Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T03:21:12.428Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Nothing but Ceremony”: Queen Anne and the Limitations of Royal Ritual

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

R. O. Bucholz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In recent years, historians of the Augustan period have done much to rehabilitate the posthumous reputation of Queen Anne, a monarch traditionally viewed as dull, weak, reactionary, and easily led. Beginning in the 1920s with the work of W. T. Morgan, continuing with that of G. M. Trevelyan and G. S. Holmes, and culminating in the definitive biography by Edward Gregg, Anne has gradually emerged as a figure to be reckoned with. We have come to see her as a tenacious and often skillful navigator, charting a middle course between the opposing shoals of the Whig and Tory parties, in an attempt to preserve freedom of maneuver for the postrevolutionary monarchy.

This article will explore a heretofore neglected aspect of the queen's political helmsmanship: the attempt to make her person and crown a focus for national (i.e., English) unity through the revival and exploitation of royal ritual and symbol. It will be argued below that Anne—alone among the later Stuarts—made extensive use of the arsenal of ceremonial paraphernalia, what David Cannadine has called “the theatre of power,” which is normally associated with her Tudor and early Stuart predecessors. This essay is thus intended not only to contribute to the ongoing reassessment of Anne's political role but also to help fill a gap between the wealth of fine work on pageantry at those earlier courts and the work Linda Colley and others have done on the reign of George III.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , July 1991 , pp. 288 - 323
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Morgan, W. T., English Political Parties and Leaders in the Reign of Queen Anne, 1702–1710 (New Haven, Conn., 1920)Google Scholar; Trevelyan, G. M., England under Queen Anne, 3 vols. (1930–1934)Google Scholar; Holmes, G. S., British Politics in the Age of Anne (1967), esp. pp. 194–216Google Scholar; Gregg, E., Queen Anne (1980)Google Scholar. London is the place of publication unless otherwise noted.

2 The term “national” is here used—with some reservations—to refer to Anne's relationship to her English subjects. Apart from her revival of the Order of the Thistle in 1703, the official celebrations of state holidays at her residences in Edinburgh and Dublin, and the various official and semiofficial celebrations of the Union, she seems to have made little attempt to appeal to her Celtic subjects through ceremony. Thus, the geographical focus of this article is confined to England.

3 Cannadine, D., “Divine Rites of Kings,” in Rituals of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies, ed. Cannadine, D. and Price, J. S. (1987), p. 1Google Scholar.

4 See esp. Anglo, S., Spectacle, Pageantry and Early Tudor Policy (Oxford, 1969)Google Scholar; Cressy, D., “Spectacle and Power: Apollo & Solomon at the Court of Henry VIII,” History Today 32 (October 1982): 16–22Google Scholar; Harris, J., Orgel, S., and Strong, R., The King's Arcadia: Inigo Jones and the Stuart Court (1973)Google Scholar; Orgel, S., The Illusion of Power: Political Theater in the English Renaissance (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1975)Google Scholar; Smuts, R. M., Court Culture and the Origins of a Royalist Tradition in Early Stuart England (Philadelphia, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar (hereafter cited as Court Culture), “The Political Failure of Stuart Cultural Patronage,” in Patronage in the Renaissance, ed. Lytle, G. F. and Orgel, S. (Princeton, N.J., 1981), pp. 165–87Google Scholar; Strong, R., Splendour at Court: Renaissance Spectacle and the Theatre of Power (1973)Google Scholar, The Cult of Elizabeth (1977); Colley, L., “The Apotheosis of George III: Loyalty, Royalty and the British Nation, 1760–1820,” Past and Present, no. 102 (1984), pp. 94–129Google Scholar, “Whose Nation? Class and National Consciousness in Britain, 1750–1830,” Past and Present, no. 113 (1986), pp. 97–117Google Scholar.

5 Clark, J. C. D., English Society, 1688–1832: Ideology, Social Structure and Political Practice during the Ancien Régime (Cambridge, 1985), esp. pp. 119–216Google Scholar.

6 King, W., ed., The Memoirs of the Duchess of Marlborough (1930), pp. 230–31Google Scholar; Public Record Office (PRO), Lord Chamberlain's Papers (LC) 5/3, fols. 9–10; British Library (BL), Additional (Add.) MS 61,422, fol. 199.

7 Swift, J., “Memoirs Relating to That Change Which Happened in the Queen's Ministry in the Year 1710,” in Historical and Political Tracts—English, ed. Scott, T. (1911), p. 367Google Scholar.

