|
|
The Vicar of Hell?
War and diplomacy had a major impact on the court. Trained officers were needed, and as a gentlemen of the privy chamber with an aptitude for a military career, Bryan was naturally called upon to serve. As a soldier Bryan displayed a bravery and enterprise that won him immediate recognition. He gained knighthood in Thomas Howard’s expedition against Brittany in 1522 after he and his company seized the town-gate of Morlaiz, permitting the English army to enter and sack the town. Later that year he exhibited great daring by journeying alone over thirty-five miles through enemy territory to join the English army advancing upon Paris. And, for repelling a Scottish attack on Protector Somerset’s expedition in 1547, he was created a knight banneret. Bryan was also a successful naval officer; initially appointed captain of the Margaret Bonaventure in 1513, he rose to become a vice-admiral of the king’s navy thirty years later.
In addition to his military achievements, Bryan also proved himself to be an effective diplomat. In this capacity he had a number of duties: ascertaining the attitude of monarchs and their leading officials towards his own government, influencing them to implement policies beneficial to English interests, and transmitting these matters to the king. In assessing such people he had to evaluate their character and vividly describe his dealings with them in order to provide Henry and his councilors with the information they needed to formulate government policy. Bryan’s initiation into the art of diplomacy came with his first mission to the Papal Court in November 1528, where he worked for the annulment of Henry’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon. His reports to the king often included pungent estimates of Clement VII and his legate Campeggio. Of the former we recall that when he was thought to be dangerously ill, Bryan mordantly wondered "...whether it be best to have him live or die, for a worse than this....cannot be found", thereby revealing his anger and disgust with Clement for his continuous evasion and obstruction in the matter of the king’s divorce. At the same time, of course, his correspondence was undoubtedly written in a way that would reveal his own steadfast support of the goals sought by Henry and Anne Boleyn.
Bryan demonstrated his gift for lively description most clearly in his letters to Lord Lisle. While in Nice on a diplomatic mission in May 1538 he depicted the local scene in graphic detail and whetted his friend’s sensual appetite by commenting on the large number of women at the French court, wishing that "....I had so many sheep to find my house whilst I live". One wonders how many feminine "sheep" found their way to Bryan’s residence on this occasion.
Bryan also adroitly employed his contacts at foreign courts to further his government’s policies, as in 1543 during a time when Anglo-Imperial relations were improving. While serving as Henry’s ambassador to the Imperial court, Bryan became aware of attempts by foreign princes to reconcile Charles with Francis I. Addressing both the emperor and his sister Mary, Governess General of the Netherlands, he showed the hollowness of these overtures, and his successful intervention in this matter helped bring about the Anglo-Imperial treaty, which led to an alliance and provided for a joint invasion of France the following year.
During the 1530s Bryan was often sent to France as an ambassador to cultivate admirable relations with the French king. His friendship with Francis made him an excellent intermediary between the French and English courts when a policy or amity or reconciliation was sought. His principal tasks following the failure of Wolsey’s efforts to annul the king’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon were to maintain Francis’s support for Henry’s divorce case and to prevent an alliance between France and the papacy
But though Bryan worked diligently and successfully with the French king for several years, his long term effectiveness was inevitably limited by the underlying hostility which had always existed between Henry and Francis and between their respective countries. Only a temporary community of interest in their common enmity toward Charles V made cooperation between the two monarchs possible for a considerable time. During this period Bryan was at his most effective. However when discord arose between the two nations, he was apparently unable to adopt the strong line with the French which Henry demanded. This led to his replacement by Edward Bonner, a man better suited to the king’s needs in these circumstances than Bryan.
His limitations were particularly evident in 1537 when he tried energetically but unsuccessfully to persuade Francis to preserve his alliance with Henry and not draw closer to Charles V when there appeared the possibility of a league between the emperor, James V of Scotland, and the French king against England. Henry had always relied upon a continuation of the perennial conflict between Francis and Charles for his own protection. But there was certainly the chance that they would sink their differences and combine against him. Such a threat arose when Cardinal Pole, acting on the pope’s authority, came to Paris in 1537 to solicit the French king to join with Charles V in a Catholic crusade against England.
Henry undoubtedly believed that Bryan was too cozy with the French king, not prompt enough to voice his displeasure with him, and insufficiently forceful in urging Francis to renounce his friendship with Charles V. Henry was a shrewd judge of men, and he may well have been right that an overbearing personality like Edmund Bonner, later renowned for his persecution of Protestants in the reign of Mary Tudor, was a man better able to adopt a harsh tone towards the French king than his easy going friend Francis Bryan, who was also a well known Francophile. Nevertheless before his departure from the French court, Bryan did have a heated exchange with Francis, on Henry’s behalf, and there is no indication that his conduct had any ill consequences, for France and the Empire soon fell out again, and Bryan, once more in Henry’s good graces, was working to conclude an alliance with Charles V in 1543.
