Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T18:46:47.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Secret History of the Tudor Court: The King's Coffers and the King's Purse, 1542–1553

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

Dale Hoak
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his presidential addresses to the Royal Historical Society, G. R. Elton drew attention to the “points of contact” in Tudor central government, namely, the relations of court, council, and Parliament. Among other things, Elton's discussion revealed the need to integrate more fully the often separately related histories of those institutions. Although such an integrated history obviously lies beyond the scope of this essay, part of the subject, Privy Chamber finance, introduces an important, if often secret, point of contact between officers of the royal household and officers of “state”—the management of the king's money. A declaration of money disbursed from Henry VIII's Privy Coffers in 1542–48 and an audit of Edward VI's Privy Purse for the years 1550–51, both discussed here for the first time, disclose some previously unknown aspects of early Tudor government and finance. Taken together, these documents should provide the basis for a deeper appreciation of the dynamics of the English Reformation regime.

I

Research of the past decade has revealed the place and importance of the Privy Chamber in the household and government of the Tudor kings. By 1540 a heretofore informal group of the king's body servants and boon companions had acquired wages and administrative functions to match their royally bestowed places and titles. The officers and staff of the king's private apartments now constituted a separate department of the royal household. Of the eighteen gentlemen in ordinary (i.e., in wages), two were honored by the title “chief” because of the intimate nature of their attendance on the king's person. One of them, the groom of the stool, became, ex officio, “first” gentleman.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , April 1987 , pp. 208 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1987

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 Elton, G. R., “The Tudor Government: The Points of Contact. I. Parliament. II. The Council. III. The Court,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 24 (1974): 183 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; 25 (1975): 195 ff.; 26 (1976): 211 ff.

2 For the Henrician manuscript, see n. 6 below. The Edwardian account (Public Record Office [PRO], Exchequer [E] 101/426/8) was once cited in passing in Starkey, D. R., “The King's Privy Chamber, 1485–1547” (Ph.D. diss., Cambridge University, 1973), p. 411, n. 3Google Scholar.

3 Hoak, D., “The King's Privy Chamber, 1547–1553,” in Tudor Rule and Revolution: Essays for G. R. Elton from His American Friends, ed. Guth, D. J. and McKenna, J. W. (New York, 1982), pp. 87–108Google Scholar; Starkey.

4 Quoted in Starkey, D. R., “Court and Government,” in Revolution Reassessed: Revisions in the History of Tudor Government and Administration, ed. Coleman, C. and Starkey, D. R. (Oxford, 1986), p. 40Google Scholar.

5 Ibid., p. 43. In his dissertation of 1973 (of which “Court and Government” is an extract), Starkey said that “there was no system” governing the operations of the coffers (Starkey, , “The King's Privy Chamber” [n. 2 above], p. 410Google Scholar).

6 British Library (BL), Lansdowne Charter 14. Walter Richardson's erroneous description of this document as “an extant account book” recording Denny's receipts of £243,423¼ as much as his misleading citation, “Lansd. Rolls, no. 14, especially fos. 264–72” (emphases added), clearly indicate that he never examined the original, which is a magnificent, fair-copy audit, on a single, twenty-four-foot roll of velum, of the receipt and expenditure of all money in Denny's charge at Westminster from 1542 to 1548 (see Richardson, W. C., History of the Court of Augmentations, 1536–1554 [Baton Rouge, La., 1961], p. 356, n. 94Google Scholar). The folios that Richardson had in mind are to be found at the end of PRO, E 315/160; they constitute a register of receipts only. (Denny was required to keep a register of issues, too, as noted at the beginning of Lansdowne Charter 14.) Thus Richardson confused E 315/160/264–72, which he cited only in its published, extracted form (Brewer, J. S., Gairdner, J., and Brodie, R. H., eds., Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII, 21 vols. [London, 1862–1932], vol. 17, no. 26Google Scholar), with Lansdowne Charter 14, a reference to which he obviously possessed but failed to follow up. When I first saw Landsdowne Charter 14 (in November 1985), I was unaware of the brief reference to it in Colvin, H. M., ed., History of the King's Works (London, 1982), 4, pt. 2:312–13Google Scholar, n. 1.

7 PRO, E 315/253/53 (the record of a payment from augmentations of £1,000 to Henry VIII by virtue of the king's warrant of May 10, 1544).

8 Hoak (n. 3 above), p. 107.

9 Elton, G. R., “The Tudor Revolution: A Reply,” Past and Present, no. 29 (1965), p. 47Google Scholar.

10 Starkey, , “The King's Privy Chamber” (n. 2 above), pp. 243, 408Google Scholar. The dates given in Bindoff, S. T., ed., House of Commons, 1509–1558, 3 vols. (London, 1982), 2:27Google Scholar, for the assumption of these offices appear to be speculative.