8 See Historical Manuscripts Commission (HMC), Buccleuch at Montagu House MSS, 1 (1899):353Google Scholar (hereafter HMC, Buccleuch); BL Add. MS 61,417, fol. 178, Add. MS 61,422, fol. 199; PRO, LC 5/3, fols. 3, 8, 9–10; Cartwright, J. J., ed., The Wentworth Papers, 1705–1739 (1883), p. 82Google Scholar; Parke, G., ed., Letters and Correspondence, Public and Private, of the Right Honourable Henry St. John, Lord Visc. Bolingbroke; During the Time He was Secretary of State to Queen Anne (1798), 3:373–74Google Scholar, 4:290; Sheppard, E. J., Memorials of St. James's Palace (1844), 1:81–82Google Scholar; Fairholt, F. W., Costumes in England (1846), pp. 351–52Google Scholar; Wray, R. T., Ancient Royal Palaces In and Near London (1902), p. 95Google Scholar; Gregg, , Anne, pp. 71–72Google Scholar; Green, D., Queen Anne (1970), pp. 40, 107Google Scholar; King, ed., p. 232.

9 King, ed., p. 230.

10 Note, e.g., the frequent disputes among court officials and other members of the nobility over rights of precedence: PRO, LC 5/2, pp. 173–74, LC 5/201, pp. 355–67; HMC, Seventh Report, App. (1879), p. 469Google Scholar, Twelfth Report, App. 3 (1889), p. 183Google Scholar, Fifteenth Report, App. 6 (1897), pp. 11–12Google Scholar; HMC, Hastings MSS, 2 (1930): 349Google Scholar (hereafter HMC, Hastings). The classic exposition of the prevalence of nonrational beliefs and attitudes in early modern England is Thomas, K., Religion and the Decline of Magic (New York, 1971)Google Scholar. For their manifestation in contemporary attitudes to monarchy and aristocracy, see Clark, pp. 64–216.

11 Gregg, , Anne, pp. 88–89, 94–96Google Scholar; King, ed., pp. 62–70, 72–73, 79–82; BL, Add. MS 61,414, fol. 166, Add. MS 61,415, fol. 13, Add. MS 61,421, fol. 87; Snyder, H. L., ed., The Marlborough-Godolphin Correspondence (Oxford, 1975), pp. 34–35Google Scholar.

12 PRO, LC 3/56, warrant, dated February 20, 1684[/5]; LC 5/201, pp. 53–54; Grant, J., ed., Seafield Correspondence from 1685 to 1708 (Edinburgh, 1912), p. 30Google Scholar; Dearnley, C., English Church Music, 1650–1750 (New York, 1970), p. 55Google Scholar. See also Gregg, , Anne, p. 51Google Scholar, for her behavior at the reception of the papal nuncio in 1686.

13 Gregg, , Anne, pp. 78–79, 156Google Scholar.

14 Swift, J., The Journal to Stella, ed. Williams, H. (Oxford, 1948), pp. 432–33Google Scholar. For another, similar, example, see Holmes, G. S. and Jones, C., eds., The London Diaries of William Nicolson, Bishop of Carlisle, 1702–1716 (Oxford, 1985), p. 238Google Scholar and n. 177.

15 Burnet, G., A History of His Own Time (Oxford, 1833), 5:2Google Scholar (hereafter cited as History). See also HMC, Twelfth Report, App. 3, p. 1Google Scholar, for her gracious reception of the earl of Chesterfield. For Anne's general inclination toward moderation, see Gregg, , Anne, pp. 155–57Google Scholar.

16 Sir Robert Southwell to Bishop William King, Spring Garden, March 14, 1701/2, HMC, Second Report, App. (1871), p. 242Google Scholar.

17 Burnet, , History,Google Scholar 5:2Google Scholar, note by Dartmouth.

18 John Percival to Thomas Knatchbull, March 21, 1701/2, HMC, Seventh Report, App., p. 246Google Scholar. Burnet, , History, 5:2Google Scholar, note by Onslow; HMC, Second Report, App., p. 242Google Scholar; Flying Post, no. 1068 (March 10–12, 1702).

19 Hamilton, E., The Backstairs Dragon: A Life of Robert Hurley, Earl of Oxford (1969), p. 43Google Scholar.

20 [Godolphin to Harley], March 8, 1701/2, HMC, Fifteenth Report, App. 4 (1897), p. 34Google Scholar. Gregg, , Anne, p. 152Google Scholar.

21 Gregg, Anne. For the association with William, see Burnet, , History, 5:3Google Scholar.

22 Neale, J. E., “November 17th,” in Essays in Elizabethan History (1958), p. 17Google Scholar; Smith, L. B. and Smith, J. R., The Past Speaks (Lexington, Mass., 1981), p. 225Google Scholar.

23 See, e.g., HMC, Twelfth Report, App. 3, p. 1, and p. 294Google Scholar below. For evidence that Anne had long identified personally with Elizabeth, see Gregg, , Anne, p. 96Google Scholar.

