Queen Elizabeth's Visit to Ingatestone Hall, 1561

ACCOUNTS OF SIR WILLIAM PETRE, 1560-1562 (D/DP A9) - ELIZABETH I AT INGATESTONE HALL, 1561

ROYAL PROGRESS [QUEEN ELIZABETH AT INGATESTONE HALL,1561]

DOCUMENT : SIR WILLIAM PETRE'S ACCOUNT BOOK, Essex Record Office reference: D/DP A9

BACKGROUND:
A royal visit to houses of men of substance in Essex and Suffolk was undertaken during the summer of 1561. A circular route was followed with the outward leg of the journey following the great eastern road and the return by way of northern Essex through Hedingham, Leez [Leighs} Priory, Great Hallingbury and into Hertford. On 14 July Elizabeth and her retinue had begun their trod at Wanstead House, which the Earl of Leicester held, and by 5 August they were at Ipswich, the furthermost point of this progress. In-between-times, Elizabeth arrived at Ingatestone Hall on Friday 19 July. This was the brick-built country residence of Sir William Petre,(1505?-1572), one of the Queen's Principal Secretaries, (another was William Cecil). A 'new man' of the reign of Henry VIII, Sir William Petre had risen from relative obscurity in Devon by way of a double degree in canon and civil law at Oxford to become a deputy of Thomas Cromwell and thence to become aVisitor of Monasteries for his royal master. Remarkably he had served each sovereign since as Principal Secretary, that is Edward VI, Mary Tudor and now Elizabeth. The Dictionary of National Biography describes him as being 'sprung from the willow rather than the oak'. The changeable winds of state bent but did not break him. Astonishingly he had purchased former lands of Barking Abbey in Essex from the crown at the going rate, but had been granted a papal bull later , (Paul IV dated 28 November 1555), confirming him and his heirs for ever in this church property, (a dispensation given in part for services rendered during the negotiations of marriage between King Philip of Spain and Queen Mary). By the summer of 1561, Sir William Petre was a senior royal servant, a man of substance with 20, 000 acres in Essex and land elsewhere. His hospitality needed to match his position.

CONTENT of Sir William Petre's Account Book entitled : 'A Declaration of Provisions and other necessaries as was bought and provided against the Queen majesty's coming...19th July to 23rd July'.

READING SECRETARY HAND
This is easier with practice! E.R.O. Schools Service Advice sheet A185 is of some assistance here. What household objects can you recognise from sketches drawn from Steer,F.W.,Farm and Cottage Inventories,(1950) and does the secretary handwriting underneath the 'spoone' confirm the recognition?

What month of the year can be picked out at the top left of the document? 'Document' is a word derived from the Latin 'docere,' to teach or to prove. What does this document set out to establish? Why keep accounts? Why is there a line drawn down through the accounts? When the master had checked the details with his chief steward there was need to show this. What numbering system, Arabic or Roman, is employed on the right of the page? Having overcome some of the initial reaction against difficult handwriting, it is time to turn to the transcript.

TRANSCRIPT: QUEEN ELIZABETH AT INGATESTONE HALL

LET YOUR EYE RANGE OVER THE TYPESCRIPT

What sorts of things are listed here? Food and drink in exotic variety and apparently large quantities will do as a specimen of 'court life',⁴⁹ but it is also interesting in its own right.

The unfamiliarity of some of the words 'brede', 'verkins', 'signettes' will slow the reader down, but this is not a handicap to understanding, but is yet a challenge to read very slowly and carefully, (too often in the modern world is the emphasis upon speed-reading, the headline snatched from a paper on the train, or the caption to a t.v.news item). If a few of the obscure terms are provided at the outset, reading this document is less threatening, e.g. 'victualls' are food and drink, or whatever is necessary to be consumed to support life and 'di' is short for 'dimidium' or 'a half'. All of the meanings of the difficult words here can be un-packed using the Oxford English Dictionary, which is based upon historic principles. Incidentally, what a boon to the scholar is the O.E.D. For those who enjoy the by-ways of scholarship, there is a delightful biography of James Murray the largely self-taught borderer, which examines the process of capturing meanings.⁵⁰

