Lionel Sharpe

By John Williams

The first ever biography of Lionel Sharpe, the man who fought for the separation of powers, the rule of law and the supremacy of parliament. It is sometimes brutal, sometimes artistic, sometimes lewd, sometimes poetical and somewhat political. It explores literary form and challenges social mores. We meet with joy, passion, love and laughter; we also encounter hate and sexual loathing and infinite loneliness. We twist the mother lode, scoop deeper and deeper into a mine of despair and finite oblivion. But we emerge crying, 'liberty!' In Lionel Sharpe, the reader will see the sweet lion, lion, lion hit freedom's sweet spot. Although Lionel Sharpe enabled democracy to flower, he is unknown. We will tremble because for Lionel Sharpe one phrase blooms: The lion's kiss fell on open lips.

"Lionel Sharpe was 'The malice of the age' and he was coming for them, for the killers of Buckingham, for free speech and for the common good. He would fight against the absolutist vision that King Charles 1st was trying to impose on England. He lived discreetly, quietly hidden away in the shadows, but the King heard him roar his silent no."

Lionel Sharpe was beautiful and damned; he gave you individual freedom by destroying individual freedom; he gave you love and fear; he gave his soul to heaven and hell.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Lulu.com
• Release date: Apr 27, 2022
• ISBN: 9781471714214

John Williams

John Williams was born in Cardiff in 1961.He wrote a punk fanzine and played in bands before moving to London and becoming a journalist , writing for everyone for The Face to the Financial Times. He wrote his first book, an American crime fiction travelogue called Into The Badlands (Paladin) in 1991. His next book, Bloody Valentine (HarperCollins), written around the Lynette White murder case in the Cardiff docks, came out in 1994. Following a subsequent libel action from the police, he turned to fiction. His first novel the London-set Faithless (Serpent's Tail) came out in 1997. Shortly afterward he moved back to Cardiff, with his family, and has now written four novels set in his hometown - Five Pubs, Two Bars And A Nightclub (Bloomsbury 1999); Cardiff Dead (Bloomsbury 2000); The Prince Of Wales (Bloomsbury 2003) and Temperance Town (Bloomsbury 2004). He has edited an anthology of new Welsh fiction, Wales Half Welsh (Bloomsbury 2004). He also writes screenplays (his ninety-minute drama, A Light In The City, was shown by BBC Wales in 2001). An omnibus edition of his Cardiff novels, The Cardiff Trilogy, is to be published by Bloomsbury in summer 2006.

Book preview

Lionel Sharpe

John Williams

Copyright Notice:

Lionel Sharpe by John Williams. Some Rights Reserved – Creative Commons – (CC BY)

First Published: 08.04.2022

Copyright year 2022

ISBN: 978-1-4717-1421-4

This book is written within Australia. In the spirit of reconciliation we acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.

Lionel Sharpe was beautiful and damned; he gave you individual freedom by destroying individual freedom; he gave you love and fear; he gave his soul to heaven and hell.

The first ever biography of Lionel Sharpe, the man who fought for the separation of powers, the rule of law and the supremacy of parliament. It is sometimes brutal, sometimes artistic, sometimes lewd, sometimes poetical and somewhat political. It explores literary form and challenges social mores. We meet with joy, passion, love and laughter; we also encounter hate and sexual loathing and infinite loneliness. We twist the mother lode, scoop deeper and deeper into a mine of despair and finite oblivion. But we emerge crying, ‘liberty!’ In Lionel Sharpe, the reader will see the sweet lion, lion, lion hit freedom’s sweet spot. Although Lionel Sharpe enabled democracy to flower, he is unknown. We will tremble because for Lionel Sharpe one phrase blooms:

The lion’s kiss fell on open lips.

The Dedication

Lionel Sharpe wrote for Anne and for his time, as you will see. I am writing for the present.

This book, to you the viewer, is adamantly, without doubt, to be taken slowly and with caution. There is a hill to navigate together. In time, if we walk forthrightly in the right direction, we will make it to the summit together.

When I made it there alone, before you, I shyly shouted, ‘I am a myth restorer’s heyday. We should erase iniquity and recall our history’. But I didn’t write this story alone: Sharpe wrote this story; we wrote this story together.

With the help of our spirits we’ll make our world live once more; you will only find courage within, so open the door and you will let in the light.

Address To The Reader

The reader will be taken on a journey to discover Lionel Sharpe, to discover how his three lions set us free. His story has never been told before; he has been lost, but he has been found. His story is untold because the lion’s kiss fell on open lips. We will find that what we thought we knew about history is illuminated by our knowing this one man. We will all love Lionel Sharpe and we will all fear him.

Lionel Sharpe’s memorial records that he lived 1559 to 1630. His life was lived during the reigns of Queen Elizabeth 1st and the Stuart monarchs, King James 1st and King Charles 1st. Until now, he has mainly been known as the man who wrote Queen Elizabeth’s Tilbury speech down and who reported that he was asked to redeliver this speech to her army. However, this book will relentlessly present the facts, until we reshape our opinion, until eventually we discover that Lionel Sharpe wasn’t only a man of his time, he was the man of all time.

With Lionel Sharpe, there are layers within layers within layers. As this book progresses, the man will slowly unravel before us, until we know his whole being. We will light up his art and feel a soul rip asunder. He was charming and strong and he won every battle he fought; he was loved and respected by the country he fought for. But he gave himself to darkness to give us democracy, and he paid with his life.

We will uncover how Lionel Sharpe lived an incredible and full life at the centre of artistic and political power, and reveal how he carried many terrible secrets to his grave. This book is the key to unlocking and understanding his secrets, including his one marvellous secret. This one secret will cause our minds to bend and twist with its immensity. Without the facts, this one secret is just an idea in the mind of one man; with the facts, this secret will be for everyone to mind. When we pull his blanket back and reveal him in all his glory, he will relight our spirits with his black ink and set our hearts on fire.

Lionel Sharpe was able to write wonderfully on both sides of the anagram’s mirror. It is why he was the mirror of the age. He loathed life and fought his way to power with his sword; he loved life and thought his way to power with his words. People saw what he did which was beautiful and what he did which was terrifying, and they saw themselves in his image. He was their reflection, staring confidently back at them from their looking glasses, challenging them, mocking them, pushing them. He would say look at me, look at what I did, look at what we will be able to do together.

We should be frightened to peer into Lionel Sharpe’s looking glass, but we should not wear fear, for his fear made us free. He may terrify us, but when we hear his tortured voice, we will love him, just as his peers did. Whilst he was with them, they heard the music to life’s dance.

