ABSTRACT
The Henrician Reformation from its advent claimed legitimacy on the basis of history and social order: authentic histories declared the naturalness of a body politic ruled by one supreme head. This famous extract from the prologue to the Act of Appeals is, however, riddled with rhetorical sleights of hand and doctrinal tension. What did it mean to claim that history declared the status of England as an empire? Whose and what history made this declaration? And in what way was the monarch's supreme headship next to God? Despite all their assertions and proclamations apologists for the Henrician Reformation never could finally or even satisfactorily answer these questions. This failure is marked in their texts by moments of polemical collapse and textual hiatus. In particular, Tudor Reformation historiography constantly found itself confronted with three key issues: who or what made Reformation happen? Was it a secular or spiritual event? And what was its historical status?
