The archbishops
Election and enthronement

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

Edward Hasted

Year published

1801

Pages

525-541

Citation Show another format:

'The archbishops: Election and enthronement', The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent: Volume 12 (1801), pp. 525-541. URL: http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=63708 Date accessed: 21 April 2014. Add to my bookshelf


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

OF THE ELECTION OF AN ARCHBISHOP, AND TO WHOM THE RIGHT OF IT BELONGED.

The right of electing an archbishop was, according to ecclesiastical canons, antiently in the prior and chapter, confirmed by the royal concessions of our kings, by bulls of the several popes, and by consiant practice, though in it they were continually opposed, and their elections as frequently declared null and void.

King John, in the 16th year of his reign, granted and declared by his royal charter, a free election of prelates in all cathedral and conventual churches for ever, throughout all England; which was confirmed by the bulls of several popes, (fn. 1) and these, together with the king's charter, are still preserved among the archives of this church. This freedom of election was, in particular, most strictly observed by king Henry VI. who, when this see was vacant by the death of archbishop Kempe, granted to the monks on their usual petition in this case, a licence to elect a new archbishop, without recommending any one in any shape to their choice, left he should seem to infringe on the liberty of their free election, at which time Thomas Bourghchier was chosen, but this was a rare instance of it.

Upon the petition of the prior and convent for leave to fill up the vacant see, from time to time, a licence of electing an archbishop was generally granted to them easily, and without any solicitation; but this was not so entirely free, as in the abovementioned instance, for it was usually accompanied, as it is at present, with a recommendation of some particular person, under the king's sign manual; and although the prior and convent, aware of this intrusion on their free liberty of election, hastened as much as possible, by making a prior election, to frustrate this recommendation, as well as the frequent one of the pope by his bull of provision; yet they were generally forced to make a second election, in conformity to one or the other of them, of the person named in them; inded the convent rarely had a quiet, undisturbed and free election, and for the most part the archbishop elect was forced upon them, either by the king or the pope.

Another strong opposition which the convent had to encounter, was from the suffragan bishops of the province, who contested, that they had the true right to elect their metropolitan, either by themselves alone, or at least by themselves in conjunction with the prior and convent of the church of Canterbury; but upon the latter making their appeals to the court of Rome, they procured the several bulls from the pope, as before-mentioned; and though they at length overthrew the pretences of the bishops, which had continued just one hundred years, (fn. 2) during which time there had been nine archbishops elected, at the same time, as perhaps was intended by the court of Rome, they made way for those papal bulls of provision, which proved a much greater grievance to them, and in great measure took the free election entirely from them; for afterwards, till the time of the reformation, though some few were duly elected by the convent, yet the archbishops in general received their admission to the metropolitical dignity by power of the papal authority, under the title of the pope's bulls of provision, as may be seen at large before in the account of the several archbishops, where the means by which each of them became promoted to this see, are fully related.

But since the reformation and the abolition of the papal power in this kingdom, the method of election has been thus: the vacancy of the see having been notified, a conge de lire, or licence to elect, is issued in the usual garb of pageantry, under the great seal, and directed for that purpose to the dean and chapter of Canterbury, inclosed in which, is an unadorned small sheet of paper, containing a recommendation of the person to be elected, under the king's sign ma nual. Accordingly, the chapter being met, and the licence and letter of recommendation being read, another person, either one of the prebendaries or a minor canon of this church, is nominated as a candidate likewise with him who is recommended, but the remembrance of a premunire, with other cogent reasons, always renders the royal candidate successful, and that by a unanimous suffrage of the chapter; nor has his opponent ever been known since the reign of king Henry VIII. to have gained a single voice in his favour. After the return of this election, the royal confirmation succeeds of course, without any difficulty, and the new archbishop is afterwards consecrated by two bishops, usually at his own chapel at Lambeth palace.

Let us now take a view of the difficulties which the archbishop elect met with in obtaining his confirmation from the court of Rome, before the reformation. After the election of an archbishop by the prior and convent of Canterbury, the royal assent and approbation was obtained with far more ease than the papal confirmation at Rome; for by the canon law it was provided, that the archbishop elect should personally appear at Rome, and obtain there a confirmation of his election. This was an undertaking of both great trouble and expence; the journey was long, tiresome and perilous, and the attendance on the dilatory process of a tedious suit, and the submission to all the humiliating vexations brought forward by the pride and avarice of those who had dealings in it, could not but be severely felt by a good and generous mind; for, notwithstanding the archbishop elect carried with him authentic instruments of his being duly and canonically elected, he in general met with many pretended difficulties during the process; fresh objections were made, and new doubts and scruples raised from time to time, merely to prolong the suit, and inhance the expence; till at last a large sum of money given, ei ther for expedition, or wasted in the fees of the court, reconciled every scruple, and thus the end being answered, the business was finished. A notorious instance upon record, of the intolerable exactions of the court of Rome, which this nation once laboured under.

Two instances among several others in the registers of the church of Canterbury, may be produced, of the trouble and charges attending this confirmation of the archbishop elect at Rome. One is of archbishop Winchelsea, who, by reason of the vacancy of the papal chair, was necessitated to spend a year and nine months in his journey, to obtain his confirmation; during which time, as appears by the register of the church, the archbishop spent in England 142l. 19s. and in the court of Rome, two thousand five hundred marks sterling; and the expences of the proctors of the chapter amounted to one thousand seven hundred and forty-four marks sterling more; all which enormous expences were laid out upon no other account than the procuring of the confirmation of the archbishop's election.