LOOK UP IN THE O.E.D. THE FOLLOWING: [ a full version is required which copes with the variety of old spellings and not the pocket or concise editions]

'TUN';
'GURNARDES';
'CONGER';
'VERKINS';
'BREWES';
'PEWETTES' [what bird does this sound like? ]
'EGRETTES';
'SHOULVLERS' [say this word quickly!];
'QUAILES';
'BITTERS';
'CAPONETTES';
'PULLETTES';
'CHEKINS' [ This last needs no looking up, but the notion of correct spelling might need an airing, for in English the spelling is varied in early modern times and tended to follow the sounds heard - witness the 'Essex' sound or accent here. William Mulcaster's Orthographie or spelling book had yet to make its appearance ].

QUESTIONS PROMPTED WHILST READING IN DETAIL:

What are the values of the items listed with their prices?

It is an abiding interest of historians to reflect upon the shifting value of things. It is largely un-historic, however, to compare a few pennies from the sixteenth century with a few pence of today. Much better is to relate these sums with the values of their day. Setting a document in context is the aim of much source work. An early wage assessment by Justices of the Peace for 1661 a little after the Tudor period survives and from it we learn that an 'aristocrat' of labour like the 'master free mason' earned 12d per day in the summer with meat and drink and 10d per day in the winter from mid-September to mid-March, or £4 by the whole year.⁵¹ Thus £3 laid out for herons and shovellers at London is a substantial sum, (in fact what a brick-maker would earn in a whole year), not allowing for inflation. The modern pre-occupation with paid wages may miss the significance of 'with meat and drink'. For many who worked in the Tudor period, whilst wages appear pitifully meagre, the opportunity to live in a household and have food, lodging and some provision for new shoes if you were a foot-boy was important.

How much was this to eat and drink?

How gluttonous were the Tudor monarchs? The Holbein image of a four-square, solid Henry VIII springs to mind. This, together with the impression gained from modern banquet re-enactments, has set firmly in the popular mind the indulgence of the Tudors at their board. What is less certain are the numbers who sat down to dine with Sir William Petre and Queen Elizabeth and final pronouncement on this matter is suspect. Clearly though, there is an element of 'potlatch' here. It will not do to provide normal, humble fare for the visitor when personal reputation is at stake. However, though the Earl of Leicester might go over-board with lavish expenditure on the Queen when she visited Kennilworth, Sir William Petre, the careful, apparently reserved and tight-lipped servant seems to have been more careful.

Why did Elizabeth go on progress?

It is tempting for all of us to look for single explanations of human behaviour. Motivation for action is often mixed, then as now? Without benefit of modern means of communication and in an age when serious rebellions against authority occurred, the need to impress her presence upon her subjects was real. Sir Roy Strong in our own age has shown how the iconography of royal portraits worked to reinforce the sense of Elizabeth's wealth and power. The engraving of Elizabeth and her entourage making a royal progress hints at the drama of the visit. Life is properly complicated and while this end was being achieved it suited the un-sanitary Tudor court to be often on the move, lest filth and disease be the consequence. Yet it is tempting to make too much of the royal progress in Tudor times. There is a medieval precedent for a travelling royal household. Indeed, many of the modern departments of state descend from such peripatetic arrangements. Royal justice went on circuit. So what is significant about the Tudor progresses? Perhaps the blossoming of written records in this period gives undue emphasis to Elizabeth's progresses? Fewer documents like these household accounts survive for the earlier periods? It is more common in Elizabeth's reign than in her grandfather, Henry VII's reign, to have familes of substance able to produce and keep such records? Quite often in history the explanations we construct are dependent upon the availability of sources.

