523. The sum total of the evidence
which they afford seems to indicate that he was in England and in the
Netherlands, that he was occupied both as a merchant and as a solicitor,
and that he was married in that year or soon afterwards.

Cromwell’s wife, to whom Chapuys refers as the daughter of a shearman,
was Elizabeth Wykys, descended from one of an ancient family of
esquires, who was gentleman-usher to Henry VII[28]. A reference in
Cromwell’s will of July 12, 1529, to one ‘Mercye Pryo_ur_’ as his
mother-in-law[29] has led some writers to suppose that he married
Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Pryor, and widow of Thomas Williams, a
Welsh gentleman; but a letter to Cromwell from one Harry Wykys of
Thorpe, near Chertsey, dated November 2, 1523[30], disproves this
theory, and corroborates the other. The most probable explanation of the
entry in the will is that Mercy Pryor married twice, and that she was
the mother of Elizabeth Wykys by her first husband[31]. Cromwell’s wife
was probably a woman of some property. He was exactly the sort of man
who would seek a wife with an eye to the financial advantages of the
match, and the theory that Elizabeth Wykys was rich fits in well with
the evidence that her mother was married a second time. Moreover
Cromwell’s property increased so fast during his years of service under
Wolsey, that even his notorious accessibility to bribes could not
account for it, had it not been augmented from some outside source.

Chapuys goes on to say that for some time after his marriage Cromwell
kept servants in his house, carrying on the business of his
father-in-law; a statement corroborated by his correspondence, which
shows that he plied his trade as a cloth and wool merchant at least as
late as 1524. There can be little doubt, however, that he continued his
business as a solicitor at the same time, for it would be impossible to
explain his sudden advance in legal prominence in the years 1520 to
1525, if he had not had long practice in the law beforehand. The strange
combination of employments in which Cromwell was engaged fitted in well
with the peculiar versatility of the man, and brought him into close
contact with diverse sorts of men, in diverse conditions of life. A more
detailed account of his career during the seven or eight years which
followed his probable return to England it is impossible to give, for
between 1512 and 1520 there occurs another extraordinary gap in the life
of Thomas Cromwell, during which we do not possess a single trustworthy
contemporary record concerning him. In 1520 there is certainly evidence
that he was known to Wolsey, but precisely how or when his connexion
with the Cardinal began, it is impossible to tell.

The statement in the Dictionary of National Biography that Wolsey
appointed Cromwell