Within the State Papers, dating to the day in August 1628 that the Duke of Buckingham was assassinated, lives a satirical poem titled The Spy which contains these words:

In press or pulpit, dare of speech be free

In Truth’s behalf, and vent their grieved mind

In phrase more serious, or some graver kind...

they cannot ‘scape The malice of the age’

Lionel Sharpe was ‘The malice of the age’ and he was coming for them, for the killers of Buckingham, for free speech and for the common good. Over the following eighteen months, he would fight against the absolutist vision that King Charles 1st was trying to impose on England. He lived discreetly, quietly hidden away in the shadows, but the King heard him roar his silent no.

In Sharpe, a serious amour, an awesome, a gravity defying man is found, one who could operate on many levels. But whilst we will often have to ponder his true meaning, he left us a very clear legacy. In the US, Britain and Australia we live in the democracies which he gave to us. He is why we are free.

As you rediscover Lionel Sharpe, take care that you tread sonorously but carefully – his mind was beautiful and he expressed the most sensitive feelings, but he was terror, too, twisted into ungodly form. He had a huge heart, but he lost his soul, and he will threaten to fracture your heart into myriad pieces. You will rage, yet you will laugh with him, and you will love him for what he did, for all time. For many he was fear, but his fear brought with it your world.

Do not wear fear, draw on his courage, and stand with him as he once stood before the English Army at Tilbury, as he delivered for our world such words, such defiance, such power, such a message for our spirits:

I am come amongft you, as you fee, at this time, not for my recreation, and difport, but being re-folved in the midft, and heat of the battaile to live, or die amongft you all, to lay down for my God, and for my Kingdom, and for my people, my Honour, and my blood even in the duft – The Tilbury Speech - taken from Lionel Sharpe’s 1623 letter to Buckingham.

FREEDOM

Lionel Sharpe

‘HE DYED JOYFVLLY THE FIRST DAY OF JANVARY AD NI: 1630’

FOR YOU TO BE FREE

..Helpe - Seraph fears Lionel Sharpe is heare

.Perhaps he ‘spares’ your ‘bones’ a sharp turn of phrase.

.Albeit he

The Malice of the Age

..shaped and formed our democracy.

It happens to be why now we are free,...

From ‘Ladislao Welen Barone di Zierotin’s’ ‘hapless crew’,

For Sharpe’s Sake eraepSpare him AnnE

ERAPSHARPE is Sharpe’s fake

Our Mirror of the Age,

COz

no man hath it [The Tilbury fpeech] but myfelf, and fuch as I have given it to.

These are Lionel Sharpe’s words, written within his 1623 letter to Buckingham. These words may be read in three different ways.

Sharpe’s oblivion ends with you; in you ends Sharpe’s oblivion.

Do not wear fear, for Sharpe’s fear founded freedom.

Lionel Sharpe’s

O U L

.....

Index

Part 1 includes:

1. Introduction;

2. Sharpe and Wriothesley and Oxford in 1604;

3. The Gunpowder Plot of 1605;

4. The 1612 London Lottery;

5. The suspicious death of Prince Henry in 1612;

6. The Addled Parliament of 1614;

7. The murder of Thomas Overbury;

8. Raleigh and Sharpe in the Tower in 1614;

9. The Discreet Rebellion of 1628-1630.

Part 2 includes:

1. Introduction;

2. For Sharpe’s sake;

3. Sharpe in early allusions to Shakespeare;

4. Shape in Shakespeare;

5. Shakespeare perhaps;

6. Shakespeare, lion and sharp;

7. Ape in Shakespeare;

8. A Sharpe turn of phrase;

9. Shakespeare’s happier phase;

10. Sphere in Shakespeare’s canon;

11. Sharpe was fear;

12. Albeit he made Elizabeth art; and

13. John Milton and Edward Phillips.

Part 3 includes:

1. Introduction;

2. The Herbert’s Sharp writing;

3. Assassination of Christopher Marlowe 1593;

4. Chettle draws up an apology;

5. Abraham Fraunce;

6. Venus and Adonis 1593;

7. The Rape of Lucrece 1594;

8. Shakespeare and Herbert;

9. The Defence of Poefie 1595;

10. The Shepherd’s sickle; and

11. The Dedication to the Sonnets 1609.

The Fourth Part includes:

1. Patronage by the Earl of Essex to 1601;

2. The Polish Delegation Incident of 1597;

3. The Harlean version of the Tilbury speech;

4. The recruitment of scholars from Cambridge; and

5. The Essex Rebellion of 1601.

Part 5 includes:

1. M. DERINGS Workes 1614;

2. The death of Shakespeare 1616;

3. The First Folio 1623; and

4. The Second Folio in 1632.

Part 6 includes:

1. Introduction;

2. Sharpe and Edward Griffin;

3. Aphorismes Civill and Militaire 1629;

4. The First Part of the Life and Raigne of King Henrie IIII; and

5. The Saints Cordials 1629.

Part 7 details:

1. Introduction;

2. The Life and Reign of King Edward the Sixt 1630;

3. Poemes by Michael Drayton 1630;

4. The Breast Plate of Faith and Love 1630;

5. THE LIFE AND DEATH OF Prince HENRY 1649;

6. TVVO SERMONS VVHEREIN VVE ARE TAVGHT 1630;

7. Sharpe’s memorial stone.

Part 8 includes:

1. The Tilbury Speech;

2. An analysis of Sharpe’s letter to Buckingham; and

3. The vocabulary and phrases used by Sharpe.

Part 9 includes:

1. Summary;

2. Who were Sharpe’s weavers;

3. The Marprelate Libels;

4. Coats of Arms;

5. Fuch forreign Enemies as;

6. Hereo;

7. The Ecclesiastical Historie of Socraties;

8. The Queen sets forth;

9. 1612;

10. Chamberlain’s letters;

11. The Earl of Arundal and the word four;

12. The King James Bible;

13. The Fatal Vespers 1623;

14. Thomas Russel;

15. Seville;

16. John Webster;

17. The Castlehaven Trial;

18. Linking Sharpe to Shakespeare;

19. George Ambrose Rhodes;

20. Locrene Mucedorus;

21. Sharp witted;

22. Shakespeare’s characters - Sharpe’s family;

23. Parallels;

24. As You Like It;

25. The Second Part of Henry the Fourth;

26. George a Greene;

27. The Annales or Generall Chron-icle;

28. Litigation involving Shakespeare;

29. Shakespeare’s memorial;

30. Anne Cornwallis;

31. John Wolfe;

32. Thomas Hobbes;

33. Sharpe’s brothers and sisters;

34. Paintings and images?

35. Thomas Scott;

36. Sir Fulke Greville by Edmund Lodge;

37. A son?

38. King James’ Speeches;

39. Sugar;

40. L You See I Fear;

41. Sir John Harington;

42. William Lambarde;

43. Barnfield;

44. Giles Fletcher;

45. A loyal double or triple agent?

46. Sharpe and King Charles 1st;

47. Sharpe’s correspondence;

48. Another secret;

49. A flaw;

50. Elizabeth Chichester;

51. A puzzle is to be resolved;

52. Clarendon;

53. Lionel Cranfield; and

54. Finish and beginning.

Part 10 includes:

