CHAPTER 2: WHITEHALL PALACE—HISTORY
The King did not wait for the completion of the legal formalities
before taking possession of York Place. On 2nd November, 1529, only
a few days after Wolsey's departure, he came from Greenwich by water,
"and landed at the house which once belonged to the Cardinal, where he
has found handsome and well-furnished apartments, provided with everything that could be wished." (fn. 1) In the Privy Purse Expenses of Henry VIII (fn. 2)
are several items relating to York Place from November, 1529, to January,
1529–30, such as: (fn. 3)

Henry VIII.
|
| [November] "It'm the xvij … war to a s'vnt of the … Savoyes
for bringing … unto the Kinges grace to york place
"Paid to the gardiner of Beaulie in rewarde for
bringing herbes and Rotes to Yorke place |
vjs viijd |
| [December] "It'm to the clerc of the Kinges closet for his
botehire for fetching of certen stuf from grenewiche
to yorke place | ijs |
| "It'm to maister Bryan for so moche money by
him gyven in rewarde to a straunge mynstrell at yorke
place | xls |
| [January] "It'm the same [xxvij] daye paied to iiij pouer
people that the kinges grace heled of ther diseases at
yorke place | xxxs |
| On 20th March, 1529–30, Thomas Alvarde was appointed keeper
of "our place or messuage called York Place." The Privy Purse Expenses
show that Henry visited York Place occasionally up to March, 1531: |
| [May, 1530] "It'm the xiij daye paied to a s'vnt of my
lorde Barkeleys in rewarde for bringing a fresshe
sturgeon to the kinges grace to yorke place | xls |
| [November, 1530] "It'm the xiij daye paied to a s'vnt of
Sr Edward Guldefords in Rewarde for bringing a
fawcon to the king at Yorke place | xxs |
| [December, 1530] "It'm to Xpofer Villars s'vnt by way
of Rewarde for bringing pomegarnetts to Yorke place
for the king | iiijs viijd |
| [January, 1530–1] "It'm the xxviijth daye paied to the
Ambassador of fraunce s'vnt in Rewarde for bringing
perys to the kinges grace at yorke place | xxiijs iiijd |
| "It'm the xxix daye paied to my lady Russell s'vnt
in Rewarde for bringing of a doo and a swanne to the
kinges grace to yorke place | xxs |
| [February, 1530–1] "It'm the forsaied xxvij daye deliv'ed
unto the kinges grace at yorke place to play at Cards and
to be p'tiner wt the sergeant of the sellor |
xli |
| [March, 1530–1] "It'm the xv daye paied to the sergeant of
the sellor for to play at the cards at yorke place, the
kinges grace and he to be copartyners togidres | xli |
Among the same expenses are two items of payment to Doctor
Stubbs (i) in November, 1529, of £200 "for his bylding at yorke place,"
and (ii) on 1st April, 1530, of £400 "to be employed aboute the Kinges
buyeldinges at yorke place."
Lawrence Stubbs was Wolsey's almoner (fn. 4) and acted as his surveyor. (fn. 5)
On 17th May, 1530, he wrote to Wolsey (fn. 6) concerning the £1000 which the
King had granted for the payment of the cardinal's debts, stating that the
Council had ordered him, after paying the creditors of the household, to
use the rest for paying persons "who made exclamation for lack of payment
for buildings," and that he had accordingly paid the painter, the smith,
the glazier and others at daily wages, who were unpaid for work at Esher
and York Place. He was unable to pay James Nedam, in full, but the King
had paid the remainder. (fn. 7) Again, on 1st July, 1530, he tells Wolsey that he
is "abiding here at Westminster for the King's buildings." (fn. 8)
It appears therefore that the works referred to in the privy purse
expenses were in continuation of those set on foot by Wolsey. The King's
plans were, however, by no means limited to such rebuilding and extensions
as Wolsey had contemplated. The old Palace of Westminster had fallen
into decay, and Henry had in view the erection of a new Royal Palace on
the site of York Place, of much greater extent than the latter, and provided
with a large park. For this purpose he effected exchanges of land with
the Abbey of Westminster and the College of Eton, acquiring from the latter
the Hospital of St. James (which he rebuilt as St. James's Palace) and 185½
acres of land, most of which lay between Charing Cross and Eye Hill. (fn. 9)
The indenture was dated 5th September, 1531. The property acquired from
the Abbey is set out in the Act of 1531 (23 Henry VIII, c. 33—Private) transcribed in Appendix A. That on the west side of the road included the Abbey's
properties between the brewhouse called the Axe (on the site of Downing
Street) and Charing Cross, as well as Petty Calais (fn. 10) and lands lying next to and
intermingled with the lands of Eton. Most of this was added (as well as certain
property in other ownership) to the Eton lands to form St. James's Park, but
a portion was utilised for what may be called the "recreation" side of the
new Palace. The cockpit, tennis courts, tilt yard, bowling alley, pheasant
yard, etc., were provided on this side of the road, and access to them from
the main portion of the Palace was afforded by two gates spanning the
road from Westminster to Charing Cross. These buildings, so far as they
were in the parish of St. Margaret's, will be dealt with in the next volume.
On the east side of the road the acquisitions from the Abbey comprised all the property extending from Lamb Alley to the Bars next to
York Place, and from "Scotland" to the chapel of St. Mary Rouncivall.
The latter property (Craig's Court) lay in the parish of St. Martin-in-theFields, and was never used as part of the Palace, and it is with the former
property that we have here to deal.
The grant by the Abbey was, like the indenture with Eton, dated
5th September, 1531, (fn. 11) but the leasehold interests in the property on the
east side of the road had been acquired nearly four months earlier. (fn. 12) Unfortunately, the descriptions contained in the indentures are not very detailed,
but in most cases copies of the original leases are available, and from the
particulars therein given it is possible to obtain an approximate estimate of
the amount of the property acquired.
This extended from Lamb Alley to the Bars. The position of the
latter is not known. If it were not for this fact, no investigation would be
necessary, for the site of Lamb Alley can be identified (see p. 229), its
northern side being almost in a line with the southern face of the King
Street Gate.
(i) The property immediately south of the Bars was that of which
Wolsey had purchased the leasehold interest from Lytton (see p. 8).
The width along the street was 108 feet 11 inches, and it was bounded on
the south by the ground in the tenure of Thomas a Legh.
(ii) The property of Legh is described (fn. 13) as a great gate with chamber
and 6 tenements with garden adjoining and 4 cottages towards the lane
called "le Endif" (fn. 14) on the south, the whole being in King Street between
the tenements late of Edmund Chaderton and the lane called "le Endyf"
on the south, the property of Richard Lytton on the north, and the Thames
on the east. The dimensions were: east to west 23 "virgae" of 15 feet
each, north to south towards the street 4 "virgae," 13 feet and 11 inches,
and towards the Thames 5 "virgae" and 9 feet, at the east end from the lane
called "le Endyf" to Lytton's tenement 6 "virgae" and 9 feet, and in the
middle next the "piretum" 3 "virgae" and 2 feet. The four cottages
contained in length from the house of John Holland to the Thames 8
"virgae" and 3 feet.
(iii) In the northern angle of King Street and Endif Lane, bounded
north and east by (ii), was the property leased (fn. 15) to Edmund Chaderton and
John "Holand." It is described as three tenements, with gardens adjoining,
in King Street, next to the lane leading to the water of Thames and called
"Endive," abutting on King Street west, the garden late of Walter Lokyngton and formerly of David Selly (fn. 16) east and north, and the lane on the south.
