At first, studying last wills and testaments seems to be a morbid approach to studying the lives of a population, but they provide unique insight into the more private aspects of life. Sixteenth-century English people typically wrote wills only when close to death, so they can be dramatic, as they come from a very vulnerable moment.1 Each testator may have been sentimental and emotional, thinking of which goods needed to be passed on and to whom, and considering how they wanted to portray themselves. Along with these important influences on wills, age, social class, and gender biases must be taken into consideration. On their deathbeds, these people were attempting to transmit their property, consider their family and friends, and, for many, make a religious statement. Carefully analyzing Tudor-era wills reveals a significant effort by sixteenth-century English people to appear to conform to intertwining societal, political, and religious expectations. Two ways this can be seen are the representation and portrayal of women in wills and changes in deathbed donations through the century.
To fully understand why the political turbulence of the Tudor era was affecting will-writing, it is important to consider the religious and political context. In 1534, Parliament created a church in England, separate from the Catholic Church, through the Act of Supremacy.2 This established the English monarch, then King Henry VIII, as the head of the church and religious leader of the country, and it required that all English people recognize that leadership and follow the doctrine of the new Church of England (a sect of Protestantism).3 After this point, political leadership and religious policy were intrinsically connected, so when power changed between Protestant and Catholic monarchs, so too did the religious policies and expectations for English subjects.4 Succeeding King Henry VIII was the Protestant Edward VI, who, during his reign from 1547 to 1553, continued his father’s policies.5 Following Edward was the Catholic Mary I, who ruled from 1553 to 1558, enforcing strict Catholicism on her English subjects.6 Elizabeth I was the last Tudor, ruling from 1558 to 1603, and bringing Protestantism back to England.7 While this political turmoil was taking place in the higher social ranks, its effects impacted individuals’ personal lives, and their wills reflect these changes.
Last wills and testaments are a unique and valuable insight into the private lives of people at a dramatic moment in their lives, but they must be analyzed with the awareness of inherent biases in age, social class, and gender. In the 1500s, will-making increased significantly, with 291,009 wills surviving from the sixteenth century as opposed to the 42,098 from before 1500.8 However, not all wills have been preserved, and among testators of surviving wills, the poor, minors, and women are under-represented relative to their numbers in the total population.9 It is also important to note that there is a debate over how useful wills are in studying areas such as the effectiveness of charity, true religious belief, and literacy. Despite this, historical literature on wills and testaments has proven its value as a source for understanding a population, especially when combined with other primary sources such as inventories, freemen’s lists, and parish registers.10 Another consideration is the nature of the will selection used here.
The twelve wills analyzed in this discussion were selected to represent a variety of social classes and regions of England. They range from 1528 to 1602, spanning the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary I, and Elizabeth I (see appendix for a list of wills included in this analysis). This small selection of wills is not a random sample, but rather is chosen from collections edited and published in the nineteenth century by English antiquarian and historical societies. Therefore, they should not be considered a statistical representation of all sixteenth-century English wills or even of those that survive. Additionally, the texts quoted have modernized spelling and punctuation. These wills are not intended to represent the entire population of wills and should be analyzed in the context of their biases but are still valuable in what they reveal about the English people during the 1500s.
Tudor England was a patriarchal society which barred women from the public sphere.11 Despite this, women exerted much influence within the family and household.12 Although this selection of wills is not a random sample, the underrepresentation of women is reflective of a pattern amongst the total collection of wills that have been preserved.13 Amongst sixteenth-century testators, between twelve and seventeen percent were women, and in this selection of twelve wills, only two are from women, both of whom do not appear to have been married at the time of the wills’ writing.14 As men dominated sixteenth-century English society, in that male heads of households were the locus of power, this dictated the role of women within the domestic sphere personally and legally.15 English law drew a distinction between the legal standing of a married woman or “femme covert” and an unmarried woman or “femme sole.”16 While single women could make wills, manage property and debts, and work independently, married women could not.17 As married women needed their husbands’ permission to write a will, their wills were not a significant portion of the total, and of sixteenth-century testatrices (female testators), most were widows or spinsters.18 Upon being widowed, a woman’s influence both increased and became more evident.19 As widows, wealthy women’s rights increased to being “comparable…to those of men” because for the first time their statuses were not defined in relation to a man, as they became “householders.”20 Reading the wills of femmes soles as well as those of husbands leaving widows, illustrates the “enhanced possibility of both independence and prosperity that widowhood could bring.”21
The 1539 will of Anne Buckenham, a spinster of Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk, reveals an emphasis on religion, charity, and the interconnection of the two. Because she describes herself as the “daughter of…” and does not mention a husband or children, it appears as though Buckenham was never married.22 As a spinster, she could write a will, and in it she clearly expresses that, five years after the Act of Supremacy, she has continued to profess her Catholic faith.23 This is significant because the Act of Supremacy separated the Church in England from the Catholic Church, requiring the English people to recognize Henry VIII as the “Supreme Head” of the Church of England.24 Rejecting the supremacy of the king was risking death, so Buckenham’s profession of Catholicism indicates religious zeal.25 The primary focus of her will is the laying out of Masses, prayers, and psalms to be said and sung for her soul, as well as those of her parents and “all Christian souls.”26 Her first bequest is “to the high altar of Our Lady, for my tithes and offerings too little paid and for the health of my soul.”27 Along with designating money for these Catholic activities, she also donates two chalices and a “table of alabaster with the images of the Trinity, St Peter, and St Nicholas” to chapels and the parish church.28 Finally, Buckenham engages in charity through religion by donating money to poor people to pray for her soul. This was in line with Catholic theology, but within a decade it would be outlawed by the new Church of England.29 The only family mentioned are her deceased parents and her godson and god- daughter, for whom she leaves money.30 As a spinster, the property she possesses and disperses consists of money and religious items, and the people to whom she gives them are religious institutions, the poor, and her godchildren. Differences in bequests result from varying family circumstances as these wills show, because, while this spinster’s primary motivation is religion, the will of a widow shows a different emphasis on familial instruction.
