anatomy of the eliz. aristocracy, stone l

7/27/2019 Anatomy of the Eliz. Aristocracy, Stone L.

1/54

The Anatomy of the Elizabethan Aristocracy

Author(s): Lawrence StoneSource: The Economic History Review, Vol. 18, No. 1/2 (1948), pp. 1-53Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Economic History SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2590261 .

Accessed: 28/09/2013 13:04

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Wiley andEconomic History Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

The Economic History Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 28 Sep 2013 13:04:41 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ehshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2590261?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2590261?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ehshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black


2/54

THEECONOMI C HI STORYREVIEWVOL. XVIII, Nos. I &) 2 I1948

THE ANATOMY OFTHE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY

BY LAWRENCE STONEIT is now someyears inceProfessorawney aunchedhisattack n theaccepted iews f he ollapse f he ncien egimein Englandn1639-42.'As he has shown, all themost acute and penetratingminds of the latesixteenth nd early seventeenth enturieswere aware of the crucial im-portance of the social transformationhat was taking place. That theshiftn the relativeproportions fthe national income held by thedifferentclasses of ocietywas the basic cause oftheupheavals ofthemid-seventeenthcentury s now clear beyond reasonable doubt. Lacking the backing ofpower that once justified their pretensions, Crown, aristocracy anc:episcopacy clung desperatelyto political rightsand social privileges,forwhich the financial,military, nd territorial oundationshad been almosttotally eroded. The piling up of debts to great magnates in the City,theweighingdown of estatesby the accumulationof mortgages n thecountry-these were the twin heralds of a new age. Under such circumstances,and confrontedwith the rise ofthe gentry,merchants, nd lawyers, newclass whose political aspirationsand whoseviews on foreign, eligiousandsocial policydiffered undamentally rom hoseof the aristocracy, heholdofthe latter upon the springsof political and social power were bound tobe loosened. A revolution,peaceful or violent, as chance and personalitymightdictate,had become quite inevitable. In the bringing bout ofthissocial transformation,he decline of the aristocracy s perhaps equally asimportantas the rise of the gentry. It would seem, therefore, ot un-profitable o attempt n analysis of theeconomic positionof this group,ofthe sixty-oddmen who in thS reign of Elizabeth held the titlesofbaron,viscount, arl or marquess. In so doing, for he purpose of llustration, semay be made of theirfriends nd relations,not noble themselvesbut all

1 R. H. Tawney, 'Harrington's Interpretation of his Age', Proc. Brit. Acad.xxvii; R. H. Tawney, 'The Rise of the Gentry', Econ. Hist. Rev. (I941), xi.A I

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 28 Sep 2013 13:04:41 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/54

2. THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWof whom were courtiers held similar social views and conformed tosimilarsocial and economic patterns.By the accession of Elizabeth, the fortunes f the nobilityhad alreadypassed through two fairly clear-cut phases during the Tudor period.Between I485 and about 1530, therehad been a deliberate attemptto putinto practice the recommendationsof Sir John Fortescue, a consciouseffort o liquidate the greatest f theold medieval baronage. The methodsemployed re by now familiar. Some weresubtle and indirect,l hemajoritycrude and all too swiftly fficacious.By I530, however, there are signs ofa certain ambiguity reeping nto theGovernment's olicy towards the oldnobility.- he Duke of Norfolk was still a power in the realm, but ineconomic resources he Crown was, generally peaking, by now separatedby a great chasm from he bulk of theold aristocracy. It began to be feltthat such a positionwas not without tsdangers. That in a sense the Crownwas but the headstone ofthe whole social hierarchy nd that by tearingdown itsnearest supports, he Crown itselfmightbe equally weakened.There opened in I538 a second phase, the formative eriod of the greatTudor aristocracy. Desiring the complicity nd co-operation of officials,favourites, nd what remained of the old nobility n the great revolutionof the seizure of monastic property, he Crown bought support by thewholesale distribution fthebooty. The lion having sucked the blood ofhis preythrewthe offalcarcase to the ackal in waiting', observedBurkein his somewhat unkind description fthe origin of the Russells, Earls ofBedford. After his first istribution fthe spoils from 538 to I547, therefollowed a second and even more extensiveshare-outduring the reignof Edward VI. The magnates who held the reins of political powerdistributed amongst themselves and their supporters the property ofmonasteries, chantries, and Crown with a cynical disregard for theinterests f the monarchy n whosename theyweresupposed to be acting.During thisperiod morepropertywas given away than was sold.2 Muchwas enteredas 'exchanged .' Whatevertheir ubsequent fortunes,hiswastheacquisitive period ofthe Tudor aristocracy.4 he Earls ofCumberland,Worcesterand Shrewsbury bsorbed Bokton,Tintern and Worksop; theEarl of Rutland swallowedthevastproperty fthemonasteries fBeverley,Rievaulx, Belvoir and Nunburnholme; theEarl of Pembrokereplaced thenuns atWilton;5 the Earl ofBedfordfounded the fortunes f the house of

1 Francis Bacon, History ftheReignof KingHenryVII (i676), p. 64.2 The Privy Council alone voted itself property valued at ?27,000 p.a.,F. C. Dietz, EnglishGovernmentinance,1485-1588 i920), cap. xiv.3 For theirtruenature,see the case of Lord Clinton. (H.M.C. Salis. MSS. ix,I95.)4 Thus the landed income of the Earl of Hertfordwas ?2400 p.a. in I540,but had risen to ?7400 twelve years later. (Wilts. Arch.Mag. xv, i8g.)5 Ejected by Queen Mary to make way once more fornuns, the Earl sweptback to Wilton on the accession of Elizabeth. In characteristic tylehe rode intothe courtyardof the Abbey surroundedbyhis retainers, shoutingtriumphantlyat the unfortunatemaidens: 'Out yewhores,toworke, toworke,ye whores,goespinne.' John Aubrey, BriefLives (ed. A. Clark; Oxford, i898), I, 3i6.



4/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY 3Russell on theestates fTavistock Abbey in the West,Woburn and Thorneyin the East. It was to take half a century of gross incompetence andunparalleled extravagance to dissipate this accumulation of wealth thusrapidly acquired.The thirdphase opened in I554 and ceased abruptlywith the arrival nLondon of King James. It was a period of slow attrition, ulminatingduring the last decade of the period in a general financialdebacle that wasonly arrestedby the prodigality nd generosity f the new monarch. Thepolitical factors hat contributed o powerfully o thisdecline have receivedfar less attention than they deserve. The price revolution and inefficientland management have loomed too large. Costs ofpublic administrationand war have not been given due place. Decline in revenue has beenstudied at the expense of rise n expenditure. Interpretation f the decayin terms of long-range inexorable economic factors has created a falseimpression f nevitability. f landed incomes weredeclining, hiswas dueto incompetentmanagement and diversion of capital to other uses, bothattributable o non-economicfactors.The pricerevolutiondid not by anymeans inevitably bring ruin to large landowners. Their survivalor ex-tinction depended on their handling of the changing circumstances. Infact,thecauses must be sought rather n the vagaries and eccentricities fhuman behaviour, n the irrational mpulses ofpsychology nd sociology,rather than the noonday illumination of the laws of economics. If theTudor aristocracy went bankrupt, this calamity occurred because theyconsistently ived beyond their means in an attempt to keep pace withextravagant social conventions. Snobbery and foppery, gluttonyandgambling were all more importantthan any changes in price structure rland tenure.

IIAn examination of the causes of the decay of the great Elizabethanaristocratichouses must therefore e first irected towards expenditure.For it is here that lay the root of the trouble which in turn involveda decline in revenue. One ofthe primary auses ofthis rise n expenditurewas the spreading taste for conspicuous waste. Contemporarieswereunanimous in their conviction that the last fifty ears of the sixteenthcentury aw the full mpact upon the English ruling classes of the habitsand folliesof Renaissance extravagance. It was not that the rich hadsuddenlybecome more foolishor more extravagant than usual. But thecommercial expansion of the sixteenth century gave opportunitiesforwasting moneyfar n excessofthoseenjoyed by the medieval aristocracy.Secondly,therewas thepowerful nfluenceof Italian habits ofneo-paganopulence. Tastes which found favour with a Medici were sedulouslyadopted by an English earl. And thirdly, herewas undoubtedlya certainmoral deterioration mong the English governingclasses subsequent toand consequent upon the ferocious cramble forpower and wealth fromI529-53. It mustbe rememberedhat the majority f the Elizabethannobilitywere the second or thirdgenerationof nouveauxiches-generations



5/54

4 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWfrom which extravagance may normallybe expected. Thus it was notmerelypuritanmoralists ike William Stubbes, or acidulated satirists ikeDekker and Ben Jonson, who bore witness to this phenomenon. Soberhistorians ike Camden, civil servants ike Thomas Wilson, statesmen ikeBurghley all joined in deploring the social consequences of these newhabits. The impact of thisextravagance hit the aristocracywithmaximumeffect t thisperiod, since it was accompanied by a conservatismn thehandling ofrevenue that was inherited rom bygone age. Land manage-ment remained medieval in its principles; the thought of going intobusinesswas- tillundignified ven for younger on; the stockmarkethadnot yetdeveloped as a profitable nd honourable method forthe employ-ment of capital. Interest rates of IO % and above precluded estatedevelopment on a grand scale for those whose ready cash was fullyabsorbed in the luxuries and fopperiesof life at court. Clinging to oldhabits of getting, hey dopted new devicesfor pending.The gap betweenincome and expendituregrewfrom tinycrack to a vast chasm.When speakingof this extravagance, tmust be remembered hat twasmost severely ocalized. Its focus was the court, its arbitersthe fashioncritics of the Inns of Court and the City Ordinaries, its life-bloodtheluxury and entertainment rades ofLondon. It was the capital that notmerely et thepatternbut also provided the onlyraison 'dtreforthisstyleof ivingand held the exclusivemonopolyofthenecessaryworkmenfor tssatisfaction. In London only were to be found the inevitable parasitesbatteningupon the follies of the vain and of the great, 'the Vintners,Players and Punks' who 'gain more by you than Usurersdo by thirtynthe hundred'.' The resultsof such London pleasureswere devastating ntheirconsequences. Thus by a five-year rgyof extravagance,the Earl ofOxford ucceededin running hrough heancestralfortune fthe de Veres.2And it was the purestvein ofdissipationthat in threeyears drove LordBerkeleyfrom mmense affluence o severe financial traits nd theburdenofenormousdebts. Merely by living the lifeofthe courtgallant and theCity fop, having noe suites n lawe, nor daughtersthenmarryedaway,forraigneembassies, domestickeservices in Court or Country,nor anyotherextraordinary xpense in theworld',' he managed to spend farandaway above the vast income derivedfromhis fifty-eight anors.The mostobvious and perhaps the most mportant orm fextravagancelay in clothes. '0! many Have broke their backs with layinghouses on'em' groaned the playwright.4 Overflowing with the corruptehumoursofthisages phantastickness r else being burntup with the inflammationofupstartfashions.. some pied fools to put on satin and velvetbut fouredaies in the yeare did oftentimes ndoe -themselveswives and Children