The dimensions were: from King Street to Lokyngton's garden 168 feet,
from the lane to Lokyngton's garden on the east side 65 feet, and along
King Street on the west side 50 feet.
(iv) South of the lane was a tenement with chamber above leased
to Richard Walker. (fn. 17) It is described as abutting on the lane called "le
Endiff Lane" on the north and a messuage called "le Rose" on the south.
The tenement was 16 feet 4 inches from east to west, and 10 feet 2 inches
north to south along King Street, while the chamber was 24 feet each way.
(v) Next came the messuage called "The Rose" with a shop and
two tenements annexed, leased to Edward Yngham. (fn. 18) The messuage
abutted on Walker's tenement on the north and on a tenement demised to
John Henbury on the south, and along King Street had a width of 40 feet.
Its length from King Street to "le Entre" was 52 feet, and from "le Entre"
along the tenement demised to Thomas "Bryhtman" as far as the latter's
stone wall 88 feet. The garden contained at the end where it abutted on
"le Endyff Lane" on the north to the stream [i.e. the Clowson] on the
south 76 feet, and where it abutted on the garden of Henbury from Brightman's wall to the stable 44 feet.
(vi) The next property was that of Thomas Brightman mentioned
above, consisting of the "Berehouse [or Brewhouse] buylded at Endiff."
It obviously lay behind The Rose and did not abut on King Street. No
details are given in any of the numerous leases of this property or in the sale
by Brightman to Henry VIII. (fn. 19)
(vii) South of (v) was the property of John Henbury. In the sale
of Henbury's interest to Henry VIII it is described as "certen tentilde;ts, curtilages, closes and gardeynes wth the appurtenants, set and being in the
kings strete … as they be conteyned with their mets and bounds lymyted in
the … indenture" of lease of 25th July, 1508. The lease unfortunately cannot
be referred to, as the Westminster Abbey Register for the years 1504–9
is missing. From particulars contained in a document concerning the
properties between Endif Lane and Lamb Alley belonging to Westminster
Abbey, it appears, however, that Henbury's property was The Red Lion,
and that it extended southwards as far as Lamb Alley. (fn. 20) On 1st May, 1529,
Henbury sub-leased to Robert Penythorn (fn. 21) a part of the property described
as "all thoise his howsynges callyd the hall, parlor, kechyn & the lyttell
Chambre Whiche one Thomas Tomlyn nowe holdyth … & a Stable, togyder
wt all the Chambers beyng over the sayd hall, parlor, kechyn & lyttell
chambre, And also the Wharf sett & lyeng at the watesyde & beyng on the
baksyde of the tenement Bruhows callyd the Redd lyon … Betwene the
pale & wharf lately lett to Ferme unto one William Hawkyns agaynst the
Sowth & the comon dyche callyd Clowson towards the North, and the water off
Temys towards the Est, & Agaynst the grounde of the sayd John Henbury
towards the Sowth … And also a Gardeyn lyeng next to the Gardeyn of the
sayd John Henbury, Al whiche the sayd Wharf, hall, parlor, wt all the
Chambres & Gardeyn one Rauf Williams late hild & occupied." This
shows that Henbury's property reached to the Thames on the east. Although it extended southwards as far as Lamb Alley, this must have
been on the east side, for other premises intervened on the side of
the street.
(viii) South of The Red Lion was the property of John Kellett.
It is described (fn. 22) as a tenement, with garden adjoining, in King Street, extending from the street on the west along a tenement on the north side
called "le red lyon" to a ditch called "le Clowson" on the east 153 feet,
and on the south from King Street along a tenement in the tenure of the
widow of Robert Currall 102½ feet, and in breadth from north to south
along King Street 37½ feet. At the east end the width of the tenement
was 90 feet.
(ix) We now come to Currall's property. On 10th February,
1521–2, the Abbey leased to Robert Currer (or Currall) three tenements
in King Street, 95 feet long from west to east on the north side and 116
feet on the south, 38 feet wide on the west side along King Street and 50
feet on the east along the common ditch, abutting on the house of John
Pomfrett (obviously Kellett's predecessor) on the north and on the tenement
of Thomas Wyld on the south. (fn. 23) On 12th April, 1527, Currer ("yoman
coke of my lord cardinalls hall") granted a sub-lease of part of the
property, described as a tenement "sett, lying & beyng in the King
Strete … on the north side of the Lambe alley", to Henry Hayes, (fn. 24) so
that Currer's property obviously reached as far as Lamb Alley, on the
street side.
The tenement of Wyld has not been identified, but the presence
of another house between Currer's property and Lamb Alley is quite inconsistent with the description of Hayes' tenement. The document of Westminster Abbey referred to above contains no mention of any property that
can possibly be identified with Wyld's house. In fact, all the properties
mentioned therein have now been dealt with. Wyld's house must therefore
have been on the other side of Lamb Alley. (fn. 25)
In framing an estimate of the extent of the property purchased
between the Bars and Lamb Alley we are faced with two unknown quantities
(i) the width of Endif Lane, and (ii) the width of The Red Lion. The
former was probably in the nature of 12 feet, the latter we may conjecture
to have been about 32 feet. With these assumptions the extent was as
follows:
|
| Lytton's property | 109 feet |
| Legh's property | 74 " |
| Chaderton & Holland's property | 50 " |
| Endif Lane | 12 " |
| Walker's property | 24 " |
| The Rose | 40 " |
| The Red Lion | 32 " |
| Kellett's property | 37½ " |
| Currer's property | 38 " |
| Total—about | 416 feet. |
This figure places the Bars near the line of the south end of the
Banqueting House and the northern line of the Holbein Gate. Owing
principally to the lack of details of Henbury's property, it is not possible
to plot out the properties south of Endif Lane, but an attempt has been
made to do this north of the lane, and the result is given on p. 17. Needless
to say, this must not be taken to be anything more than a rough approximation. Two important factors are unknown—(i) the line of the river wall,
if, as is probably the case, it differed from that adopted by Henry VIII when
laying out the Palace extension, and (ii) the point at which Endif Lane met
the river. In the case of the former, the extension southward of the line to
the north of Whitehall Stairs has been adopted as probable.
It will be seen that the adoption of the lengths of 357 feet and 168 +
123 feet given in the leases as the length of Lytton's land and of the properties
on the north side of Endif Lane indicates that the eastern line of the road
south of the Bars was much nearer the river than the later line shown on
the plan of 1670. The length of 345 feet ascribed to Thomas a Legh's
property cannot be fitted into the line given by the above figures, but even
if it is correct, the western part of this property is still about 55 feet from the
later line of King Street. At the south end the distance from the river was
341 feet (see p. 229) as against about 360 feet in the case of the later line.