1. Introduction;

2. The Theatre of the Empire of Great Britaine 1612;

3. Queen Elizabeth’s 1586 letter to Leicester;

4. Leicester’s Last Letter to Elizabeth;

5. THE LIFE Of the Renowned Sr PHILIP SIDNEY 1652;

6. The letters of Languet and Sir Philip Sidney;

7. Summary; and

8. For the future which we live within.....

Part 1

Dear son of Memory, great heir of fame,

What need’st thou such weak witness of thy name?

Thou in our wonder and astonishment

Hast built thyself a live-long monument.

John Milton. On Shakespeare. 1630.

We are searching for Lionel Sharpe together; together we will find that he was a significant spy who was a significant historical figure. He will challenge our thinking and our assumptions. In finding him, we will uncover an ink-black light which will pull us towards the darkest places. We will join the pieces to link Lionel Sharpe’s shade to his light. We will rediscover his blackness, his whole being. We will see the emptiness of the man who made us free and we will feel how immensely full with life he was.

Lionel Sharpe did fantastic and terrible things for us. He left us great art and he gave us the rule of law, the separation of powers and the supremacy of parliament. Many may want to kneel before this altered history, but instead we should stand with him and repeat his demands for freedom. We should insist that we are given the right to free speech, the right to freedom of assembly, and the right to privacy. But we should not fight our fight the way he fought his fight. We should not kill and humiliate as Sharpe did; we should stand up for our rights peacefully and lawfully.

Despite all his many crimes, Lionel Sharpe did his duty and he died for us on New Year’s Day 1630; he died for parliament, and in doing so, he won democracy. When we think about his sacrifice, we should recall that, though our rights are important, what is more important is that we do our duty to protect and enhance our democracies. We will not take our democracies for granted, we will not assume they will last forever, we will cherish their strength and their fragility. We will serve.

To unwrap who Lionel Sharpe really was and what he really did, we should be resolute in our commitment to examine each evidential tier carefully and with discretion. Each revelation should not drop uncared for upon us, without thought. Here we will think about what the meaning was for the people involved. Whilst this book is grounded in facts – cold and hard and indisputable – these facts altered the lives as well as the deaths of people. They lived and they cared and they thought, earlier in history than us, but they were as human as any of us. Some were courtiers, some were poor, some were religious, some were irreligious. We should think about them as though they were us.

In his own words, Lionel Sharpe will inform you who he was and what he did and why he did it: they are elegant and beautiful words which will touch our hearts; they are earthy and guttural words which will challenge our sensibilities; and they are malevolent and emotionless words which we will fear to read. He wanted to be found and to be seen and we will see him. We’ll give form to his life, we’ll give form to his death and we’ll give form to his memory.

When we examine next how Sharpe and Wriothesely were both involved in the events surrounding the death of Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, in 1604, we will be introduced to Sir Fulke Greville who was a statesman who held various posts during his career, for example Treasurer of the Navy and Chancellor of the Exchequer. However, he was additionally a spy master who Sharpe worked for in the beginning of his career. He was Sharpe’s very good friend: their lives and deaths were very much intertwined.

In September 1628, Fulke Greville was assassinated. This was twenty-four years after Oxford had died. Fulke Greville was one of the first to die in this tumultuous period, when Sharpe shaped our world.

When Fulke Greville died, he became a martyr for freedom with a remarkable ability to command power and respect from beyond the grave, as the many entries from and to him that survive in the State Papers for the period September 1628 to 1630 prove. These were almost certainly Sharpe’s messages or written on his behalf. Sharpe was going to get the men that killed his friend; he was going to do this for Fulke’s sake, for power and for freedom.

Fulke Greville’s closeness to Sharpe can be demonstrated by this brief chronology recording the death of George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, who in 1628 was Sharpe and Fulke Greville’s patron and ally, and the deaths of Sharpe and Sharpe’s two most trusted friends, Fulke Greville himself and Sir Charles Cornwallis:

Evidence of failed assassination attempt on Sharpe - July 1628

Buckingham assassinated - 23.08.1628

Fulke Greville assassinated - 30.09.1628

Charles Cornwallis’ death - 21.12.1629

Lionel Sharpe’s death - 01.01.1630

We will be considering Sharpe’s role leading the Discreet Rebellion of 1628 to 1630 later. For now the reader may draw their own conclusion as to whether or not these deaths cause them any suspicion or were in any way odd. Might one or two be a coincidence, readers may reasonably think, but we will find that there were many more such coincidental deaths. In due course, we will see evidence which indicates that Lionel Sharpe was extra-judicially executed on New Years Day 1630 because he fought for democracy.

For whose sake, will you the reader be able to find the secrets herein? Perhaps you will see a few. Some may make you laugh, some may make you cry, some will be so filled with pain and suffering and betrayal that you will quake, and some will be so asinine, made from silly synonyms even, that you will doubt their quality, though eventually they will shine. There will be fear and terror, too. For to know Sharpe will be to fear for your soul’s life.

We will start in the middle of Lionel Sharpe’s career and work our way towards its conclusion. We will discover how Sharpe’s sphere of influence was massive, how he shaped and formed England and our world, how he emancipated us from tyranny, and how he enabled us to be free.

Sharpe and Wriothesley and Oxford in 1604

We will now establish that Lionel Sharpe was a very important historical figure. This itself is a significant discovery. However, as each subsequent chapter progresses, it will become increasingly apparent that Lionel Sharpe was the leviathan of his age. It will be a roller coaster ride, as settled beliefs and assumptions, one-by-one, will have to be set aside.

Lionel Sharpe was close friends with Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton. As a youth, Wriothesley had been very much in the orbit and sway of Robert Devereaux, Earl of Essex, who was Sharpe’s patron until the Essex Rebellion of 1601. Wriothesley is well known because Shakespeare dedicated his narrative poems, Venus and Adonis 1593 and The Rape of Lucrece 1594, to him.

On 24th June 1604, Lionel Sharpe and Wriothesley were arrested together and taken to the Tower. This was the same day that Oxford, died. It will be demonstrated here that this was very unlikely to have been an arrestingly ridiculous coincidence.