ThomasDekker,Gull'sHornbookDedication).2 Thomas Wilson, tate fEnglandCamden Misc. xvi,p. 22); H.M.C. Salis.MSS. Xiii, I04-37 passim.3 John Smyth, Lives of theBerkeleys,I, 386.4 W. Shakespeare, The Famous History f theLife of King HenryVIII, Act I,sc. i, 11. 3-4.



6/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY 5ever after' assertedthe satirist.' For the 'costliness and the curiosity, heexcess and thevanity, he pomp and the bravery nd finally heficklenessand the folly. .nothing s more constant n England thanunconstancy nattire', declared a dazzled rusticobserver.2 t was stated thatthenumberof mercers n London had risenfrom30 to 300 between the time ofQueenMary and theyear i 6oo.3 The speed with which fashions lteredwas quitebewildering.Tailors crouched anxiouslybehind pillars in old St Paul's,watchingfora new cut ofdoublet or a novel pair of hose displayeduponthe gallants exhibiting themselves n the aisles. The Spanish slop andthe Skippers galligaskin, the SwitzersblistredCodpiece and the Danishhanging sleeve; the Italian close strosser nd the French standingcollar;the treble-quadruple Daedalian ruffs nd the stiff-neckedebatoes, allsucceeded one another n confusionworse confounded, as foreign ashionsflooded into London at break-neckand purse-emptyingpeed. The con-sequences were plain to see. The 'Gallant in Mercers bookes exalted forSattensand velvets4 was a commonplace about thetown. Clothingpriceswere fantasticallyhigh: seven doublets and two cloaks belonging to theEarl of Leicester werevalued at (543.5 The Earl of Arundel owed /1o23to forty-twomercers, aylors,dyers,etc.6 The Earl of Essex owed f736for cloth to one Abdy, a draper.7The main costswere partlythe silkandsatin materials,but even more thegold and silver trimmings. he cost ofembroiderywas quite unbelievable. In thereignofJamesa lady at a courtball was reported to be wearing embroideredstuffworth/J5oa yard.8Evenmodest ountry entlemenikeGervaseHolles spent 30 on embroideryfora single suit.9An idea ofthe quantitiesemployedmay be deduced fromthecase of the silver ace used on a suit made forLord Berkeley, n whichthetailorthought tpossibleto overcharge o the extent f 5 lb. inweight.10Even the humble servantsand attendants about the court at a periodbefore the fashion was fullydeveloped struttedabout with over I lb.weight of silver and gilt spangles upon theircoats.11The extentof thisextravagancecan be checkedfrom mport tatisticso London. In thefouryears I594-8, there was imported ust under one ton of gold and silverthread fromVenice and Cologne, besides ratherless than threetons ofcopper thread, to satisfyhe wants of the less extravagant.'2As for ilks,a quantityto make about i i 0,000 yards oftaffetawas imported n theyear

1 T. Dekker, p. cit. (TempleClassicsed. pp. i8, 200.)2 W. Harrison, escriptionfEngland, hap. vii.3 B.M. Harleian MSS. I878/56.4 T. Dekker, p. cit.p. 34..5 B.M. Harleian Charters, 35/I5.6 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 45/84.7 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. vii, 283, 375.8 Thomas Birch, Court nd Timesof James , ii, 226.9 A. C. Wood, Memorialsof the Holles Family (Camden Soc. LV),p. 127.10JohnSmyth, p. cit. I, 338.11B.M. Lansd. MSS. I6/53; 83/58.12 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. viii,545.



7/54

6 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWI592-3,1 theamounthavingrisen o about2i0,000 yards n i6oo-i.2 Sorapid was the ncreasethat, bytheturnofthecentury,Robert Cecil foundit worthhis while to take on a special farmof the silk customs, while alittle later Sir Giles Mompesson organized his outrageous monopoly ingold and silverthread. Outside thesestatistics overedby official eturns,an immenseand prosperous muggling rade in luxuryclothsgrewup. Inthe year 1597, it was reportedthatfromStade alone therewere illegallyimported50 chests ontaining o lessthan 7,500 yardsofvelvet.3 nI564-5, on the other hand, gold and silver thread importshad beennegligible n quantitywhiletheflood offabricswas stillkeptwithinmodestproportions, ilk importsbeing to the value of C8ooo, taffeta 3500 andsatin the same.4 The rising extravagance of the aristocracy had thusalteredthepattern ofEnglishimports o a verymarkedextentduringthelast fortyyears of the sixteenth entury.The expenditureon clothes wasnotmerelyruining he-nobility s a class, itwas also upsetting he balanceofEnglish trade.The second most obvious formof extravagance was hospitality. Theostentatiousprogresses that the Queen was accustomed to make everysummerthroughout he southerncountiesofEngland were calculated tohave reducedmany a noble hostto beggary.Accompanied by costlygifts,elaborate masques and entertainments,unctuated by feastsupon whicha year's income mightwell be spent-a visitbyher graciousMajesty wasa thingto be fearedabove all othereconomic disasters. Peersfled abroador to remotepartson themererumourthat a progresswas planned for hecounty in which theyresided. Nor was this panic unjustified. Nothingmore reliable than rumourshave survivedforthe more famous of theseorgies ofhospitality.The cost of the entertainment f the Queen by theEarl of Leicester at Kenilworth in I575 was assertedto have amountedto C6ooo.5 The Queen's numerousvisits o Theobalds are said to have costLord Burghley C2000 to C3000 a time.6 Less extravagantoccasions are,however, ubjecttostatistical heck. When SirNicholas Bacon entertainedhissovereign t Gorhamburyfor ixdays, n I577, it costhim C577. 6s. 7d.,togetherwithtwenty-fiveucks,twostags,and a golden cup. Lord Northspent C762. 4s. 2d. in threedays unketingat Kirtlingon a similaroccasiona year later. Two days' entertainment y Sir Julius Caesar at Mitchamin I590 wassaidbytheaggrieved ost ohaveleft im 700 thepoorer.7In addition therewere the giftswhich the Queen expected as a matter of

1 H.M.C. Salis. IV, 574. In addition, in i6oo one man alone was said to besmuggling I300 lb. weight of Venetian gold and silver lace. (B.M. HarleianMSS. i878/56.) Sir Giles Mompesson and themonopolistpatenteesput internalconsumption at 400 lb. a week, which is ratherover Io tons a year. But theirguess proved to be excessive. (M. A. Abrams, 'The English gold and silverThread Monopoly, I6I I-2I ', J. Econ. andBusiness, ist. III, 382-406.)2 B. M. Harleian MSS. i878/59.3 Ibid. i878/56. 4 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 8/17.5 W. Dugdale, Antiquitiesf Warwickshirei656), p. i66.6 F. Peck,Desideratauriosa,, 25. Cf.Cal. S.P. Dom. I59I-4, p. 38.7 J.Nichols, Progresses fQueenElizabeth I823), II, 55-8, 236-8; III, 68.



8/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY 7course. In 1595 Lord Keeper Puckering'sfarewell presentto his royalguest was a nosegay containingwithin t diamonds valued at CJ400.1 Inthe eyesof Her Majesty, the honourof entertaining oyaltywas morethanadequate compensation for the outlay of the host. But impoverishmentand final bankruptcy were the inevitable reward for such habits ofprodigality, mposed by the dictates of the Queen upon a class whichlooked to the Court to set the fashion n social convention.Even left to themselves, he style of entertainment f the aristocracy,both in theirgreat houses n the country nd at Ordinaries n the City,wason a trulyprincely cale. Princelyalso was the cost. In the twelvedaysfrom Christmasto Twelfth Night at his seat at Woolaton, Sir FrancisWilloughbyspentfI04 on food alone, forhimself nd his guests.'2 t wasnot so much the gargantuan size of the feastor the Trimalchian rarity fthe dishesthat ran away with themoney, even if both these featureswerepresent to a degree that seems unbelievable to the twentieth-centurypalate.3 It was rather the scale of the entertainment,he vast numbersof the guests ssembledto do honour to the host that caused the expense.For to keep hospitalitywas a sign of dignity, he hall-markof the truegentleman. A mere knight ike Sir Francis Willoughby,whenhe came toLondon on i0 November I58o, entertainedat Lincoln's Inn no less thanforty-eightentlemen to dinner and then forty-twoo supper.4 An earlkept open house to all comers who could claim the titleofgentleman. Histable mightwell run into hundreds.5 Even theprudent Burghleywas notimmunefrom he contagion.The expenditureof C362. I9s. i id. on a feastat BurghleyHouse to the French Commissioners n 30 April I58i, mightpossiblybe ascribedto the necessities f public policy. But no such excusewill serve for the C629. is. iid. spent on the three days' feastingthataccompanied the marriage of his daughter a year later.6 The Earl ofClare's grandfatherwas thus by no means the only Elizabethan ofwhomit could be said thathe 'sent all his revenuesdowne the privyhouse'.7Ostentatious buildingwas another of the weaknessesofthe great. Theimmensemansions ofthe parvenu Elizabethan aristocracy emain to thisday to give the English countryside ne of ts mostcharacteristic eatures.The fact that theywere constructedwith a view to ostentation ather hanto comfortwas soon brought home to their subsequent occupants. Thus,by theturnof the century, he heirsof the firstMarquis ofWinchesterhadalreadybeen obliged to pull down part of themonstrous difice rectedbytheir father t Basing.8 Vast, impracticable,sometimesexceedingly ugly,the greathouses were not infrequentlyrected on a foundationof debtsand mortgages. Not everyonewas as fortunate s Sir FrancisWilloughby

1 Ibid. II, II 2 H.M.C. Middleton MSS. 46i.3 Trimalchian, however,was Lord Berkeley'sfeastwhen he loaded his tablewith 'a bore enclosed in pale workmanlyguilt by a Cooke hired fromBristol'.(Smyth, op. Cit. 1I, 287.)4 H.M.C. Middleton MSS. 555.5 E.g. the Earl of Essex. (H.M.C. Salis. MSS. IX, 271.)6 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 33/69, 71.7 A. C. Wood, op. cit. p. 42. 8 J.Nichols, op. cit. I, xxxi.