Similar to the spinster, the widow dispersed specific domestic goods, but she was also concerned with the upbringing and marriages of her surviving kin. Describing herself as a “poor blind widow,” Anne Hilton, of Finghall in Yorkshire, confines the religious text of her 1548 will to the standard preamble.31 Typically, Tudor wills begin with a preamble stating the testator’s name, social standing, parish of residence, and a statement expressing a religious sentiment. While the preambles of this selection vary slightly, almost all have a similar structure to that of Anne Hilton, which reads:
In the name of God, amen. The 20th day of April, the year of our lord God 1548, that I Anne Hilton, a poor blind widow, of the town and parish of Finghall, sick in body, whole and constant of reason and remembrance, doth make and ordain my last wyll and testament as hereafter shall follow. First I bequeath my soul to almighty God, my maker and redeemer, which bought it with his precious blood, and my body to be funerated [buried] within the churchyard of Finghall aforesaid.32
The remainder of her will focused more on instructions for her household items, livestock, farmhold, and family.33 After dispersing her possessions to William Hilton and Elsabeth Percival (without explaining her relationship to them), Hilton instructs her daughter and son-in-law to raise Elsabeth Percival until, coming of age, she marries.34 Next, Hilton gives property, including her title and farmhold, to Brian Howchyson until William Hilton is old enough to take possession.35 Although not all of the specific relationships are explicit, Anne Hilton assures that those for whom she was responsible in life will be taken care of after her death. This contrasts with Anne Buckenham, who does not discuss personal relationships or familial instructions in her will. In itself, these women’s ability to write wills and pass on property shows the independence of the femme sole, but this independence is also apparent in the content of men’s wills.
The conveyance of responsibility and property to widows is evident in the wills of husbands. Although outwardly the husband’s role in the family was superior to the wife’s, “the practical reality…was of mutual interdependence.”36 Within the family structure and household economy, women played an essential role, and they acquired significant skills.37 Though husbands may have publicly and legally dominated their wives, their wills show that they left their widows with significant responsibilities and trust.38 Testators chose as executors those whom they could trust to fulfill their instructions in administering and managing the residue of their property; many married men chose their wives as executrices of their wills, showing husbands’ confidence in their wives.39 In these wills, many men who made their wives executrices further demonstrated their trust by not leaving specific instructions for the women. An example is Nicholas Riche, of Bawtry in Yorkshire, whose 1529 will makes his wife “sole executrix” and gives all his goods to her “to dispose them, as it shall seem [to] her the best, for the health of her soul and mine both.”40 These husbands were not forced to give power to their wives due to a lack of other options. Rather, they chose them to fulfill their final wills over other men in the family. Despite having adult brothers listed in his 1570 will, Thomas Wade of Bildeston in Suffolk, designates his wife the “sole and alone executor,” responsible for paying debts and administering his will.41 Legally, married women were under the control of their husbands, but these wills show how, when preparing for death, husbands acknowledged the independence and freedom women had within the family. While choosing executors for wills was a private matter that provides insight into an aspect of life that was not advertised, other parts of wills were specifically included with the intention of demonstrating a certain aspect of one’s life.