11 The keeping of other palaces fell to other gentlemen of the Privy Chamber (e.g., at Hampton Court and Nonesuch it was Sir Thomas Cawarden), and, like Denny at Westminster, they took charge of the contents of those palaces as well as the security of the secret treasure housed in them. For Cawarden's keeperships, see BL, Harleian (Harl.) MS 1419A, fols. 250, 280.

12 BL, Harl. MS 1419A, fols. 111a, 118b. In another inventory taken on January 20, 1550, it is described as “the kinges secrete Juelhous at the nether end of the Gallery by the privie garden” (Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fol. 221).

13 Brewer et al., eds., vol. 17, no. 267.

14 BL, Harl. MS 1419A, fol. 91a.

15 BL, Harl. MS 1419A, fols. 118b, 115a, 151. During Northumberland's tenure, privy coin was stashed in, and stolen from, the chamber where Edward VI customarily heard his preacher's sermons (Hoak [n. 3 above], p. 107).

16 BL, Harl. MS 1419A, fols. 142b.

17 “The Declaracon of thacompte. of Sir: Anthony Denny” is BL, Lansdowne Charter 14. The register of moneys charged, or received, to Denny's keeping is PRO, E 315/160/264–72. A calendar of the latter, giving yearly totals, was published in Brewer et al., eds., vol. 17, no. 267. Note especially that the “Declaracon” corrects some of the entries in E 315/160; however, in some cases, in respect of the source of receipts, the Public Record Office volume provides information not found in the Lansdowne Charter. Denny was required to keep duplicate “bookes of issues or discharge,” but these have not been found.

18 BL, Lansdowne Charter 14. This sum supercedes all previously cited amounts.

19 Bindoff, ed. (n. 10 above), 3:368.

20 BL, Lansdowne Charter 14.

21 The “Declaracon” records the sum of £840.5.11¼ received from Sir Edmund Peckham (high treasurer of the mint) on April 30, 1547, with £70.2.6 of that amount earmarked “for the paymentt of the chardges of the new garden and orcharde at Grenewiche” (BL, Lansdowne Charter 14). The entry in Denny's register indicates that, of the whole amount received from Peckham, the £70.2.6 was actually charged among the receipts of money within his office of groomship of the stool (PRO, E 315/160/270; Brewer et al., eds., vol. 17, no. 267, p. 149).

22 “Preste” comes from the Old French verb prester, to advance money for work to be done or not yet completed or to hire the services of (a person) or the use of (a ship, etc.) by advance payment (see the Oxford English Dictionary).

23 BL, Lansdowne Charter 14. Although payments are listed by recipient's names, not by type, the totals given here are only those that can be identified specifically as military expenditures. Wriothesley and Rich, e.g., are named as “high Treasourer of the Warres” and “late Treasourer of the Warres,” respectively.

24 Ibid. The remainder (£6,333.6.8) Denny received from Sir Bryan Tuke, treasurer of the King's Chamber.

25 Starkey, , “Court and Government” (n. 4 above), p. 45Google Scholar.

26 BL, Lansdowne Charter 14. The £31,366.0.5¼ included £16,320.15.2¾ “to Dominico Grizo and Antho[ny] Carcydony. for Jewelles. plate Rich cloth of Gold. Silver, tissue and sondrie sortes of veluetes and silkes.”

27 PRO, E 101/546/19 (for a discussion of which, see text); see also Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office: Edward VI (CPR), 5:85Google Scholar.

28 Davies, C. S. L., Peace, Print, and Protestantism, 1450–1558 (St. Albans, 1977), p. 217Google Scholar. An estimate dating from Edward VI's reign put the total at well over £2,000,000. It is thought that the actual cost of the campaign of 1544 was three times Wriothesley's own reckoning of £260,000, or about £780,000 (Elton, G. R., Reform and Reformation: England, 1509–1558 [Cambridge, Mass., 1977], pp. 310–11Google Scholar).

29 The quotation is from the entry recording the delivery of £2,000 “to his graces owne handes at Gr[en]ywch,” by command of a signet warrant dated December 27, 1544 (PRO, E 315/253/60b).

30 BL, Harl. MS 1419A, fol. 118b.

31 On the transition from Henry's reign to Edward's, see Jordan, W. K., Edward VI: The Young King (London, 1968), pp. 51–65Google Scholar.

32 The commission of July 2, 1547, ordering the general inventory (CPR, 1:261) was followed by another of September 14, 1547, requiring Denny to account for all the money in his charge (ibid., p. 139). Two documents have survived in response to the latter commission, namely, Denny's “Declaracon,” which is, as already noted (in n. 17 above), BL, Lansdowne Charter 14, and an original fair copy, in two volumes, of the commissioners' own inventory, dated January 20, 1550 (Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, and MS 129B).

