Written by Emma Holbrook, Kali Hollands, and Jade Lynch
(Cover image – © History Extra)
When it comes to discussing the Tudor dynasty, there are a vast number of areas you could hone in on. Their fashion and what each piece of a person’s outfit symbolised something, or perhaps the food they dined on and what was easily available to the less fortunate or even the royal family themselves and the drama and splendid they caused during their lifetimes. There are endless facts and figures you could fixate on but there is one topic that we feel offers a more unique and interesting glimpse into the lives of the Tudors–their servants!
It has always fascinated us–and also you, dear reader!–what were all the roles servants played in a Tudor household or what responsibilities members of the King or Queen’s household had that impacted the monarch’s daily life?
What were their responsibilities and daily routines like?
And who were these people who dedicated their lives in service to the superior and richer?
Well, fear not, dear reader! For we shall be exploring some of those roles and offer you a glimpse into what life as a Tudor servant might have been!
Food Tasters:
Belladonna. Arsenic. Aconite. Foxglove.
Centuries ago, poison spread fear amongst monarchs across the globe and often left political figures of significance suspicious of those around them. Often undetectable and void of odour or taste, poison was a vital weapon that, if placed into the wrong hands, could lead to the devastation of families and sometimes, the horrendous murder of innocents. It was a resource so profoundly significant that monarchs would crumble and shiver at the mere mention of the word, sending them into a frightful panic over the thought of falling victim to the deadly mixture. The safety of monarchs was paramount to the security of the realm and even the safety of the royal court, there are no boundaries that assassins would not cross for a chance to harm a monarch they so despised.
But if poison was often undetectable and assassins could be hiding in plain sight, how was the safety of monarchs protected and achieved?
Bring in the vital role…of the food tasters.
As an occupation, food tasters had existed for thousands of years, long before the Tudors ever came into power, for the use of poison only blossomed throughout history—even today, poison can still be linked to the deaths of many political and non-political figures across the globe. Evidence shows that in Ancient Rome and Egypt, poison was the most preferred method of dispatching one's rival or enemies without blooding one's hands. Slaves were often forced into the role of a food taster (or praegustaor) as their lives were of little value and due to the high population within the slave trade, they were also very easily replaceable.
Roman author Pliny chronicles the severe level of distrust that Mark Antony held towards Queen Cleopatra to have been so deep that he employed a food taster to be on hand at any given time should the Egyptian Pharaoh make an attempt on his life. He further elaborates on an instance where Cleopatra coated her prayer beads with poison before dropping them into his wine not only as a threat but a demonstration of how vulnerable he was against her sly and creative assassination plots.
Fast forward to the Tudor era, the concern regarding poisoning a monarch had only developed to the point where food tasters were not only common for monarchs but for political or influential figures within the royal court. A food taster could often be found within the household of a Privy Council member or a dominant man of the church, as assassinations upon those closest to the King also occurred, but were rare and not considered the norm.
So what was the official role and duties of a food taster in the Tudor era?
Ironically, the role of a food taster is simple: to taste and ingest the food prepared for another person, usually a person of high importance, to confirm the food is uncontaminated, free of poison and safe to eat. If the food taster ingests the food without signs of poisoning or contamination within the food, then it is safe. However, if the food taster becomes unwell or dies suddenly, it proves the suspicions were not without cause and an immediate investigation will begin to find both the source of the poison and the culprit. However, once assassins became aware that food tasters were often employed by their enemies, they began using slow-acting poisons which could sometimes take hours or days to take effect on the victim, leading to a greater chance of succeeding in their plot.
There is another type of food taster called a cupbearer who is responsible for testing all the liquids that person consumes as it wouldn’t make sense to have the same person taste both the meal and the drink as it would make it impossible to determine which item (if not both) was poisoned.
There are rumours that food tasters were even placed into the household by assassins because they could ensure that the poison reached the lips of the victim, even if it meant sacrificing themselves to aid the ‘greater good’. Whether this is true or not, it does seem plausible to believe that assassins would go to these lengths to rid themselves of a rival or an enemy, as someone once might have believed the execution of an English Queen, being that of Anne Boleyn, to be possible. Yet we all know what happened to her and the poor women who followed her.
One famous incident where the employment of a food taster might have saved many lives was the 1531 poisoning of John Fisher, the Bishop of Rochester, along with members of his household by a man known as Richard Roose (also referred to by Richard Rouse, Richard Cooke, and Richard Rose). Whether this is indeed the man’s real name or not, Richard Roose was the accused culprit behind the assassination attempt and was subsequently boiled—yes, boiled—to death on orders of the King who took the incident very seriously as it spread fear amongst other members of the Clergy and high standing courtiers of the Henrician Court.