It would therefore appear that the old eastern line of the highway south
of the Bars was practically a continuation of the modern line north of that
point, but that from Endif Lane it sloped so as to reduce the width of the road
to a more normal amount. There is no reason to believe that the eastern
line north of the Bars has ever varied, and the plan of 1670 shows that the
expansion of the highway in that direction was formed by a curve in the
western line starting from near the site of the Admiralty. The reason for
the expansion is suggested by a description (fn. 26) of six tenements on the west
side of the road, north of the Bars, purchased by Henry VIII, as "set and
lyeng ayenst the white crosse and ayenst the grene before the Kinges Manor
latelie called Yorke Place." We may therefore imagine the road at this
point broadening out round an open grass space and a cross. (fn. 27) <This grass space or green continued in existence until the end of Elizabeth's reign, and was where James I was proclaimed King following her death. 'The corpse was brought to the Palace at Whitehall, and by 10 o'clock the King was proclaimed at Whitehall upon the Green, right against the Tilt Yard'. Letter, dated 1 April 1603, in Historical MSS Commission, Calendar of the Manuscripts of the Most Hon. the Marquis of Salisbury..., Part XV, p.25.>
The King's plans were all ready, (fn. 28) and it is probable that building
operations were started immediately upon the acquisition of the leasehold
interests in May, 1531. To what extent the existing buildings of York
Place were demolished it is impossible to say, but certainly some were pulled
down. The accounts (fn. 29) contain references to "two pykes to two Shores
made for the overthrowing of the wallis of the greate Towre in the palesse,"
"labourers … occupied in … overthrowing the wallis aswelle of the kinges
place in the paleis as also at the mewis and Kennyngton place," "iij pyckaxis
with hamber heedis provided for breking downe of the greate Toure in
the palesse," "the wagies of hym which deviseth the engynnes for the
overthrowing of the wallis at the paleis and Kennyngton place," "to Rauffe
Williams for a bargeyne in greate with hym made for the taking downe of
a Toure of Stone and bricke at the Kings place within his paleis." While
speaking of demolitions it may be remarked that some of the stone used for
Whitehall was obtained from the destruction of Wolsey's college at
Ipswich. (fn. 30)

Figure 1:
PROPERTY BETWEEN LAMB ALLEY AND
YORK PLACE ACQUIRED IN 1531
There seems no reason to suppose that the central part of Wolsey's
mansion was pulled down. The Hall had only just been rebuilt (see p. 8),
if indeed it was finished, and the wine cellar close by still persists. The
exact extent of York Place, as Wolsey left it, is a matter of speculation.
Even if he had not built on the ground acquired from Lytton, the measurements of that property show that in the middle and towards the east York
Place reached further south than the Bars which were its boundary on the
street side. Again, in view of the uncertainty attaching to the position
of the boundary between York Place and "Scotland,"it is impossible to
say whether Wolsey had utilised any portion of the latter for building,
though the references quoted below suggest that it was still open ground.
It had been resumed by Henry VIII on the cardinal's fall (though no record
of the resumption has been found) and is alluded to occasionally in the
accounts. (fn. 31)
How far the lay out of the Palace, as orĩginally constructed by Henry
VIII, corresponded with that of the Whitehall of, say, Charles II's time,
is not known, but it certainly differed in some respects. One great difference
was in its extent to the south. As appears from the above, the property
acquired by the King reached only as far as Lamb Alley, and it is shown
on p. 228 that the site of The Lamb, with its gardens and meadows, on the
south side of Lamb Alley, was not used as part of the Palace until about 1545,
when it was converted into the Palace orchard.
In the early part of 1531–2 the orchard was apparently on the
north side of Endif Lane, (fn. 32) but in the course of that year was extended
to Lamb Alley. The accounts contain entries relating to the employment
of "xxv Gardeneres for the levelling of a certeyne Grounde late Edified,
appoyntid by the Kinges highnes for the enlarging of his Orcheyarde annexid
unto his forenamed manor," to "breking, taking up and conveying awey
the olde walle of a Foundacion by the Theamyse side, Cont' in length from
Endyve lane to the fornamed lamb Aleye," to making a new wall "by the
Theamyse side enclosing the ende of the Orcheyarde there," and to "pyles
drevyn in the Foundacion of the walle made betwyxte of the Theamyse and the
forenamed Grounde appoyntid for the enlargeing of the Orcheyarde." (fn. 33) It
would therefore appear that from 1531 to about 1545 the site of the later
Privy Garden was occupied by the Orchard.
The Privy Gallery, one of the most striking features of Henry VIII's
Whitehall, and referred to on numerous occasions in the building accounts
as "the new gallery," was brought from Esher. (fn. 34) The frame of the
gallery was set up in a field on the west side of the road, (fn. 35) and subsequent
entries refer to the putting together of the frame, (fn. 36) the formation of the walls (fn. 37)
and the masons' work. (fn. 38)
Other galleries referred to are (i) the gallery next the Thames,
(ii) the low gallery by the orchard, (iii) the low gallery in the garden, and (iv)
the nether gallery. (i) is probably to be identified with the later Shield Gallery.
(ii) The "lowe galarye by the Orcheyarde" (fn. 39) [i.e. the later Privy Garden]
is almost certainly the Stone Gallery, which ran at right angles to the Privy
Gallery. An early entry mentions brick "spente in and upon a Chymney
made in a lodgeing late altrid and transposid in the lowe galarye annexid
unto the new Galarye nowe in making, and towardes a Chymney and a jakes
made in the crosse houses in like maner nowe in making." (fn. 40) Its walls were
decorated with an illustration of the King's coronation, (fn. 41) but as no subsequent
reference to this adornment has been found, it has not been possible definitely to identify the gallery. As the orchard adjoined the Thames (see
above), the southernmost part of the Stone Gallery and of the lodgings which
afterwards occupied the whole space between the gallery and the river
could not yet have been built. The southern block of the Privy Lodgings
was, at least as early as the reign of Elizabeth, known as the Prince's
Lodgings. (fn. 42) As the allusion in the name can hardly have been to any
other than the prince who afterwards became Edward VI, these buildings
must have been erected at some time between 1532 and 1547.
(iii) & (iv). The "lowe galarye within the gardeyne" (fn. 43) and the
"nether galarye in the Gardeyne" (fn. 44) may be identical.
The garden in question is probably the old garden of York Place,
and was almost certainly situated (see p. 88) on the other side of the
Privy Gallery, on the site of the later Preaching Place Court of Pebble Court.
The extension of the Palace on the west side of the road resulted
in travellers from Charing Cross to Westminster or vice versa having literally
to pass through it. It happened too that when parishioners of St. Margaret's,
who were resident in St. Martin's, died, their bodies were brought through
the Holbein and King Street Gates, and the narrow road through the Palace
lying between, in order to be buried in St. Margaret's churchyard. This
caused considerable apprehension to the King, who was afraid of infection
arising from those who had died of plague or "other contagious sickness,"
and he therefore on 12th November, 1534, directed that in future all parishioners of St. Margaret's resident in St. Martin's should be deemed to be
parishioners of the latter parish, and be buried accordingly in St. Martin's.
The text of the letter embodying this decision is given in Appendix B. It was
followed up in 1542 by letters patent decreeing that the portion of St.
Margaret's which lay north of Whitehall should be annexed to St. Martin's. (fn. 45)
Henry had now, to use the language of the statute of 1536 (28
Henry VIII, c. 12), "apon the soyle of the said mansion place & howse [York
Place], & apon the ground therunto adioynyng, most sumptuosly &
curyously … buylded & edyffyed many & dystryncte, beautyffull, costly
& pleasant lodgyngs, buyldyngs & mansions, for his gracys synguler pleasure,
comforte & Commodite, to the greate honor of his highnes & of his
realme, & therunto adioynyng … made a Parke, Walled & envyroned
wt brycke & stone, & theryn … devysed & ordeyned many & syngler commodious thyngs, pleasurs & other necessaryes, most apt & convenyent to
apperteyne only to so noble a prynce, for his syngler comforte, passetyme &
solace." The title "York Place" was no longer suitable, and it was therefore ordained that the whole of the Palace and park should be "called and
namyd the Kyng's Pales att Westm,'"and that the old palace of Westminster
should be reputed only as a member and parcel of the said new palace. We
have here no mention of "Whitehall"—a name which seems, however,
already to have been sparingly in use. The earliest instance occurs in a
document (Westmr. Abbey Deed, 18049A) of about Michaelmas, 1530, concerning property on the west side of the road "prope mansion' dni Regis vic'
Whytehale alias Yorke place." Two other early instances are dated 1533 and
occur in (i) Wriothesley's account of Anne Boleyn retiring after her coronation feast "by water to Yorke Place, which is called White Hall, "and (ii) the
account in the Chronicle of the Grey Friars of her being brought before her
coronation to "Whytt halle at Westmyster that some tyme was the bysshoppe
of Yorkes place." The name "York Place," however, continued for
several years to be generally used, and "Whitehall" does not seem to have
completely superseded it until about 1542. The name may be supposed to
have reference to the appearance of the new stone buildings of the Palace. (fn. 46)
The Palace had hardly been completed before it received a new
Queen. Anne Boleyn had resided there before the alterations were put in
hand, and is alluded to in the building accounts (fn. 47) as "Lady Anne Rochford."
