Mary Tudor (47 page)
Authors: Linda Porter
His pleas did not go unheeded.The emperor wrote at the beginning of the next month that he was, indeed, to stay—there could be no negotiation on that point. His salary up to the end of 1553 would be sent to him, though there would be no increase beyond what was normally paid to ambassadors in England. And he did get the money owed to him from the Burgundian post he held. Beyond that, no decision had been taken about how long he would stay. Charles V knew that Renard’s tenure in London was increasingly likely to depend on Mary herself.
While Simon Renard worried about his own household, he could do little to affect the formation of Mary’s personal establishment, beyond being asked to convey the emperor’s concerns that some of her ladies were using their position to dispense too much influence. ‘If you have an opportunity of speaking to her without her taking it in bad part, you might give her to understand that people are said to murmur because some of her ladies take advantage of their position to obtain certain concessions for their own private interest and profit.’
24
These women were clearly more canny than their image, largely derived from the negative comments of Spanish visitors, suggests. Unattractive, overdressed ladies of a certain age most of them may have seemed to outsiders, but they adapted with great alacrity to the privileges that came with their new-found status.We do not know whether Renard found a tactful way to pass on his master’s reproofs, but Mary’s household had been on the outside looking in for so long that it is hardly surprising that some took advantage. Their behaviour was no different from that of courtiers down through the ages, but the fact that women could operate so blatantly was viewed with disapproval. That it was known so soon after Mary’s accession across the North Sea indicates a high level of resentment, but Charles V did not reveal his source of information.
24
These women were clearly more canny than their image, largely derived from the negative comments of Spanish visitors, suggests. Unattractive, overdressed ladies of a certain age most of them may have seemed to outsiders, but they adapted with great alacrity to the privileges that came with their new-found status.We do not know whether Renard found a tactful way to pass on his master’s reproofs, but Mary’s household had been on the outside looking in for so long that it is hardly surprising that some took advantage. Their behaviour was no different from that of courtiers down through the ages, but the fact that women could operate so blatantly was viewed with disapproval. That it was known so soon after Mary’s accession across the North Sea indicates a high level of resentment, but Charles V did not reveal his source of information.
The truth was that Mary’s household, and especially her privy chamber, was a preserve where the queen would brook no interference. Below stairs, the establishment remained much as it had in her brother’s reign, and overall the household was not remodelled on the basis that a queen regnant would have different needs from a king. But in the queen’s privy chamber, her personal domain, where she sought relief from the pressures of ruling, as well as companionship and security, there was a complete revolution. This traditional preserve of male intimacy became female dominated very quickly after the accession. The main posts were filled in a matter of weeks and they all went to women. Mary had three levels of female servants who supported her on a daily basis, away from the prying eyes of diplomats and politicians: ladies, gentlewomen and chamberers. The ladies, who numbered about half a dozen at different times of the reign, included Lady Anne Petre, Lady Eleanor Kempe (a long-serving attendant), Lady Frances Jerningham and Lady Frances Waldegrave.The latter two were the wives of existing members of Mary’s household, so their commitment to Mary was well established, though in the case of the Waldegraves that loyalty was put to the test when the queen came to consider the question of marriage. Lady Petre, the wife of former privy council secretary William Petre, had entertained the queen during the difficult days of Edward’s reign, as her husband owned estates in Essex not far from Mary’s.Though this hospitality was intended to keep an eye on Mary, she does not seem to have resented Anne Petre at all, and perhaps derived some enjoyment from her company. She would surely not have employed her otherwise. Anne Petre was the second wife of one of the more notable political survivors of mid-Tudor England. Herself a widow when she married him, Lady Petre probably found herself able to aid her husband through her appointment, though his experience meant that Mary could scarcely have done without him. Not much is known about the others. Frances Jerningham was married by 1536, but this does not mean that she was necessarily much older than Mary, and Frances Waldegrave was a few years younger than the queen.
