Rich and Maleverer seem really corrupt – were all the king’s men that way?
A. There is no question that men in power, such as Rich and Maleverer, took advantage of their positions to benefit themselves or their families. This was by no means new in the Tudor period and certainly not out of the ordinary. In many cases it was not even illegal. In Tudor England, getting favours and benefits from the royal government depended on who you knew. Ambitious men who desired to have a successful career at court needed to have an influential patron, particularly early in their careers. It also helped to be good at what you did. For example, Shardlake had formerly served Cromwell, but he was a good lawyer, so after Cromwell’s fall Cranmer continued to employ him on government jobs. Shardlake’s utopian vision to have unbiased and equal rights before law is a modern concept that even today’s society rarely lives up to. Men like Rich and Maleverer were not out of the ordinary, and neither were their actions. Rich was the Chancellor of the Court of Augmentations which was est