Her arrival at Whitehall on the day of her coronation has already been
mentioned (see p. 21), and on the following day the new tilt yard (on the
site of the Horse Guards) was the scene of "great justes … donne by
eightene lordes and knightes." (fn. 48)
Three years passed, and on 19th May, 1536, Anne was beheaded
on Tower Hill. Next day, Jane Seymour was formally betrothed to Henry,
and on 30th May she was married "in the Queen's closet at York Place." (fn. 49)
Wriothesley gives an account (fn. 50) of a kind of naval engagement on the Thames
before "Yorke Place" a month later (29th June). "Their was a great
boote made like a caricke, goodlie trymmed with targattes and ordinance
and full of men of armes, and also their was three other bootes made like
foistes, which warred against the carick, and so shott great peeces of ordinance
one against another by the space of tow howers long." Some casualties
occurred, and the King stopped the fight. "Then was justing at the tilte
before the said Yorke Place on the land … which was a goodlie sight to
beholde; the King and the Queene standing in the gatehowse beholding them."
Henry died at Whitehall on 28th January, 1546–7, (fn. 51) and three weeks
later Edward VI was brought thither from the Tower in readiness for his
coronation. During the six years of his reign Edward spend most of his
time either at Whitehall or Greenwich. For an account of his erection of
a pulpit in the Privy Garden see p. 88. Edward died at Greenwich on
6th July, 1553, and a month later his body, which had been embalmed,
was removed to Whitehall for burial in Westminster Abbey.
Mary, during her short reign, spent some portion of her time at
Whitehall, but her favourite residence was St. James's. On 14th January,
1553–4, she received at Whitehall the special ambassadors from the Emperor,
who had come to treat concerning her marriage with Philip of Spain. During
the advance of Whatt from Charing Cross to Ludgate in the early morning
of 8th February, "a certein Captayne of the said rebelles with divers of his
souldiers retourned from Charingecrosse, downe to the court gate at white
halle, and gave a larme before the gate, and shotte divers arrowes into the
saied courte the gate being open, in so muche that one maister Nicolas
Rockewood being a gentilman of Lyncolnes inne, and in armour at the said
court gate, was shotte throughe his nose with an arrowe by the rebelles. For
the comminge of the said rebelles was not loked for that way." (fn. 52) The rebellion collapsed, and a fortnight later the men of Kent came to Whitehall,
bound two and two together, and with halters round their necks, and "be-twyn
the ij tyltes the powr presonars knelyd downe in the myre, and ther the
Quens grace lokyd owt over the gatt and gayff them all pardon, and they
cryd owt "God save quen Mare!" (fn. 53) On 27th November, 1554, Parliament was summoned to the presence chamber at Whitehall before Philip
and Mary to receive Cardinal Pole as special ambassador from the Pope.
A year later (4th November, 1555) Pole held a synod of both the convocations at Whitehall, that place being selected because Pole at the
time was lodging in the Palace, and to allow Gardiner, Bishop of
Winchester and Lord Chancellor, who resided there and was very ill, to
attend the meeting. (fn. 54) Gardiner died at Whitehall about a week later. On
Philip's short second visit in 1557 the King and Queen spent most of the
time at Whitehall, where on 2nd July the former stood sponsor to the son of
the Duke of Norfolk. Philip left London for good on the following day, and
Mary soon after removed to Richmond. She returned in November to
Whitehall, whence she rode on 20th January, 1557–8, to open Parliament. (fn. 55)
On 7th March Parliament was held at Whitehall, and three days later Mary
left the Palace for the last time. (fn. 56)
Elizabeth was at Hatfield when her sister died, and did not arrive
at Whitehall until just before Christmas. On 14th January, 1558–9, she
left the Tower, where she had been staying for a couple of days, and made
a ceremonial entry through the city, where she was greeted with one pageant
after another, to Whitehall, to prepare for her coronation on the following day.
It must be remembered that, like other Tudor sovereigns, Elizabeth
had the choice of several royal residences, and was in the habit of spending
some time at each. She was thus frequently, and at times for rather long
periods, at Somerset House, St. James's, Greenwich, Hampton Court,
Richmond, Windsor, Oatlands and Nonsuch. Moreover, she frequently
went on progresses, sometimes extending over many weeks, through the
country. She was, however, in residence at Whitehall for something like
a quarter of the whole time during the reign. (fn. 57)
In February, 1558–9, the Speaker and other members of the House
of Commons attended at Whitehall to address the Queen on the subject of
her marriage. On the day appointed Elizabeth "came foorth into the greate
gallery at White-Hall, richly furnished in attire, and honorably attended,"
and listened to the Speaker's "sett oratione." (fn. 58) To this she gave the wellknown answer, which closed with the memorable words: "As for me, it
shall be sufficient that a marble stone shall declare that a queen, having
lived and reigned so many years, died a virgin."
We have an account of a river pageant at Whitehall on May-day
in the Queen's first year. Two pinnaces, decked with streamers and flags,
over against "the Quens plasse at Westmynster," fought against one another
with eggs, oranges and squibs. A squib fell on a bag of gunpowder "and
sett dyvers men a fyre." One of the pinnaces was "over-swelmed," and many
persons fell in the water, "butt, thanke be God, there was but on man
drowynd, and a C. bottes abowtt here, and the Quens grace and her lordes
and lades lokyng out of wyndows." (fn. 59)
Later in the month Elizabeth received the French ambassadors
with much pomp and ceremony. On 24th May the Duc de Montmorency and his colleagues arrived, and "entered the great hall on the
ground floor, hung with very choice tapestries, with the canopy, throne
and royal cushions." Then "mounting the stairs, they went to kiss [hands]
and do reverence to the Queen, who received them very joyfully and
graciously, going to meet them as far as the guard chamber at the head of the
stairs, and being conducted to the presence chamber they presented their
credentials, and explained their embassy." (fn. 60)
Montmorency came again in 1572 to treat concerning the proposed
marriage of the Queen to the Duc d' Alencon, (fn. 61) and a special Banqueting
House was provided (see p. 116) for the festivities. A more splendid Banquenting House was erected in 1581, when other commissioners, followed
by d' Alencon himself, came over for the same purpose. Plays, masques,
jousts and other entertainments of a princely charcter were given, and the
Queen is represented as only giving thought to "whether there are any
new devices in the joust, or where a ball is to be held, what beautiful
women are to be at court." (fn. 62)
Visits of other ambassadors and foreign notabilities there were of
course in plenty. Thus in 1600–1 we have reference to "makeinge ready
the gallerye at Whitehall for her Matie and the twoe Ambassadors againste
the runninge at Tilte" (November, 1600); "makinge readye a standinge
in ye Tiltyeard for the Barbaria Ambassador at the runninge" (November,
1600); "makeinge readye at Whitehall againste the comeinge thether of
the Ambassador and the duke of Bracchiano" (January, 1601); "makeinge
readie at Whitehall against the comeinge of the Muscovia Ambassador"
(March, 1601). (fn. 63)
Sometimes the Palace was decked in its best for the benefit of foreign
sightseers. For instance in September, 1578, the keeper of the standing
wardrobe had to arrange for the Queen's apartments to be hung and furnished
"wth riche stuffe … againste the comminge of a frenche Lorde to se the
howse," (fn. 64) and in September, 1581, is an entry of expenditure in "makinge
reddye by her Mats Comaundemt of Whitehaule for cominge thether of
the Countie of Emden and his Trayne to see the magnificence of the same." (fn. 65)
On both these occasions the Court was elsewhere, and the costly hangings
and other decorations had been taken down.