As a diplomat Bryan achieved no stunning successes, but despite occasional criticism from his associates and his royal master, he performed his duties with considerable skill as his continuous employment by Henry clearly demonstrates. The same comment may also be applied to other activities in which he was employed. Some working officials like John Allen, Chancellor of Ireland, possibly out of jealousy, may have regarded Bryan as a jovial lightweight who achieved advancement because of his personal friendship with Henry VIII rather than through real capacity. Probably he was not an individual of exceptional ability. There is no indication, for example, that he was ever considered for appointment to the Privy Council, despite his long terms of service to the king. Nevertheless, as a court official, as a diplomat and as a soldier, there is every reason to conclude that Bryan conducted himself creditably.
But as he was undoubtedly aware, loyalty and good service were not sufficient to protect
against a sudden loss of favor that might lead to dismissal from the king’s service or to charges which could result in imprisonment or execution. Survival depended, to a considerable extent, on an ability to retain the good will of a temperamental and ruthless sovereign and on a willingness to change sides at the right moment in the constant factional rivalries at court. An excellent example of Bryan’s discretion and adroitness in this regard can be seen in his cautious reply to Robert Hobbes’s questions concerning his interrogation by Thomas Crowmell at the time of Anne Boleyn’s downfall. For many years Anne had been Bryan’s patroness at court, providing a means for him to secure grants and honors. When the king’s interest shifted to Jane Seymour, Bryan was probably quick to realize that his personal advantage and future lay with the king’s new favorite, and it is possible that his quarrel with Anne’s brother Lord Rochford was staged to break his ties with the Boleyn faction.
Certainly Bryan’s demeanor-his sometimes outspoken, blunt manner that included a willingness to speak plainly to the king himself, created the appearance of honesty and straightforwardness. But was he, in fact, what one historian has called Henry VIII, a "faux bonhomme", a man whose apparent good nature could not be trusted, who would advance his own interests by any means even at the expense of those who had been his benefactors. This is undoubtedly one implication of Thomas Cromwell’s nickname for him-the Vicar of Hell", if
indeed Henry’s chief minister invented the term. The evidence is not clear on this point. David Starkey believes Bryan was "charming, lecherous, and double-dealing" while also possessing a gift for vivid expression. B XC y own research confirms his lechery and charm, but does not lead me to consider him as particularly duplicitous. Although I have included the Vicar of Hell in the title of this biography, I believe it is a sterner judgement than he deserves.
Perhaps Cromwell and others possessed knowledge concerning Bryan’s actions that has not survived. However, the evidence which does remain is open to a favorable interpretation of his character. Even if his desertion of the Boleyns merits condemnation, it is almost the only instance of this kind which I have discovered. It is possible to criticize Bryan for apparently acting as a spy against Wolsey on behalf of Henry and Anne Boleyn concerning the handling of the ‘divorce’ in 1529. However, Bryan had been removed twice by Wolsey from the king’s privy chamber, and he undoubtedly felt keen resentment toward the cardinal. In this case, his own conduct seven years later was certainly far less reprehensible than that of Cromwell himself who stage-managed the demise of Anne and her friends. It was also less blameworthy than the behavior of his uncle Thomas Howard duke of Norfolk who acted as foreman of the jury which found her guilty of treason. All three men, however, were doing what they considered necessary to save themselves in a highly dangerous situation.
It is possible that Cromwell’s term the "Vicar of Hell" has nothing to do with exceptional callousness and cynicism on Bryan’s part but refers only to his reputation as an uninhibited debauchee, something that might well have offended a man of Cromwell’s self-controlled personality. Or he may have been repeating a "nickname" half-contemptuous, half-affectionate" in intent, that implied no serious moral condemnation. However the expression is interpreted there is evidence that Bryan could be relied upon to protect a friend’s interest. He had not informed on Robert Hobbes, although the abbot had expressed his opposition to the king’s breach with Rome at a time when treason by word alone was punishable by death. By his silence Bryan was doing more than protecting his friend, he was running a personal risk because he was obliged by law to report such words. His subsequent interrogation in 1538 may have resulted from this dereliction of duty. Furthermore he was also asked if he had ever heard his patron, the Duke of Norfolk, uphold papal supremacy. Bryan had loyally replied that he had never heard him express such an opinion.
Bryan also took the time to give good advice to the affable but loquacious Lord Lisle concerning his duties as governor of Calais and the danger he ran by his failure to carry them out properly. The advice did no good, but it demonstrates a kindly side to Bryan’s character.