Those closest to the queen, who had known her longest and never left her side through all the difficult years, were to be found among the eleven gentlewomen of the privy chamber. Here Susan Clarencius, who had served Mary since the 1530s, presided with considerable power and influence. She was not officially appointed chief gentlewoman, but her power in this unspoken role was well understood throughout Mary’s reign. Her main importance was that she controlled access to Mary. Born Susan White in Essex, she may already have been widowed when she joined Mary. He husband,Thomas Tonge, held a variety of heraldic posts, though it was his last, Clarenceux king of arms, which gave his wife the ‘surname’ for which she became more commonly known. Her precise age at the time is uncertain, but she was probably at least six years older than her mistress. Susan Clarencius influenced Mary more than any other of her ladies, or so the imperialists thought. Certainly she did well in monetary terms during Mary’s reign, receiving annuities, pensions and wardships of minors who had been left orphaned. She was also an acquisitive lady, constantly making demands of the Venetian ambassador, Michieli, for presents to be given to Mary which subsequently ended up as gifts to Mrs Clarencius herself. Michieli was clearly aggrieved when Susan brazenly asked for his own ‘coach and horses and all their furniture’ to be handed over to the queen.The coach had been specially made in Italy and Mary soon passed it on to Mrs Clarencius.
25
Susan’s presence, always hovering in the background and often at the queen’s right hand, could not be ignored by those who sought private audience. It is not surprising that she was one of only a handful of people who had keys to the privy apartments. But her judgement was not always good, and though she fussed over Mary, the evidence of her behaviour in 1555, when she was chief among those who raised false hopes of pregnancy in the queen, points to the fact that she was not the best choice of confidante. She was an overprotective servant rather than a trustworthy and objective adviser.
25
Susan’s presence, always hovering in the background and often at the queen’s right hand, could not be ignored by those who sought private audience. It is not surprising that she was one of only a handful of people who had keys to the privy apartments. But her judgement was not always good, and though she fussed over Mary, the evidence of her behaviour in 1555, when she was chief among those who raised false hopes of pregnancy in the queen, points to the fact that she was not the best choice of confidante. She was an overprotective servant rather than a trustworthy and objective adviser.
The best known of Mary’s women was the young Jane Dormer, a girl of good looks and charm from a Buckinghamshire Catholic family that had long been close to the crown. As a child, Jane played with Edward VI, who was tutored by her grandfather, Sir William Sidney. She probably joined Mary in 1548, when Mary’s East Anglian household was in the process of being established. Before that time, she had been brought up by her grandparents, her mother having died when she was only four. Jane’s father, Sir William Dormer, remarried, but she did not stay with him. She would have been ten years old when she entered Mary’s service, and this girl who had been a courtier from an early age grew up in the favoured environment of the princess’s staunchly Catholic household. Jane was intelligent and accomplished as well as devoted to Mary. Contemporaries saw her as the jewel among Mary’s gentlewomen and composed verses in her honour: ‘Dormer is a darling and of such lively hue that who so feeds his eye on her may soon her beauty view.’
26
This, and her age and unmarried status, turned Jane Dormer into the star of Mary’s court. Shortly after Mary’s death, she made a splendid marriage to the Spanish count Feria, who acted as Philip’s representative in England during the last months of Mary’s life.
26
This, and her age and unmarried status, turned Jane Dormer into the star of Mary’s court. Shortly after Mary’s death, she made a splendid marriage to the Spanish count Feria, who acted as Philip’s representative in England during the last months of Mary’s life.
She was not, though, the only attractive woman in Mary’s service. Anne Bacon was said to be comely as well as learned, and another of Mary’s ladies, Frances Neville, was rather too familiarly addressed by the louche William Howard with the hearty greeting ‘Come hither, thou pretty whore’, which shows that Mary’s court was not a strait-laced enclave of old crones who spent all their time attending mass and telling their rosaries.
Below the gentlewomen came the chamberers and the six maids of honour, the debutantes of their time, with a Mother of the Maids to chaperone them.There were only twelve males in this private environment, five gentlemen and seven grooms, but two of the important offices, that of chief usher and keeper of the privy purse, were deemed inappropriate for women. Mary did not consider that her women should act as doorkeepers or manage financial matters.
The extent of the influence of this group of 30 or so women is not easy to gauge. Their presence was the constant in Mary’s life and, in many cases, they had been close to her for years. They were there with her when she rose for her first mass of the day at six in the morning and they prepared her for bed, very seldom before midnight, at the end of the day. Her dress, her toilette, her daily health, her preoccupations - all were within their area of responsibility. It seems probable that she talked to them freely on matters that touched her most deeply as an individual, such as marriage, sex, religion and her relationship with her sister. The lighter aspects of court life - culture, entertainment, her wardrobe, for example - would also have been regular topics of conversation.We can do no more than speculate about the ladies’ role in policy-making or whether the queen sought their views on weightier matters of government. Mary was good at keeping things to herself when she chose and she could be imperious. She was never in any doubt that she was queen and they were her servants, however much she cherished them, so it would be unwise to read too much into their role.