Ordinarily, the festivities at Whitehall were concentrated about the
anniversary of Elizabeth's accesion (in November), Christmas and Shrovetide. It was particularly at the first-mentioned "that the tilt-yard of Westminster blazed with the pageantry and range with the spears of the manhood
of England." (fn. 66) At the two other seasons masques and plays were the chief
amusements provided, and were usually given in the Great Hall or in the
Great Chamber. (fn. 67) Plays seem to have increased in number towards the end
of the reign, elevan being recorded in the winter of 1600–1.
Of building at Whitehall during Elizabeth's reign we hear but little.
The erection of the Banquenting House in 1581 has already been referred to.
Otherwise the only operations on any large scale were in connection with
the "longe raunge of the newe buildinges nexte the streete where the officers
of the housholde do lye." (fn. 68) … These, which were erected in 1601, were probably in the neighbourhood of Scotland Yard.
Elizabeth died at Richmond on 24th March, 1602–3. Her body
was brought to Whitehall for the funeral, which took place on 28th April,
at Westminster Abbey. (fn. 69)
James I was staying at Whitehall at the time of his coronation (25th
July, 1603), but his earliest residence there for more than a few days was
in February-March of the following year. During his reign the Court was
generally at Whitehall, Hampton Court or Windsor. "After the winter of
1603, when plague held him at Hampton Court, his Christmasses and Shrovetides were invariably at Whitehall, and hither he always proceeded at the
end of October, in time for the celebration of All Saints' Day on 1st November
… The Twelve Nights, with Candlemas and Shrovetide, remained the
chief seasons for plays and masks, (fn. 70) but the plays were greatly increased in
number. One was often given on All Saints' Day to usher in the winter,
and others were called for at intervals during the winter months. James
was also regularly at Whitehall on his Accession Day, 24th March, which,
like his predecessor, he honoured with a tilt." (fn. 71)
The first notable event of the reign, so far as Whitehall is concerned,
was the arrival towards the end of 1604 of the Queen's brother, the Duke
of Holstein. (fn. 72) The visit of the duke is chiefly remarkable for the questions
of precedence which arose between him and the ambassadors, and which
made the lives of the great court officials a burden. On the occasion of the
marriage of Sir Philip Herbert at Whitehall on 27th December, 1604, the
Venetian ambassador managed to get a more honourable seat at dinner
than the duke, who, in consequence, was rather put out. At supper-time,
however, the duke stole a march on the ambassador, got to table first, and
took the latter's place. The ambassador was furious, and positively declined
to attend the masque which was to follow unless his proper place was given
him. An apology was made, and the King himself conducted him to the
Hall for the masque, where a seat was prepared for him on the King's right
hand. The duke was accommodated with a seat on the left of the Queen,
but he declined to avail himself of it, preferring to stand for the three
hours during which the masque and balls lasted. (fn. 73) The duke stayed in
England until the beginning of June, (fn. 74) and about a year later his brother,
Christian IV of Denmark, came. His only visit to Whitehall was a matter
of two days, (fn. 75) at the beginning of August, 1606.
In the following year we are introduced to the first of James' unworthy favourites. Robert Carr, afterwards successively Viscount Rochester
and Earl of Somerset, being in attendance on Lord Dingwall at the tilt
yard at Whitehall, fell with his horse and broke his leg. According to
Weldon (fn. 76) he was carried into a house at Charing Cross, where the king frequently visited him until his recovery, but it would rather appear from the
official records that he was lodged in the Palace. (fn. 77)
The same year saw the erection of the new Banqueting House (see
p. 118), as well as the rebuilding of "the oulde buildinges betwene the
banquettinge house and Councell chamber." (fn. 78)
In 1612–13 the ceremonies at Whitehall reached their high-water
mark in the festivities which greeted the Elector Palatine on his visit to
woo and wed the Princess Elizabeth. He arrived at Whitehall on 18th
October. He was provided with apartments at first in Essex House, and
afterwards in the Lord Treasurer's lodgings in the Palace, and created a
most favourable impression by his constant attendance on the Princess, who
had a separate establishment at the Cockpit. (fn. 79) The death of Prince Henry
on 6th November was not allowed to interfere with the elector's courtship.
On 27th December the royal pair were betrothed in the Banqueting House.
On 11th and 13th February, there were fireworks and a triumph on the
Thames, and on 14th February the marriage was performed in Whitehall
Chapel. The feast was provided in a new Banqueting House erected for
the occasion (see p. 61), and was followed by a masque in the Banqueting
House proper. On the next night another masque was given in the Great
Hall. The elector and his bride left Whitehall on 10th April.
In 1616 Prince Charles was created Prince of Wales in the Great
Hall of Whitehall.
In January, 1618–19, a great disaster occurred. The Banqueting
House, which had only been built about eleven years, was completely destroyed by a fire which also caused damage to the neighbouring buildings
(see p. 120.) A new Banqueting House was immediately put in
hand.
In addition to the two banqueting houses the principal building
operations carried out by James at Whitehall seem to have consisted in
the erection in 1617–18 of new lodgings for the Marquess (afterwards Duke)
of Buckingham, who had succeeded Somerset in the king's affections. This
building was "towards the privie garden", (fn. 80) but its exact position is uncertain.
James died on 27th March, 1625, at Theobald's. Charles I had,
after the death of Prince Henry, taken over the latter's establishment at St.
James's, and he continued to reside there for some days before taking up his
permanent quarters at Whitehall. (fn. 81) Henrietta Maria, whom he married
by proxy on 1st May, arrived in England in June. The presence of a Roman
Catholic Queen, with a train of attendants belonging to the same religion,
necessitated some provision being made for their worship, but, with the
exception of one room at Whitehall, (fn. 82) this was provided away from the
Palace.
The Queen's French attendants (who, after all, were practically
the only companions she had) were at first the cause of considerable illfeeling between the royal pair, and in July, 1626, as the result of a "scene"
at Whitehall, the King drove them all from the Palace, (fn. 83) replacing them (in
contravention of the marriage treaty) with English.
A rather curious entry in the records, dated 9th July, 1628, concerning a warrant "to ye great Wardrobe for ye delivery of 3 Bedticks
unto Mr. Vanderdoort to bee used for the drawing of his Mats Picture" (fn. 84)
introduces us to what was perhaps the most striking feature of Charles I's
Whitehall—the art collection. Prince Henry had begun the collection, which
together with the keeper, Abraham Vanderdoort, had afterwards been taken
over by Charles. The latter is said to have built a cabinet at Whitehall
(see p. 98), where many of the articles were kept, though most of the
pictures and statues were distributed among the galleries and principal
rooms of the Palace. A description of the collection (drawn up apparently
by Vanderdoort himself) has been edited by Horace Walpole.
