not know whether they were tortured, whether they confessed, or what they confessed; but we may naturally connect this letter, directly or indirectly, with the events which immediately followed. In the middle of November we find a commission sitting at Lambeth, composed of Cromwell, Cranmer, and Latimer, ravelling out the threads of a story, from which, when the whole was disentangled, it appeared that by Queen Catherine, the Princess Mary, and a large and formidable party in the country, the King, on the faith of a pretended revelation, was supposed to have forfeited the crown; that his death, either by visitation of God or by visitation of man, was daily expected; and that whether his death took place or not, a revolution was immediately looked for, which would place the princess on the throne.
The Nun of Kent,[1] as we remember, had declared that if Henry persisted in his resolution of marrying Anne, she was commissioned by God to tell him that he should lose his power and authority. She had not specified the manner in which the sentence would be carried into effect against him. The form of her threats had been also varied occasionally; she said that he should die, but whether by the hands of his subjects, or by a providential judgment, she left to conjecture;[2] December.and the period within which his punishment was to fall upon him was stated variously at one month- ↑ Divorce, of Catherine of Aragon, p. 280.
- ↑ We remember the northern prophecy, 'In England shall be slain the decorate Rose in his mother's belly,' which the monks of Furnoss interpreted as meaning that 'the King's Grace should die by the hands of priests.'—Vol. i. cap. 4.