9/54

8 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWwho exchanged coal fromhis mines forbuilding-stone orWollaton Hall;or the Cecils who could use official gents and official ransport o importbricks and stonework,wood panels and Antwerptapestries rom he LowCountries to embellishBurghley House; or Nicholas Bacon, who coulddraw freestone romthe Abbey of St Albans, and timberfrom his ownparks with which to rebuild Gorhambury. Even so these improvementscost the last Ci894. I IS. 9d. in five years; Willoughbyhad to sell a largesectionofhisestatesto pay thecosts; and Sir Thomas Cecilwas in constantdoubt of what his thrifty atherwould thinkof the expense.Equally costlywas living in London. Those who were not fortunateenough to extort one of the old episcopal palaces were obliged to payfantasticprices for house rent. London's population was expanding ata tremendous rate and overcrowdingwas pushing up rentals. Thus theCount d'Egmont in i604 was payingfor a furnishedhouse in London ata rate of C450 per annum.2A serious source of aristocraticextravagance was expenditure at theshopsofjewellers nd gold-and silver-smiths. n inventory f thejewelleryof the Countess ofSomerset n I 586 reads like thecontents fan Emperor'streasure chest.3 Plate was bought,given,exchanged, accumulated in thegreatestprofusion. In i589, the Countess of Rutland's New Year gifts oher friendsn plate and jewellerycost her no less than XI 74. 6s. 8d.4Thehabit ofpurchasingand presentingewellery and plate developed into aruinouslycompetitivemania. When the Duc de Montmorenci was in-stalled as Knightof theGarter n I572, he received presents f ewels andplate fromhis fellowknights nd from the Queen, which amounted invalue to Ci6oo.. os. 6d., besides C440. 9s. 6d. forhis personal attendantM. de Foix.5 On New Year's Day 1577-8, the Queen gave away 5882ounces of gilt plate.6 The Earl of Leicester's parting giftto his royalmistress s set out in hiswill was fantastic n itsextravagance: 'the j ewellwith threegreatEmerodswitha faire argetable diamonde in themyddestwithouta foyle, nd settabout with many diamonds withoutfoyle; anda roape offayrewhitepearles to thenumberof sixe hundredto hang thesaidJewellat.'7 This expenditurewas, however,notall waste. When timesbecame hard theplate and jewels founda readymarket n theCity pawn-shops. Indeed, Sir Christopher lount who marriedtheEarl of Leicester'swidow appears to have lived fortenyears principallyfrom he sale ofthelate Earl's jewels,8 and it was only when this source of revenuegave outthat he joined the Essex revolt.If expenditureon plate and jewels was thus occasionally useful,nosuch compensationsapplied to other featuresof courtly ife. The Queen1 Ibid. II, 56; H.M.C. MiddletonMSS. 567, 588.2 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XII, 95.3 J. Strype,Annals f theReformationI728), III, Appendix,p.- i68. (Cf.a similar istforLady Anne Hamilton n i632, H.M.C. Reports, , 35.)4 H.M.C. RutlandMSS. I, 279.5 J.Nichols, p. cit. , 305.- 6 Ibid. I, xxxvi.7 The Earl ofLeicester'swill. (B.M. HarleianCharters, 35/I2.)8 B.M. Harleian MSS. 304/88-go.



10/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY 9herselfwas mean enoughto be proverbial. Even unique opportunitiesikethe offer f a couple of camels would not induce her to open her purse-strings.' Less prudentcounsels,however, prevailed among her courtiers.The legacies of court,so the countrywas convinced,were 'pride, passionand prodigality'. Gambling forhighstakeswitha sovereignwho detestedlosingwas apt to be an expensive pastime. Thus Lord North, n the per-formance fhis duties as a courtier,ost I02 one month, 28 anotherand?3? a third, n gaming withhis royal mistress.2Dice and cards becameincreasingly opular in courtcirclesthroughout heperiod,to the ndignantoutcriesof thePuritans and moralists. Lord Eure's sons and theircronies,who descended one day upon littleSir PostumousHoby, played cards allnightand half the morning,drank the house dry,and made rude noisesduring family prayers,were typical specimens of the type.3 Gamblingceased to be a pastime and became a passion. The Earl of Pembroke,exiled to his statelymansion at Wilton, complained bitterly hat he couldfindnone among the ocals tomake up a set at primero.4John Smythhadto confessthat Lord Berkeley's longe and slender lady-like-handknewa dyeas well and how to handle it as anyofhis ranke and time'.5The sumsthatchanged hands tended to growas thecenturydrewto a close. SarahHarington lost ?50? at cards in a single night,6while at a royal orgyorganized by King James on 7 January I 6o8, none was admitted to playwho had not ?300 in cash ingling in his pocket.7Especially costlywere outdoor sportswhich were also pursued withfanatical zeal. The Elizabethan aristocracy appear to have spent moretime in the company of their hounds and falcons than upon all otheroccupations together.8Elizabeth, as became a lady,tooka less mpassionedinterest, referring carefully rranged holocaust of beasts, displayed inneat heaps beforeher contentedgaze.9 No records remain of the cost ofthe more extensiveof these huntingestablishments.The expense could,however, carcelyhave been lessthan theLi ooo to LI 700 a year spentonsuch pursuitsby the Earl of Bedfordthree-quarters f a century ater.'0The otheroutdoorsportswere equally expensive. Beforehe took to piracyon thehigh seas, thataccomplished gambler,George,Earl ofCumberland,dissipatedhis fortunen the ncreasingly opular sportofhorse-racing, ndin a series of ousts and tournamentsconducted with all the pomp andpanoply, absurdity nd extravaganceof the age ofFroissart.Lavish in theirhospitality, avish in theirsports,no less generouswerethe Tudor nobility in the size of their establishments.The Statute of

I H.M.C. Salis. MSS. xiv, 28i.2 LordNorth's xpense ccountprinted yJ.Nichols, p. cit. I, 24I-7.3 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. x, 303; XI, I I.4 Ibid. xi, 36 . - I Smyth, p. cit. I, 363-6 Wood, op. cit.p. I62. 7 Birch, p. cit. , 78 Cf.H.M.C. Salis. XII, 302; Smyth, p. cit-nII, 63.9 When theQueen slaughteredwenty-sevenfhisdeer n a single fternoonthe anguage nd actions fLordBerkeley ecame almost reasonable. Smyth,op. cit. I, 378.)10G. Scott-Thompson, ife n a NobleHousehold,. 203.



11/54

Io THE ECONOMIC HIS TORE REVIEWRetainers was in practice never enforced fter hethirties, nd some of theretinuesof the great Lords become once more princely n both numbersand apparel. It was a matterat once of pride and ofjealousy to maintaina greaterfollowing han the next man. The costswere irrelevant rovidedthat the pack of liveried retainers-'all that flocke of stoute braggingrusshebucklers' 1-were substantial nough to excite the admirationof thecountryside, o brawl bloodily with the servants ftheirmaster's enemies,and to create an imposing how at court. Thus Henry Lord Berkeleybeganlife with his one hundred and fiftyervants n livery hat daily attendedhim in theirTawny coates .. with the badge of thewhite Lyon rampantimbroidered on the left leeve'.2 Lord Buckhurst, irst arl of Dorset, fortwentyyears had never less than 220 servantsupon his check-roll.3Thelandslide in the familyfortunes f the Earls ofRutland seems merely tohave increased the size of their establishment. In I529 the householdnumbered I35 servants,while the spiritual needs of the Earl were servedby no less than five haplains, all ofwhom wereknights. By i6I2, however,the servantshad swollen to I94, while the rise n thenumber of chaplainsto nine, none of them knights,would seem to indicate an increase inthe piety of the earl while reflecting he decline in the status of theclergy.4Expensive also was the education of the children of the great. For thesons, the grand tour was already de rigueur. hroughout a war-rackedcontinent, he English sprigsofnobilitywere constantly o be observed,indefatigably tasting the pleasures and savouring the vices of France,Germanyand Italy. In thebackground urkedthe tutor o whose nominalcharge the young lord had been entrusted, ometimesa timid and re-proachfulmentor, ometimes bold and dissoluteboon companion. Aftera year or two,theyounglordwould return o England witha smatteringofforeign anguages, a heartycontemptforhis barbarous and untravelledfellow-countrymen, sound knowledge of the seductive courtesans ofVenice and ofNaples, the heady wine ofParis and ofLyons, and finallywitha taste forfopperyn clothesthat was to last as long as hispursecouldstand the strain. Such aunts werenaturallynotcheap. For example, thatof theyoungEarl ofOxford n I 576 costno less than?376i, all transferredto the foreigncapitals, at a discount, by the great Italianate financier,Benedict Spinola.5In the case of daughters, heexpensewas not in education by travel,butin marriage by dowries.The normal aristocraticmarriagewas exclusivelya businessdeal, a schemeto cementa political alliance or a designto unitetwo adjacent pieces of property. Eligibilitywas a matterof cash ratherthan charm,and thesums tended to be very arge. The Earl of Rutland's

1 Sir Thomas More,Utopia (Everyman d.), p. 57.2 Laterthe poor Lord was obligedbyfinancial tress o reducehis retinue o70. (Smyth, p. cit. I, 282, 285, 364.)3 A. Collins,ThePeerage f England I779), II, I7I.4 H.M.C. RutlandMSS. iv, 296, 488.5 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XII, 37.