John De Critz, sergeant painter, was kept busily employed during
the reign. There are many references to his work in the records, some
of which will be found later on in this volume. Allusions to works of art
also occur. Among others we have references to (i) "repayring & mending
twoe great peeces of paynted woork that were done by Palma, thone being
the Story of David and Goliah, thother of Saules Conversion, wch were
much defaced," "repayring, mending and new varnishing vijen of the greate
Emperours Heades that were done by Titian, being likewise much defaced,"
"painting a large Store in oyle cont' divers naked figures in it bigger then
the life, being xven fo. square;" (fn. 85) (ii) "repairing an ould peece of painting
of Adam and Eve" (see p. 100), "mending and repairing a picture of
Holbyon," "repairing an old Dutch peece" and "mending and repairing
a greate old peece of a Musitian painted by Titian, and for mending and
repairing the great pece of venus asleep;" (fn. 86) (iii) "Certen Drawings taken
oute of the Hangings of the Apostles," "mending and Repairing certen peeces
of painting of Julio Romanoes doeing," "guilding with fine Angell gould a
Copper plate of St. George for his Mats Cabinett." (fn. 87)
The paintings on the ceiling of the Banqueting House were also
done by Rubens at the command of Charles (see p. 127), who had a special
hall built for the performance of masques so that the paintings should not
be injured (see p. 62). Mention should also be made of Vandyck's residence
at Whitehall during this reign. (fn. 88)
On the departure of Charles to the north in March, 1639, to take
up arms against the Scots, he left Whitehall in nominal charge of the prince
(afterwards Charles II), only nine years old. (fn. 89)
On 10th January, 1641–2, following his unsuccessful attempt to
arrest the five members of the House of Commons, he left Whitehall, never
to return until he came back to die.
Whitehall was for a time deserted. A graphic, but perhaps overdrawn, picture of its emptiness and desolation is contained in a pamphlet,
"A deep sigh breath'd through the lodgings at White-Hall," printed in the
same year, from which the following extracts are taken:
"A Pallace without a Presence! A White-Hall clad in sable
vestments! … These are misteries and miseries …
"To begin at the entrance into the Court, where there had
wont to be a continuall throng, either of Gallants standing to ravish
themselves with the sight of Ladies hansome legs and Insteps as they
tooke Coach; Or of the tribe of guarded Liveries, by whom you could
scarce passe without a jeare or a saucy answer to your question; now
if you would aske a question there is no body to make answer …
"Being entred the Court-yard, which had wont to be a Schoole
of Complement … now if you have a mind to exercise ther's room
enough …
"You may without a rub, walke into the Hall, for surely there
are no strong smells out of the Kitching to delight your Nostrells withall,
no Provision to bee sould, nor the greasie Scullions to bee seene over
Head and Eares in a Kettle full of Kidnies, nor anything else to stoppe
your progresse into the House …
"If you steppe up Staires to the Guard Chamber, where His
Majesties great Beefe-eaters had wont to sit in attendance on their
places, which was nothing but to tell Tales, dovoure the beaverage, keepe
a great fire, and carry up Dishes … now they are all vanisht, nothing
left but the bare Walls, and a cold Harth, from whence the Fire-irones
are removed too, and as its thought converted into shooes for light
Horses. The great black-Jackes set under the Table, all full of Cobwebs …
"You may walke into the Presence Chamber with your Hat,
Spurres and sword on, And if you will presume to be so unmannerly, you
may sit downe in the Chaire of State …
"If you be minded to survey the Lodgings and withdrawing
rooms, you shall finde those rich and costly hangings of Persian Arras
and Turky worke (like the Bishops) for their pride taken downe …
"In the Cockpit and Revelling Roomes, where at a Play or
Masque the darkest night was converted to the brightest Day that
ever shin'd, by the luster of Torches, the sparkling of rich Jewells …
now you may goe in without a Ticket or the danger of a broken pate,
you may enter at the Kings side, walke rounde about the Theaters,
view the Pullies, the Engines …
"There is no presse at the Wine-Sellor Dores and Windowes,
no gaping noise amongst the angry Cookes in the Kitchings, no wayting
for the opening of the Posterne-dore to take water at the Stayres, no
racket nor balling in the Tenis Court, no throng nor rumbling of
Coaches before the Court Gates, but all in a dumbe silence, as the
Pallace stood not neere a well peopled City, but as if it were the decay'd
buildings of ruin'd Troy."
In 1643, in anticipation of an attack on London by the Royalist
forces, the Parliament threw up fortifications round the City, and it is probably on this occasion (fn. 90) that the gun battery between the Banqueting House
and the Holbein Gate, so devised as to sweep the approach to the Palace
from Charing Cross, was constructed (see p. 110). It lasted for 80 years.
In the following year steps were taken to "purge" Whitehall. A
list was, on 18th June, ordered to be drawn up of "what ill-affected and
other Persons do lodge in Whitehall,"and on its being received, it was on
22nd July resolved "That the Committee for Whitehall shall have Power to
purge Whitehall from all Papists … all Women whose Husbands are now,
or have been, in Service against the Parliament, the Servants and Children
of all such, all other ill-affected Persons and Persons of scandalous Conversation, and to dispose of their Lodgings to well-affected Persons." (fn. 91)
In 1648 troops were quartered in the Palace. (fn. 92)
On 19th January, 1648–9, the King, who had been brought to St.
James's, was removed thence to Whitehall "and lodged in his usual BedChamber; after which a Guard of Musqueteers were placed, and Centinels
at the door of his Chamber." Next day he was taken to Sir Robert Cotton's
house near the west end of Westminster Hall, where (except for one night
when he was brought back to St. James's) he lodged during his trial. At
the rising of the Court he was carried back for a few hours to Whitehall
"through the Privy-Garden … to his Bed-Chamber," and thence removed
again to St. James's. (fn. 93) The execution was fixed for 30th January. In the
morning of that day Charles was brought through the Park, up the stairs
that led to the Tilt-yard Gallery, and so over the Holbein Gate to "a room,
which is that they now call the Green-chamber." (fn. 94) After resting there for a time,
he was led through the Banqueting House to the scaffold, which had been
erected in front of that building, (fn. 95) and there beheaded.
All the early accounts of the execution mention the provision of a
special means of access from the Banqueting House to the scaffold. Thus
Herbert's original MS. (fn. 96) states that "his Maty past to ye scaffold through
ye wall yt was purposely broken downe at ye north end of ye roome," while
other writers refer to a "window" which was enlarged to allow of the King's
passage. Where exactly this special exit was is a question which has been
much debated, but certainty on the point seems unattainable. (fn. 97)
Parliament now set about disposing of the furnishings of Whitehall, (fn. 98)
and utilising the rooms as lodgings for its own adherents. (fn. 99)
A notable resident in Whitehall at this time was John Milton,
though no information is available as to the precise site of his lodgings.
On 11th June, 1651, a committee was appointed to confer with the committee of Parliament for Whitehall on "the case of Mr. Milton, in regard of
[the latter committee's] positive order for his speedy remove out of his
lodgings in Whitehall, and to endeavour with them that Mr. Milton
may be continued where he is, in regard of the employment which
he is in to the Council, (fn. 100) which necessitates him to reside near the
Council." (fn. 101)
In 1650 Cromwell had taken up his quarters at the keeper's house
in the Cockpit, but in 1654 he removed to the main building. The course
of events can be traced in the following extracts from Severall Proceedings
of State Affairs:
24th March, 1653–4—"His Highnesse and Family remain
as yet at the Cockpit."