24 Gregg, , Anne, p. 130Google Scholar. It should be noted that William had referred to himself as “the common Father of all My People” at the opening of his last parliament in December 1701 (Journals of the House of Commons, 13:647Google Scholar).

25 Elton, G. R., England under the Tudors (1955; reprint, 1971), p. 399Google Scholar.

26 Boyer, A., History of the Reign of Queen Anne, Digested into Annals (1703–1713), 1:162Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Annals).

27 Ibid., pp. 75–76; BL, Add. MS 17,677 YY, fol. 190. For this itinerary see Boyer, , Annals, 1:99–100Google Scholar; Luttrell, N., A Brief Relation of State Affairs from September 1678 to April 1714 (Oxford, 1857), 5:197, 204, 205, 207, 210, 218, 223Google Scholar; HMC, Fifteenth Report, App. 4, pp. 44, 46, 48Google Scholar.

28 Boyer, , Annals, 1:139–41Google Scholar; Luttrell, 5:232, 235; Gregg, , Anne, p. 165Google Scholar. See also the commentary in the Observator, vol. 1, no. 59 (November 11–14, 1702)Google Scholar.

29 For an eyewitness account of Anne's coronation, see Morris, C., ed., The Journeys of Celia Fiennes (1949), pp. 300–305Google Scholar; see also Ratcliffe, E. C., The English Coronation Service (1936), pp. 136–37Google Scholar; Luttrell, 5:155, 158, 166; and BL, Harleian (Harl.) MS 6118. For a description of a garter ceremony, see Boyer, , Annals, 3:187Google Scholar. For the queen reviewing troops in Hyde Park, see English Post, nos. 238 (April 17–20, 1702), 377 (March 8–10, 1702[/3]); Evening Post, no. 621 (July 30–August 1, 1713); BL, Add. MS 17,677 GGG, fol. 298v. For the queen reviewing parades of the standards taken at Blenheim and Ramillies, respectively, see Daily Courant, no. 849 (January 4, 1705); no. 1459 (December 17, 1706); no. 1462 (December 20, 1706).

30 Luttrell, 5:462; Boyer, , Annals, 1:139Google Scholar; Monthly Register (August 1705), pp. 258–59Google Scholar; Daily Courant, no. 1312 (June 28, 1706).

31 Boyer, , Annals, 1:76–78, 99Google Scholar, 4:178; Luttrell, 5:223; London Gazette, no. 3852 (October 8–12, 1702); Monthly Register (August 1705), p. 260Google Scholar.

32 Luttrell, 5:210; English Post, no. 309 (September 30–October 2, 1702); Post Man, no. 1006 (August 22–25, 1702).

33 Melville, L., Bath under Beau Nash (1907), pp. 34–35Google Scholar; Connely, W., Beau Nash (1955), pp. 21, 23Google Scholar; Gadd, D., Georgian Summer: Bath in the Eighteenth Century (Bath, 1971), pp. 20, 78Google Scholar; McIntyre, S., “Bath: The Rise of a Resort Town, 1660–1800,” in Country Towns in Pre-industrial England, ed. Clark, P. (Leicester, 1981), p. 202Google Scholar; Corfield, P. J., The Impact of English Towns, 1700–1800 (Oxford, 1982), p. 57Google Scholar; Pimlott, J. A. R., The Englishman's Holiday: A Social History (New York, 1976), p. 36Google Scholar. For examples of the nobility and gentry following the court to Bath, see HMC, First Report, App. (1870), p. 19Google Scholar; HMC, Ninth Report, App. 2 (1884), p. 467Google Scholar; Kent Archives Office (AO), U 1590 C 8/4, September 9, [1703]; Borsay, P., The English Urban Renaissance: Culture and Society in the Provincial Town, 1660–1760 (Oxford, 1989), p. 241Google Scholar.

34 Smuts, , Court Culture (n. 4 above), p. 18Google Scholar.

35 See, e.g., Boyer, , Annals, 1:78Google Scholar, 3:97, 4:82–83.

36 Ibid., 1:78.

37 Ibid., 4:10–13.

38 See ibid., 1:99–100; London Gazette, no. 4154 (August 30–September 3, 1705); and Monthly Register (August 1705), p. 260Google Scholar.