12/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY IIsisterhad (5000,1 that of the Earl of Arundel 3000,2 Lord Sandys'sdaughterthe same,3while Lord Willoughby's hreedaughterswereobliged o share/4000 between hem.4Suchhugecashpaymentswere,however, pt to be farbeyond he meansof the mpoverishedobleman,and not nfrequentlyheywerearranged s debts, nterest pon thesumduebeingpaidregularlyo thebride'shusband. Someontheother andplannedtomake a profit ytheirprogeny, aising aughtersike stock-breederso be soldto thehighest idder t the ppropriatemoment. hus,Sir ArthurGorgeswasmuchaggrievedhattheQueen had interferedoprevent im elling isdaughter or J6ooo.When shedied soonafter, ecomplainedn the anguageofa speculativetud-farmerfhis hardhapto havehad all my abourseitheroppedorfrost-bittenhen the fruitsthereofhouldhavereturned ntomycomfort'.5Such match-making ethods id not make forsubsequent omesticfelicity. he Earls of Shrewsburynd Derby, NorthumberlandndCumberland,ussex ndPembroke,ords CobhamandZouche,were llestrangedrom heirwives.The tale ofsufferingst thehands of theirhusbands fthefemales fthe house ofWilloughby eads ike a saga ofpersecution,heirmaltreatmentangingromsolationn a remoteountryhousewithoutmeansoftransportaveto church n Sundays, oforcibleejectionby armed retainersccompaniedby thebreaking fdoorsandsmashingfwindows.6Otherwomenweremore uccessfuln taking he nitiative.Husbandscouldon occasionbe useful. he dowager ady Russell,hard-pressedylaw-suits,hreatened ercousinRobert Cecil that I will take me to amischiefndmarryo avoidthe nconvenience'fbeingkilled yvillains7SirJohnDavis explainedhisimpoverishmentytheperennial actthat'to give mywife ontentmentlivedat so higha rate as therewas nopossibilityfsaving nything.8 Clarendon's bservationpon the EarlofPembrokehathe 'paid muchtoo dear forhis wife's ortuney takingherpersonnto hebargain'wasthus fmore han ndividual pplication.Finally, heextravagancef thearistocracyid notceasewithdeath.Wastefuln theirifetime,n education nd indress,nhospitalitynd insports,heir eath was but a fittingpex to a careerofdissipation. hewaste was not in the huge marble or alabastermonumentshattheyerectedforthemselves,ike thosewith which the parvenuDudleys,Leicesternd Warwick, ullied heperfectionf theBeauchampChapel.Thesetombswererelatively heap.That inWestminsterbbeyofLady.Frances idney,Countess fSussex, ost mere 200,9 thatoftheEarlof

1 Ibid. xi, I 4 I2 J. Strype, p. cit. ii, Appendix, . I 34.3 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XIV, 94.4 Ibid. xiv, i89.5 Ibid. XI, 222. Cal. S.P. Dom. I598-I60I, p. 479.6 H.M.C. MiddletonMSS. passim.7 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. ix, 339.8 Ibid. XI, 42I.9 Arthur ollins,Sidney apers1746), i, 8o.



13/54

I 2 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWRutland at Bottesford,I$50-. What ran away with themoney was the costof the funerals.The Elizabethan age was one of an intense nd exaggeratedcult of heraldry. By the magnificenceof the funeral procession, by thenumbersofmourners ressed, t the expenseofthe deceased, in sober black,by the splendour of the quarterings and hatchments,emblazonings andheraldic banners borne aloft bove the corpse-by such outward trappingswas it hoped that the old hierarchic structureof society might be pre-served.2The second Earl ofDorset was unique in thinking uch pageantryto be a waste of money.3 Even the prudent Burghleygave his wife asplendid funeral, thoughhe salved his conscience afterwards y writinga letter to the Dean of St Paul's apologizing for such display of worldlypomp.4The -peak period for such follieswas in the late I580's and the I590's,just at thetime when the aristocracy s a class could least afford uch vainostentation.The second Marquis of Winchester ould probably afford he0iooo he ordered in his will to be spent on his funeralat Basing. The32000 spent on buryingthe firstEarl of Pembroke in fitting tyle atSt Paul's in I570, could have meant nothing o his affluent eir.5 But whatof Robert, Earl of Leicester, interredat a cost of C3000 despite debtsamounting o over/85,ooo;0 6 orthe bankruptWalter,Earl of Essex, whosefuneral,despitethe povertyofthe house ofDevereux, nevertheless an to/I I 22. 6s.3d.; or RobertRatcliffe, arl ofSussex, sinking apidlybeneatha burden ofdebts and mortgages,who was buried in state to the tune ofLi629. 5s. 4d.?8 The disease was contagious. A mere attorneyin theCourtofWards,Robert Nowell, treatedhimself o a funeral osting 752.9The merchantprince,Sir Thomas Gresham went tohisgraveat thealmostaristocratic xpense of/800.10Frequently,however,certaindifficultiesrose. The new Earl of Rutlandin I 88 had to sell lands to pay forhis father'sburial.1I Most improvidentof all were the Sidneys. Sir Henrydied burdened with debts in I586, butthe familydrove yetfurther own the slope ofbankruptcyby indulging

1 H.M.C. Rutland MSS. IV, 5I2. Other examples are those of Lord Berkeleyin I532, C40 (Smyth, p. cit. I, 244); Duke of Norfolkn I522, CI33. 6s. 8d.(Collins, Peerage,, 79); Earl ofDorset, n i609, under?J300 (Ibid. II, i9i);Earl of Sussex in I583, C292. I2s. 8d. (H. Walpole, AnecdotesfPainting,, I6o).By way of contrast that of Thomas Sutton, the greatest bloodsucker of thearistocracy,was made by Nicholas Stone in i6i2 and cost ?400. (Nichols, op.Cit. III, 30.)2 Descriptions of Elizabethan aristocraticfuneralsare to be found in B.M.Harleian MSS. 2i29, and a prifited ccount ofthat of the Earl of Derby in I574in Collins,op. cit. II, 55-62.3 Cf. his will, printed Collins, op. cit. II, I9 .4 B.M. Lansd. MSS. I03/57. 5 Collins, p. cit. , 224; III, I2I.6 B.M. Harleian Charter,D 35. 7 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 23/67.8 F. Blomfield,HistoryfNorfolk1 805), I, 5I8; his widow's funeral some yearslater cost ?I368 (op. cit.).9 A. B. Grosart, Towneley owell MSS. pp. I-48.10 BiographiaBritannia,p. 2388.11 H.M.C. RutlandMSS. I, 24I.



14/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY I3in obsequies that cost the phenomenal sum of/I57o. I9S. 7d.1 When SirPhilip Sidney was killed n Flanders a monthor two later,he left bsolutelynothingto pay forthe funeral,to the despair of Sir Francis Walsinghamwho was left s the executor.' Here, indeed, arose a nice point of aristo-cratichonour. A humble funeralwould be a disgraceto family nd class.On the otherhand, thewastingof what was leftof the estateon splendidobsequies which thus involved a shameless breach of contract with thehungry reditors eemed, fnot equally dishonourable, t least a regrettabledecision to be forcedto take. Fortunately,however, in the case of SirPhilip Sidney, the issue never arose. Although she was incensed that afavourite ourtier hould, sillyfellow,go off nd get knockedon the headin a scuffle,3heQueen nevertheless greed to pay forSir Philip's funeral.The impressive rocession hat wound its way to the Abbey was subsidizedout of the royal exchequer.4 But this example of royal generositywasrepeated only n the case ofLord Hunsdon.5When the heirsof theEarl ofHuntingdon,Lord Presidentof the North,tried to persuade the Queen topay for the funeral of such a loyal public servant, they met with anadamant refusal.While the vulgar squabble continued, the corpse layrottingunburied at York for no less than four and a half months,6 illeventuallythefamily arriedout the interment t a costof II400.Nothing providesa more striking nd tragiccontrastto the pomp andpanoply of the last ritesgivento thepolitically uccessful, han the detailsof the funeralbill for Philip Howard, Earl of Arundel,the greatestnoble-man in England. He was shuffled ut of the worldand intothe graveyardat the Tower for paltryf4. I 3s. 4d., a warningto all papistsand suspectedtraitors.8 he squandering of one or more years' income upon a funeralprocessionwas a privilegereserved forthose upon whose prosperity ndloyaltythe regimedepended for ts existence.

IIIThough conspicuouswaste in various formswas thus a primarydrain onaristocraticncome, t was by no means the only one. The cost of itigationmusthave run a close second. Any relatively rimitive ocietybut recentlyweaned fromhabits of violence, fromthe hereditaryblood-feudand the

1 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 50/88.2 B.M. Cotton. MSS. Galba C, x fol.44.-3 When Lord North asked forpermissionto go off to the wars a fewyearslater, the Oueen angrily replied: 'You will never leave till you are knock't onthe head as that inconsiderate fellow Sidney was.' (Robert Naunton, FragmentaRegalia (i641), p. 59.)4 Nichols, p. cit. II, 485-96.5 It cost /Io97. 6s. id. and consumed i232 yards of black cloth. (Lansd.MSS. 82/56.)

6 H.M.C. Hastings MSS. II, 45.7 N. H. Bell, Huntingdon eerage I820). He died I4 December I595 and wasburied 28 April I596.8 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 79/74.



