Elizabeth I's Secret Lover

by Robert Stedall

  Robert did not always get his own way. In 1565, Thomas Sampson, who had become Dean of Christ Church, Oxford, was deprived of his post by Elizabeth on the grounds of his Puritan beliefs. Not even Robert (who was temporarily out of favour with her) could gain his reinstatement, but he persuaded the Bishop of London to allow Sampson to preach at Paul’s Cross. When Thomas Lever, who had been his father’s protégé, returned from the Continent in 1559, Robert arranged his appointment as rector and archdeacon of Coventry. In January 1563, Lever was appointed Master of Sherburn School in Durham. After becoming a canon at Durham Cathedral, he championed diocesan clergy to take a Puritan line against ‘popish’ practices such as the wearing of a surplice. When dismissed by the bishop, even Robert could not save him. Nevertheless, Lever retained his archdeaconry at Coventry, filling it with non-conformist ministers. Although he was cited for breaches of discipline, Robert worked hard to protect him, but he remained mired in controversy until his death in 1577.

  Perhaps the most celebrated and learned of the Puritan leaders enjoying Robert’s patronage was Thomas Cartwright, a lecturer and preacher at Cambridge University.14 He challenged the establishment with ‘a clear, logical exposition of scripture … [leading to] widespread non-conformity at Cambridge’,15 while Oxford retained its establishment leanings. To clamp down on him, the Cambridge authorities expropriated his professorship and fellowship in 1571. In 1573, a warrant was issued for his arrest after he openly supported John Field (another of Robert’s protégés), who had attacked the Elizabethan church settlement and refused to conform. Cartwright escaped to the Continent, spending eleven-and-a-half years visiting Reformed churches and writing religious works, which Elizabeth and her bishops considered seditious. She had no time for religious zealots and felt threatened by ecclesiastical indiscipline.16 Nevertheless, Robert always stood by him.17 He eventually joined with Burghley to beg the Queen for Cartwright’s repatriation. When she refused, Cartwright, then aged 50, returned without consent in 1585, only to be imprisoned.

  At last, Robert began to feel isolated in his support for firebrand non-conformists and he pulled back. He recognised that there was more discord between Protestant and Puritan, than between Protestant and Catholic. A majority of the Council, including Robert, Burghley, Walsingham and Sir Francis Knollys, began to see Presbyterianism as disruptive, setting non-conformists on a collision course with the establishment. With Elizabeth determined to retain a diocesan structure to support her position as head of the Church of England, Robert saw the urgent need for reconciliation to prevent a disintegration into rival camps.18 The Council now encouraged different branches of the Protestant faith to work within the aegis of the Church of England. To settle the controversy over vestments, Robert initiated discussions with the Strasburg leader John Sturm and German Protestant princes.

  A good example of Robert’s more conciliatory approach was in his attitude to Thomas Wood. In 1576, Wood, a local farmer in Leicestershire, who had served under Ambrose at Le Havre, began to participate in weekly ‘prophesying’ meetings despite not being ordained. Although ‘prophesyings’ by groups of local ministers had innocently exhorted large numbers to religious study with ‘exercises of interpretation of the scriptures’, they threatened to become rallying calls for dissent from Anglican dogma. Elizabeth wanted them suppressed. Robert recognised the danger and to the great shock of the Puritan movement, began to support Elizabeth.19 This resulted in Wood openly criticising Robert’s private life until Ambrose had to defend his brother. Robert also wrote a letter, which extended to 3,000 words. He claimed: ‘There is no man I know in this realm, of one calling of another, that hath shown a better mind to the furthering of true religion, than I have done, even from the first day of her Majesty’s reign to this.’ He continued:

  I will not justify myself for being a sinner of flesh and blood as others be. And besides, I stand on the top of a hill, where I know the smallest slip seemeth a fall. But I will not excuse myself. I may fall many ways and have more witnesses thereof than many others who perhaps be no saints neither, yet their faults less noted, though some ways greater than mine.20

  Although Archbishop Matthew Parker had banned prophesyings in 1574, they had continued to flourish, and the next Archbishop of Canterbury, the Puritan Edmund Grindal defended them. Elizabeth banned Grindal from court and sought to deprive him of office. It was only when the Council, with Robert’s encouragement, unanimously defended him that he was permitted to remain as Archbishop, but without any authority, until his death on 6 July 1583. It was an important confrontation as it raised the question of whether the Queen or the Archbishop were the final authority in the Church of England. This was a matter on which Elizabeth would not back down.

