 | | European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia |
March 16th, 2012, 04:22 PM
|
#21 | | Historian
Joined: Sep 2010 Posts: 4,935 |
how many people came with the queen?? just an estimate?? i know she had her ladies along with her guards--who else had the honor of traveling with the queen?
| | |
| |
March 19th, 2012, 06:13 AM
|
#22 | | Historian
Joined: Mar 2011 From: Bedfordshire,England. Posts: 5,553 |
She would have had many,kbear,from Knights to peronsal guards,maids,serving girls,advisors,counsillors,food tasters,heralds,musicians,doctors...the list would go on,and they all had to be accomodated in one way or another.
| | |
| |
March 19th, 2012, 07:21 AM
|
#23 | | Academician
Joined: Mar 2012 Posts: 85 |
I imagine some of that food was probably eaten by local dignitaries who were also invited along.
| | |
| |
March 19th, 2012, 07:42 AM
|
#24 | | Historian
Joined: Jan 2011 From: Southeast England Posts: 5,489 | Quote:
Originally Posted by kbear how many people came with the queen?? just an estimate?? i know she had her ladies along with her guards--who else had the honor of traveling with the queen? | In Elizabeth the Queen, Alison Weir writes:
The Queen travelled either on horseback, in an open horse-drawn litter padded with cushions or - from 1564, when this mode of transport was first introducdd into England from Holland - in an uncomfortable, unsprung twelve-wheel coach of red leather studded with gilt nails, seating only two persons. Two empty litters accompanied her in case of accidents or being required by her ladies.
Behind Elizabeth stretched her retinue of about five hundred people and an endless procession of 2,400 horses and 400-600 carts laden with clothing and jewellery, provisions, househild effects, state papers and tents for those servants who could not be accomodated in the houses they would visit.
| | |
| |
March 19th, 2012, 07:54 AM
|
#25 | | Historian
Joined: Jan 2011 From: Southeast England Posts: 5,489 |
In The Virgin Queen, Christopher Hibbert writes:
There were two principal departments in this caravan, the one controlled by the Lord Chamberlain, and the other and larger by the Lord Steward. Thd Lord Chamberlain had charge of the arrangements of the Queen's Privy Chamber, of the gentlemen grooms and yeomen, and of the ladies and maids of honour who were attendant upon her there. He had to ensure that all ceremonies were conducted in an appropriate stule of grandeur, that visitors were received in an appropriate style of grandeur, that visitors were received in a manner suitable to their rank, and - in consultation with the Captain of the Guard and the Master of the Horse - that the Queen's safety was never in jeopardy. THe Lord Steward was in charge of all the more domestic departments as well as those of the Keeper of the Queen's Jewels and the clerks, cashiers and accountants of the Board of Green Cloth. Responsible for all the servants from grooms and stable bous to cooks, butlers and scullions, from sempstresses and laundresses to the woman whose sole task it was to sew seed pearls onto dresses, from the staffs of the Boiling House and the Bakehouse to those of the pastry, the Confectionary and thr Laundry, there were, on occadions, under the Lord Steward's control well over a thousand persons.
| | |
| |
March 21st, 2012, 03:40 AM
|
#26 | | Historian
Joined: Mar 2011 From: Bedfordshire,England. Posts: 5,553 |
Nobody could refuse a monarch unless death or plague played a part in the area so they had to open their houses and land for Royal useage.It was an honour but a terribly costly one !!
| | |
| |
March 21st, 2012, 07:49 AM
|
#27 | | Historian
Joined: Jan 2011 From: Southeast England Posts: 5,489 | Quote:
Originally Posted by halomanuk Nobody could refuse a monarch unless death or plague played a part in the area so they had to open their houses and land for Royal useage.It was an honour but a terribly costly one !! |
I think those who she stayed with were mostly those who could afford it. In Elizabeth the Queen, Alison Weir writes:
In Elizabeth's opinion, going on progress saved opn expenditure, since the cost of maintaining her court was being borne by her subjects, although she was carefulmnever to exploit those who could not afford the expense, and the Exchequer and the Revels Office often contributed.
| | |
| |
March 21st, 2012, 07:51 AM
|
#28 | | Historian
Joined: Mar 2011 From: Bedfordshire,England. Posts: 5,553 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Louise C I think those who she stayed with were mostly those who could afford it. In Elizabeth the Queen, Alison Weir writes:
In Elizabeth's opinion, going on progress saved opn expenditure, since the cost of maintaining her court was being borne by her subjects, although she was carefulmnever to exploit those who could not afford the expense, and the Exchequer and the Revels Office often contributed. | But not all monarchs were as thoughtful as Elizabeth eh ? Especially her dad .
| | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.
|  |