15/54

I4 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWassertionof self-judgedright by self-exertedmight, s apt to throwitselfwithpassion into the costlygame of itigation.The Elizabethan noblemanthus turnedfrom rmed affraysn the countryside o wars in WestminsterHall'.1 This growth of litigation during the late sixteenth century wasaccentuated by two special features. The speed with which land waschanging hands at this period, combined with the inordinate complexitiesof and tenure,gave ample scope forthe quirks and quiddities of awyers.Secondly, therewere certain very grave defects n the contemporary egalsystem. Despite the boastings of Coke, all was not well with the EnglishCommon Law. Still half-strangled y its ancient and obsolete procedure,it was furthertultified y the parallel urisdictionofthe overlappinghost ofprerogative courts.The latter had by now ceased to serve their originalpurpose ofapplying swift nd equitable justice, and had degenerated ntovehicles for obstructionand chicanery, employed by unscrupulous legalexperts. 'Seven several suits at law' for a single case were not unusual.A final decision could rarely be obtained in less than five years or more,while enforcementmighttake even longer. It was not accidental that theElizabethan slang name for highwayman or footpad was 'high lawyer .2Fees rocketed: a writof habeas corpus that cost2S. 6d. in I 558 could notbehad for ess than I 2S. in I 576. A supersedeas rose similarly rom s. 6d. to7S. 6d.3 Proving a will mightcost between twohundred and fourhundredpounds.4 The numbers called to the bar at Gray's and Lincoln's Inn roseby two-thirds etween the ast decade of the sixteenth nd thethirdoftheseventeenth enturies.5 n I62 I it was declared thatwithin iving memorythere had been onlyfour ttorneys or ll the countyof Lincolnshirewherethere were now over 200.6The unfortunateristocracywere the carrion upon which these vulturesfed. At a time when one suit was 'sufficient o break the back of anyreasonableman ofwealth ,7thenobility ndulged recklesslyn such uxuries.That the defendantmight be bankrupt was not a deterrent. Few agreedwith Sir Gervase Holles's philosophical acceptance ofthefact that to suea beggar was but to catch a lowse'.'8 In I 628, the Earl of Devonshire foundhimself urdenedwith no less than thirty awsuits.9 Henry Lord Berkeleybecame involved in a lawsuit with the Dudleys that lasted no less thanthirty-eightears. On one occasion in the course ofthisprolonged strugglehe spent Ci8oo in ten weeks. Apart from his tremendous uit withall itsramifications, hisLord was involved in more than forty-nine ther casesin the course of his life, the majority of which were prosecuted inseveral courts and lasted many years.'0 The Earl of Hertfordpursued a

Birch, op. cit. I, 438.2 Robert Greene, A NotableDiscoveryfCoosenageBodley Head Quartos), p. 38.3 Ellis, op. cit. (3rd ser.), IV, 55.4 H.M.C. Rutland MSS. IV, 2i6; that of the Earl of Leicester cost C500(Harleian Charters, D 35).5 R. H. Tawney, 'Rise ofthe Gentry', Econ. Hist. Rev. (I94I), XI, 2I.6 H.M.C. Rutland MSS. IV, 2i6.7 Ibid. IV, 215. 8 A. C. Wood, op. cit. I22.9 Collins, Peerage, I, 326. 10J. Smyth,op. cit. II, 228-356.



16/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY I5feudwithLord Mounteagle thatbegan in I562 and was stilldraggingonthrough hecourts hirty-twoears ater.' The Earl ofDerby,Lady Russell,theEarl ofHuntingdon ndLordMountjoyall similarlybeggaredhemselvesin law-suits.2 However untrue in the case of that wealthy aristocraticmoney-lender, he lamentofAnne CountessofWarwickmay neverthelessserveas the epitaph ofher class: 'suits and troublesby law have emptiedmypurse and pulled down my estate'.3

IVIf ostentatiousextravagance and needless litigationwere the only twodrainsthatemptiedthe aristocratic offers,ittle ympathywould need tobe expended on thefinancialtroublesoftheclass. The thirdheavycall onthe purse ofthe greatwas, however,ofgreaterpublic utility: t was theserviceoftheState. The Tudor administrativetructurewas builtupon theprincipleofvoluntary ervice; toperatedthrough n unpaid bureaucracy.Royal centralizationwas extendedto cover everybranch ofthe nationallife. Economic and monetarypolicy, ustice and administration, eligionand morals,were all theoretically ontrolledfrom hecentre. But if twasdespotism, t was despotismon the cheap, despotismthat relied entirelyon the freeassistanceof a certain class. MisterJusticeShallow did notfindhimself ut ofpocketas theresultofhis official uties. But itwas farotherwisewiththe greaterofficersnd functionaries.Until necessity om-pelled the adoption of the solution of corruptionand peculation whichbecame generalizedunderKingJames, an Elizabethan noblemanaccepteda responsible appointment at the risk of his family estate. Reliableestimatesof the losses involved are impossibleto come by since only thecomplaintsofthe aggrievedsurviveas witnessoftheirmisfortunes.Howfar their tatements re to be trusted s oftendoubtful. It is unlikely hattheyfailed to exaggerateforthe sake ofeffect.But the long listofnobleholders of responsiblepositionswho died overwhelmedwith debts is acogent witness of the essential truthof their assertions. Soldiers andmilitary ommanders n Ireland or theLow Countries, dministratorsiketheLords PresidentoftheNorthorWales, ambassadorsand special envoysleading missionsabroad, nobles entrustedwith special tasks such as theguardingand entertaining fMary Queen of Scots-all withoutexceptionfoundthemselves mpoverishedby the verysuccess of theircareers. Theambassadorsfound hemselves articularly ardpressed, or heir llowanceswerewoefullynadequate to-paythecostsof travel4and ofthelavish styleof ivingand open hospitality xpectedofa representative fHer Majestyabroad. Not all were willing, ike Sir Edward Stafford, o make up thedifferenceysellingState secrets o theSpaniard. WhenWalsinghamwenton hismission o France in I57i, he returned 50o out ofpocket. In i587

1 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XIII, 5I7.2 Ibid. XII, 487; XI, 562; IX, 339; X, I26; III, 275-3 Ibid. IX, 22.4 E.g. in I59I it cost Sir Henry Unton C293 to move himself,his baggage,horses and attendantsfromLondon to Rouen. (Nichols, op. cit. III, 87.)



17/54

i6 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWthe Earl ofDerby had to borrow Jjiooo to equip himself or the specialembassy to which he was nominated.' Lord Zouche found himselfsobeggared by two embassiesto Scotland and Denmark thathe was forcedto sell his estates nd retire emporarily rompublic life.2Some idea ofthecosts of such missions may be gained by the fact that a nine months'embassy n Germany n i636 cost the Earl of Arundel over and above hisdiet of C6 a day, a sum thatamounted to no less than ?I9,262.3 It is notsurprising herefore hat orders to head an embassyproduced somethinglikepanic among theunfortunate ecipients.Lord Darcybegged desperatelyto be let offbeing sent on mission to Germany n view ofthe fact that hisrental for the last fortyyears had remained constant at only ?400 perannum.4 Lord Eure, orderedto go to Bremen as Commissionerfortradenegotiationswith the Hansa in i602, got Lord Burghley o testify hat hecould not even 'upon pawning a good piece of his land find/500 for theexpense of this ourney'.5 Eventually, Robert Cecil himselfwas obligedto stand bond forC?2ooo advanced and transferred o Lord Eure's creditat Bremen by a suspicious merchantfinancier.6When Sir Richard Leewent on embassy to Sweden with forty r fiftyn his train,he borrowedmoneyforthe ourney frommerchantfinanciers, n pawn ofplate, ewelsand furs. Retribution came when the merchantsbegan dunning SirRichard fortheir advances.7Public servants at home fared no better. The Earl of Huntingdonclaimed to have spent [20,000 over and above his allowance on publicserviceas Lord President ofthe North.8 Lord Sheffield eclared thathespent /iooo per annum in excess of the allowance on the same office.9Sir William Fitzwilliam, Lord Deputy of Ireland, died a bankrupt, hislands extended for debt, and owing the Queen /i1ioo.10 The militaryfaredeven worse. There were little spoils to be picked out ofthe bogs ofIreland or the devastated countryside f France and the Low Countries.Sir Thomas Maria Wingfieldhad to beg an advance ofpay to gethimselfacross to Ireland in i 6oo. In I 603, hisbrother ould describe himselfwithjustice as 'a poor gentleman consumed and wasted in the wars'."1 SirEdward Denny mortgagedhis house and let out his land on long leases inreturnfor fines o as to raise 7I300, which sum he spentfirst t sea withLord Thomas Howard at Cadiz, and later in Ireland. There he died afterseventeenyears' service, eaving Ci890 of debts and a widow and ninechildrenwithout nough readymoneytobuythemselvesmourning owns.12Some pleas like that of George Touchet, i8th BaronAudley,fora grantofland in Ireland have a trulypathetic ring. In language befoggedwithsentiment,he explains how he wants the land 'to advance the ruinsanddownfallofan old and decayed house... .I have fought or t. I have lost

I J. Strype, p. cit. I, I04; B.M. Lansd. MSS. 53/66.2 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. xii, I57; cf.B.M. Lansd. MSS. 30/41.3 Ibid. i, i-i6. 4 Ibid. xii, 4, 280. - 5 Ibid. XII, 537.6 Ibid. xii, 633,677-8. Ibid. XVI, 74.8 Ibid. III, 275. 9 Ibid. XVI, 396. 10 Ibid. xvi, i6o.1 Ibid. xv, II0; XVI, II0. 12'Ibid. x, 59.