  Elizabeth was supported by Hatton, who was progressively growing in influence on ecclesiastical matters. It was on his advice that Elizabeth appointed John Whitgift, now aged 53, as Archbishop of Canterbury to replace Grindal. Hatton had never been an ally of religious radicals and had faced an assassination attempt from a fanatical Puritan in 1573.21 Nevertheless, he remained in awe of Robert. As late as 30 January 1584, Walsingham and Hatton agreed to defer a decision on how to deal with a suspect Roman Catholic priest until Robert could be present on the following day.22 While Robert ‘and the majority of the council had worked for ecclesiastical unity’,23 Whitgift wanted church uniformity and set out to dismantle the broadly-based Calvinist church set up by his predecessors. This ‘unyielding prelate strove to restore the dignity and power of all grades of the ordained clergy and ruthlessly stamped out non-conformity’.24 To achieve this, he needed Elizabeth’s and Hatton’s support. Hatton gave him warning when he faced opposition in the Commons but assured him of backing at court.25

  Whitgift was acting with royal authority when he ‘required all clergy to subscribe to certain articles concerning belief and practice’.26 When some refused, he asked Hatton to intercede to prevent tacit support for them from other members of the Council. He complained: ‘Unless such contentious persons were some way animated and backed, they would not stand out as they do.’27 When Cartwright’s supporters tried to gain his release, Whitgift refused him a preaching licence. Nevertheless, Robert employed him as a chaplain and appointed him as Master of Leycester Hospital at Warwick with a supplemental annuity of £50. Cartwright irritated the church hierarchy by preaching to packed congregations in the surrounding area. When, after four years, his appointment was terminated, he was jailed. He later travelled to the Netherlands as chaplain to Robert’s expeditionary force. On Robert’s death, Ambrose continued to provide protection for him but when Ambrose also died, he was again arrested and faced the loss of his income.28

  With Robert having urged his Puritan friends to work within ‘the prevailing pattern of church leadership’, he now ‘found himself caught up in the crossfire between entrenched episcopal and non-conformist positions’.29 Although radicals wanted him to stand up to Whitgift and the Queen, the Archbishop asked him to provide practical support for ‘that lawfully constituted church authority to which he had given verbal allegiance’.30 In December 1584, Robert played the role of conciliator, summoning representatives of both viewpoints to Lambeth. The disputants argued before Robert, Burghley, Walsingham and Lord Grey of Pirgo, but failed to resolve their differences. In March 1585, Robert made a blistering attack on Whitgift’s policies in the House of Lords. With the country poised for war against Catholics on the Continent, Robert’s supporters believed that Whitgift was attacking the wrong enemy. Cecil complained:

  I desire the peace of the Church. I desire concord and unity in the exercise of our religion. But I conclude that … this kind of proceeding is too much savouring of the Roman Inquisition and is rather a device to seek offenders than to reform any.31

  The Archbishop’s intransigence had lost Robert his former control of church policy through Government and prevented him from nominating his own appointees to benefices.32 Nevertheless, Whitgift retained the Queen’s support; in 1586
, his appointment to the Council further damaged Robert’s authority.

  Robert also found himself competing with Sir Walter Raleigh, who had engaged Elizabeth’s fancy. In 1582, Raleigh had arrived at court bringing dispatches from Lord Grey de Wilton in Ireland. He was ‘dark handsome, lively and extraordinarily intelligent … His charm, his brilliance, his magnetism exercised an engrossing influence over her’.33 Thanks to her generosity, Raleigh was ‘able to indulge his taste in rich clothes, such as the Queen loved to see him wear’.34 It was Robert who ‘clipped Raleigh’s wings by bringing forward his stepson, the Earl of Essex’.35 With his own prestige waning, and Elizabeth pursuing policies which he considered disastrous, he might have withdrawn from public life. Instead he plunged his efforts into taking a more aggressive approach to international foreign policy.