Roose’s assassination on the Bishop and his household was for one reason only; religious disagreement. As he disapproved of the King’s pending divorce from his loyal wife, Catherine of Aragon, and Bishop Fisher was a supporter of the King’s divorce and therefore his second marriage to Anne Boleyn, Roose had decided to remove the Bishop’s influence over Protestantism, the King and the Bishop’s presence altogether. It is believed that Roose, who was either the cook or a friend of the cook at the Bishop’s residence in Lambeth, had added a ‘white powder’ into the porridge served to the Bishop and his household. Whilst the Bishop himself survived as he had strangely chosen not to eat that day, two people sadly lost their lives during the attempt; Burnet Curwen, a member of Fisher’s household, and Alice Tryppyt, a beggar who had sought charity in the form of food.
Whilst the assassination was a failure in the eyes of Roose as he did not succeed in killing Fisher, he was now responsible for the innocent murder of two individuals. During his imprisonment and subsequent torture, Roose claimed a stranger had given him the powder that was intended as a joke, suggesting that he did not understand the true purpose of the powder. Henry VIII, who was deathly afraid of poisons and acquired many food tasters over the course of his reign, addressed the House of Lords to make murder by poisoning a treasonous offense and even the talk of poisoning could be deemed as treason also. The punishment for those found guilty of treason was execution, however, Henry VIII made it mandatory for those guilty of murder by poison to be boiled to death—such irony, Henry.
Whether Roose had lied about his intentions to kill Fisher or was truly innocent as he had claimed, his fate was sealed. Richard Roose was boiled to death at Smithfield in London in April 1532, most likely an instant death but still gruesome nonetheless.
Henry VIII’s fear of poisoning would be inherited by his successor and arguably most famous daughter; Elizabeth I. Like her father before her, Elizabeth was frightened of being poisoned; however, this fear did not limit itself strictly to food. She had her dresses, jewellery and even her makeup checked (by that being worn) by another woman before she ever allowed it to touch her body. Poison could be laced onto fabrics and could result in many falling victim, not just the wearer so Elizabeth made sure her ladies remained vigilant at all times—what is so ironic is that it is believed that the lead makeup she wore was what eventually killed her as lead poisoning was very common in the Elizabethan era. Sadly, due to the lack of an autopsy per the Queen’s request, we will never know if this is truth or fiction.
The Queen’s Ladies-in-Waiting:
Everybody has heard of some of the sixteenth century’s most famous queens; Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour etc. But what of the women behind the scenes?
The women who ensured these high-ranking ladies were cared for, feeling and looking their best, and had someone to confide in?
It’s time to explore the lives of the Tudor ladies-in-waiting.
Ladies-in-waiting came from noble families across the country, and were at the very top of society, besides the royals. Competition was rife amongst the young women, clambering for a place in the queen’s court. Noble mothers at the time who were desperate for their daughters to become a lady-in-waiting would recommend her to friends or family, trying to promote her further up the social ladder. Once chosen, the women swore an oath of allegiance to their new mistress. They would be obliged to understand and follow the Household Ordinances, which stated rules of conduct and courtly etiquette. Ladies-in-waiting spent much of their time at court around plenty of nobility and high-ranking individuals. This meant that many women chosen for the role were selected based on attractiveness; when Catherine of Aragon was sent to England, her parents requested that her attendants be beautiful.
Each queen had a rank of attendants; Mistress of the Robes, Ladies of the Bedchamber, Ladies and Gentlewomen of the Privy Chamber, chamberers and maids-of-honour. These titles all collectively make up the ladies-in-waiting. Furthermore, there were the great ladies; wives of senior noblemen who visited court frequently but did not reside in the household.
A lady-in-waiting was far from a servant. She was a confidant, an assistant, a companion and sometimes a close friend to the queen. Duties varied from court to court, but in general, a lady-in-waiting would attend court ceremonies; full of dancing, music, masque plays and greeting ambassadors. They would follow court etiquette and join the queen in her past-times; embroidery, reading, dancing, chess, music etc. These ladies didn’t just accompany their queen inside, but would also participate in outdoor activities; hunting, hawking, archery, and bowls. Ladies-in-waiting would handle and take care of the queen’s wardrobe and jewels; helping her to dress and undress too. They would also help the queen with her intimate needs and accompany her on tours and travels. In her private chambers, secrets and advice would be shared between Her Majesty and her attendants; they would be there to listen and support their queen.