39 For local celebration of such national events and anniversaries (excepting the obligatory government-sponsored celebrations in Dublin and Edinburgh), see, for accession day, Post Man, no. 1251 (March 11–14, 1704); Post Boy, no. 2470 (March 10–13, 1710/11); for coronation day, see English Post, no. 243 (April 29–May 1, 1702); London Gazette, nos. 3805 (April 27–30, 1702), 3810 (May 14–18, 1702); Post Man, nos. 961–62 (April 25–30, 1702), 965 (May 5–7, 1702), 970–71 (May 16–27, 1702); for the royal birthday, see Post Man, nos. 1089 (February 13–16, 1703), 1735 (February 8–11, 1707); London Gazette, no. 4409 (February 9–12, 1707[/8]); Post Boy, nos. 2617 (February 16–19, 1712), 2771 (February 10–12, 1712/13); Daily Courant, no. 3852 (February 27, 1714); for the proclamations of war and peace, see Post Man, no. 971 (May 19–21, 1702); Post Boy, nos. 2810 (May 12–14, 1713), 2812–13 (May 16–21, 1713), 2815 (May 23–26, 1713); for news of victories and thanksgivings, see Post Man, nos. 1048 (November 10–12, 1702), 1051 (November 19–21, 1702), 1058 (December 5–8, 1702), 1061 (December 12–15, 1702), 1072 (January 7–9, 1703), 1315–16 (September 7–12, 1704), 1618 (May 25–28, 1706), 1634 (July 4–6, 1706); Flying Post, nos. 1183–85 (December 3–10, 1702); London Gazette, nos. 3868–69 (December 3–10, 1702), 4053 (September 11–14, 1704); Daily Courant, no. 2035 (August 26, 1708); Post Boy, nos. 2679 (July 10–12, 1712), 2683 (July 19–22, 1712), 2835–40 (July 9–23, 1713). For examples of extraordinary charity or the initiation of corporate projects on such days, see Evening Post, no. 83 (February 21–23, 1710); Post Boy, no. 2463 (February 22–24, 1710/11), 2838 (July 16–18, 1713).

40 References to Anne as a second Elizabeth were especially common in the addresses that flowed in after the victory at Blenheim. See London Gazette, nos. 4052 (September 7–11, 1704), 4054–56 (September 14–25, 1704), 4064–67 (October 19–November 2, 1704), 4070–71 (November 9–16, 1704), 4073 (November 20–23, 1704). The image of Anne as the “nursing mother of all her people” persisted to the end of the reign; see Flying Post, no. 1164 (October 20–22, 1702); London Gazette, nos. 4020 (May 18–22, 1704), 4048 (August 24–28, 1704), 4058 (September 28–October 2, 1704), 4076 (November 30–December 4, 1704), 4116 (April 19–23, 1705), 4643 (January 21–24, 1709 [/10]); Post Man, nos. 1632 (June 29–July 2, 1706), 1649 (July 16–18, 1706), 1653 (July 25–27, 1706), 1662 (August 17–20, 1706); British Apollo, vol. 1, no. 32 (May 28–June 2, 1708)Google Scholar; Post Boy, no. 2612 (February 5–7, 1711/12); the Britain, no. 28 (April 8–11, 1713). Anne was also frequently identified with Deborah: see Daily Courant, nos. 215 (December 24, 1702), 773 (October 6, 1704), 828 (December 9, 1704), 857 (June 13, 1705), 1321 (July 9, 1706); London Gazette, no. 4058 (September 28–October 2, 1704). Finally, references to her “English heart” were not uncommon; see the Observator, vol. 1, no. 1 (April 1, 1702)Google Scholar; Post Boy, no. 2678 (July 8–10, 1712).

41 Holmes and Jones, eds. (n. 14 above), p. 406; Boyer, , Annals, 3:97Google Scholar; Luttrell, 5:462; 6:122, 166.

42 Daily Courant, nos. 1624 (April 29, 1707), 3658–59Google Scholar (July 4–6, 1713); Evening Post, no. 609 (July 2–4, 1713).

43 Boyer, , Annals, 1:78Google Scholar; Green (n. 8 above), p. 118. See also the testimony of L'Hermitage in BL, Add. MS 17,677 YY, fol. 201.

44 Boyer, , Annals, 1:121–22Google Scholar.

45 John Sharp, archbishop of York, to William Lloyd, bishop of Worcester, March 31, 1703, English Historical Review (EHR) 5 (1890): 122Google Scholar.

46 Luttrell, 5:223, 285, 288, 414, 548; Cartwright, ed. (n. 8 above), pp. 325, 375; Gregg, , Anne (n. 1 above), p. 148Google Scholar; Holmes and Jones, eds., p. 300; English Post, no. 382 (March 19–22, 1702[/3]); Flying Post, nos. 1180 (November 26–28, 1702), 1189 (December 17–19, 1702); London Gazette, nos. 3901 (March 29–April 1, 1703), 4019 (May 15–18, 1704), 4126 (May 24–28, 1705), 4172 (November 1–5, 1705), 4185 (December 17–20, 1705), 4276 (October 31–November 4, 1705), 4289 (December 16–19, 1706), 4552 (June 23–25, 1709), 4657 (February 23–25, 1709[/10]), 4684 (April 25–27, 1710), 4971 (February 26–28, 1711[/12]), no. 4993 (April 17–19, 1712); Evening Post, no. 558 (March 5–7, 1713).