  Chapter 20 Royal visits to Dudley homes

  In 1572, the Queen paid a visit to Warwick, which Robert always considered his parental home. She was the guest of Ambrose and his wife Ann Russell, who had become the Queen’s close companion, and Robert accompanied her. This was a house party that involved the whole town. It took some time for the royal coach to make its way through the thronging crowd up Castle Hill to the gates. Ambrose and his wife were not living in the castle, but the Queen stayed with them for two days at ‘Mr Fisher’s house’. The climax of the party was a firework display reflected in the river. This was enhanced by cannon brought by Ambrose, as Master of the Ordnance, at his own expense from the Tower. From here she left Warwick by the north gate for a private visit with Robert to Kenilworth, six miles away. She remained in ‘blissful retreat’ until the Saturday, when she returned to surprise Lady Warwick at supper. She sat down to join everyone, but as usual ate little and, having left the table, went out into the gallery. Here she encountered Mr Fisher, who was prevented by gout from going down on his knees, but he enjoyed a conversation with her.

  Elizabeth now returned for a public visit to Kenilworth, where she received the news of the Massacre of St Bartholomew. Her party went on to Berkeley Castle. Henry, Lord Berkeley, who occupied the property, was not present, as his ownership was disputed by the Dudleys, but Robert took Elizabeth hunting in the chase, where they slaughtered twenty-seven stags, and had a ‘wonderful day’. Berkeley was furious at the decimation of his stock and blamed Robert for his arrogance, but the Queen took Robert’s side.

  In July 1575, Robert arranged another visit for Elizabeth and her court to Kenilworth. This was without doubt the most glittering spectacle of her reign. It was memorable for its incredible extravagance and range of entertainments. She had been staying at her home at Grafton in Oxfordshire after making some structural improvements and Robert paid her a visit. He wrote to Burghley, who was to join them at Kenilworth, that she was very pleased with the result. Her only problem had been a shortage of light ale, which she preferred drinking to water that might be contaminated. Even Robert considered the local ale too heady, but eventually a source of light ale was found that met with her approval. She never took strong drink and always added water to wine.

  On 9 July, Robert rode out from Kenilworth to greet the royal party at Long Itchington, where he had erected an enormous pavilion for a sumptuous dinner.1 The party consisted of thirty guests with their servants. These included Sir Henry and Mary Sidney, their son Philip, Burghley, and Lettice Knollys. It is apparent that Douglas Sheffield, whose son was now born, stayed away. The weather was heavenly, hot with a few refreshing showers. When they reached Kenilworth at eight o’clock in the evening, the whole castle was lit by thousands of twinkling candles and torches, ‘looking like a fairy palace rising from the lake’.

  On the bridge, seven pairs of columns were adorned with votive offerings: wheat, grapes, branches laden with fruit, cages of birds, platters of fish protected by fresh grass; the sixth pair were in the form of two ragged staves, from whose branches hung glittering armour; the last pair were two bay trees, hung on all sides with lutes, viols, flutes, recorders and harps.2

  As the visitors approached the Castle gates, ‘a salute of cannon greeted the Queen’s entry, and at that moment the clock on Caesar’s Tower, with its blue dial and gold figures, was stopped; time was to stand still for these enchanted days’.3 There now:

  appeared a floating island on the large pool there, bright blazing with torches, in which were clad in silks the Lady of the Lake and two nymphs waiting on her, who made a speech to the Queen in metre of the antiquity and owners of the castle …4

  For the next eighteen days:

  actuality and myth completely overlapped. When Elizabeth went hunting, a savage man and satyrs appeared to recite flattering verses. Returning on another day to the castle she was ‘surprised’ by Triton who emerged from the lake, dripping weeds and water, to make another oration. Even at her departing she found Sylvanus running at her stirrup and urging her to stay for ever. There were masques and pageants in plenty, banqueting and bear-baiting. There was a rustic wedding and games arranged for the townsfolk in the tiltyard. There were mummers and a troupe of actors from Coventry who came to present traditional plays. There were tumblers and jugglers, and firework displays.5

