To pardon and to punish: Mercy and authority in Tudor England

This study explores the role of the royal pardon in the construction and experience of authority in Tudor England. Working initially from the historiography of law and order, it ultimately places itself among studies of English political culture. This thesis examines the functions and meanings of mercy in early modern society; it argues that while pardons constituted potent instruments of royal authority, public expectations of mercy also shaped the sovereign's exercise of power.; The Tudors used punishment and pardons as complementary strategies to exact the deference and obedience of their subjects. Historians who have discussed early modern justice without serious reference to mercy have overlooked something of vital significance to contemporaries. This thesis opens by delineating the web of ideas within which pardons operated; drawing from both Classical and Scriptural traditions, writers insisted upon the necessity of clemency as both a right and a duty of legitimate rule. It then explores the punitive context that pardons relied upon for their effect. During the sixteenth century, parliaments rendered an increasing number of behaviours punishable by the law, experimented with new types of penal sanctions, and restricted access to traditional forms of mitigation. In addition, Henry VIII gathered the prerogative of pardon into his hands alone; increasingly, people who hoped to avoid the penalties for their offences had no recourse but to seek mercy from their sovereign. Yet, as the law became more severe and the power of pardon became centralised, mercy assumed even greater importance. To mitigate the appearance of overly harsh justice---to present themselves as clement and hence legitimate rulers---the Tudors granted ever more pardons and sought new ways to extend their mercy more broadly. The leading actors in an intensely theatrical political culture, they also crafted dramatic spectacles to advertise their clemency and enhance their authority. Public expectations assured some people of remission, and broadly shared norms of due justice, pity, and humanity underpinned the decisions to pardon particular individuals. Nevertheless, the discretionary use of mercy most often served the interests of the Crown and elites. With few bureaucratised methods of presenting a suit to the sovereign, petitioners had to work within existing social hierarchies of dominance and deference, pledging at least outwardly a humble submission to their sovereign. Finally, this study turns to the most dramatic performances of pardon: those offered, accepted, or rejected during the armed revolts of the period. Here again, but even more explicitly, the Tudors traded mercy for deference. The negotiations for mercy that permeated each protest and its resolution reveal with greatest clarity the relationship between pardons and punishment in the continuous reconstruction of the hierarchical bonds of obedience that lay at the core of Tudor political culture.