47 Boswell, J., The Life of Samuel Johnson (Macmillan Globe ed., 1914), p. 8Google Scholar; Clark (n. 5 above), pp. 161–65; Bloch, M., The Royal Touch: Sacred Monarchy and Scrofula in England and France, trans. Anderson, J. E. (London and Montreal, 1973), pp. 182–83, 222–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 Quarrel, W. H. and Mare, M., eds., London in 1710 from the Travels of Zacharias Conrad von Uffenbach (1934), p. 115Google Scholar. See also Chamberlayne, E., Anglia Notitia: or the Present State of England (1669), p. 237Google Scholar.

49 For this political calendar and its increasingly partisan connotations, see de Krey, G., A Fractured Society: The Politics of London in the First Age of Party, 1688–1715 (Oxford, 1985), pp. 59–60, 253Google Scholar; Kenyon, J., Revolution Principles: The Politics of Party, 1689–1720 (Cambridge, 1977), pp. 66–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stewart, B. S., “The Cult of the Royal Martyr,” Church History 30 (1970): 175–87Google Scholar.

50 For the day's schedule, see Ewald, W. B., The Newsmen of Queen Anne (Oxford, 1956), p. 43Google Scholar, quoting the Post Boy of February 5–7, 1706. See also McGuiness, R., “The Origins and Disappearance of the English Court Ode,” Proceedings of the Royal Musicological Society 87 (1960–1961): 69–82Google Scholar, and “A Fine Song on Occasion of the Day Was Sung,” Music and Literature 50 (1969): 290–95Google Scholar.

51 Boyer, , Annals (n. 26 above), 1:215Google Scholar. See also the account of Mary Stanhope, maid of honor, in Kent AO, U 1590 C 7/16, February 9, [1703].

52 Ewald, p. 43.

53 Luttrell (n. 27 above), 5:281.

54 Montagu, W., duke of Manchester, Court and Society from Elizabeth to Anne (1864), 2:275Google Scholar; Gregg, , Anne, p. 258Google Scholar.

55 Gregg, , Anne, pp. 182, 231–32, 234Google Scholar; BL, Add. MS 17,677 BBB, fol. 40v.

56 Luttrell, 6:29, 154, 357, 359. For the prince's chronic health problems, see BL, Add. MS 17,677 YY, fols. 84v, 190, 259–60, 267v, Add. MS 17,677 BBB, fols. 104, 107, 116v, Add. MS 17,677 CCC, fol. 510; Kent AO, U 1590 C 7/16, February 8, [1706].

57 Luttrell, 6:368, 382; Boyer, A., The Political State of Great Britain (1711–40), 1:53Google Scholar; BL, Add. MS 17,677 CCC, fols. 683v, 686.

58 Luttrell, 6:390, 403; Cartwright, ed. (n. 8 above), p. 108: Peter Wentworth to Lord Raby, London, February 14, 1710.

59 Speck, W. A., Tory and Whig: The Struggle in the Constituencies, 1701–1715 (1970), pp. 100–101Google Scholar. Speck has identified all of the peers and all but one of the commoners as Whigs, the exception being the Tacker Sir Thomas Hanmer. When they can be identified, most of the fourteen doctors of divinity created on the queen's visit also prove to be Whigs (Boyer, , Annals, 4:13Google Scholar). Admittedly, only one of the twelve DCLs created at Oxford in 1702 can be shown to be a Whig (Somerset), but the remainder were at least household servants or local dignitaries as well as Tories. This, the lack of other honors to important politicians, and the queen's stay with Somerset at Marlborough on the return leg of the progress suggest a slightly thicker veneer of moderation than was applied on the later progress.

60 Luttrell, 5:578, 586, 589; Boyer, , Annals, 4:178–79Google Scholar; London Gazette, nos. 4154–55 (August 30–September 6, 1705).

61 Daily Courant, no. 2588 (February 8, 1710).

62 Arthur Maynwaring to Sarah, duchess of Marlborough, Tuesday afternoon [November 15, 1709], BL, Add. MS 61,460, fol. 118.

63 BL, Add. MS 31,143, fol. 613; Halsband, R., ed., The Complete Letters of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu (Oxford, 1966), 1:70–71Google Scholar.

64 Boyer, , Annals, 9:335Google Scholar; Luttrell, 6:688; see also HMC, Fifteenth Report, App. 4, p. 657Google Scholar.

65 Curtis, G., The Life and Times of Queen Anne (1973), p. 180Google Scholar.

66 Boyer, , Annals, 9:335Google Scholar; Burrows, D. J., “Handel and the English Chapel Royal during the Reigns of Queen Anne and George I” (Ph.D. thesis, Open University, 1981), 1:141Google Scholar; Avery, E. L., Van Lennep, W., et al., eds., The London Stage, 1660–1800 (Carbondale, Ill., 1960), 2:255Google Scholar.

