either case, the second element of this passage is a warning that if someone is allowed to accrue wealth—any wealth—through this deception, he will become so greedy and possessive that he will not only seek to increase his own wealth, he will do so to the active detriment of others us no moore crave it, / By God, we comme to (“let late”). warning leads us to the third and (for our purposes) most significant Pryde’s element of this excerpt: the specific anti-Wolsey satire. The most significant stanza is lines 350-353: Outward honestie, inward infidelitie, Both rydes on a mule: In peace he is bolde, but in war he is colde, That soonest wyll recoyle. The mule was preferred mount, as it was for most churchmen. It is a Wolsey’s particular potent satiric symbol because it perfectly illustrates alleged Wolsey’s dissimulative nature: a Christ-like symbol of humility swathed in rich red silks, ridden by a man ostensibly dedicated to the Church, but instead devoted to worldly displays of wealth. This paradox was an ideal image for critics of Wolsey, and its appearance in is noteworthy because it represents an early usage of an image Godly Queene Hester that, as we shall see, resurfaced repeatedly in anti-Wolsey literature throughout the sixteenth century. Foxe was evidently so taken with it that he appears to have invented a farcical incident involving mules and the spilling of garbage disguised as riches. Of course, it must be briefly noted that this line of argument does not require the author of to have been a Protestant; indeed, the persecuted innocents of the Godly Queene Hester play father Marchodeus and the Jews more broadly) stand in for the monastic (Hester’s communities Wolsey had been investigating and suppressing in part to fund his new colleges at Oxford and Ipswich. While we might perhaps shrink from conclusively stating that the author of was a conservative, Walker has Godly Queene Hester convincingly argued for an interpretation of as carefully Godly Queene Hester “a thought out apology for monasticism based upon the social utility of the monastic Whatever labels we might wish to attach to the author, it is more relevant for houses”.
either case, the second element of this passage is a warning that if someone is allowed to accrue wealth—any wealth—through this deception, he will become so greedy and possessive that he will not only seek to increase his own wealth, he will do so to the active detriment of others (“let us no moore crave it, / By God, we comme to late”). Pryde’s warning leads us to the third and (for our purposes) most significant element of this excerpt: the specific anti-Wolsey satire. The most significant stanza is lines 350-353: Outward honestie, inward infidelitie, Both rydes on a mule: In peace he is bolde, but in war he is colde, That soonest wyll recoyle. The mule was Wolsey’s preferred mount, as it was for most churchmen. It is a particular potent satiric symbol because it perfectly illustrates Wolsey’s alleged dissimulative nature: a Christ-like symbol of humility swathed in rich red silks, ridden by a man ostensibly dedicated to the Church, but instead devoted to worldly displays of wealth. This paradox was an ideal image for critics of Wolsey, and its appearance in Godly Queene Hester is noteworthy because it represents an early usage of an image that, as we shall see, resurfaced repeatedly in anti-Wolsey literature throughout the sixteenth century. Foxe was evidently so taken with it that he appears to have invented a farcical incident involving mules and the spilling of garbage disguised as riches. Of course, it must be briefly noted that this line of argument does not require the author of Godly Queene Hester to have been a Protestant; indeed, the persecuted innocents of the play (Hester’s father Marchodeus and the Jews more broadly) stand in for the monastic communities Wolsey had been investigating and suppressing in part to fund his new colleges at Oxford and Ipswich. While we might perhaps shrink from conclusively stating that the author of Godly Queene Hester was a conservative, Walker has convincingly argued for an interpretation of Godly Queene Hester as “a carefully thought out apology for monasticism based upon the social utility of the monastic houses”. Whatever labels we might wish to attach to the author, it is more relevant for
GSL_PhD_Thesis_Library_Copy.docx