The following chronology, relating to the events surrounding Oxford’s death back in 1604, is largely taken from the Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House, British History Online, and from a paper titled A Monument Without a Tomb A Mystery of Oxford’s death by Christopher Paul. A fuller chronology is found within appendix 4.

27.04.1603 Oxford wrote to his former brother in law Robert Cecil saying he was least regarded by the Queen, and that her death has left him to try his fortune.

20.06.1604 Sir Griffin Markham to Lord Cecil. ‘The shortness of the time permits me not to conclude anything, the men that we are to deal with being very many, very scrupulous and desirous to be satisfied by their counsel ...’

23.06.1604 The Earl of Bath to Lord Cecil. Regarding a dispute with a carpenter about the passage of great portions of wood and timber through his land. Sending his servant as an eye witness.

24.06.1604 Purported death of the Earl of Oxford.

24.06.1604 Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton, is arrested with Lionel Sharpe.

25.06.1604 Henry Wriothesley and others released.

30.06.1604 Lionel Sharp to the Same. Moved by duty to his Majesty and the fear of peril he stirred up some worthy gentlemen to offer their services to withstand any attempt against him, but never intended to stir a foot till the King’s pleasure was known. They have meant much good and done no harm. He chose Sir Thomas Erskine to present their duty to his Majesty, as he was Captain of the Guard and so near about him; but Erskine gave him no commission to do it, though he did not refuse to receive their duties. If anything is done amiss it is the writer’s fault only, but pardonable, he trusts, for his loyalty. If Cecil is otherwise informed, much worry has been done him. Offers himself for further examination, and begs Cecil to put the best construction on his goodpurpose.—30 June. Holograph. Endorsed: 1604. 1 p.(127. 87.)

03.07.1604? Sir Gawdy receives a letter from his brother Philip stating that, ‘upon Sunday last Dr Sharpe was sent to the Tower close prisoner, the cause not directly known, but for treason, and supposed that he hath done very ill offices betwixt the king, and his Lords’

03.07.1604 - Sir G. Hervey, Lieutenant of the Tower, to Lord Cecil. I send you herewith the declaration of D. Sharpe required, which you should before this time have received, if the evil disposition of his body had not hindered it. I neither may nor will plead for the man or matter but think that (by the chips which are fallen into his eyes) he has learned hereafter to beware how to hew above his reach. From the Tower, 3 July 1604.

07.07.1604 – Sir G. Hervye, Lieutenant of the Tower, to the Same. Having acquainted you with the desire of D. Sharpe, I have upon hope of your good allowance presumed from him to offer your lordship these passionate enclosed. - From the Tower, 7 July 1604.

07.07.1604 – Sir Griffin Markham to Lord Cecil. ‘Your Lordships inclination to justice and mercy and the many obligations I have received encourage me to become a suitor to you fir sine increase of liberty …. His Majesty out of commiseration has bestowed my estate upon Sir John Haringeton to whom I was engaged little. If I redeem not this I shall neither be able to live without arms nor to satisfy my own debts grown to me for my contry’s service... If my most foul faults have not made me too unworthy to mention any alliance, give me leave to press you to patronise me and with your honourable credit to assist me. - From the Gatehouse, this 7 of July.’

17.07.1604 Sir Fulke Grevyll to the Same [Cecil Papers]. Asks the meaning of these confused rumours they hear. The bearer will explain why he does not wait upon the King and Cecil, who will then pardon his absence and unmannerlinesse. - Debtford, 17 July.

16.08.1604 – ‘Bridget Ross to Lord Cecil. On July 27th, Sir Griffin Markham entered her husband’s house with his wife and family, and took up residence there. He behaved most offensively, ordering her father-in-law, Charles Clapham out of the house under threat of violence... Fearing for her own life and that of the sun petitioner left the house secretly. She appeals to Cecil to intervene for the safety and education of her child, and requests him to entrust his person and education to some reliable person, she herself being ready to defray all necessary expences... ‘

Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, was Secretary of State (1596-1612) under Queen Elizabeth and then King James, and he was Lord High Treasurer (1608-1612). He was the political giant of his time, towering over his contemporaries in the raw power he exercised, very often silently and from within the darkest shadows. His father was William Cecil, Baron Burghley, who had been Secretary of State and Lord High Treasurer for Queen Elizabeth. In each of their times, the father and the son were both, in effect, the power behind the throne.

The above entries demonstrate that Sharpe was instructing the Lieutenant of the Tower to make reports for him to Robert Cecil and that Lionel Sharpe had direct personal contact with Robert Cecil.

They also demonstrate that he or Wriothesley chose Sir Thomas Erskine to present their duty to the King, who was compliant with their request. Erskine was a very close friend to the King and Captain of the Guard. In other words, Lionel Sharpe was a very powerful man.

The only possible avenue to argue against Sharpe being a major spy would be to say that the 3rd July and 7th July 1604 entries by Sir G Hervey were in relation to a different Sharpe being at the Tower instructing him. The only Sharpe known to be at the Tower around or at this time was Lionel Sharpe. As well as this, the June 30th 1604 entry appears to have been this same Sharpe writing either a defence of himself or a defence of Wriothesley to Robert Cecil. It is virtually certain that this was Lionel Sharpe. The burden of proof has been shifted. It is safe to say that the role of disputing the fact that Lionel Sharpe was a significant spy would now rest with anyone who doubts that Lionel Sharpe was a significant spy and not the other way around.

It might also be assumed that the information Sharpe ensured was passed on to Cecil included a plea by Oxford for his life, written in the name of Sir Griffin Markham, dated 7th July 1604. If so, then Oxford was a very brave man. He must have known the position he was in was dire. This plea is repeated again below. It is made the same date as the Lieutenant of the Tower wrote to Cecil saying, ‘Having acquainted you with the desire of D. Sharpe, I have upon hope of your good allowance presumed from him to offer your lordship these passionate enclosed’.

As you read, imagine you had been beaten and perhaps tortured and were being held in a cell. It is most definitely a plea, but there is honour here and service and a willingness to concede much, but not all. Here you will hear dignity:

our Lordships inclination to justice and mercy and the many obligations I have received encourage me to become a suitor to you fir sine increase of liberty …. His Majesty out of commiseration has bestowed my estate upon Sir John Haringeton to whom I was engaged little. If I redeem not this I shall neither be able to live without arms nor to satisfy my own debts grown to me for my contry’s service... If my most foul faults have not made me too unworthy to mention any alliance, give me leave to press you to patronise me and with your honourable credit to assist me. - From the Gatehouse, this 7 of July.