67 [Edward Harley] to Abigail Harley at Eywood, February 6, 1710/11, HMC, Fifteenth Report, App. 4, p. 657Google Scholar.

68 Williams, H., ed., The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift (Oxford, 1963), 1:214Google Scholar; Holmes and Jones, eds. (n. 14 above), pp. 556–57.

69 Swift, , Journal to Stella (n. 14 above), pp. 158–59, 267, 322, 328, 331, 350, 363, 366Google Scholar; HMC, Portland MSS (1899), 5:4Google Scholar; Halsband, 1:81, 100.

70 Swift, , Journal to Stella, p. 363Google Scholar; HMC, Portland, 5:15Google Scholar; BL, Add. MS 17,677 EEE, fols. 234, 243v.

71 Cartwright, ed. (n. 8 above), pp. 247–48; BL, Add. MS 22,226, fols. 288v, 290; Green (n. 8 above), p. 281; Boyer, , Political State (n. 57 above), 5:89Google Scholar; Williams, 2:11.

72 Roberts, P., ed., The Diary of Sir David Hamilton, 1709–1714 (Oxford, 1975), p. 56Google Scholar; BL, Add. MSS 17,677 GGG, fol. 29v, Add. MS 31,144, fols. 321v, 324v.

73 BL, Add. MS 17,677 EEE, fol. 119v, Add. MS 22,226, fols. 37, 298v; British Mercury, nos. 390 (December 24, 1712), 446Google Scholar (January 13–20, 1713/14); Post Boy, no. 2772 (February 12–14, 1712/13).

74 British Mercury, nos. 391 (December 31, 1712), 412–13Google Scholar (May 27–June 3, 1713), 424 (August 19, 1713); Evening Post, no. 591 (May 21–23, 1713); Post Boy, no. 2814 (May 21–23, 1713); BL, Add. MS 17,677 GGG, fols. 101v–2, 125v, 145v, 183, 276v–277.

75 BL, Add. MS 22,226, fol. 85, Add. MS 31,144, fol. 334; Gregg, , Anne (n. 1 above), pp. 374, 378Google Scholar; HMC, Portland, 5:305Google Scholar; Cartwright, ed., p. 247.

76 Cartwright, ed., pp. 358, 359, 375, 387, 395; HMC, Downshire MSS, 1 (1924):ii, 901Google Scholar; Green, p. 308. See also British Mercury, no. 422 (August 5, 1713); Evening Post, nos. 494 (October 7–9, 1712), 496 (October 11–14, 1712); Bunbury, H. E., ed., The Correspondence of Sir Thomas Hanmer, Bart. Speaker of the House of Commons with a Memoir of His Life (1838), pp. 147, 150Google Scholar; PRO 31/3/202, fols. 37, 39v, 68v, 77; Parke, ed. (n. 8 above), 3:440, 477–78.

77 Margaret, , Lady Verney, ed., Verney Letters of the Eighteenth Century from the MSS. at Claydon House (1930), 1:356Google Scholar: Mary Lovett to Lord Fermenagh, May 15, 1714.

78 Newsletter, May 1, 1714, HMC, Portland, 5:433Google Scholar.

79 Morris, ed. (n. 29 above), pp. 300, 302. See also the account in the Flying Post, no. 1087 (April 23–25, 1702), which attributes “great Satisfaction” to the crowd “to see her Majesty look so well, and with an Air of so much Royalty and good Nature.” For other examples of Anne's ability to rise to a great occasion, see Bodleian Library (Bodl.), Lister MS 37, fol. 80 and pp. 291–93 above.

80 King, ed. (n. 6 above), p. 273.

81 During the first years of their reign, William and Mary appeared in public fairly frequently. Thereafter, royal appearances were rare, especially after Mary's death in December 1694. The notable exceptions were the King's “Namur” progress in the summer of 1695 and his public entry into London after the signing of the Peace of Ryswick in 1697 (see Baxter, S. B., William III and the Defence of European Liberty, 1650–1702 [New York, 1966], pp. 246, 255, 333, 359Google Scholar; Schwoerer, L. G., “The Glorious Revolution as Spectacle: A New Perspective,” in England's Rise to Greatness, 1663–1763, ed. Baxter, S. B. [Berkeley, 1983], pp. 109–49Google Scholar; de Krey [n. 49 above], pp. 58–60; BL, Add. MS 6283, fols. 1–5v, Add. MS 6308, fol. 50). As J. M. Beattie has shown, George I's temporary revival of the social and artistic life of the court during his dispute with the Prince of Wales did not extend to public appearances out-of-doors. The King attended no thanksgivings, rarely took the air, and made only one progress—to Newmarket in 1717—worthy of the name. The English portions of his summer trips to and from Hanover were planned so as to avoid crowds (Beattie, J. M., The English Court in the Reign of George I [Cambridge, 1967], pp. 11–14, 55, 257–58Google Scholar, “The Court of George I and English Politics, 1717–1720,” EHR 81 [1966], pp. 26–37)Google Scholar.

