Knights of the Bath Behaving Badly

[This month’s ‘Flower’ is provided by the editor of the Percy Papers volume, Bob Alexander]:

In November 1616, newly created Knights of the Bath may have engaged in very unceremonious activities, in spite of high-minded exhortations they had heard during their KB inauguration. So says John Chamberlain in letters to Dudley Carleton available at the National Archives in Kew and published by Norman E. McClure. The Knights’ behavior, according to Chamberlain, was so bad that a play and banquet scheduled for them had to be cancelled. I have not been able to verify these statements completely, but some elements in Chamberlain’s story are corroborated by documents that could be of interest to readers of the REED N-E website. Taken as a whole, these materials indicate the expenditure of time and money required by a small aspect of membership in the 17^th c. British aristocracy.

Chamberlain names some of these Knights in his letter of 9 November 1616:

I have not the list of the 24 Knights of the Bath that were made at this time, [1] but yt may suffice that they were all of noble houses, and that the Lords Matravers, [2] Percie, [3] and wriothesly [4] were the ring-leaders, and younge Seymor [5] that maried the Lady Arbella [6] did claudere agmen and was the last.

[The Letters of John Chamberlain, ed. Norman E. McClure, Vol. II, No. 251, p. 31; SP Dom Jac. 1, 14/89, # 17, 44r; London 9 November 1616]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Chamberlain’s next letter, dated 14 November, describes subsequent events:

on Saterday night [7] the Knights ̭˹of the Bath˺ were entertained by the Lord Mayor at Drapers hall with a supper and a play, where some of them were so rude and unruly and caried themselves so insolently divers wayes but specially in putting citizens wifes to the squeake, so far forth that one of the sheriffs brake open a doore upon Sir Edward Sackvile, which gave such occasion of scan-dall, that they went away without the banket though yt were redy and prepared for them – neither did they forbeare these disorders among themselves, for there [50v] were divers picques and quarrells at their severall meetings, but specially at the miter in Fleetstreet, insomuch that younge Parker [8] sonne to the Lord Mountegle, and wille Howard the Lord Treasurers youngest sonne [9] went into the field, but were there prevented and reconciled.

[McClure, II, No. 252, p. 35; SP Dom Jac. 1, 14/89, # 21, 50r-50v; London 14 November 1616]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Drapers’ Hall was the site of other events, and is mentioned frequently in the 2015 REED volume Civic London to 1558, ed. Anne Lancashire with David J. Parkinson. The 17^th century hall has been torn down and rebuilt, but a plan of the original building is available at the Drapers Hall archives, as well as a print of the original frontage. Miss Penelope Fussell, Drapers Hall archivist, very kindly allowed me to see these documents.

Some kind of sexual harassment at the Hall is implied in Chamberlain’s letter; for the curious, “to put to the squeak” probably means “to cause to squeak [or shriek].” This meaning is given by the OED under “Squeak,” sb. 1. The dictionary quotes George Etheredge, 1664, Comical Revenge, IV. iii: “(The women shriek within) hark! He puts them to the squeak.”

I have not found accounts by other witnesses to support these charges. However, aspects of Chamberlain’s story are confirmed elsewhere in SP Dom volume 89. For instance, a list of the Knights of the Bath (3r) includes the names mentioned by Chamberlain. “Lord Percy” is listed second.

A detailed report (10r-18v) on the Knight of the Bath ceremonies provides some cover for Algernon Percy, who was ill during at least part of the inauguration and so perhaps was not present at Drapers’ Hall. A note in the left margin of 15r states that “The lord Percy having taken a cold the night before in the Bath, went not to the Chapell as the rest did.” A second hand advises a copyist to “Leaue this out.”

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ironically, parts of the KB ceremony focus on the duties of the Knights to act honorably and protect the oppressed, obligations that some of the participants forgot, if Chamberlain is to be believed. They took an oath to “honour God above all thinges” and “be stedfast in the faith of God.” The same oath also required them to “suffer no extortion so far forth as you may, nor sit in place where any wrongful Judgment be given to your knowledge” (15r).

We also learn that music was important in the KB ceremony, and that all honorees had to contribute to the musicians’ fees. A document titled “ffees to be paid by every Knight of the Bath” lists a total of 33 pounds 6 shillings, including 30 shillings for “Musicians” and 40 shillings for ‘Trumpeters” (13r). Music accompanied the Knights’ processions at various points (15r, 16r).

Further expenses of 340 pounds, 14 shillings, 2 pence for “apparel, fees, and gifts” were disbursed by Earl Percy “on the occasion of Lord Percy’s being created Knight of the Bath” (Historical Manuscripts Commission Third Report, 1872, p. 63). Becoming Knight of the Bath, in other words, required significant resources, and, on one occasion, was associated with damage to some reputations.

Notes

[1] Saturday, 2 November 1616, SP Dom 14/89, 14r.

[2] McClure identifies all full names in his edition. “Matravers” was James Howard, Lord Maltravers, second Earl of Arundel and Surrey.

[3] Algernon Percy, created tenth Earl of Northumberland in 1632

[4] Thomas Wriothesley, created fourth Earl of Southampton in 1624

[5] William Seymour

[6] Lady Arabella Stuart

[7] 2 November 1616 or 9 November 1616

[8] Henry (fifth Lord Monteagle, 1622), son of William Parker, fourth Lord Monteagle

[9] son of Thomas Howard, first Earl of Suffolk

 

Provided by Robert Alexander, 02/2016. Research support was very kindly supported by a 2015 Franklin Research Grant from the American Philosophical Society.