If as yet the reader doesn’t agree with the possibility that this was OxforD writing under the alias Griffin Markham, then this writer appeals to their inclination to justice and reasonableness and pleas as a suitor would that they consider his point of view once they have read on. Should they think this point unsuitable thereafter, it will be the foul fault of this writer.

It is worth pointing out that the names Griffin and Markham were both names that were strongly connected to Sharpe and that they were aliases that he regularly used. The evidence for this is going to be set forth later in this book.

Of course, perhaps Griffin Markham’s message to Cecil dated 7th July 1604 was only what it purported to be. There was a historical figure, Griffin Markham, who was a conspirator in the Bye and Main Plots of 1603, which included a plot to kidnap King James. He was sentenced to execution but reprieved and exiled to Europe in 1605, where he is said to have spied for Robert Cecil.

In light of the 16th August 1604 message from Bridget Ross to Robert Cecil, it seems that Griffin Markham was already out and strong arming her in August 1604. Perhaps he was required to do this to prove he was prepared to do dirty work for Cecil. Otherwise, why was Griffin Markham, a conspirator in a plot against the King in 1603, let off so lightly?

Griffin Markham’s 7th July 1604 message reads as though it was from someone the equal of Cecil who was down on his luck, someone who would think about offering an alliance. Griffin Markham could not be said to have been on a level of parity with Cecil. Whereas Oxford was on that level.

If we look closely, we find an answer, because the 20th June 1604 message from Griffin Markham to Robert Cecil makes it plain he was already working for Cecil, and this pre-dates the 7th July 1604 plea by Griffin Markham, where he is offering to work for or with Robert Cecil. This adds significant weight to the proposition that Griffin Markham was an alias being utilised by Sharpe and which he was prepared to lend out to others. More than this, we will see what many will regard as conclusive evidence that Griffin Markham’s name was being adopted as an alias by an agent of Robert Cecil, when we examine Sharpe’s role in uncovering the Gunpowder Plot next.

We may wonder why Sharpe and Wriothesley had been arrested together on the day that Oxford allegedly died? What had they appeared to be up to that prompted this arrest? What mishap happened to our man Sharpe which led to his arrest, given that we will find there is copious evidence showing how Sharpe wove intricate webs which rarely failed. He was the spy, the man who invariably succeeded, and yet here something went wrong and he was arrested?

It was a temporary situation because we know that Wriothesley was released the following day.

These entries provide an answer:

23.06.1604 The Earl of Bath to Lord Cecil. Regarding a dispute with a carpenter about the passage of great portions of wood and timber through his land. Sending his servant as an eye witness.

24.06.1604 The Earl of Oxford’s reported date of death.

30.06.1604 Lionel Sharp to the Same. Moved by duty to his Majesty and the fear of peril he stirred up some worthy gentlemen to offer their services to withstand any attempt against him, but never intended to stir a foot till the King’s pleasure was known. They have meant much good and done no harm. He chose Sir Thomas Erskine to present their duty to his Majesty, as he was Captain of the Guard and so near about him; but Erskine gave him no commission to do it, though he did not refuse to receive their duties. If anything is done amiss it is the writer’s fault only, but pardonable, he trusts, for his loyalty. If Cecil is otherwise informed, much worry has been done him. Offers himself for further examination, and begs Cecil to put the best construction on his goodpurpose.—30 June.Holograph. Endorsed: 1604. 1 p. (127. 87.)

01.07.1604 Francis Morris writes to Sir Bassingbourne Gawdy giving details of Lionel Sharpe’s involvement in the 24.06.1604 arrest of Southampton [Wriothesley].

03.07.1604? Sir Gawdy receives a letter from his brother Philip stating that, ‘upon Sunday last Dr Sharpe was sent to the Tower close prisoner, the cause not directly known, but for treason, and supposed that he hath done very ill offices betwixt the king, and his Lords’

Thus we are able to establish that Sharpe was arrested for treason, but that Sharpe was saying that he (Sharpe or Wriothesley perhaps) ‘stirred up some worthy gentlemen to offer their services to withstand any attempt against him’. If Sharpe or Wriothesley was an agent provocateur, this would explain why they were caught in the net when it fell. Or were they in fear that an attempt would be made against the life of Sharpe, Wriothesley or the King? Either way there seems to be an excellent possibility that Oxford had been accused of acting against the King’s interests and that he and his supporters were rounded up.

If this was the case, then it would have been a tremendously sad way to die. Oxford had been kept prisoner and given hope of life. He had made his plea to Cecil, but he did not have enough to offer and he was killed. May he rest in peace.

The letter writer, John Chamberlain, provides some evidence in support of the view that supporters of Oxford were being targeted. In a letter dated August 14th 1604, which was about one month after these events, he wrote to Dudley Carleton talking about men being hunted down, ‘set upon’ and killed. Then he says:

lastly that the fift of August a lioness whelped in the Towre, a thing seldom or never heard of before. Thus you see how we pay you with your owne coyne and send you trees to the woode. The sicknes increaseth at Oxford and have taken away one Evelie principall of Hart Hall on Wensday last, which gave them all such an alarme...

We should think about Bridget Ross, who was caught up in these events. It should be fairly obvious to most readers that the 16th August 1604 entry appears to be Bridget Ross attempting to reach an accommodation with Sharpe’s employer, Robert Cecil, to prevent his man, Griffin Markham, from further tormenting her. Bridget Ross offered Cecil her son, as a hostage we might think, and she offered to pay Cecil. How must she have felt to have her home invaded, to be put in fear for her life, to have to offer her son up to Cecil, to have to offer to pay to be left alone?

The Gunpowder Plot of 1605

The Gunpowder Plot was a nationally significant plot which had the aim of blowing up the Houses of Parliament, thus killing King James 1st and a large part of the ruling elite of England. It represented an attempt by discontented Catholics to overthrow or to throw into turmoil the entire political system. The plot was ‘discovered’ on November 5th 1605. It was ‘discovered’ because of a letter sent to Lord Monteagle warning him about the plot.

Here we will encounter something very beautiful, something the reader may never have seen before. It is both the weakest evidence and the strongest evidence for Sharpe’s involvement in the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot. It is the weakest evidence, because it is in the shape and form of anagrams left by Sharpe, and most will only be able to accept this evidence after they have had their thoughts shaped and formed by this book. It will also require an acceptance that Lionel Sharpe routinely signed his name to incriminating documents by the use of sinfully lovely anagrams. Some time soon, the reader will know these anagrams to be the strongest evidence and they will know it was Lionel Sharpe.