18/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY I7my blade and limbs and have been oftentimesike also to lose my life.'"Naval commanders found themselves n the same plight. Captures ofEast India carracks like the Madre de Dios or the sack of rich citieslikeCadiz and Panama were rare enough. Rarer still was it that such lootsufficed o cover the cost of the investment. For war at sea was almostentirely matter of private initiative. Speculators invested n the semi-piratical expeditions n thesame way as they placed theirmoney with theTurkey or Muscovy Company or sunk it in mining enterprises. Despiteall the tales, accepted even by learned and well-informedontemporarieslike Thomas Wilson orWilliam Camden, of wealth beyond the dreams ofavarice that poured into England from the privateeringventures of theI 580's and I 59o's, there s not a single naval commanderor speculator,noteven Drake himself,who could claim to have made a great fortunebysuch means. Lord Thomas Howard spent ?20,ooo (/5000 of it on theCadiz expedition), and got but littleout of t.2 Raleigh got even less. Themost indefatigable pirate of them all-George, Earl of Cumberland-afterfifteen ears of financing xpeditions against the Spaniard at a costwhich he himself ssessedat 1ioo,ooo, at last foundhimself verwhelmed.with debt. When the Queen refusedto help him despite his servicesheannounced in theatricaltermshis intention f retiring nto the country oreorganize his estates. 'My thoughts must turn from interceptingofCarracks to sowing of corn,from igging hip to breeding sheep, and fromhonour to clownish cogitations.'3More astonishing ven than the impoverishment f the ordinaryrun inthe mill diplomats, soldiers and sailors was the financial bankruptcy'ofthemostfavoured nd most powerful ervants f theState. The old Earl ofSussex, after years of faithful ervice in the Council, died in debt witha revenue of ?45? and debts to the Queen to be paid off at a rate of5?oo year.4 SirFrancis Walsingham died at the end ofa longand highlysuccessful areer as Secretaryof State, owing a total of t27,324, ofwhich[I 2,oi6 was due to the Queen.5 Sir ChristopherHatton, the cherishedfavourite f the Queen, died owning and worth 498 per annumand withdebts to the Crown totallingthe tremendous um of/42,139. 5S. od.TheQueen thereforeeized the mansion n Hatton Gardensand tookan annualtollofk3oo outof hepropertys repayment.She alsoextracted I 28.6s. 6d.a yearin wardship for heyoung heir and assignedodd parcels ofthedebtto herown creditors o extractfrom he widow as besttheycould.6

Ibid. XVI, 52, 384.2 Thomas Birch, Memoirs f theReignofQueenElizabeth I 754), II, I I5.3 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. x, I38, 234; cf. ibid. XII, 227, 32I, 574. Nichols, op.cit. II, 496.4 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XIII, 330, 349.5 Conyers Read, Mr SecretaryWalsingham,II, 444.6 Sir N. H. Nicolas, Memoirs fthe ife and Times fSirChristopheratton I 847),p. 498; H.M.C. Salis. MSS. X,429; VI, 305; Cotton. MSS. GalbaD, XII, fol. 2I3.Robert Naunton terselywrote Hatton's epitaph: 'he was a mere vegetable ofthe court that sprung up at night and sunk againe at his noone' (FragmentaRegalia, p. 93).

B



19/54

r8 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWFinally, there s the case of the Earl of Leicester. None-of the Dudleyscould be said to have been unaware of the importance of money. Indeedin three successive generations Dudley managed to excite the commentof a grasping nd avaricious societyby the zeal and pertinacitywith whichhe sought his own financial advantage. The Earl of Leicester was by nomeans the most backward of the family n this respect and his financialdifficulties re in consequence the more significant. he accusation thatthe Queen wrecked the prospectsof military uccess n the Low Countriesfrom 585-7 by her financial meanness has been rebuttedon the groundsthat the Earl refusedto render accounts and was peculating what littlemoney did arrive.' But the examination of Leicester's financial arrange-mentsbefore etting ut puts the matter n rather differentight. Besidessellingoff utlying statesand making a seriesof minormortgages otalling

?9000 the Earl undertook a financial obligation of the firstmagnitude.Working through Horatio Pallavicino, he raised a loan of Li 6,ooofrom ome twenty-two eading City merchantson the security f a mort-gage of the great 6767-acre estate that constituted he Barony of Denbigh.2When the Earl died fouryears ater, the debt, risen by one year's interestto ? 7,600, was still owing.3 In the rush for he spoils which followed, heQueen and merchants shared the Denbigh estate between them insatisfaction f their respectiveclaims on the Earl's heirs. The merchantspaid a nominal ?8ooo and the Queen ?ioooo for full purchase of thewhole estate.4This, however, was but a portion of the earl's expenditureon his military dventure n the Netherlands. AfterLeicester's death theQueen presentedher bill to Sir ChristopherBlount, who had married thewidow. It ranged from wo sums of ?8ooo and /J?oo lentforadditional-troops of horse n I 586 and I587 to petty ums due to the office f ordnancesuch as Ci6. I3s. 4d. for powder by bill I4 June I587, or /I7 for demi-lances drawn from he Tower duringthe Armada crisis n I 3 August 588.5Besides a total Royal debt setat f35,o87. 2S. 3d., and theJJ,600 due ontheDenbigh mortgage, he Earl died owingno less than ?33,5I 5 I 7s. 9d.to individuals.6 Extravaganthe undoubtedly was, but the greatestcauseof hisdifficultiesrose out ofhisspeculation n the nterventionn the LowCountries. So farfromfeathering is nest,he unquestionably ostheavilyon the venture. If even the worstoftheDudleys ruined himselfn pursuitofhisambitionand in theserviceofthe State, theplightofthe ess favouredand less graspingcan easilybe imagined.Wasteful n dressand hospitality, eckless n litigation, heirdevotiontopublic service ervedto put thefinishingouchesto theimpoverishmentfthe Elizabethan nobility.1J.E. Neale, 'Elizabeth and the Netherlands, I586-7', E.H.R. XLV, 373.2 S.P. Dom. Eliz. i82/49, i83/I2, i6; Strype, op. cit. III, 498. -3 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 6i/8i; Harleian Charters, 35. Cal. S.P. Dom. Addit.I580-i625, p. 208.4 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. iv, i82, and Burghley's somewhat incoherent notesscribbled on the back of B.M. Lansd. MSS. 62/70.5 P.R.O. Exchequer KingsRemembrancer,Decrees and Orders, 6/i3I,I7/429.6 See Appendix I.



20/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY I9V

Turning from analysis of expenditure to examination of revenue, thestarting-pointmust clearly be the increments rom the land. The causesofthe diminution f thissource of ncome,pricerevolution nd long lease-holds, administrativencompetence and the absentee landlord,have beenanalysedWith oo much brilliance and care by Professor awney to bearrecapitulation.The pressureofthe price revolution ould be avoided onlyifleases were granted forperiods of not more than seven years. But thechaotic nature of noble financial administration precluded any suchefficiency. he pressureof excessiveexpenditure made the temptationofquick cash returnstoo great to be resisted. Large finesfor leases fortwenty-one ears or morewere therefore henorm. By the time the leasewas up, the prudent tenant had made a fortuneout of the differencebetween theold rent nd croppricesthatrose teadily nderthe nflationarypressureofthe century.To the last, however, the Elizabethan noblemanpersisted n this improvident olution of his temporarydifficulties. heEarl of Arundel's estateswere reportedto be all in lease formany years.1By i6oi, the Earl of Rutland's lands were withoutexception leased fortwenty-oneyears.2 When the Earl of Cumberland got into financialdifficulties, e went northand bargained withhis tenants for ong leasesin return orquick fines.3The resultof thecombination of the lax controlofthe absentee landlord,the corruptionof the stewardor bailiff and theceaselessdemand forready cash at whatever theprice,was an inefficiencyof administration hat had the most serious consequences. When LordCobham appointed an expert to reorganize his finances,he was told thathis employeeswere cheating him rightand left. The expert's plans forimprovingrentals ranged froma /36 increase on /I34 a year to a ?33increase on C46.4When the Earl ofDerby carried out a similarsurvey, heresultswere evenmorestartling.One tenanthad paid theEarl Ciooo fora twenty-one-yearease ofland and some woods. In eightyears,he hadmade C2000 out ofthewoods and therewere still Ciooo worth eft o becut. As forthe land, he paid the Earl a rentof/2 and sublet t for?70.5If some were thusincompetent,otherswere merelyold-fashioned. Pricestrebled n half a century,but Lord Darcy could stillboast complacently'I have lived as my fatherdid beforeme, of the old rentsofmyland .6The majoritywereforced o adopt theheroicremedyfor heirnecessitiesofthe direct sale of and. 'A seller have been all the days ofmy ife',rue-fully confessed Sir Fulke Greville.7 By I583, Sir Henry Sidneydeclaredthathe had leftnot so much ground as will feeda mutton.8 Some ofthesales of thearistocracywere on a huge scale. In I 588, the Earl ofRutland'divised two parts of his lands unto his executors forthe paymentofhisI H.M.C. Salis. MSS. xiii, I I7.2 Ibid. xi, I4I. 3 Ibid.XII, 32I, 574.4 Cal. S.P. Dom. I598-i60i, p. 5I5.5 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XVI, 282, 303.6 Ibid. xi, 5i6. 7 Ibid. XI, 433. 8 S.P. Dom. Eliz. I59/I.