And there were other ladies, not members of the household, but equally close to Mary now she was queen, whose influence was regarded as being of equal significance. One was Gertrude Courtenay, marchioness of Exeter, who had seen her family all but wiped out because of its support for Mary Tudor and her mother. At first, she seemed to be rebuilding her prominent position rapidly. A plea directed through Gertrude, so the duchess of Northumberland and others thought, might incline the queen to mercy. Lady Exeter could not save Northumberland himself, though it appears that she was instrumental in the decision to spare his ally, the marquess of Northampton. But her relations with the queen became strained after the coronation. The reason was her son, Edward, whose suitability as a husband for Mary was, by October 1553, being pushed much more openly. Gertrude naturally supported his candidacy and Simon Renard believed that her influence might sway Mary. The queen, however, had other ideas, and seems to have resented Gertrude’s stance on the matter. The resulting friction made for a difficult atmosphere between the two women.
Another companion from long ago was much more fortunate. Margaret Douglas, countess of Lennox, whom the queen had seen only rarely since the end of her father’s reign, became the most prominent beneficiary of the queen’s generosity. She was delighted to be able to renew her patronage of her cousin, whom she had always loved and whose religious beliefs she shared. Mary could scarcely contain her desire to show favour to this still handsome woman, who had shared part of her girlhood and whose companionship she could now enjoy again. Margaret returned to court in magnificence. She was given apartments at Westminster, provided with food and drink for her household and attended the queen clad in splendid dresses and jewels, most of which were recent presents from Mary.There was considerably more to come. Margaret was also granted revenues from the wool trade which made her a rich woman and, most tellingly of all, she was given precedence over Elizabeth at court, though only after the coronation had taken place. Her behaviour indicates that she considered this to be only right and proper. No question hovered over her legitimacy. She was a Tudor queen’s daughter and it began to look as though she would be officially named as heiress presumptive. Elizabeth, already anxious about her place in Mary’s affections, did not enjoy Margaret’s elevation and the favours showered on her but she could not afford to be uncivil to her. Renard reported that he had attended a banquet with his fellow imperial ambassadors shortly before the other three returned to Brussels. The queen ‘supped in hall’ with them, while ‘the music of hautboys, cornets, flutes, harps and dulcimers ceased not to play’. But the Lady Elizabeth and Margaret Douglas sat at a window, reduced, perhaps, to small talk.
27
Under the queen’s eye but not allowed to share her regal repast, both the once flighty Margaret and the ambitious, discontented Elizabeth must have wondered about Mary’s intentions.
27
Under the queen’s eye but not allowed to share her regal repast, both the once flighty Margaret and the ambitious, discontented Elizabeth must have wondered about Mary’s intentions.
So women played a major part in Mary’s daily life as queen and she presided over this female world with a mixture of dependence and majesty. She could be almost embarrassing with her generosity but she expected loyalty and she defined what that loyalty meant.Views that ran counter to her own were not welcome. This was equally true of the wider household and the ceremonial posts, where men still dominated. Mary rewarded those who had put her on the throne, but her relationship with them was now on a different footing. Sir Edward Hastings, whose part in raising the Thames Valley to support her was so vital to her success, was made master-of-horse and the post was effectively upgraded, being answerable now directly to the queen herself. The earl of Arundel became great master and lord steward of the household, posts previously held by his arch-enemy, Northumberland. But despite his work in pushing the remnants of the council of Lady Jane Grey towards Mary, he was never close to the queen and soon became suspected of angling to marry his son to Elizabeth, which did not endear him. The earl of Oxford was given the revived, purely ceremonial post of Lord Great Chamberlain in recognition of his crucial conversion to Mary’s claim. The posts of Lord Chamberlain and Vice Chamberlain, which carried more clout, went to Sir John Gage and Henry Jerningham respectively. Gage was nearly 80 years old and a long-standing servant of the crown. Jerningham, of course, was part of the East Anglian affinity. Sir Thomas Cheyney, the treasurer, was the only Edwardian household officer at this senior level to survive, and he was a Catholic.
Other books
Murder Comes by Mail by A. H. Gabhart
Standoff by Sandra Brown
3:AM Kisses by Addison Moore
The Life and Crimes of Bernetta Wallflower by Lisa Graff
A Duchess by Midnight by Jillian Eaton
Fear the Darkness by Mitchel Scanlon
Sea Monsters by Mary Pope Osborne
Ivy's Twisted Vine Redux by Latrivia S. Nelson
Chianti Classico by Coralie Hughes Jensen