33 In the Chairhouse, £5,000 in demisovereigns were found in five canvas bags “In a coofer of Walnuttze” and another £1,136.18.0 in “xviij purses parte silkeand parte silke and golde” (Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fols. 209, 212). When the commissioners opened the coffer marked with the letter L, they found £5,583.15.9 in seven bags of canvas, leather, silk, and velvet and thirty-two of Henry's most prized purses of fine white leather, embroidered black velvet, white satin garnished with gold lace, those knit of silver, gold, blue, and crimson silk, etc. (Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fols. 169–70). The total (£11,420.13.9) is less than that accounted “by reason of the diuersitie in rating the angells and other olde golde aboue mencyoned” (Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fol. 216a).

34 On November 18, 1549, the council authorized £5,000 of this money to be paid to Sir Edmund Peckham, high treasurer of the mint, to be converted “to the kinges vse”; another £2,000 two days later; and a further £3,000 on December 29, 1549. Northumberland's government ordered the remaining £1,435.9.5 to be delivered to the first gentleman of the Privy Chamber (Northumberland's brother, Sir Andrew Dudley) on April 1, 1553 (Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fol. 216a). Notes in the margins of the inventory record the date and amount of the deliveries from each of the purses and bags listed (Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fols. 169–70, 209, 212).

35 Bindoff, ed. (n. 10 above), 3:368.

36 Acts of the Privy Council (APC), 2:121Google Scholar. The £400 was drawn from purses in the walnut coffer in the Chairhouse by authority of a council warrant of August 25, 1547 (Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fol. 212).

37 Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fol. 212.

38 Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fol. 150.

39 APC, 2:121; BL, Lansdowne Charter 14; Library of the Society of Antiquaries, MS 129A, fol. 212.

40 BL, Lansdowne Charter 14; APC, 2:121, 128, 230.

41 Bodleian Library (Bodl.), Ashmole MS 1729, fol. 9 (Edward's own memorandum of about February 1549).

42 Jordan (n. 31 above), p. 376.

43 Bodl., Ashmole MS 1729, fol. 9.

44 Ibid.; Jordan; Haynes, S. A., A Collection of State Papers Relating to Affairs in the Reigns of King Henry VIII, King Edward VI, Queen Mary, and Queen Elizabeth, from the Year 1542 to 1570, 2 vols. (London, 1740), 1:93Google Scholar.

45 APC, 2:249.

46 From Seymour's deposition of February 18, 1549 (Haynes, 1:108).

47 Ibid. Seymour said that Fowler told him of Stanhope's order, which went into effect about July or August 1548, but under examination both suspects played dumb, claiming that they knew not what purpose it served.

48 Hoak (n. 3 above), pp. 100, 102, 104–5.

49 APC, 3:175.

50 Hoak, pp. 106–7.

51 APC, 4:28, 31 (references of April 27 and May 1, 1552); Hoak, D. E., The King's Council in the Reign of Edward VI (Cambridge, 1976), pp. 210–11Google Scholar.

52 Richardson (n. 6 above), p. 362.

53 Ibid.

54 PRO, E 101/546/19 and passim. The council had rewarded Robert Constable with £25 in June 1548 for his service “northward” (APC, 2:206).

55 This is the only such example in Osborne's file (PRO, E 101/546/19). From another source we know that he was ordered to deliver £240 to Dudley on January 8, 1553 (APC, 4:202).

56 Richardson (n. 6 above), p. 364.

57 PRO, E 101/546/19.

58 Sir Andrew Dudley assumed the keeping of Westminster Palace on Somerset's removal in October 1549 (Bindoff, ed. [n. 10 above], 2:61–63).

59 Compare the references to Osborne's receipts (March 11, April 27, May 1, and July 17, 1552) in APC, vols. 3, 4, and passim, with the chief gentleman's (April 27, June 28, and December 10, 1551, and March 11, July 1, and December 3, 1552).

60 PRO, E 101/426/8.

61 PRO, E 101/426/8, membrane 1.

62 PRO, E 101/426/8, membrane 2.

63 PRO, E 101/426/8, membrane 3.

64 Ibid.

65 For Junes, see ibid.

66 PRO, E 101/426/8, membrane 4.

67 PRO, E 101/426/8, membrane 1.

68 Ibid. The fact that Stanhope is not mentioned with Denny as a keeper of the Purse is not surprising since only ten months before the declaration of the account he was executed for allegedly plotting with his brother-in-law, the duke of Somerset, to murder Somerset's rival, the duke of Northumberland.

69 On the reverse side of the second folio of the council warrant of October 9, 1552, to Osborne, a warrant ordering him to deliver to the bearer £100 in reward to “Monsieur de villandree,” there is an accounting (in Osborne's hand?) of sums to be collected to make up the £100. Five pounds were to be had “of ye purse” (PRO, E 101/546/19 [Osborne's file]).