21/54

20 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWdebts'.' The Earl of Oxford 'set his patrimony flying' selling manors,woods and lands by the score.2The Earl of Northumberland iquidatedall his property n Kent.3 The Marquis ofWinchester old up the Pauletproperty n Devon and Cornwall.4The Earl of Bedfordtried to realize onWoburn and Covent Garden.5 In I599, the Earl of Derby planned tosettle his estateby raising 330,00? from he sale of land.6 Lord Berkeleyactually received/4IOOO in halfa centuryby the same expedient.7 It isthus not surprising hata sample surveyof3300 Midland manors shouldshow an absolute decline in aristocratic and ownershipby 47% over theyears 56I-I64I.8It has been suggested hat an important esult fthe English Reformationwa's the transferencefvaluable mining and from he monks to the newpushfulTudor aristocracy, hatupon coal and iron, copper and zinc, alumand copperas, were based the fortunes f many an Elizabethan house.9The evidence s, however,by no means so categorical. Metallurgy, ndeed,was a profitablefield for investment and those like the Sidneys whopossessedlands in the Weald of Kent were not slow to develop the millsand bloomeries,forges nd furnaces of thesixteenth-centuryronworks.10The profits, owever,were not excessive. The Sidneys continued to spendfarabove any income the Robertsbridgeworksmight afford.With someexceptions, mining was almost always unprofitable n the Elizabethanperiod. The reason forthis at first ightsurprising henomenonwas therapid exhaustionof the surface seams. Continually rising demand com-pelled the drivingof ever deeper shafts. Sixteenth-century ngineeringwas, however, ncapable ofsolvingtheconsequent problemof an adequatepumping system odrainthepits.The overheadsroseabruptly s moreandmore capital was poured into the enterprises.The general impressionoflate sixteenth-century ining n England is similarto thatprevailingtwocenturies ater,when an identical crisiswas solved by the introduction fthe Boulton and Watt steam-engine. By the turn of the century,coal-minestended to become 'so greatlywroughtthat theyare grownso deepand drownedwithwater as not tobe recoveredwithout xtreme harges .11All the capital resources,businessenterprise, nd technicalmachineryofBevis Bulmer were insufficient o hold back the waters in the Mendip

1 H.M.C. Rutland MSS. I, 26i.2 For the list oftwenty-fivemanors sold, see Strype,op. cit. II, 589, Appendixno. 7.3 Collins,op. cit. I, 370, 406.4 H.M.C. Salis. XI, 584.5 G. Scott-Thompson, Life in a Noble Household, . I 7.6 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. IX, 405.7 He sold thirty-two f his fifty-eightmanors, fromwhich sales he drewi9% of his average total income from I56i to i6ii. (J. Smyth, op. cit. II,pp. 356-6I, 259-6I, 373, 409.)8 R. H. Tawney, Rise of theGentry,p. 35-6.9 H. R. Trevor-Roper, 'The Bishopric of Durham and the Capitalist Re-formation',DurhamUniversityournal,March I946, p. 46.10 H.M.C. Lisle and Dudley MSS. I, 305-2I.11 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. xiv, 33I.



22/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY 21lead-mines.' The greatest contemporarymining enterprise,the MinesRoyal, workingCumberland copper, onlykept tself float by Governmentsubsidies. The shareholders uffered steady loss and the report on halfa century's ctivityproved that t had never showed a profit.2 he recordsof the Woolaton coal-mines worked on their estatesby the Willoughbysshow overheads increasing far more rapidly than profits,while theireconomic venture at Middleton showed an equally heavy investment.3 fthe Newcastle Hostmenwaxed fat on profits rom oal, it is probable thattheirwealth derived more from theirvigorously defended monopoly ofdistribution han mining receipts proper.4 If the Earl of Sheffield riedto obtain land from the Earl ofHuntingdon 'being instantly o proceedin a coal-mine ,5 ifSirJohnManners workeda mine at Haddon,6 there sno evidence thateithermade a fortune ytheirventures. It is certain thatLord Mountjoy and the Earl ofHuntingdonboth investedhuge sums forno return n futileprospectingfor alum.7 Only the Earl of Shrewsburymanaged certainly o derivea substantial ncome frommining. Derbyshirelead wentfarto supportboth thesplendid establishment t Hardwicke andthe costly quarrel kept up with his redoubtable wife and the brothersCavendish.8More reliable by far as a source of income than speculation and costlymining enterprises,was the moneylender. Heavy borrowingas a meansof anticipatingrevenuewas the rule,not the exception, among the Eliza-bethan aristocracy. Caught in the legal toils so carefully aid by theircreditors he great aristocraticeviathansplunged and floundered, inkingever deeper with each year into the mire of debts and mortgages andlivingin perpetual terror flawyersand of bailiffs.There were of coursesome ikeJohnKilligrewwhoopenlydefied uchofficers. afely ntrenchedin PendennisCastle, he ignoredthe law and laughed at his creditorswhentheydunnedhimfor heirCi i,ooo.. He rode abroad witha private body-guard of armed ruffianswho informedenterprising ailiffs n the tersecolloquialism ofthe time that 'yf theydid assault theym, heyshold buyit . The majority, owever, nhabitingmore aw-abidingareas than Corn-wall, were at themercyof their creditors nd the law.

I H. M. Robertson, 'Sir Bevis Bulmer', Journal fEconomic ndBusinessHistory,IV, I02.2 Report by Popham in i602 (H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XII, I45); cf.W. R. Scott,JointStockCompanieso1720 (Cambridge, I9IO-I2), vol. II.3 H.M.C. Middleton MSS. 314-i6, 416, 555, i69. In I537-8 profitswere(405 on an investmentof a mere J72; in I576-8 total receipts appear to haveaveraged only C4 3.4 This opinion is also held by ProfessorJ. U. Nef, 'The Dominance of theTrader in the English Coal Industry n the XVII Century', Journal f EconomicandBusiness istory,, 422-33.5 H.M.C. Hastings MSS. II, 4. 6 H.M.C. Rutland MSS. I,415.7 R. B. Turton, The AlumFarm,S.P. Dom. Eliz. 244/IO9.8 Lead production expanded so rapidly thatbetween I 558 and i6oo thepriceactually fellfromJ8 to j7. ios. a fodder 200 lb.), despite thegeneral price riseof up to 300%. (B.M. Lansd. MSS. 76/5I.) (B.M. Harleian MSS. i878/62.)9 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 59/i8.



23/54

THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWOne class ofcreditor, he unpaid tradesmen,mercers,haberdashers andbrewers, re more to be pitied thancondemned. They are the gullsand thenobility, oronce, theconey-catchers. he only remarkablefeatureofthisgroup s the facilitywithwhich they ppear to have allowed theirbankruptclients orun up their ills. In 585, theEarl ofArundel owed JI 03. 7s.6d.to forty-tworadesmenand J78i. Is. 5d. to fiftyictuallers and provisionmerchants.' The Earl of Leicester appears not to have paid a single bill,however small, foryears.2Of far greater importance to the aristocracythan the running up oftradesmen's bills, was dependence upon the credit resourcesof the greatfinancial magnate, the full emergence of whom as a prominent socialfigure, ccurred n the I590's. Three forms fsecuritywerecommonly m-ployed. Firstly, he nobilitycould borrow on bonds of Statute Merchant,thesebonds being officially egistered n the office f the Clerk of Recog-nisances.3 The bulk of the lenders were city magnates, Aldermen andmembers of the principal London Guilds, who were prepared to investtheir fluid capital in this form of banking enterprise. Goldsmithswereprominentbut by no means in the first ank ofimportance. Scriveners,so oftencreditedwith a leading role in the originsofbanking, played infactscarcely any part at all. On the otherhand, gentlemenfrom he InnsofCourtwere extremely ctive,thoughthisdescriptionsvirtuallywithoutany class or professional ignificance.The Recognisances do not, however,

formby any means a complete picture of the London money market.Some of the greatest borrowers,and some of the greatest enders eachfound t prudent to conceal theiractivitiesfrom he publicity nvolvedintheregistration fthe StatutesMerchant. Thus twoofthe argestborrowers,theEarls ofRutland and Essex, kept theirnames scrupulously lear oftheofficial ntry ook. So did the greatfinanciers, oratio Pallavicino, LionelCranfieldand Arthur ngram. This form f money-lendingwas frequentlya formofspeculation upon the bankruptcy f the borrower. Profits rosefrom he certainty f the inabilityof the borrower o repay on the agreeddate. Not infrequently, he recognisance was made out foras much as

1 See Appendix I.2 B.M. Harleian Charters, 35.3 P.R.O. Lord Chamberlain'sOffice,Recognisancesfor Debt, Rolls andEntry ooks. I am indebted o MrH. R. Trevor-Roperor allingmy ttentionto this orm fevidence. By nomeans ll types fdebts re thusregistered,ndit is not certain hat venthose yStatuteMerchant re all included.Therewasonly one office, n London, and theRecognisances thus chiefly eflect he moneymarket of the capital alone. Certain debtors and certain creditorspreferred okeep their transactions from prying governmental eyes. Mortgages of courseare not included. Yet in many cases a verycomplete picture may be obtainedofthe borrowings nd lendings of many of the mostprominentfigures fthe age,at any rate for the period I590 to the mid-i630's, when the yearly number ofrecognisances enrolled was very large. Before and after these dates they dropaway sharply n bulk. In the margin of the entrybooks is recorded the date onwhich therecognisancewas officiallyancelled eitherbyrepaymentof the debt,or 'capta in rure' (meaning presumably the surrender of land to the creditor).For well over half the entries,however, there is no record of cancellation at all.