The Tudor era was a time of great political, religious, and economic turbulence that brought changes from the central government into individuals’ personal lives, as can be seen in the religious preambles of wills. Testators usually dictated their wills and, despite a lack of evidence concerning who physically wrote each will, it is likely that clergymen often were the ones writing them down.42 As clergy were often involved in making wills, it is less likely that the true religious belief of the testator will be clear because, for example, a Protestant may feel less inclined to express their beliefs to a Catholic priest.43 Despite debate over how indicative preambles are of true religious belief, there are patterns in how they were written during the reigns of Edward VI, Mary I, and Elizabeth I.44 During Edward VI’s reign, the prevalence of Catholic preambles decreased, then increased during Mary I’s reign until decreasing again when Elizabeth I came to the throne. However, it was not until the late 1500s that explicitly Protestant preambles became popular.45
Due to the sixteenth century’s connection with politics and religion, expressing “prohibited beliefs” in preambles carried a risk that testators considered when writing wills. Expressing certain religious beliefs carried legal penalties which changed in accord with the reigning monarch, likely resulting in testators suppressing expression of their beliefs in their preambles, and instead emphasizing their loyalty to the king or queen.46 An example of this is a 1555 will from Mary’s reign, that of Odnel Selby of Tweedmouth in Northumberland, who does not place an emphasis on Catholicism or religion beyond the standard in the preamble, but directly references Mary and Philip as “defenders of the faith,” showing the importance of conforming to the monarchs’ wishes over actual religious belief.47 While preambles reflected the reign of the time, they did not necessarily indicate the true belief of the testator, but rather showed conformity to societal, and therefore religious, expectations; “Catholic devotion may have been largely suppressed, but it was most usually replaced by ‘conformism, passivity, or even indifference.’”48 Reflecting the Protestant prioritization of “inward” versus “outward” expressions of religion, the will preambles of Protestants and those conforming to Protestant expectations tended to be simpler and more concise.49 Two wills from Elizabeth I’s reign, those made by Thomas Smith of Old Angerton in Northumberland in 1581, and Cuthbert Bates of Halliwell in Northumberland in 1602, follow a structure but exclude a religious preamble or religious references at all, differing from the other wills in the selection where religion is a standard part of the structure.50
Although there were standard religious preambles for wills, “when an individual held particularly forceful religious opinions these come through clearly in the terminology employed in his will.”51 While a short preamble “did not invariably reflect lack of strong faith,” “full and expressive dedicatory clauses were more likely from unusually religious testators, and…undoubtedly evidence of personal conviction.”52 An example is the will of William Shepard of Mendlesham in Suffolk, written in 1537 (after the Act of Supremacy).53 Shepard makes his Protestant beliefs clear. He directly refers to Henry VIII as “protector of the faith and the supreme head” and rejects the authority of the Bishop of Rome by saying, “I…forsake the Bishop of Rome’s usurped power.”54 Much of his will is dedicated to demonstrating his religious devotion, even declaring that “touching the distribution of my temporal goods, my purpose is, by the grace of God, to bestow them as fruits of faith, so that I do not suppose that my merit be by good bestowing of them, but my merit is by the faith of Jesus Christ only, by which faith such works are good.”55 By contrast, writing in 1558, the last year of Mary I’s reign, Thomas Trollope of Thornley in Durham, explicitly says that he is Catholic: “First of all I declare and confess to be a true Christian, believing all the articles of our Catholic faith and all other ceremonies which our mother holy church doth observe and keep.”56 Further demonstrating that belief throughout his will, he talks about the “most precious blood” and asks for the prayers of “the saints in heaven.”57 Both of these wills contain clear Protestant or Catholic theological sentiments about salvation and follow similar formats, but they intentionally make distinctions that are in line with the religious expectations and laws of the reigning monarch. While some testators devoted their preambles to religious intention and contemplation, often the preambles were affected more by the political circumstances, whereas other aspects of wills such as charitable bequests are better indicators of religious belief.58
Changes in the use of religion in wills resulted from the turbulence of the century, and one aspect that was affected by this was charitable bequests. Throughout the entire period, charitable bequests were the segments of wills that “really reflected the strength of a testator’s faith.”59 As these people came to the ends of their lives, they emphasized repentance and preparation for impending judgment, and accordingly many employed charity in their wills.60 Before the Reformation, charity in wills was done through religious institutions, primarily the parish church and monastic institutions.61 These common bequests can be seen in two wills that preceded the Act of Supremacy: Robert Gest of Brompton in Yorkshire gives to church works, convents, friars, and the parish priest, and Nicholas Riche donates “for tithes forgotten” and for prayers for his soul and his wife’s.62 After the Reformation and further into Elizabeth I’s reign, charitable donations were made more often through secular means than through parish churches.63 In 1570, Thomas Wade wrote in his will to bequeath money “to the poor of Bildeston,” but through his executor, collectors, or the minister, and with no mention of religious intentions or requests for prayers, a practice that had been rejected by Church of England.64 Two years later, in 1572, Roland Clark, of Dinsdale in Durham, also bequeathed money to “the poor man’s box” of his town.65 Finally, the 1580 will of William Cowley, of Berwick on Tweed in Northumberland, bequeathed money or bread to the poor, again not through any religious institution.66 Whereas the earlier and more Catholic wills inherently connected charity with their parish churches, these wills portray charity as a secular act.
Through an analysis of this collection of wills, the efforts to assert a certain image of oneself that aligns with complex expectations of the time is visible. The changes in religious preambles and deathbed donations display the effects of changing political leadership on the way people viewed religion and religious institutions. The wills of single women, and the way in which husbands treated their wives in their last testaments, both reveal a more influential role for women than one might expect in a patriarchal society. This contrast between private lives and public appearances resulted from a turbulent era that did not afford consistency in the lives of the English people. While the turbulence of this era is well known through the perspective of political and religious changes at the top echelons of society, there were significant effects on the everyday lives of the common people. By reading and analyzing last wills and testaments from Tudor England, one gains a personal perspective into and understanding of those lives.
