The New Murrey and Blue blog

It is well known that John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, was one of the principal opponents of Henry VIII’s attempt to divorce Catherine of Aragon. The boiling to death of his cook for the alleged crime of attempting to poison him is less familiar.

The facts are that a number of people in the bishop’s household fell ill after eating soup prepared in the bishop’s kitchen. Fisher himself, who only ate a little of the soup, did not suffer any consequences, but two people, Bennet Curwan, a gentleman, and Alice Trppitt, a widow, died.

The bishop’s cook, Richard Rouse, or Rice, was arrested and under questioning admitted adding a laxative to the soup, apparently as a joke. Not a very good joke, admittedly, but even if the confession was legitimate the crime would seem to amount to manslaughter at worst.

Henry VIII did not see it that way. He had an Act of Parliament passed retrospectively making this crime high treason, and any future poisoning the same. It also enacted that the unfortunate cook was to be boiled alive.

This did not mean that he was dropped into boiling water, as a lobster might be. Oh no, the water started cold and was gradually heated up. And the cook was apparently dipped in and out of it until he died. A more horrible form of execution can scarcely be imagined – even hanging, drawing and quartering was merciful by comparison.

Some people think that Anne Boleyn and/or her party were behind the poisoning attempt. If so, they were incredibly clumsy and inept in their dealings. What manner of assassin destroys (potentially) a whole household to take out one old man? It seems more likely that it was accidental food poisoning, or, at worst, a joke in poor taste that misfired.

Richard III did not boil anyone alive – but it seems he is the tyrant and Henry VIII the model ruler. As someone said – it’s a funny old world.