  All the entertainments were accompanied by exquisite music and dancing, with people from the locality invited to watch the spectacle. It can be surmised that the 11-year-old William Shakespeare, living five miles away at Stratford, was in the audience. Much of the analogy in A Midsummer Night’s Dream seems reminiscent of the Kenilworth entertainment. Killigrew had discovered an Italian maker of fireworks, who sent Robert a programme for a ‘pyrotechnical display’6 that would take two months to prepare. These were Shakepeare’s ‘stars that shot madly from their courses’. The plan had:

  provided for live dogs, cats and birds to be thrown out of the body of a flaming, flying dragon; but as detailed accounts of the fireworks seen at Kenilworth make no mention of this feature, it may be assumed that it was cancelled.7

  On the first evening, there were ‘serpents of fire in the meads’, and on another there was a display in the Castle courtyard of:

  a fountain throwing water, wine and fire for seven or eight hours continuously, and ‘three wonderful wheels of scented fire of different colours’, a combination of colour, light and scent, the three ideals of Elizabethan pleasure.8

  There were picnics and minstrelsy on the lake. And everywhere ‘magic’ surprises – bushes that burst into song, pillars that grew fruit and gushed wine, trees decked with costly gifts. To achieve this effect, [Robert] and an army of servants bustled behind the scenes, ready to change the programme at a moment’s notice in accordance with the whim of the Queen or the weather.9

  Robert Laneham explained the luxury provided:

  Delicates that any way might serve or delight; as of wine, spice, dainty viands, plate, music, ornaments of house, rich arras and silk (to say nothing of meaner things), the Mass of provision was heaped so huge, which the bounty in spending did after betray. The conceit [was] so deep in casting the [plate] at first: such a wisdom and cunning in acquiring things so rich, so rare, and in such abundance: by so immense and profuse a charge of expense, which, by so honourable service, and exquisite order, courtesy of officers, and humanity of all, were after so bountifully bestowed and spent. What may this express, what may this set out on us, but only a magnific mind, a singular wisdom, a princely purse, and an heroic heart?10

  Elizabeth lacked her father’s gastronomic appetite, and it is recorded that she ate ‘smally or nothing’, doing ‘scant justice to the food and drink’,11 but none of the allegory was lost on her. As always, this concealed personal messages. Marriage was the constant theme. The Queen should marry or should release her suitors from their bondage. This should not be seen ‘as a last desperate gamble for the Queen’s hand’.12 Robert’s affections had strayed, and his courtship was no more than formal. He now wanted lawful progeny, but he wanted Elizabeth to release him. This theme of Robert’s love for Elizabeth continues, not just in Shakespeare, but in
John Lyly’s Endymion. In this, the shepherd (Robert) falls in love with the unattainable Cynthia (the Moon) representing Elizabeth, with Tellus (the Earth), being seen as Douglas Howard, and Floscula (the little flower) as Lettice Knollys.13

  The allegory may have been overplayed. On the twelfth day of the visit, there had been plans for the royal party to travel three miles to Widgen Hall to dine in a pavilion, but the Queen did not attend, or see ‘a ready device’, which had been prepared of ‘goddesses and nymphs’. Plans had to be changed and the poet, George Gascoyne, who was responsible for the libretto of the revels, was given orders to come up with a ‘pièce d’occasion’ at short notice.14 It records that Sylvanus, the man in the woods, meets the Queen on her return from hunting, after hearing nothing but lamentations that she plans to leave, and he begs her to remain so that he can be restored to his former happiness. She seems to have accepted this apology for some offence, the cause of which may have been Robert’s friendship with Lettice.

  Another problem arose when Robert called on neighbouring gentry to appear wearing his Dudley livery with the blue coat and silver badge of the bear and ragged staff, which the players wore as a privilege. Edward Arden of Park Hall, who had been High Sheriff of Warwickshire, indignantly refused. He also added offensive comments on Robert’s private access to the Countess of Essex, dubbing him a ‘whore-master’.15 The Catholic Arden later suffered death for treason, after which some of his lands passed to Robert. It was not safe to criticise Robert and Lettice. Elizabeth’s later visit to Robert, when Lettice was the hostess, must have caused an ‘electric atmosphere’.16