Item, that thou hast cōmended and praysed al the sayd persons, so erring and beleuing (or at the least wyse some of them) secretelye, and also openly, takinge and beleuyng them to be faythful and Catholike people, and their said opinions to be good and true, & the same to the best and vttermost of thy power thou hast allowed, mayntayned, and defended at sundry tymes.

Item, that thou, hauyng heard, knowen, & vnderstanded al the premisses, thus to bee, as is aforesayd, hast not regarded all or any part thereof, but contrarye to the same and euerye parte thereof, hast attempted and done, condempning, transgressyng, and breakyng that promise, fayth, religion, order, and custome aforesayde: and hast becōmen, and art an heretick and misbeleuer in the premisses, denying the verity of Christes bodye and bloude in the sacrament of the altar, and obstinatelye affirmyng, that the substaunce of material breade and wyne are there remayning, and that the substaunce of Christes body and bloud taken of the vyrgin Marye, are not there in the said sacrament, really and truly beyng.

Item, that al the premisses be true, notorious, famous, and manyfest, and that vpon al the same, there haue, and be, amongest the sad and good people of the Citye of London and dioces of the same in great multitude, cōmonly and publiquely, a common and publike fame and opinion, and also in al places where thou haste beene, wythin the sayde Dioces of London.

TO the fyrst, they answer and confesse the same to be true.

To the seconde, they answer and beleue the same to be true.

To the thyrde, they answer and beleue the same to be true.

To the fourth, they answer and thynke the same to be true.

To the fyft, vnto thys clause, (and so was in it very dede,) they answer and beleue the same to be true. And vnto that clause, and so was it in very dede, they answer negatiuely, & beleue that it was so in very dede.

To the sixt, seuenth, and eight, they answer and beleue the same to be true.

To the nynth they answer & say, that they thynke they haue a iust and lawfull cause and ground to swarue and go from the sayde faith and religion, because they haue now red more of scripture, then eyther they them selues, or theyr Parentes and kynsfolke, godfathers or Godmothers haue read or sene heretofore in that behalfe.

To the tenth, they answer, say, and beleue, that the sayd persones articulate, haue bene named, taken, and counted for heretyckes: and so condempned for heretickrs: yet aboute three yeares past, they were taken for good Christian persons. And for so muche as these Respondentes, dyd euer heare them preache concernyng the sacrament of the aultar, they say that they preached wel, in that they sayde and preached that Christ is not present really and truly in the said sacrament, but that ther is remainynge the substaunce of breade and wyne.

To the leuenth, they aunswere and saye, that howe soeuer other folkes do repute and take the said persons articulate: yet these respondentes them selues did neuer, nor yet doo so accompte and take them. And further they saye, that in case the said persons articulate named in this article haue preached, that in the sacrament of the aulter is verye materiall breade and materiall wyne, and not the substaunce of Christes bodye and blood, vnder the formes of bread and wine, then they preached well and truely: and these respondentes them selues do so beleue.

To the twelueth they answere and say: that where other folke haue dispraised the sayd persons articulate, and disallowed theyr opinions these Respondentes (for oughte that they at any time haue hearde) did like and allowe the said persons, and their sayinges.

To the thirtene, they aunswer & saye: that they haue not broken or condemned any promys made by their Godfathers and Godmothers for them at their baptism, and that they are no hereticks, nor misbeleuers (in that they beleue) that there remaineth onely breade and wyne in the sacrament of the aulter, and that Christes natural bodye is not ther, but in heauen: for they saye that the scriptures so teache them.

To the fourtene they aunswer and beleue, that the premisses before, by them confessed, be true, notorious, and manifest.

The hystorye of VVylliam Hunter, concerning the notable and Christian constancie, as wel of him as of his parentes, in the cause and time of martirdome, suffring for the Gospell.  

Commentary     Close

The Martyrdom of William Hunter

William Hunter's case should have disturbed the authorities. He was one of the first of the lay people of humble background to be executed and, unlike some of the other early martyrs with similar backgrounds (e.g., Thomas Tomkins and John Warne), he had no previous history of religious dissidence. The narrative Foxe presents of his arrest and judicial ordeals presents a vivid picture of overzealous local authorities feeding the fires of persecution.

[Back to Top]

Foxe's narrative is an excellent example of the importance of oral sources to his martyrology. The entire account of Hunter in the Rerum consists of praise of Hunter's parents for subordinating their natural love for their son to ther duty to God and their support for his refusal to submit (Rerum, pp. 427-8). This material was reprinted in the 1563 edition, with no significant change or addition. But in the second edition, Foxe added the detailed and vivid narrative of William Hunter's arrest, interrogations and martyrdom, which was clearly supplied by Hunter's brother Robert. The reader should keep this source in mind when reading the account: its strengths are its mastery of local detail and its access to the feelings of the martyr and those around him (e.g., his description of William Hunter's dreams). But partisanship may colour some of the 'facts' of the narrative: for example, did the sun shine brightly on Hunter after he prayed for the Son of God to shine upon him?

[Back to Top]

Commentary on the Glosses     Close

William Hunter

Several notes focus upon the unnaturalness of popery: Foxe exploits the request to Hunter's father to return his son to what he suspects, with justice, will be his death; the glosses concerned with this episode use metaphors of 'fruit', and comment on the naturalnes of the relations between Hunter and his father. In the gloss 'The fruite of the Popes doctrine to set the father agaynst the sonne', Foxe sets the generative metaphors of fruit and paternity against each other to emphasise the subversion of the natural order by papal doctrine and offers a contrast in a later gloss, 'The working of nature betwene the father & the sonne'. Another gloss emphasises the comforting of Hunter by the son of the sheriff ('The Shriffes sonne geueth comfortable wordes to W. Hunter'), which suggests that a son was set against his father. Two glosses make use of phrases established in Book X as anti-catholic commonplaces: the charge that papists cannot 'abide' scripture ('The Catholickes cannot abide the Bible') and the use of the phrase 'pelting chafe' to indicate the fury of a persecutor ('M. Browne in a pelting chafe'). Some glosses near to the account of Hunter's death ('His father and mother come to cōfort him'; 'His father & mother exhort him to be constant'; 'Maister Higbed maruelleth at the constancy of Williams mother') emphasise constancy and several relate the prophetic dream Hunter had shortly before his death and the occasions of 'verification' of it ('A notable thing concerning W. Hunters dreame'; 'W. Hunters dreame verefied'; 'Williams dreame verified'). The cruel treatment of Hunter is also stressed ('Boner commaundeth W. Hunter to the stockes. W. Hunter 2. dayes & 2. nightes in the stockes, with a crust of bread, & a cuppe of water'; 'W. Hnnter layd in the conuict prison with as many yrons as he could beare'). An erroneous date in the 1563 edition is corrected in later editions.

[Back to Top]