3rd April—"The Lord Ambassador of the King of Portugal
had this day audience by His Highnesse the Lord Protector at the
Cockpit."
12th April —"On Friday next [14th April] His Highnesse
intends to come to Whitehal and is that day to Dine there."
13th April—"This day the Bedchambers and the rest of the
lodgings and rooms appointed for the Lord Protector in Whitehall
were prepared for his Highnesse to remove from the Cockpit on the
morrow."
14th April—"His Highness the Lord Protector with his
Lady and Family this day Dined at White-hal, whither His Highness
and Family are removed, and did this night lie there, and do there
continue."
Cromwell exercised some influence in preventing the entire dispersal of the furnishings of Whitehall. In June, 1653, we hear that "the
late King's hangings and furniture are called in, for refitting the rooms at
Whitehall," (fn. 102) and the petition of Clement Kinnersley, "wardrobe keeper
to the Protector," in December, 1654, mentions that during the nine months
of his employment he had got in many goods, which would not else have
been recovered, and with which he had furnished Whitehall. (fn. 103) When, a
little over a twelvemonth later, Evelyn visited the Palace, he was well satisfied
with the way in which it was furnished. (fn. 104)
Among the notable events at Whitehall during Cromwell's residence
may be mentioned the attempt by Miles Sindercombe in 1657 to fire the
Chapel Royal and murder him in the ensuing confusion (see p. 55), and
the marriages of his daughters, Frances and Mary, to Robert Rich, grandson
and heir of the Earl of Warwick, and Thomas Belasyse, Viscount (afterwards
Earl) Fauconberg, respectively. The marriages were celebrated on 11th
and 19th November, 1657, "at Whitehall, with all imaginable pomp and
lustre." (fn. 105) An account of the wedding feast of Frances and Robert Rich,
which took place at Whitehall on 12th November, states that there were
"48 violins and 50 trumpets, and much mirth with frolics, besides mixt
dancing (a thing heretofore accounted profane) 'till 5 of the clock" on the
following morning. (fn. 106) Rich died a few months later (16th February, 1657–8)
"in his apartments in Whitehall." (fn. 107)
Cromwell died at Whitehall on 3rd September, 1658. In the
following year we find his widow removed to the lodgings at the Cockpit,
and Whitehall put up for sale. (fn. 108) Nothing seems to have come of this, however, and on Monck's arrival in London on 3rd February, 1659–60, the
Prince's Lodgings at Whitehall were assigned to him. (fn. 109)
On 29th May, 1660, Charles II arrived at Whitehall by way of
the City and Charing Cross, being received by the two houses of Parliament,
and what was in some respects the most noteworthy era in Whitehall's
history began. In the popular mind Whitehall (apart from its being the
scene of the execution of Charles I) is inseparably associated with Charles II,
though no doubt this fact is largely due to interest in the King's love affairs.
To most people it is the Whitehall of Lady Castlemaine, the Duchess of
Portsmouth, "la Belle Stuart," and Nell Gwynne. This is not, however,
the whole story. The King's lavish expenditure on building works, the
pomp and ceremonial, as well as the court etiquette and manners, which
favourably impressed even foreigners who were used to the magnificent
court of Louis XIV, gave a splendour and dignity to Whitehall which it
had never before had in like measure, and it was this which combined with
the popularity of Charles and the romantic careers of the Court beauties
to make up the Whitehall of Pepys, Evelyn and De Grammont.
O(?)ne of the first matters that engaged attention was the recovery of
the contents of Whitehall that had been dispersed, and Evelyn on 18th June
records that plate, hangings, pictures and so forth were then daily being
brought in. The statement is confirmed by another writer, (fn. 110) who adds that
the Jewel Office was appointed as the place of receipt. "Their you might
have seene Carpetts, hangings, pictures, medells, inscriptions and peeces of
Art, rich bedds, curtins and vallance comm hilter skilter, many that had
bought goods of his majestys on purpose that att his returne they might
be restored brought in to the Jewell Office all such." A large amount is
said to have been recovered from Cromwell's widow. (fn. 111) The collection later
in the year received a valuable addition from the Dutch Government. (fn. 112)
The King's first year at Whitehall was saddened by the deaths of
his favourite brother, the Duke of Gloucester, and his sister Mary, Princess
of Orange. The former died at Whitehall of smallpox on 13th September.
Shortly afterwards the princess arrived. (fn. 113) She had actively exerted herself
to promote Charles's restoration, and was assured of a welcome at the English
court. She was not, however, overpleased at finding one of her former
maids of honour the acknowledged wife of the Duke of York and mother
of a prince of the blood royal. She therefore came to the resolution
to curtail her visit, but before the time for her departure arrived, she fell ill
with smallpox, and died at Whitehall on Christmas Eve.
On 23rd August, 1662, Charles brought home his queen, Catherine
of Braganza. Their arrival at the Palace, where the Queen was destined to
spend years of misery due to her husband's infidelities, was marked by a
magnificent river pageant. An omen of the unhappiness in store for her
was provided in the presence of the Countess of Castlemaine among the
spectators. (fn. 114) Since the time of Henry VIII the married life of the Kings of
England had been without reproach, but now the King not only flaunted
his amours openly, but provided apartments in the Palace for his mistresses.
The official records mention the residence there, among others, of Lady
Castlemaine, the Duchess of Portsmouth, the Duchesse Mazarin, Miss
Stuart, and Winifred Wells. The name of Nell Gwynne does not
occur. (fn. 115)
Among other residents in Whitehall may be mentioned the notorious
Oates and Bedloe, though the rooms they occupied were not in that part of
the Palace which lay in St. Margaret's. Lord Arlington received instructions
to provide lodgings for Oates "upon His first information concerning ye
plott." All rooms being occupied he prevailed on Sir Edward Carteret to
give up his rooms from 7th November, 1678, at a rent of £60 a year. (fn. 116)
Oates stayed there until 31st August, 1681, when an order was issued to
"warne Mr. Oates to Withdraw himselfe from Lodging any longer in ye
Court." (fn. 117) Bedloe was provided with Sir Paul Neale's lodgings at £1 a
week. (fn. 118)
Charles evidently found Whitehall in a bad condition of repair.
The works of reparation, alteration and improvemend detailed in the records
are very extensive. A great amount of rebuilding also took place during his
reign, the most important works being: (i) the reconstruction of the Court
Gate and the building of the new gallery connecting it with the Guard
Chamber, (ii) the building of new lodgings in the Volary Garden, (iii) the
erection of new rooms for the Queen near the Privy Stairs, and (iv) the
provision of a new Bathing Room and Laboratory. Details of these works
are given in the next chapter.
On the night of 1st February, 1684–5, the King had been supping
with the Duchess of Portsmouth in her apartments at the end of the Stone
Gallary. He retired to rest in his usual bed-chamber, attended by the Earl
of Ailesbury and Henry Killigrew. The former did not sleep well. "Several
circumstances made the lodging very uneasy,—the great grate being filled
with Scotch coal that burnt all night, a dozen dogs that came to our bed,
and several pendulums that struck at the half quarter, and all not going alike,
it was a continual chiming." (fn. 119) The next morning, as the barber was preparing
the King for shaving, the latter was suddenly seized with an apoplectic fit.
At first he seemed to recover, but on the night of 4th February he became
worse, and died on the morning of the 6th.
The brief reign of James II saw the continuance of the building
operations set on foot by Charles. The whole of the range of buildings extending from the Holbein Gate eastwards to the Vane Room, including the
Privy Gallary, the Council Chamber, and Treasury Offices, was pulled down
and rebuilt in sumptuous style (see p. 102). At the west end, on a portion
of the Privy Garden, a Roman Catholic Chapel was erected (see p. 105). The
rebuilding of the Queen's apartments fronting the river was also put in hand.