Bryan must have had the ability to inspire feelings of affection and comradeship in others. No doubt he was also something of a prankster. At a masque attended by Bryan, the king, and his daughter Mary, Henry told him that he had heard that she knew "no foul or unclean speeches". He asked Bryan to go to Mary and discover whether or not the rumor was true, possibly by making a vulgar remark to her. Returning shortly thereafter to the king, Bryan stated that her reaction convinced him that the report was indeed true. On the level of rough horseplay, one recalls how he rode through the streets of Paris with Francis I throwing eggs and stones at the people.
Bryan could not have survived at court unless he fully supported the king’s religious revolution of the 1530s. Hobbes testified that Bryan possesses the Bible, translated by the Protestant Miles Coverdale, but insufficient evidence survives to indicate whether Bryan was a Protestant sympathizer, a conservative upholder of the religious and social order opposed to innovation in a Protestant direction like the Duke of Norfolk, or a person totally without bias in either direction who followed the prevailing wind.
An anecdote preserved by Sir Francis Englefield, an official of Queen Mary’s court, displays Bryan’s support for Henry’s reforms against the teachings of Luther. It describes an occasion on which Bryan publicly defends the king’s religious policy in a dispute with a Lutheran woman at the court. The lady in question had expressed her dislike of the Ten Articles of 1536 and their affirmation of the king’s supremacy. Bryan retorted: "...if we must have devices in religion, I had rather have them from a king, than from the knave ...Friar Martin, who not yet twenty years ago was deviser of your new religion, and behaved himself so lewdly in answering his Majesty". This reference was to Martin Luther’s description of Henry as a "comic jester", a "miserable scribbler", and a petty "glossator" following the publication of the king’s treaties The Defense of the Seven Sacraments in 1521. Bryan added: "I would rather for my part stick to the devising of a king that has majesty in him than to a thousand of Luther’s companions put together". Although this story and Bryan’s subsequent connection with Norfolk might suggest a conservative religious attitude, his association with the Boleyn family may imply at least mild protestant sympathies.
Bryan’s involvement with the conservatives at court following Anne Boleyn’s execution is difficult to trace, but by the end of the king’s reign he appears to have been wholly identified with the Howard faction. He maintained a close friendship with the Duke of Norfolk and on different occasions defended him against charges of remissness as a military commander, and against accusations of popery. There is no clear indication of what attitude Bryan adopted to the fall of Thomas Cromwell or his cousin Catherine Howard, but by the time of Henry’s death his close connections with the Howard family may have been the reason that he was omitted from the king’s will.
Although Cromwell’s nickname the "Vicar of Hell" implies a distaste for Bryan’s behavior, other observers spoke favorably of him. The French ambassador Guillaume du Bellay described him as "a man of his word", and the Lord Privy Seal Sir John Russell expressed admiration for Bryan’s energy and devotion to duty while putting the south coast of England in a position of defense against the French invasion threat in 1545. However, we occasionally find a critical appraisal of Bryan. As a courtier he had been accused by rebellious subjects during the Pilgrimage of Grace of serving in Parliament, not has his own man, but as the king’s puppet.
The Scottish poet Andrew Maclaren wrote in 1865: "We must be made fast to something that is fast, if we are not to be swept like thistledown before the wind". This proverb on survive-ability epitomizes Bryan’s dedicated service to the king over a long period; the way in which he rose to success at the beginning of Henry’s reign, remained steadfast to the king, and retained his good-will throughout his life. Comments by John Russell and Guillaume du Bellay suggest that Bryan impressed others as a diligent and honest official. The expanse of his career suggests that he was also something of a renaissance type, a ‘uomo universale’: the successful man of affairs who combined practical ability as an official with learning, literary talent, and courtly accomplishments. During a career of over thirty-five years Bryan had served the government in a variety of capacities. His association with the activity at court is well attested, and his own reputation as a poet placed him high in the esteem of his contemporaries. Wyatt, as already mentioned, dedicated to him one of his satires on court life, a work which clearly foreshadows Bryan’s translation of Guevara’s book.
Of his appearance we know little, except that he had lost an eye in a jousting accident. His ceaseless activity, however, caused a friend, Thomas Wyatt, to comment that "...a restless energy lay at the heart of him who behaved like a twenty year old at fifty", and several witnesses comment on his youthful appearance even at his death. Although Bryan’s political match with Lady Ormond in 1548 provided him the opportunity to live out the rest of his life in Ireland and escape the courtly intrigues he had attacked in Guevara’s book, Scudamore’s report of his last moments suggests he had not lost the amiable, ingratiating qualities that had characterized him throughout life.