Jane Boleyn is one such lady-in-waiting who served not just one but five Tudor queens. Jane has been painted throughout history as a jealous, calculated wife; blamed for the executions of Anne and George Boleyn. However, this is believed now to be a huge misrepresentation. Jane was just a woman who served her queens, who wanted to do good for herself and her family and, unfortunately, was placed right in the centre of a dangerous court.
Before her fifteenth birthday, Jane was sent to the court of Queen Catherine of Aragon; documents note that she was part of the queen’s party to the Field of The Cloth of Gold in 1520, the meeting between Henry VIII and the French king, Francis I. This was a prosperous position to have at this age. The role of a lady-in-waiting was the dream of many young women in Tudor England and Jane was exceedingly lucky; it was a finishing school to prepare Jane as a future great lady. Jane would have risen at dawn to prepare herself and begin the day attending to her queen. She would have accompanied and entertained Catherine throughout the day with the other ladies; participating in dancing, singing, reading out loud and playing card games. Jane would have worn green velvet dresses or cloth of gold or silver; precious metals woven into fabrics. This was an Act of Apparel she would have been ordered to follow and the cut of her dress would have reflected her modesty as a maid of honour; long-sleeved and below her ankles. Royal members of the court would have worn purple, and this acted as a symbol to Jane on who to curtsy to and use the correct etiquette around.
Jane’s family arranged her marriage to George Boleyn in 1525 and as Anne Boleyn, George’s sister, caught the king’s eye in 1526, Jane’s husband began to rise in power; being awarded the title Viscount of Rochford and Jane, Viscountess Rochford. Jane now had more power over the other ladies-in-waiting at court and as her husband rode further up the social ladder, so did she.
In 1533, Henry VIII married Anne Boleyn and annulled his marriage with Catherine of Aragon. Jane Boleyn was now lady of the bedchamber to Anne Boleyn. Her position was exceedingly successful; now a family member to the royals and the top of the game as a lady-in-waiting. Jane was part of the king’s inner circle and placed further up the social hierarchy. Her privileges would have increased, and she would have been given the best chair at the banquet, compared to her fellow ladies-in-waiting. Jane had unique access to all areas of the royal palaces and accompanied Anne wherever she went. During Anne’s childbirths, Jane would have been present; assisting her during her lying-in period, where Anne retired to her bedchambers. Jane would have assisted with the birth, keeping Anne company and witnessing the arrival. It’s rumoured that Anne and Jane hated each other, and Jane was incredibly jealous of her husband’s close relationship with his sister. However, Jane helped her queen remove a woman from the court, who was speculated to be the king’s new mistress. Anne was furious and enlisted Jane to help remove this female rival, however, their scheming led to Jane’s banishment from court. This risky behaviour would have damaged her reputation, yet she still helped Anne. Jane could represent a lady-in-waiting who was loyal to not just her queen, but her family too.
During Anne and George Boleyn’s downfall in 1536, Jane was called in for questioning by Thomas Cromwell, Henry VIII’s chief minister. It’s speculated that, due to Jane’s jealousy of her husband and sister-in-law’s relationship, her lips may have loosened; sharing with Cromwell how Anne and George’s relationship was incestuous and vulgar. Despite this being one of the reasons for the sibling’s arrest and execution, there’s no proof at all that Jane was the cause of this. If she shared this information, Jane would have been left with nothing. Why share this if it would lead to Jane having no lands, assets or a husband’s protection? It's rumoured that Jane was the person to share with Cromwell the mocking remarks made by Anne and George, about the king’s virility. Again, why share this information if it made Jane a relation to a traitor?
After her husband and queen were executed in May 1536, Jane was in a precarious position. She was now left with nothing and connected to two traitors who had committed the worst possible offence: incest. Jane was an intelligent woman, who knew how the Tudor court worked and used this to her advantage. She turned to Thomas Cromwell for help, who agreed and secured her money that was owed from the Boleyns. Jane was also placed back at court and ready to serve her new queen.
Henry VIII’s new wife, Jane Seymour, selected Jane Boleyn as not just any lady-in-waiting, but Lady of The Privy Chamber. This was an incredibly sought-after and top-of-the-court role for a young woman like Jane. She would have assisted her queen with personal and confidential tasks and helped her with daily affairs and routines. At Hampton Court Palace, Jane would have ventured into the most private areas. This is an example of a resilient, brave and strong woman who had made good for herself on her own, using her advantages and intelligence. It’s been considered throughout history that perhaps Jane was placed back into court for a reason; perhaps to spy for Chief Minister, Thomas Cromwell. Other ladies-in-waiting at the time would have gossiped and stared at Jane; the widow of an incestuous traitor now held one of the best roles at court.