The first anagram we will look at will be the more compelling of two that we know that Sharpe left for us in order to claim his fame. It is wonderful and it is artistry and it is impossible to conceive how one mind could have made it alone. It is found within the cover art for the official account of the Gunpowder Plot, printed by Robert Barker the Royal Printer to King James in 1606 (The British Library); it is found within these words:

CVLOSA EFICIES,R,P.HENRICI,GA

In the original, which is on the title page, underneath the emboldened E there is a full stop. The original isn’t emboldened, but it contains a bold-faced partial anagram for Sharpe, which has been underlined by this writer and which links him intimately and intertwinedly with Prince Henry (‘Henrici’) – the King’s son who he became Royal Chaplain for around the time this document was printed.

The entwined names of the Prince and his loyal servant are here delineated on either side by the palindromic letters I C I.

The anagram is missing the A, but that is where we will come to see that Sharpe could sing his own song. To have their doubts assuaged, a reader might wish to be able to announce, I see, I see A. In order to announce this, they should look to the first palindromic ICI and read ‘A EFICI’ backwards as I C I SE A, whilst recalling that the letters S and F looked very similar at the time and writers played with this.

To make up for this strange F as an S, until readers are perfuaded that this S F confusion was exploited by writers at that time, some readers are going to want to be able to announce another time that I see, I see A. To have their doubts assuaged, Sharpe gives it to them one more time. For this, they should look to the second palindromic ‘ICI’ within ‘ICI,GA’, except in the original the G looks suspiciously like a C, making I C I C A.

A ES I C I (Sharpe/Henry) I C I C A = A ees I ees II see I see A

egA eht fo rorriM ehTThe Mirror of the Age.

The anagram has a spare E which is marked by the full stop under it, which has to be swapped for the A. You will see we lose a E in ‘CVLOSA E’ = C V LOS A E.

We lose an E deliberately, because it is Sharpe’s famous spare E. Hear spare E now and understand what spare E means later.

Most readers should be in agreement that this anagram is stunning in its complexity and intrinsic beauty. It is arguably the greatest anagram ever written. The only competitors are other anagrams which are revealed within this work. As we will discover, Lionel Sharpe was a master of language.

The second anagram is very much less compelling than this; the second anagram is found within the missive which was sent to Lord Monteagle warning of the Gunpowder Plot. This letter contains a singular phrase – ‘youer preservacion’.

Firstly there is ‘er pre’ which is like a palindrome made with three letters from Sharpe’s name. The letter H is missing from the anagram for Sharpe, though Sharpe is itself an anagram for spare H.

But for my first and perhaps my last first person, for me, in the original document, when I look at the word ‘preservacion’, the ‘v’ I see to remind me of a letter h, because the smudged word above has given a helping hand by handing down the long arm of the missing letter h. Thus we have ‘youer preserhacion’ which gives to us an anagram for Sharpe with the extra er marked out by that palindrome ‘er pre’.

One spare E is smudged beyond recognition. The ‘ion’ is very close to being lion. The first ‘r’ could serve as an L, as it is a straight line, though not very long.

The letters after ‘preserhacion’ seem to look similar to ‘I L’ and thus we have ‘preserhacion Il’ which makes:

I C Lion Sharpe.

This leaves out the palindromic ER. But if we just leave out the smudged E and keep the R:

I C R Lion Sharpe.

This anagram will be far less persuasive, for most, than the first. Even if we do not stretch the adjacent letters into an I and an L, we still have Sharpe. This could be a coincidence, but for this writer, the first anagram above is very unlikely to be coincidental.

Perhaps it will be perhaps for now, but before long that perhaps must turn from possibility to overwhelming likelihood or certainty. At that point in time, the reader will accept that Lionel Sharpe routinely signed his name to incriminating documents to inform us and his peers that it was him who did what he did.

But was Sharpe responsible for Lord Monteagle being given advance notice of the plot? This writer will give the reader an advance tip - of course he was. We will soon come to discover that, when it comes to being Lionel Sharpe, the anagram within the letter to Lord Monteagle was the tip of the iceburg. For this writer’s sake, this had better be accepted, because without hazarding too much, a lot hangs on this one tipping point. In time, the reader will see, but meanwhile, with the reader’s current sensibilities (hearing possible anagrams as being very dubious being a very sensible concern) in mind, we will leave these incriminating anagrams to one side in order to share pertinent evidence which is indesputable with the reasonably sceptical reader.

Lord Monteagle’s brother-in-law, Francis Tresham, was one of the Gunpowder Plotters, so he is the suspected writer of the letter warning about the plot, though he was able to persuade his colleagues that he had not betrayed them. Even so, the form of the discovery is itself suspicious. It would be as though someone sent an email to a British politician giving them details of a very major Al Quaida operation.

Robert Cecil played a leading role in the plot’s discovery. As has been noted, there is excellent evidence that Sharpe was working for Robert Cecil in 1604 as a spy. We have already seen that the Cecil Papers contain an entry dated 20th June 1604 in which Griffin Markham reports to Robert Cecil that, ‘The shortness of the time permits me not to conclude anything, the men that we are to deal with being very many, very scrupulous and desirous to be satisfied by their counsel …’. Who were this mysterious group who were in the gun?

Power told people the answer to this question back then, because people in the know knew that Sharpe was behind Griffin Markham and they would have seen that Sharpe was on the title page of the official account of the Gunpowder Plot. We will now see more evidence for this.

There is another important entry in the Cecil Papers endorsed Griffin Markham. It is addressed to Robert Cecil and it mentions the Gunpowder Plot. This document is dated December 11th 1609, four years after the Gunpowder Plot was discovered. It is repeated in full here because it carries with it a senseless sense.

It is said that one having told a senseless tale to Sir Tho. More, then Lord Chancellor of England, he bade him put it into verse that there might be rhyme in it, because else it was without rhyme or reason.

I may be thought to bring as senseless a tale to your Lordship, now Lord Treasurer of England, and if I had not renounced all rhymes I might also be like to put it into verse.

Yet when I call to mind that letter by which the powdered treason was discovered, and out of how dark words and how devilish meaning so divine a sense was gathered as saved all our lives, I thought good to certify this intelligence, consisting all of colours, namely green, white and grey, in which though my eye can discern no colour of danger, yet my zeal I have put to the purple makes me propose them to sharper sights.

Peter Green, a tall soldier, and now serving Sir Griffin Markham in Bruxells came into England about a month since. Being absent from London some few days he told his lady he had been about the business of one Mr Whyte, a banished priest, adding these fond words upon small occasion, viz; though my head be now turning day, yet I doubt not to live to see this Whyte Abbot of Westmimster.