82 The Life of her late Majesty Queen Anne As well before her Accession to the Throne as after (1721),Google Scholar 1:415Google Scholar. There is evidence that, when out-of-doors, Anne, like Elizabeth, was sufficiently accessible to her subjects to be spoken to, receive petitions, etc.: see PRO, State Papers (SP) Domestic 34/32, fol. 131, 36, fol. 16.

83 Green (n. 8 above), p. 271; PRO, Lord Steward's Papers (LS) 13/175, fol. 99; Daily Courant, no. 2635 (April 4, 1710); Evening Post, nos. 365 (December 11–13, 1711), 515–16 (November 25–29, 1712), 556 (February 28–March 3, 1713); Post Boy, no. 2766 (January 29–31, 1712/13); British Mercury, nos. 420 (July 22, 1713), 459Google Scholar (April 14–21, 1714); but cf. Green, p. 281; the Britain, no. 19 (March 7–11, 1713). It is true that the queen's advisors often feared for her safety and took precautions such as doubling the palace guards and urging her to avoid public occasions during politically sensitive periods late in the reign: see PRO 31/3/201, fols. 15–17; Memoirs of the Marquis of Torcy Secretary of State to Louis XIV (1757), 2:277–78Google Scholar; Boyer, , Annals, 11:306–7Google Scholar; HMC, Bath MSS, 1 (1904): 201Google Scholar; HMC, Twelfth Report, App. 3, pp. 99–100, 107–8Google Scholar; Sharpe, R. R., London and the Kingdom (1894), 2:649Google Scholar; Cartwright, ed. (n. 8 above), p. 248; British Apollo, vol. 3, no. 156 (March 21–23, 1711)Google Scholar; Evening Post, no. 515 (November 25–27, 1712). Nor were they above manufacturing plots in order to discredit the Whigs; see Gregg, E., The Protestant Succession in International Politics, 1710–1716 (New York and London, 1986), p. 145Google Scholar. The queen herself does not appear to have taken such threats seriously (see HMC, Bath MSS, 1:223Google Scholar).

84 George Beaumont to Dr. Radcliffe, 2 Aug. 1714, quoted in Hone, C. R., The Life of Dr. John Radcliffe, 1652–1714 (1950), pp. 102–4Google Scholar. However, cf. Cartwright, ed., p. 410, for Radcliffe's claim that he was never summoned.

85 See, e.g., Campbell, K., Sarah Duchess of Marlborough (1932), p. 166Google Scholar.

86 John Charlton to Lady Granby, Totteridge, November 11, 1703, HMC, Twelfth Report, App. 5 (1889), p. 177Google Scholar. For similar activities in 1704, though without mention of Kit-Cat sponsorship, see BL, Add. MS 17,677 ZZ, fol. 483v. In later years, the Godolphin ministry and allied foreign ministers compensated for the queen's declining attendance at public thanksgivings by sponsoring celebratory balls, see BL, Add. MS 17,677 BBB, fols. 343v–344, Add. MS 17,677 CCC, fols. 557–58, Add. MS 17,677 DDD, fol. 81; British Apollo, vol. 2, no. 70 (November 23–25, 1709)Google Scholar; Post Boy, no. 2148 (February 17–19, 1708/9); Post Man, no. 1708 (February 17–19, 1709).

87 Speck (n. 59 above), p. 93; Boyer, , Annals, 10:278–80Google Scholar; HMC, Eleventh Report, App. 5 (1887), p. 307Google Scholar; “Postscript,” Evening Post, no. 354 (November 17, 1711)Google Scholar.

88 Flying Post, nos. 3280 (October 4–7, 1712), 3293 (November 4–6, 1712), 3299 (November 18–20, 1712), 3304 (November 29–December 2, 1712), 3334 (February 7–10, 1712[/13]), 3377 (May 19–21, 1713); BL, Add. MS 17,677 HHH, fols. 70v–71; de Krey (n. 49 above), pp. 256–58; MacPherson, J., ed., Original Papers Containing the Secret History of Great Britain from the Restoration to the Accession of the House of Hanover (1775), 2:446Google Scholar.