24/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACr 238o or ioo % overand above theactual cash advance.1The ease withwhichthis methodoflendingcould be employed to defeat the provisionsoftheStatute ofUsurywas doubtlessthe reason for ts greatpopularity. Legalprosecutionforextortionwas impossibleover a contract which in theorytook the formof a gamble, and in which therewas no mention of a rateof nterest.The second type of oan tookthe form fpawnbrokingon a grandscale,carried on principallyby ewellers and goldsmiths n pledges ofplate andjewels. The Earl ofLeicester paid off ome of hisdebt to theQueen bythesurrenderOf?3000 worth of plate.2 Sir Edward Hastings in I599 wasliving on the proceeds ofhis wife'sewels.3 The plate of SirWalterRaleighwas 'eaten out with interest tt on Chenies in Lumbard Street.4 Worsestillwas the case of Lord Vaux ofHarrowden, 'the unfortunate eere ofParliamentforpovertiethat ever was', who found himself nable to takehis place in the House of Lords, having pawned his Parliament robes toa recalcitrantLondoner who refused o hirethem back to theirownerfora fewdays, even at a highrate of nterest.Unable to pay theprincipal,thenoble Lord was forced to keep to his lodgingsbeing too 'raggedlie sutedand clothed' to dare showhimselfn public.5But the thirdand by far the mostwidely practised type of loan was-uponmortgage of ands. It was all verywell forthe Earl ofEssex-of allpeople-to assert: I am in consciencepersuaded that thebonds ofnoble-men.. aremoresafethanthose ofordinarymerchantswho growbankrupteveryyear.'6 Such was not the opinion of the hard-facedfinanciers ponwhose advances the nobilitywere obliged to subsist. Land was the mostsure and most prized of all securities. It was real and eternal. Moreimportant till, t was the sine qua nonof social ascent, the acquisition ofwhich could swiftlyransform vulgar citybusiness man, stillstinking fthe counting house, into one of the gentry, respectable and respectedmember ofthe upper class societythat provided therulersofElizabethanEngland. The mortgaging fpropertywas therefore he mostcommonlyemployedand probablythe most mprovident fall theways inwhich thenobility ought to increasetheir mmediate cash resources. Thanks to theobstinate insistenceof their creditors, t was land ratherthan jewels or

1 Thus Lord WilliamHowardgaveThomas Suttonrecognisancesor 4000inreturn or loanofC23io. 5S. and C8ooofor 4591i. 9S. 4d. op. cit.195/25I,284). An extreme ase is that ofHenryBrooke,Lord Cobham'sbrother, hoborrowedCioo off ne WilliamWright, ivinghim a bondforC200. Unableto meet thisobligation t the appointedtime, he borrowed 200 to repayWright rom nothermoneylender,iving he atter bondfor 73??nreturnfor hisnew oan. Thus in ust overa year,his original Ioo loan had involvedhim n a ?3?? debt- theequivalentof2oo % interest. H.M.C. Salis. MSS.IV, 49.)2 Ellis, op. cit. (3rd ser.), IV, 75-9. 3 H.M.C. Salis. IX, 53.4 E. Edwards, LifeofRalegh i868), n, 299. Other examples are Sir HenryNeville (H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XI, 300); Sir Fulke Greville (B.M. Lansd. MSS.88/6i-2); and the Earl ofShrewsbury College ofArms,Talbot Papers, H andG, passim).5 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 73/26. 6 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. VII, i96.



25/54

24 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWbonds that was their most easily realizable asset. Ancestral estates werethussacrificed n the altar ofday-to-dayprodigality. Non-paymentmeantforeclosure nd the loss of propertyfar n excess of the value of the loan.The Earl of Norfolkmortgaged demesnes worth?53. 6s. 8d. per annumfor loan of Cioo.1 John Killigrew found himself bout to lose one estateworth?6oo a year fornon-paymentof ?5??, and another worth ?400a year for non-paymentof /300.2 Lord Cobham prepared to mortgageland he valued at ?5000 to raise a loan of ?6oo.3 Robert Milner com-plained that he was about to lose land worth/JI ,ooo per annum fornon-payment of a debt of ?4000.4 The harshness of this form of lendingdepended on the time allowed for redemption of the mortgage. Asaristocraticneeds and creditors'rapacity ncreased, so the period of gracetended to shorten o a matter of months.5There were, however, far ower circles n the aristocratic nferno hanthese. Some reached the point where their ewels and plate were all inpawn, their ands all mortgaged,their credit entirely xhausted. The firstnecessitywhen this stage was reached was retirement rom he expensivelottery f the court. The Earl of Worcesterblessed with so small a revenueand so manychildren' (includingfourmarriageable daughters), nnouncedthat he had 'adopted country ife, being the only means to repair myestate'6 Others sought pastures new across the seas. The Earl of Sussexbegged fora military ommand abroad rather than 'live in a miserablepovertye t hoame'.' Sir William Cornwallisangled for hepostof consulat Venice. This request was made, he was careful to point out to theprudish Cecil, not with a view to 'service unto Venus' with the famouscourtesansof theRialto, but rather in my absence to restore nd recovermy estate which is shrunk and shaken with so many years service to aprince utterlywithoutreward .8 Not a few ike Lord Arundel of Wardourwent offto Hungary to fight he Turk. Sir Francis Verney adopted theheroic expedientofturningBarbary pirate at Algiers.9Yet othersclung on at home by various means. Lord Berkeleywenttolive with his mother-in-law s paying guest at ios. a week.'0 Sir JohnHarringtonmade judicious presents f his newly nventedwater-closet ndwaited in eager anticipationfor rewards fromgrateful ecipientsof his so'commodious and necessary' sanitarydevice.' Some hard-pressedwestcountrygentry iscoveredhow to improve theirrevenues and demonstratetheirpatriotism t one and the same time. From among theircopyholdersthey organized ill-equipped and unfinancedvolunteer evies to go offto

1 Ibid. I, 527. 2 Ibid. VIII, I9I.3 Ibid. XI, 582. 4 Ibid. xii, 54.5 E.g. the case oftheDowager Marchioness of Winchester n I6oo. (BodleianLibrary, Tanner MSS. 283/7, II 5/I4.)6 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. VII, 267; XII, 43; XIII, 427; XIV, 270. S.P. Dom. Eliz.243/66. It was the successful disposal of two of the daughters in I596 thatSpenser celebrated in his Prothalamion.7 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 84/72. 8 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. xv, I76.9 Verney apers (Camden Soc. i852), p. 95.10 Smyth,op. cit. II, 284. 11 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. XII, 199.



26/54

THE ELIZABETHAN ARISTOCRACY 25the wars. Starvation, disease and the enemy effectively emoved themajority, pon which arge fineswere evied forre-entryntothe copyholdof the deceased.' Sir Edward Stradling kidnapped the heiress of oneGamage and incarcerated her under lock and key in hishouse, planninga forciblemarriage and the seizure of her lands when she came of age.2Sir AntonyAshley,thwartedof thepriceless ewels he had smuggledbackfromCadiz, offered ecil 0i oo ifhe would givehimthe wardship of somerich lunatic.3 If not so standard a recourse as in the days ofJames, themarriage of an heiress was already in the go's beginningto be a possiblesolution. The firstof such marriages was made by Frances Howard,daughter of Viscount Bindon, to Henry Pranel: the son of a Londonvintner. But the indignationof Lord Burghleyat-hermesallianceand themannerin whichher second husband, the Earl ofHertford,would taunther with her mean associations,4 re evidence that the prevailing temperofthe age was stillopposed to such sociallydrastic measures.All the sameLord Staffordfished forthe only daughter of 'a riche Citizen... to bemaryeduntomysonne .5 FrancisBacon asked for knighthood o increasehis prestige n the eyes of an aldermans daughter,a handsome maid tomy iking.6 But not all suchbargainsturned out according to plan. JohnKingston publiclyannounced his intentions: Body of our Lord! I will gomarry hisolde widdow and pay mydebts. Then when I have buried herI will marrya youngwench and get children'. But alas, 'shee deceivedhim inpartfor heeheld himtugabove 38 yearesand lived near 12 yearesafter him'.7Lastly, there were those whom all these expedients failed to relieve.Ancient pedigree was then no protectionfrom the humiliationsof theindigent. SirGeorge Peckham,nearestrelativeto theEarl ofSouthampton,was one of these unfortunates.His lands were distrainedfordebt in I583,afterwhichhe sponged successfully pon hisfriends n the south ofEnglandfor threeyears. He moved reluctantlyfromcountryhouse to countryhouse, outstaying is welcome untilejected brutallyfrommanor and fromgrange by his exasperated friends. He then tried the North where hemanaged to imposehimself pon his acquaintances for about a year. Butunable even topay forhisfood,SirGeorge,his wife nd childin DecemberI 587 finally ound themselves t the end oftheir ether; whear to hide myhead in good faythe do notknow', declared the old knight;his clothesheadmittedwere 'more like the ragges ofsome Roge than the garmentsofa gentleman'.8The Elizabethan shore was litteredwithnameless gravesof many others ike Sir George, the obstinate etsam thrownup by theflood-tide f social transformation.1 Ibid. IV,4.2 Strype, op. cit. III, 275.3 H.M.C. Salis. MSS. VII, 4.4 Ellis,op.cit. (3rd ser.), V, 91.5 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 68/2o.6 J. Spedding,Works fFrancisBacon (I 865), LifeandLetters,II, 8o.7 Wood, op. cit. p. 215.8 B.M. Lansd. MSS. 6i/8o.



27/54

26 THE ECONOMIC HISTORY REVIEWVI

The greatestof all the sources of aristocraticrevenue still remains to bediscussed. Greatereven than the income from ncestralpropertywas thatto be anticipated fromthe impropriatedparsonages and appropriatedtithes, episcopal manors and escheated demesnes, royal forests andmonastic woods, patents and perquisites,sinecures and offices hat wereat the disposal of the Queen as rewards forher courtiers nd favourites.The court was a vast gambling saloon where punters played for thehighest stakes. The losses have already been examined; the gains mustnow be described. The magnetismexertedby theElizabethan court canonlybe realized when theimportanceof thiscasual sourceof ncome is setin its true proportions. The court was not merely the source of bothpolitical power and social pre-eminence,twas potentially heonlymeansofseekingfortune tillopen to a class thatpersisted n despisingthehum-drum activitiesof the merchantand tradesman. The bankrupt youngerson of the Elizabethan peerage mighttake to the sea as a pirate, to theland as a soldier of fortune. But he scorned to go into the city. Thatcrucial transformationn social customstill ay in thefuture.Beggingandwheedlingon the otherhand wereperfectly onourable. 'Necessity knowsno law and forgetsblushing', brazenly proclaimed that perfectcourtierand gentlemanSir Philip Sidney.'The official ttitude owardsthearistocracy hroughout heElizabethanperiod remainedfriendlynd protective.The social hierarchy ughtto bepreserved. It might at first ight seem strangethat Lord Burghley,soplainly a member of the new bourgeoisie,hould be concerned with thepreservationof class distinction. But no such doubts or hesitationshadroomto flourishn the mind of one who tookpains to tracehis genealogyeitherfromOwen Whyte,who 'came with Harold thatwas Earl Godwinsson out of Cornwall', or from a Sitsiltalreadynoteworthyn io91.2 TheGovernmentat

anatomy of the eliz. aristocracy, stone l

Documents