Of course such summer expeditions or 'progresses' allowed the cleaning of the vacated palaces of Greenwich, Whitehall, Richmond, Hampton Court, Oatlands and Windsor. It was true also that some of the burden of hospitality fell on those county gentlefolk who were visited. There was indeed an element of potlatch in the competition among the wealthy and ambitious to display their loyalty. But these royal journeys were more complicated affairs than these popular reasons for journeying and hospitality would suggest. There was a machinery of state involved with officers and appointed tasks.

We have many new and fascinating insights into the organisation of the Court in such an adventure in the 1570s.⁵² The royal journey needs its historical context. The loyalty of Elizabeth I's subjects constituted the backbone of the state. With neither a standing army nor a professional police force, the coercive resources of the Crown were extremely limited. In such circumstances adulation was neither a luxury nor a self-indulgence. Obedience based upon a willing devotion was cheaper and more effective. The furthermost point of the 1578 'progress' was Norwich, but many days were spent in Essex on the outward and the inward legs of the journey. An unexpected detour during early September was made to include Horeham Hall near Thaxted because of reports of the plague in London which infection might be expected to follow the regular route to the north through Hertfordshire, (Sawbridgeworth and Royston were places on the royal itinerary).⁵³

Lord Chamberlain and Vice-Chamberlain were responsible for the detailed preparation and management. The 'harbingers' went ahead to look for suitable lodgings. The Queen's 'gestes' or itineraries were published and mayors of towns and Lords-Lieutenant of counties had to confirm the absence of plague. Towns and villages were ordered to provide stocks of fuel, food and fodder. A Yeoman Purveyor and his deputy were assigned an area with a Royal Commission 'to take up and provide for us'.⁵⁴

Finally, business of state continued to be conducted as a matter of routine. In areas where a regular royal mail service was not in place, special arrangements were made for the Council, which accompanied her as part of the Court, to receive and despatch their reports and instructions. The Council had nine meetings during the stay at Audley End in July 1578. Present was Lord Burleigh and foreign courtiers were received. The Scottish Ambassador also had talks with the Council at Audley End.⁵⁵

What is not present in the accounts?

Can you think of the kinds of modern record of human action which it would be helpful to have of this summer visit of 1561? What would we give give for an authentic videotape? How pleasant it would be to have a news interview of Sir William after the three days were over. What would help us to probe deeper into the workings of the royal court? A memorandum or 'diary' would be too much to hope for from that age. Letters of description would be well. What royal business was done in the long gallery or in the withdrawing chamber? Is there anything to be found dated from Ingatestone Hall in the Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series? If these avenues are denied us, perhaps we can argue from what is known to have been happening in that year to a disciplined guess at what were talking points? A proposed meeting at Nottingham between Elizabeth and the Queen of Scots was postponed, but not before tilts were set and a warning given to all lusty young knights to show feats of arms. There were disturbances in France. Munitions needed to be conveyed to Ireland, [some things sadly seem always to be with us]. Anonymous letters were circulating about one John Payne, concerning the restoration of the 'old religion', [Cal.S.P.,1547-1580,pp.202-3]. Surely rumours were beginning to circulate about Katherine Grey, her rash secret marriage to Lord Hertford and the fact that she was now 'quick with child,' [see Chapman,H.,W.,Two Tudor Portraits,(1973),p.199].

ASSOCIATED SOURCES AND USEFUL EXTENSION MATERIAL:

One interpretation of such history is given in the lively 'Look and Learn' article entitled 'When a Queen came to call', [E.R.O. Schools Service Advice series A258]. Pupils may be asked to comment upon the personalising of history in this way. Does 'docu-drama' achieve a worthwhile purpose? How accurate is it? What is their opinion of the recent historical fiction about Ingatestone Hall and Queen Elizabeth, the fine work by Alan Childs entitled Under the Rose, (1990,Anglia Young Books). This was carefully researched in E.R.O., though the incident with a Spanish spy is fabricated. Does History need dramatic help in this way?

Beyond the estate walls, how much impact did the royal progress have? Chelmsford Churchwarden's Accounts have part of the answer. 6s.8d. was paid to the ringers when the Queen came through the town.⁵⁶