The man that spake these words is as green in wit as in name, and has stronger bones than brains, so as I think him not like to be trusted with any matter of great consequence.

What Mr Whyte is I cannot learn further than a religious man, and it may be he is as clear in mind as in name from any ill meaning to the State.

Yet the words carrying a meaning of an expectance of such change as is not like to fall without some great concussion of the State, I thought fit thus plainly to set down.

Plain indeed, but telling all the same. These lines make plain that this wasn’t by Griffin Markham:

Peter Green, a tall soldier, and now serving Sir Griffin Markham in Bruxells came into England about a month since.

The above document’s informality suggests the writer was on very familiar terms with Robert Cecil. The reader may form their own opinion as to why this speaker has the style, a shape and form, which they may think has a sheen, an appearance even, that is familiar to them. There is more to these senseless ramblings than meet the eye, as we will discover.

Now compare the Griffin Markham entry above with an entry dated January 23rd 1608/1609, the start and finish of which is repeated here. In this document Griffin Markham writes to Robert Cecil and appears to adopt a totally different style and tone.

I am desirous to be as little troublesome to you as my poor distressed estate will give me leave; but when I see my imminent ruin will speedily come if some compassion be not had, I am forced earnestly to sue. It is now going upon three years since I entered into banishment, since which time every year something has been wrested from me...

Assist me with your favour to the altering of banishment, and I will endeavour by my service to make appear to the world that I remember my vows at the bar in such fashion as you shall have no dishonour, nor that grace his sacred Majestry has so mercifuly bestowed appear unworthily given.

To return to the Gunpowder Plot, in the Cecil papers there is an entry dated 1601 [c.June] which lists, ‘The names of those that are fined and reserved to her Majesty’s use.’ One of those listed is ‘Robert Catesby, 4,000 marks’. Robert Catesby went on to be one of the key conspirators in the Gunpowder Plot.

There is additionally an entry in the Cecil Papers dated August 27th 1604, which was just over a year before the Gunpowder Plot was discovered. This entry is titled ‘Gunpowder’ and it relates to the purchase/sale of large amounts of gunpowder. It records that this gunpowder was to be delivered into storage within the Tower and could in effect be sold on to any of his Majesties’ loving subjects.

Secondary sources indicate that the gunpowder purchased by Robert Catesby, which was used in the Gunpowder Plot, was purchased from the Tower, though this writer hasn’t seen contemporaneous records to confirm this was the case.

The Lieutenant of the Tower at the time was the same Hervey who Sharpe was instructing to write to Robert Cecil one month earlier in July 1604. It was on Hervey’s watch that the gunpowder held at the Tower was sold on to Catesby.

Hervey was made Lieutenant of the Tower in 1603. Shortly after this his son was caught carrying communications between two of the Tower’s prisoners, Sir Walter Raleigh and Lord Cobham. A more plausible, though speculative, scenario would be that Hervey’s son was entrapped by someone to carry these secret letters, perhaps someone employed by Sharpe, which fact could then have been used to blackmail Hervey into working for Cecil. A threat to his son with implications on his career would have been cause enough for Hervey to look for any relief.

Hervey died in 1605, before the Gunpowder Plot was ‘discovered’. We might assume that after Hervey had served his purpose, after he had acted for Cecil for a number of years at the Tower, including in relation to keeping Cecil abreast of the incarceration of Oxford and including selling the plotters the gunpowder they required, he was a lose end to be done away with, before he could be questioned by the Star Chamber about the Gunpowder Plot.

Sharpe was advanced to the role of Royal Chaplain for Prince Henry Frederick in about 1606, shortly after he wrote a letter to the Prince warning of the danger of Catholicism in light of the Gunpowder Plot’s discovery. Prince Henry Frederick was the son and heir to King James 1st , so to be appointed a Royal Chaplain for him was a very significant promotion.

George Ormerod in THE HISTORY OF THE COUNTY PALATINE AND CITY OF CHESTER (1819) tells us that Sharpe’s letter was sent the day after the Gunpowder Plot was discovered and that Sharpe was then raised to the archdeaconry of Berkshire on 9th November 1605, which was four days after the discovery of the plot. He also records that Sharpe was rector of Malpas, in Cheshire.

Thomas Harwood, in ALUMNI ETONENSES OR, A CATALOGUE OF THE PROVOSTS AND FELLOWS OF ETON COLLEGE AND KING’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, FROM THE FOUNDATION IN 1443, TO THE YEAR 1797 (1797), confirms that Sharpe was raised to the archdeaconry of Berkshire on 9th November 1605.

There is evidence that Lord Mounteagle had prior knowledge of the plot before he received the mysterious warning letter. One of the original documents pertaining to the investigation into the plot says, ‘being demanded what other persons were privy (to the plot) beside the Lord Mounteagle, Catesby,’ etc. This suggests that Lord Mounteagle was privy to the plot before the letter arrived. However the words ‘the Lord Mounteagle’ were originally blocked out, which suggests that his state of knowledge was being kept quiet.

There is other evidence for this in a book titled What Gunpowder Plot Was by Samuel Gardiner. This records that a Father Gerard provided evidence in the form of notes prepared by an anonymous correspondent of an Anthony Wood, which are preserved in Fulman’s Collection in the library of Corpus Christi College Oxford. These notes are introduced with the statement that the Gunpowder Plot was ‘without all peradventure a State plot’. This word ‘peradventure’ was an important trigger word for Sharpe and his faction. These records state that:

Sir Henry Wotton says, ‘twas usual with Cecil to create plots that he might have the honour of discovery...

The Lord Monteagle knew that there was a letter to be sent to him before it came.

These notes are open to very valid criticism. Firstly, for this writer they are read second-hand, and thus they do not have the quality of a first-hand account, though there isn’t any reason to doubt their existence nor to think that they have been misrecorded. Gardiner additionally points out that they were not written until at least seventy-six years after the Gunpowder Plot. Also Gardiner found many factual inconsistencies to be present. We would expect factual inconsistencies over a period of time, but that doesn’t mean that the content has to be totally invalidated. Particularly if we could establish that the writer had accurately recalled the words of Sir Henry Wotton.

Sir Henry Wotton is of interest because he was born in Boughton Malherbe and his family were based there. During the same period, Sharpe held the parish of Boughton Malherbe and used this as a base of operations. Sir Henry Wotton was the half brother of Edward Wotton, 1st Baron Wotton, whose son Thomas Wotton inherited his title and then died on 2nd April 1630. This was another death in this dangerous period. Lionel Sharpe’s memorial, which is in St Nicholas’ Church, Boughton Malherbe, records his death as taking place on New Years Day 1630, whilst Sharpe’s enemy, William Herbert, died on 10th April 1630.