89 Flying Post, nos. 3308 (December 9–11, 1712), 3335 (February 10–13, 1712[/13]), 3353 (March 24–26, 1713).

90 See de Krey, pp. 253–58; Flying Post, no. 3282 (October 9–11, 1712).

91 See esp. de Krey, pp. 256–57.

92 Cartwright, ed., pp. 208, 210, 215.

93 Ibid., p. 248. See also MacPherson, , ed., Original Papers, 2:270–71Google Scholar.

94 British Mercury, nos. 283 (January 11–14, 1712), 293Google Scholar (February 4–6, 1712); Protestant Post-Boy, nos. 58 (January 12–15, 1711/1712), 62Google Scholar (January 22–24, 1711/12); Mac-Pherson, ed., 2:270–71, 273, 280.

95 The classic statement of this point of view is contained in Holmes (n. 1 above), chap. 2. For an analysis that finds more consensus in Augustan society, see Colley, L., In Defiance of Oligarchy: The Tory Party, 1714–60 (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 10–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

96 Cobbett, W., ed., The Parliamentary History of England (1810), 6:25Google Scholar.

97 See, e.g., Defoe's trenchant analysis, contained in a letter to Robert Harley probably written in the late summer of 1704 (Healey, G. H., ed., The Letters of Daniel Defoe [Oxford, 1955], pp. 51–55)Google Scholar.

98 See n. 59 above. All of the men so honored were either household servants or powerful local figures.

99 Cobbett, , ed., Parliamentary History, 6:356Google Scholar.

100 Mansfield, A., Ceremonial Costume: Court, Civil and Civic Costume from 1660 to the Present Day (Totowa, N.J., 1980), p. 70Google Scholar.

101 For example, her behavior during the Sacheverell trial suggests a delicate balancing act between the extreme positions taken up by the two parties: see Gregg, , Anne (n. 1 above), p. 306Google Scholar; Holmes, G. S., The Trial of Dr. Sacheverell (1973), pp. 116–17, 208, 210–11, 220, 227, 228Google Scholar.

102 For evidence of High Church dissatisfaction, see Doble, C. E., Remarks and Collections of Thomas Hearne (Oxford, 1885–1921), 1:61Google Scholar, 2:88, 90, 93, 360–61; Bennett, G. V., The Tory Crisis in Church and State, 1688–1730: The Career of Francis Atterbury, Bishop of Rochester (Oxford, 1975)Google Scholar. chaps. 4–9.

103 I would like to thank Gary de Krey for calling my attention to this point.

104 The following discussion of the court is based on research for my doctoral thesis, Bucholz, Robert O., “The Court in the Reign of Queen Anne” (D. Phil. thesis, Oxford, 1987)Google Scholar. All references in this article are to the thesis.

105 Ibid., chaps. 2, 5.

106 Ibid., chap. 6.

107 Ibid., chap. 7.

108 Quoted in Philip, Earl Stanhope, History of England Comprising the Reign of Queen Anne until the Peace of Utrecht, 1701–1713 (1872), 2:310Google Scholar. For Anne's conversation, see Bucholz, chap. 7.

109 Lady Orkney to [Harriet, Lady Harley], [?June 1714], HMC, Portland, 5:463Google Scholar. Contemporary commentaries are almost unanimous on the dullness of Anne's court: see King, ed. (n. 6 above), pp. 230–31; Burnet(n. 15 above), 6:230; Gray, J. M., ed., Memoirs of the Life of Sir John Clerk of Penicuik, Baronet, 1676–1755 (Roxburgh Club, 1895), p. 72Google Scholar; Quarrel and Mare, eds. (n. 48 above), p. 133; Swift, , Journal to Stella (n. 14 above), p. 328Google Scholar.

110 Gray, ed., p. 62.

111 For an interesting discussion of the monarch's “two bodies,” see Starkey, D., “Representation through Intimacy: A Study in the Symbolism of Monarchy and Court Office in Early-Modern England,” in Symbols and Sentiments: Cross-cultural Studies in Symbolism, ed. Lewis, I. (1977), pp. 187–224Google Scholar.

112 Bucholz, chap. 4. See, e.g., the career of Peter Wentworth in Cartwright, ed. (n. 8 above), “Introduction.”

113 For the stocks, see Dickson, P. G. M., The Financial Revolution in England: A Study in the Development of Public Credit (1967)Google Scholar; and Carswell, J., The South Sea Bubble (1960)Google Scholar. For the professions, see Holmes, G. S., Augustan England: Professions, State and Society, 1680–1730 (1982)Google Scholar; and Prest, W., ed., The Professions in Early Modern England (1987)Google Scholar. For the parties, see Holmes, British Politics (n. 1 above); and Speck (n. 59 above). While there is no all-encompassing scholarly study of Augustan London as a social and cultural center, Foss, M. (The Age of Patronage: The Arts in England, 1660–1750 [Ithaca, N.Y., 1971])Google Scholar, is a good popular treatment and there are numerous specialized studies.