On the morning of 18th December, 1688, James left Whitehall,
never to return. On 12th February, 1688–9, Mary arrived, in apparently
high spirits, ran from room to room, peeped into the closets, examined the
quilt of the state bed, and in every way showed a girlish delight at being
mistress of so fine a house.
On the following day the Crown of England was offered to William
and Mary in the Banqueting House (see p. 137), and they were proclaimed
by the heralds at the Court Gate.
Whitehall was not favoured by William as a residence. Its low
and damp situation ill suited his asthma, and he found more congenial
quarters at Kensington. During his absences from England, however,
Mary occasionally resided at Whitehall, (fn. 120) and the only constructional work
of importance carried out at the Palace was the formation of what was afterwards known as Queen Mary's Terrace (see p. 59).
Mary died on 28th December, 1694, at Kensington, and her body
was removed to Whitehall on the following night. The funeral took place
on 5th March, 1694–5.
Fire was always a danger at Whitehall. Mention has already been
made of the destruction of the Banqueting House in 1619. On that occasion
the fire was only prevented from spreading by the demolition of adjoining
buildings. This destruction, and possibly the actual damage by fire to
other buildings in the Palace, is reflected in entries relating to "making
ready the King and Quenes lodginges at Whitehall after the fyer in the
banquetting house" and to "yronworke … made for the privie lodgings
at Whitehall since the late accidente of fyre in the banquetting house," as
well as a record of payment to "John de Creetes, his Mats sergeaunte
Painter, for repairinge and newe framing diverse Peeces in his Mats privy
Lodgings at Whitehall, being defaced with the late fier there." (fn. 121) The fire
was accompanied, as usual in such circumstances, by plunder. (fn. 122)
In 1651 the Council of State gave instructions for the provision of
"two engines to cast water in case of fire, 50 leather buckets, 4 short ladders,
and 4 shorter hooks than those already in Whitehall." (fn. 123) A serious fire seems
to have taken place in 1661. On 18th October of that year a warrant (fn. 124) was
issued for payment of £540 to the paymaster of works "for new building,
erecting and repairing of the offices wch were pulled downe to prevent the
encrease of the fire lately happening in the Pallace at Whitehall."
A few months later another conflagration occurred. In a letter
dated 21st February, 1661–2, (fn. 125) it is stated that "Whitehall was four times
on fire in that great wind. (fn. 126) My lord Barclet lost to the value of £500.
Secretary Nicklaus his lodgings were on fire and Prince Robart's & my Lord
Mandevell's. Duke D'arsy's chamber was plundered, for to prevent the
burning he took down his goods, and they cleared his chamber of all, nor can
he recover any of them again."
These two disasters coming close together provoked the issue of
special regulations (fn. 127) "for avoiding the great dangers happening by fire."
All persons having lodgings in the Palace were required to provide as many
leather "boquetts" as they had chimneys, and in case of any fire happening
every person was at once to send his "boquetts," full of water, to the
"ayd therein." Provision was made for an annual inspection of the buckets.
In case of a chimney being on fire "so as to be discovered above the top,"
the owner of the lodgings was to be fined 10s., which sum was to be distributed among the labourers employed for quenching the fire. Finally, in
the case of a chimney fire, it was ordered "that they do not fire any guns up
the Chimneys, but rather clap a wet sheet very close against the Mantle and
jambes."
The Great Fire of London in 1666 caused much apprehension at
Whitehall, and Sir John Denham's new buildings in Scotland Yard were
pulled down (fn. 128) to prevent the fire reaching the main portion of the Palace if
it should come so far.
In the following year another scare occurred, and the orders as to
sweeping chimneys and inspection of buckets were renewed. (fn. 129)
When, however, in 1691 a big conflagration broke out, buckets were
of little avail. The account of the disaster as given by Luttrell is as follows.
"The 9th [April, 1691] about 8 at night, hapned a dismal fire at Whitehal,
it began in the duke of Glocesters lodgins, late those of the dutchesse of
Portsmouth, occasioned (as said) by the carelesnesse of a maid in burning
of a candle from a bunch of candles, and leaving the others lighted, quickly
sett fire to the buildings; it burnt violently for several hours, and consumed
the greatest part of the stone gallery on both sides, that towards the privy
garden and that towards the Thames, wherein were the lodgings of the lord
Devonshire, Heer Overkirks, Lord Monmouths, etc.; they blew up several
times before it could be stopt."
The fact that "they blew up" is amply confirmed by the entry (fn. 130)
in the records relating to the making of "ltie [50] new Shasse Windows in her
Mats Lodgings, the Vane Room, Great Anti-Roome, Lord Chamberlains,
Lord Portlands and Lord Monmouths Lodgings and in ye New Chappell."
The last-mentioned is evidence that the force of the explosions was felt on
the other side of the Privy Garden.
This disaster was a small thing compared with what was to come.
At about 4 o'clock in the afternoon of 4th January, 1697–8, a Dutch woman
in Col. Stanley's lodgings, close to the Earl of Portland's house by the river
side, having occasion to dry some linen, lighted a fire of charcoal, and left
the linen hanging in too close proximity. It caught fire, and soon the hangings
and furniture of the room were involved. The conflagration spread, and,
in spite of all endeavours, it persisted until the greater part of the Palace
was destroyed. Gunpowder was brought, and orders given to blow up buildings to prevent the progress of the fire, but this seemed only to increase it. (fn. 131)
At one time it was thought to have stopped, but it broke out again next the
Council Chamber, and only ceased when it reached the Banqueting House and
the Holbein Gate. The former building was damaged, and so much apprehension was felt for the Duke of Ormonde's house, on the west side of the
Gate, that it was cleared of all its rich furniture and hangings in anticipation
of its being consumed. The fire was eventually mastered about 7 o'clock in
the following morning, though even then it was glowing in the ruins of the
Roman Catholic Chapel. With some exceptions (principally the lodgings
of the Earls of Portland and Essex) all the main Palace buildings from the
river side to the Holbein Gate and Banqueting House were destroyed, and
the havoc extended northwards to Sir Alexander Frasier's house in Scotland
Yard. The Chapel Royal, the Great Hall, the Guard Chamber, the
Presence Chamber, the Privy Gallery, and the Roman Catholic Chapel
were swept out of existence. (fn. 132) About a dozen persons perished, in the
flames, or by the falling of materials from the houses, or from the
explosions. (fn. 133)

Figure 2:
Ruins of Whitehall after the Fire
According to an account contained in Vertue's notebook (fn. 134) all the
pictures, tapestry and rich furniture belonging to the Crown were saved by
the exertions of Sir John Stanley, "not so much as a Curtain or stool missing."
In the afternoon the King visited the scene, "and seem'd much
concern'd, and said, if God would give him leave, he would rebuild it much
finer than before." (fn. 135) Wren prepared at least two designs for the rebuilding
of the Palace, but nothing was done, and for years the ruins cumbered the
ground (see e.g. pp. 152 and 167).
From time to time sites were let on building lease to private individuals,
and gradually a new Whitehall of a very different character arose. The
story of these buildings is dealt with at length in the pages of this volume.
The time is probably now not far distant when they in turn will be swept
away.
In The Council's Collection Is:—
(fn. 136) Ruins of Whitehall after the Fire (photograph of water-colour drawing in the Wren
Collection in Library of All Souls' College, Oxford).