Abstract
There were many opportunities in Elizabethan London for a real relationship between Fleetwood and Buckhurst, who had many interests and acquaintances in common. These arose chiefly within the learned and social circles centered on the Inns of Court, especially during term time, and from the transient acquaintances established during the weeks or months when parliament was sitting. It is likely that they would have recognized each other as familiar faces around the Temple from the mid-1550s. Sackville entered the Inner Temple by the admissions list for November 1554 when he settled in London to study law, and would have proceeded to a call at the Inner Temple bar after the usual seven years.1 Although he sat on the bench as a justice of the peace in Kent and Surrey from 1559, for which no formal legal qualifications were required, he was not made of the quorum and thus not considered qualified to try more serious cases at quarter sessions until 1562. During 1573, as Lord Buckhurst, he was made custos rotularum for the county of Sussex where his dynastic and business interests, including iron forges and farming, were long settled. This post was a sign of his prestige and seniority as a justice; the county custos was responsible for the records of magistracy and for the clerks who attended and recorded court sessions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
STC 10661 (now New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, W 03 D); cf. Alsop, chapter 5 below. For Sackville owned manuscript books of historical works, and their interchange with Fleetwood and Archbishop Parker (d.1575), see further May McKisack, Medieval History in the Tudor Age (Oxford University Press, 1971), 51 and 59.
For Sir Richard Sackville’s life see the ODNB article by Sybil M. Jack; he was steward of Duchy of Lancaster lands in Sussex 1549–1553, and 1561–1566. Cf. N. M. Fuidge in The History of Parliament, The House of Commons, 1558–1603, edited by P. W. Hasler, 3 vols. (London: HMSO, 1981), 3:314–15.
See further The Mirror for Magistrates, edited by Lily B. Campbell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938, reprinted New York: Barnes and Noble, 1960);
David Norbrook, Poetry and Politics in the English Renaissance, revised edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 50–51 and n. 78.
On Gorboduc, see further Greg Walker, “Strategies of Courtship: The Marital Politics of Gorboduc,” in The Politics of Performance in Early Renaissance Drama (Cambridge University Press, 1998), 196–221;
Marie Axton, The Queen’s Two Bodies: Drama and the Elizabethan Succession (London: Royal Historical Society, 1977), 38–47, and “Robert Dudley and the Inner Temple Revels,” Historical Journal 13.3 (1970): 365–78, especially 374–77;
Susan Doran, Monarchy and Matrimony: the Courtships of Elizabeth (London: Routledge, 1996), 55–57.
Quotations from Gorboduc are from the text in Two Tudor Tragedies, edited by William Tydeman (London: Penguin Books, 1992).
For Queen Elizabeth’s replies to the Commons in February 1559 and January 1563 see Proceedings in the Parliaments of Elizabeth I, Volume 1: 1558–1581, edited by T E. Hartley (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1981), 44–45 and 94–95.
For the resident ambassador Bishop De la Quadra’s news about Dudley see Wallace T. MacCaffrey, The Shaping of the Elizabethan Regime: Elizabethan Politics, 1558–1572 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968), 150–51, cf. 136.
On Day and Norton in 1570 see Michael A. R. Graves, Thomas Norton the Parliament Man (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994), 42–44, 114–18.
On the Revolt of the Northern Earls see Krista Kesselring, The Northern Rebellion of 1569: Faith, Politics and Protest in Elizabethan England (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).
The diners in Cecil’s chamber at Windsor Castle included William Petre, John Mason, Dr Wotton, Walter Mildmay, Richard Sackville, and Roger Ascham. See Ascham’s preface to his The Scholemaster (published after his death by John Day in 1570), in Roger Ascham, English Works, edited by William Aldis Wright (Cambridge University Press, 1904, reprinted 1970), 175–81.
For Sackville appointments in February 1561 see Robert Somerville, History of the Duchy of Lancaster, vol. 1, 1265–1603 (London, 1953), 621 and 619.
For Sackville burgages in East Grinstead see P. D. Wood, “The Topography of East Grinstead Borough,” Sussex Archaeological Collections 106 (1968): 49–62;
on the purchase of the barony of Lewes (county town of East Sussex) see J. E. Mousley, “Sussex Country Gentry in the Reign of Elizabeth” (University of London, PhD thesis, 1956), 689 (citing Close Roll, 18 Eliz., part 5).
Baker (a former speaker of the Commons and recorder of London) did finally sign the letters patent for Jane Grey two weeks before the king’s death, but later did nothing to oppose Mary’s accession; see further Helen Miller in The House of Commons 1509–1558, edited by S. T. Bindoff, 3 vols. (London: Seeker & Warburg, 1982), 1:366–69.
On Alford’s speech see N. M. Fuidge and M. A. Phillips in House of Commons, edited by Hasler, (1981), 1:335–38 at 336.
See further on this topic, “Religion and the Politic Counsellor,” EHR (2007), 892–917. Contrast Fleetwood’s pursuit of seminary priests and arrest of English recusants hearing mass, including (in 1582) arrests at the Salisbury Court home of Mrs. Alford, who was not prosecuted herself (on presentation of Francis Alford’s surety): see P. R. Harris, “William Fleetwood, Recorder of the City and Catholicism in Elizabethan London,” Recusant History 7.3 (1963): 106–22 at 115. Harris also shows how Fleetwood put his respect for the law above his hatred of Catholics in obtaining a reprieve for two women sentenced by him after a malicious prosecution abused the law and his court (at 118).
For Buckhurst’s assessments and attempts at revising Leicester’s handling of policy and resources in the Low Countries, see my ODNB article, and Charles Wilson, “Thomas Sackville: An Elizabethan Poet as Citizen” in Ten Studies in Anglo-Dutch Relations, 1558–1565, edited by Jan van Dorsten (Leiden University Press and Oxford University Press, 1974), 30–50.
On the visit “to peter howse to see dr pernes studdie or librarie supposed to be the worthiest in all england” see Patrick Collinson, “Andrew Perne and His Times” in Andrew Perne Quatercentenary Studies, edited by David McKitterick (Cambridge: Cambridge Bibliographical Society, 1991), 1–34 at 32 n.119 quoting Cambridge University Archives, Stokys’s Book (Misc. Collect. 4), fol. 88v.
See further, for quotation from Plowden’s Reports, Ernst H. Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957, reprinted 1981), 11–13; cf. on dynastic continuity, 335–36; on the crown as fiction and separate from the person of the king, 358–59, 378–83 and 407–8; on the phoenix icon used throughout Elizabeth’s reign see 510 and cited sources; for development of the phoenix symbolism in the wider context of kingship/queenship see 388–95.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2013 Charles Beem and Dennis Moore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zim, R. (2013). “Marveilously Given to Be Antiquaries”: William Fleetwood’s Itinerarium and Thomas Sackville, Lord Buckhurst. In: Beem, C., Moore, D. (eds) The Name of a Queen. Queenship and Power. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137272027_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137272027_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-44476-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-27202-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)