70 APC, 3:18. The same description is used in the surviving copy of the account itself, which, although dated December 11, 1552, runs from January 1, 1550 (PRO E 101/426/8, membrane 1). For a similar reference of December 7, 1550, see APC, 3:175.

71 Hoak, , The King's Council in the Reign of Edward VI (n. 51 above), pp. 207–8Google Scholar.

72 APC, 3:475.

73 PRO, E 101/625/4.

74 Ibid.

75 The form of address comes from the paper indenture between Dudley and Osborne, May 15, 1533, one of the items in the bundle E 101/546/19; Alsop, J. D., “The Structure of Early Tudor Finance, c. 1509–1558,” in Coleman, and Starkey, , eds. (n. 4 above), p. 45Google Scholar.

76 See his letter to the council of June 16, 1551 (Hatfield House, Cecil Papers, 151, fols. 7–8) and the council's earlier determination (APC, 3:305). Edward VI's memorandum of October 3, 1552, parrots the same idea (BL, Lansdowne MS 1236, fol. 19a). I have summarized all of this in Hoak, , The King's Council in the Reign of Edward VI (n. 51 above), pp. 206, 210Google Scholar.

77 Elton, G. R., The Tudor Revolution in Government: Administrative Changes in the Reign of Henry VIII (Cambridge, 1953), p. 237CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Richardson, W. C., ed., The Report of the Royal Commission of 1552 (Morgantown, W.Va., 1974)Google Scholar, must be read in light of Elton's review of it in “Mid-Tudor Finance,” Historical Journal 20, no. 3 (1977): 73–77Google Scholar; and Alsop, J. D., “The Revenue Commission of 1552,” Historical Journal 22, no. 3 (1979): 511–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

78 PRO, State Papers (SP) 1/199/105–8 (quoted in Elton, , The Tudor Revolution in Government, p. 237Google Scholar, n. 1).

79 See Hoak, D., “Rehabilitating the Duke of Northumberland: Politics and Political Control, 1549–53,” in The Mid-Tudor Polity, c. 1540–1560, ed. Loach, J. and Tittler, R. (London, 1980), pp. 40–41Google Scholar.

80 See n. 76 above.

81 Hasler, P., ed., House of Commons, 1558–1603, 3 vols. (London, 1981), 3:158–59Google Scholar.

82 Anne Blythe's father, Dr. John Blythe, was Regius Professor of Physics at Cambridge, suggesting perhaps that Osborne first met Cecil and Cheke at Cambridge. Cecil (St. John's) and Osborne (college unknown) were the same age; Cheke (St. John's) was seven years older.

83 Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, MS Ancien Saint-Germain Français, 15888, fol. 215 (a copy of a contemporary French observation, translated and quoted in Hoak, , The King's Council in the Reign of Edward VI [n. 51 above], p. 123Google Scholar).

84 Hoak, , “The King's Privy Chamber” (n. 3 above), p. 90Google Scholar. For a summary of the offices and influence of Darcy and Gates, see Hoak, , “Rehabilitating the Duke of Northumberland” (n. 79 above), pp. 43–44Google Scholar.

85 For the official careers of the chief gentlemen, see Bindoff, ed. (n. 10 above) (Darcy [2:14–16]; Dudley [2:61–63]; Gates [2:198–99]; Sidney [33:318]; and Wroth [3:667–68]).

86 Alsop, , “The Structure of Early Tudor Finance” (n. 75 above), p. 145Google Scholar.

87 Ibid., p. 150.

88 Hoak, , The King's Council in the Reign of Edward VI (n. 51 above), p. 87Google Scholar.

89 Huntington Library, Ellesmere MS 2580 (an original paper of four leaves constituting eight pages). The text, covering the first seven pages, is in an as-yet-unidentified fair-copy secretary hand. Another, less formal contemporary hand added the heading and, on the last page (i.e., on the “outside” of what was once a quadrilaterally folded document), “The xvj of Maii 1559 Toching the redresse of the Comy[n] Welth.” The watermark, a florally fringed orb surmounting a cross, confirms the contemporaneity of the manuscript. Ellesmere MS 2625 is a later, Elizabethan copy of 2580: it omits some phrases found in the earlier paper and adds a substantial amount of material.

90 In recommending him to the electors at Bridport, Christopher Smythe said that Osborne was a “great officer” in the Exchequer and that, if they returned him to Parliament, he would not ask for wages (Hasler, ed. [n. 81 above], 3:158–59).

91 This calculation was made by checking the lists given in Hoak, , “The King's Privy Chamber” (n. 3 above), pp. 98, 101Google Scholar, against the entries in Bindoff, ed. (n. 10 above).