Apparently Sir Henry Wotton ran spies for Essex, who was additionally Sharpe’s patron. Perhaps anticipating trouble, Sir Henry Wotton took holy orders in 1627. It appears that he did not wholly escape responsibility for what went on in the late 1620s and early 1630s, because he was probably required to write a letter which introduced Milton’s Comus (1634), which masque will be considered later. His introductory letter to the masque and the masque itself both referred to Lionel Sharpe by anagrams, including two in the first three lines of the masque.

Thomas Wotton, who died in 1630, was married to Mary Throckmorton; the Gunpowder Plotter Robert Catesby was the son of Anne Throckmorton. A coincidentally liberal use of a name, maybe, as there must have been many Throckmortons. Still, what on earth was going on with the Wottons?

Another liberal use of a name is here, too, because there must have been many Sharpes, but there is a document that has not yet been viewed in full by this writer which suggests that a John Sharpe had an interest in a property at Bushwood, Stratford as at January 1675 (The National Archives BRU8/17/54). Bushwood Hall was the birthplace of the Gunpowder Plotter Robert Catesby.

If Lionel Sharpe infiltrated the Gunpowder plotters, then how did he do this? The best possibility is that this was through a man called Stephen Littleton, who was executed for his role in the Gunpowder Plot.

A genealogy site (STIRNET.COM Sharpe02) records that Sharpe’s grandmother was Helenor, the sister of Sir Edward Litelton of Pelletnawte in Staffordshire. Sir Edward Littleton (d.1574) of Pillaton Hall in Staffordshire had a son called Sir Edward Littleton (1555-1610). There is evidence that Lionel Sharpe may have acted to protect him in 1601.

There is a play titled The Fifth of November or The Gunpowder Plot - A Historical Play Supposedly Written By William Shakespeare which was printed in 1830. This writer can find no reference to this play elsewhere, which is surprising, given that everything about Shakespeare is looked at very carefully. It is supposedly seen to be a fake, but we will see later that there is good evidence that this play is the real deal and that the writer had inside knowledge about the plot’s discovery. This play makes Littleton and Fulke Greville two of its key characters.

In this play Guy Fawkes says:

I used to play hide-and-seek in the Tower.... and if the under-turnkey had not been our friend and a concealed catholic...

We already know that Lionel Sharpe was very intimately involved with the goings on of the Tower; we have yet to consider the evidence which indicates that Sharpe probably played the role of a concealed catholic hiding behind his equally fake vehemently protestant public persona.

In 1603 various private members’ bills were brought in parliament, including in relation to Thomas Throckmorton’s estate, to enable the sale of lands for the payment of debts c.26, and for the restitution in blood of Thomas Littleton and family c.28.

The Bill listed between the Throckmorton Bill and the Littleton Bill is a bill for the naturalisation of William, Anne and Barbara Browne c.27. Anthony Maria Browne, 2nd Viscount Montague, had been approached by Catesby about the Gunpowder Plot, and he was suspected of involvement afterwards.

Sir Charles Cornwallis was on the legislative committee for the Littleton Bill (The History of Parliament 1604-1629 ed. Andrew Thrush and John P. Ferris 2010). Thomas Littleton found himself in very illustrious company in this Act, because the other private member’s restitution bills brought that year were in relation to the Earl of Essex’s children, the Earl of Arundel’s son, the Duke of Norfolk’s descendants, Lord Pagett’s son and for the blood of Thomas Lucas.

What was happening with these three bills, which have the family names of two or three Gunpowder Plot conspirators on them? And why was the Bill with the surname of Sharpe’s probable relative supervised by Sharpe’s close friend Cornwallis? It is very suspicious that these Bills were brought in 1603, with these three names in apparently close proximity.

What then can be concluded as facts in relation to the possibility that Sharpe was involved in the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot:

1. Sharpe was definitely working for Robert Cecil as a spy in 1604;

2. Robert Cecil discovered the Gunpowder Plot, probably via his network of spies;

3. The day after the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot, Sharpe wrote to Prince Henry Frederick in regards the plot;

4. A few days after the discovery of the plot, Sharpe was raised to Archdeacon of Berkshire;

5. A short while later, Sharpe was promoted to Royal Chaplain for Prince Henry;

6. A man with the same surname as Sharpe may have had an interest in a property which may have been the birth home of one of the leading conspirators;

7. Griffin Markham was investigating a group in 1604 on behalf of Robert Cecil;

8. Griffin Markham had detailed knowledge of the Gunpowder Plot;

9. There is evidence that Sharpe used the name Griffin Markham as an alias;

10. There is an unusual entry in the Cecil papers about the Tower and the sale of large amounts of gunpowder dating from about a year before the plot was discovered - 1604;

11. The gunpowder used in the Gunpowder Plot was purchased by Catesby from the Tower;

12. Sharpe was providing instructions to Sir Hervey, the Lieutenant of the Tower, in 1604;

13. There is a record which states that Sir Henry Wotton, who Sharpe must have known well and who lived in the same village as Sharpe, said in regards the Gunpowder Plot that ‘twas usual with Cecil to create plots that he might have the honour of discovery’; and

14. The same person recorded that ‘The Lord Monteagle knew that there was a letter to be sent to him before it came’.

If it is accepted as a fact that Griffin Markham was an alias Sharpe used, then this takes on a different look altogether. It is possible that setting down on paper a brief summary may clarify matters:

Sharpe was a spy for Cecil; in 1601 the Gunpowder Plotter Robert Catesby was fined 4,000 marks by Cecil; Sharpe was infiltrating an unidentified group in 1604 for Cecil; Cecil provided the gunpowder used in the plot to Hervey in 1604; Sharpe was providing Hervey with instructions about one month before Hervey acquired the gunpowder from Cecil; Hervey sold Catesby the gunpowder used in the 1605 Gunpowder Plot, or it was sold from the Tower he controlled; then Hervey died; then Cecil ‘discovered’ the plot; Sharpe wrote a letter about the plot within a day or two of its discovery to Prince Henry; days later Sharpe was appointed Archdeacon of Berkshire; then Sharpe was appointed Royal Chaplain to Prince Henry; Sharpe’s 1609 message to Cecil showed that he had intimate knowledge of the Gunpowder Plot.

We shouldn’t forget those tricky anagrams; anagrams that historians who hold to the current status quo may wish our pesky investigation had not uncovered.

And then there is that play.

Whatever the full extent of Sharpe’s role in the Gunpowder Plot, this book will prove beyond