After the tragic death of Jane Seymour, Henry VIII now had a new wife at court: Anna of Cleves. This was the fourth queen that Jane Boleyn would now be working for as a lady-in-waiting. Anna was a German princess and was unaccustomed to the language, culture and ways of the Tudor court. Jane would have helped her queen adjust to her new life; helping with English customs and vocabulary. Jane is rumoured to be one of the women that Anna confided in about the king’s failure to consummate the marriage. However, this is just speculation and more likely to have been a false conversation; invented to help the king annul his marriage with Anna.
Katherine Howard is the fifth and final queen that Jane attended to. Katherine was also Jane’s cousin and the two got on very well; Jane became one of Katherine’s closest confidantes as chief lady-in-waiting. As Jane was older than Katherine and much more experienced, she would have given her plenty of life advice. Katherine’s court was youthful and full of teenagers; Jane would have been a wiser and more intelligent figure to Katherine.
However, in 1542, Katherine was accused of adultery and news was given to Henry that his “jewel” had taken other lovers before him. It was also reported that Katherine was having an affair with Thomas Culpeper; Katherine was arrested for adultery and seized by the king’s guards. Jane, who was fond of Katherine, would have witnessed her arrest at Hampton Court. She must have been devastated.
Jane Boleyn, as chief lady-in-waiting, was taken in for questioning. A letter was discovered in Katherine’s apartment, stating how Jane was involved in the secret meetings between Thomas and Katherine, running messages and helping the alleged affair take place. Other ladies-in-waiting also accused Jane of assisting the queen. But Jane was an intelligent and experienced woman, who again, knew how the court worked. Why risk her life in such a foolish way? It’s possible once again that Jane was forced to share these alleged allegations with those who wished to hear it. Whatever was the cause of her actions, Jane Boleyn was arrested and imprisoned in the Tower of London. Despite indicating signs of a mental breakdown, which spared a person's execution, Jane Boleyn would not be leaving the tower.
On the 13th of February 1540, Jane Boleyn was beheaded at The Tower of London, making her the first lady-in-waiting to be executed. Jane is a prominent figure in the Tudor court and an illustrative example of a sixteenth-century lady-in-waiting. Her story proves how ladies-in-waiting were always there; witnesses to one of the most tumultuous periods of British history.
The Groom of the Stool:
Don’t be fooled by the polite name, for this job would certainly be the bottom choice for anyone today! However, in history, to have this position bestowed upon you would have been a great honour and meant that you were (quite literally…) closer to the monarch than anyone else.
The Groom of the King’s Close Stool, as it is more formally known, was a role in assisting the monarch in going to the toilet and the personal hygiene comes with this. The name itself derives from the item of furniture that was once used as a toilet, which was called a ‘close stool’. It was a bit like a chair with an opening in the seat and a chamber pot concealed within.
It remains a matter of debate of just how close the duties of the groom were, but we do know that the groom would have been responsible for monitoring the king’s diet and bowel movements, as well supplying a bowl, water and towels when duty called. They may also have dressed the king.
In the Tudor era, this role even transformed to include being in charge of the ‘privy purse’, acting as the king’s personal treasurer and playing a part in England’s fiscal matters.
Surprisingly, it was often noblemen or members of the gentry that were awarded this role. Being so close to the king’s body and personal space was a great and trusted honour, with the groom being treated as more of a secretary who was rewarded with high pay, lodgings, clothes and furnishings.
By the time of Henry VIII, the Groom of the Stool was usually a close friend of his. It is said by historians that this position was an especially prized one, as it was an honour to have unobstructed access to the king.
Some of the most notable being William Compton (1509-1526), a lifelong friend of Henry VIII, and Sir Henry Norris (1526-1536), a wealthy friend of Anne Boleyn who ended up being accused of adultery with Anne and was subsequently beheaded.
Until next time...
- Have a ‘Tudor-fic’ week!
References:
Food Tasters:
Ladies-in-waiting:
The Waiting Game. Nicola Clark. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
https://www.thoughtco.com/jane-boleyn-lady-rochford-biography-3530611
https://www.tudorsociety.com/jane-boleyn-viscountess-rochford/
The Groom of the Stool:
Alison Weir, Henry VIII: The King and His Court
History Extra, 'Groom of the stool': who were the men who changed Henry VIII’s underpants?
Comments