Other archbishops in suing for their confirmations, met with full as long and tedious a business; for whatever difficulty there was in passing the Alps, and that frequently in the most inclement season of the year, there was still more in bringing it to a speedy conclusion in that venal court, where it found so many wilful stops and hinderances.

The long attendance of archbishop Winchelsea might indeed, in some measure have been occasioned by the vacancy of the papal chair; but most of the other archbishops met with their delays from the pope himself and the cardinals, who were excellently versed in all the arts of stripping those of their money, who had any dealings with them, and never ceased, whilst they had any thing left for them; and there are some instances, when, after taking this long journey, and much money expended, the pope chose to declare the archbishop's election null and void, under the power of providing for this see with one of his own choice.

I shall here produce only one instance more, and that for the sake of shewing what strong and powerful efforts were made by the king, as well as the whole nation, against the papal provisions and other usurpations of the see of Rome, at that time; this was in the case of Simon Mepham, who was elected archbishop on Dec. 11, 1327, and within a month afterwards began his journey to Rome, carrying with him the usual testimonials, as well from the prior and chapter, as from the king. Upon the dilatory proceedings in his cause, the king sent a second letter to the pope and to the several cardinals, and soon after a third, in both which, he recommends the archbishop's cause in a special manner, pressing the pope with much vehemency for a speedy dispatch of it; and this was accompanied with one from Isabella, the queen mother, and another from the nobles then assembled in parliament at Northampton. In these letters, they all repeat how much the speedy return of the archbishop would promote the peace and tranquility of the nation, and that through his absence several weighty affairs were interrupted, which could not be transacted without the immediate presence of the archbishop; and they all concluded with a plea against cassating the election, and putting another into the chair by papal provision.—The king's former letter urgeth this from the great danger of sedition and schism from the people which might follow thereupon; but in his third letter, he beseeched the pope, that if he should find just cause to make null the present election, he would acquiesce in his former request of providing for the see of Canterbury, by the promotion of Henry, bishop of Lincoln, to it. The queen mother gave the pope more roundly to understand, that this was a concern, not only of the people of the province of Canterbury, but of the whole nation, which she and all the nobility had espoused as their common interest, and had agreed to acquaint him therewith in that same stile, being well assured that the promotion of any other to this dignity would give great offence to the people, and raise a lasting schism in this church. The nobles wrote in the same manner, and in the same strain, concluding, that they trembled at the event, which a contrary decision would produce among the people. By these vehement importunities, the pope condescended to celebrate the confirmation of the archbishop, at a public consistory on May 27, and returning, he arrived at Dover on the 5th of September following. (fn. 3)

Of the Archbishop's Consecration and Inthronization.

The archbishop was usually consecrated, unless he was a bishop already, on the next Sunday immediately after the declaration of his confirmation. The solem nity was performed by a cardinal, whom the pope appointed for that purpose, in some church where the court of Rome was at that time.

After this, there still remained in former times, another ceremony, without which the archbishop could not exercise the power and office, or so much as take upon him the name and title of archbishop; which was, that according to canonical sanctions, he was to receive the pall, the badge and ensign of the fulness of his authority; which was usually, though not without earnest petition, given soon after the consecration. (fn. 4) The use of it was allowed only upon solemn times and occasions, called apostolical privileges, and in this they were inferior to the pope, who reserved to himself the honour of wearing the pall at all times and in every place. There was this provision too, wisely made, that no archbishop should lend his pall to another, or transmit it to his successor, but he carried it with him to the grave, and was buried in it. (fn. 5)

The bulls declaring the confirmation of the archbishop being arrived in England, and that to the king being presented to him, the archbishop appeared personally before him, for such was the custom of the realm, and laying his hand upon his breast, took the oath of sidelity; upon which the king ordered the writ to restore the temporalities of the see to him.

The archbishop, after this, being received at his first coming to his church with the usual ceremonies, the greatest of all solemnities followed next, which was his inthronization, which was celebrated with a pomp and state, almost equal to royalty itself. The entertainment was great and magnificent; the variety of costly and dainty provisions in most profuse quantities, prepared with the rarest skill of cookery, seems almost incredible. In the archives of this church, there is an old printed roll, containing the inthronization feast of Geo. Nevill, archbishop of York, made in the 6th year of king Edward IV. and of William Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, in the 20th year of Henry VII. which are strong instances of it. Battely has given in his appendix, the bill of sare of the former, with the names of the great officers who waited at that feast.—The description of archbishop Warham's feast he has given, whole and entire, in the same appendix; (fn. 6) in it there is an account of the manner in which the services were performed, of the number of dishes, the distinct messes or companies of the guests, the bills of the provisions and prices of the same. The compiler of the Antiquities of the British Church refers us to this very printed roll, and says, that he was afraid to related the number of guests and dishes, left he should report what could not be believed. He mentions too, the devices of the subtilties and the verses that were made on them; whence it is plain, that in those days the skill in cookery and confectionary flourished far beyond the art of poetry These devices, as they were then termed, consisted of the most gross and fulsome slattery, such as archbishop Warham himself, who was a good and learned man, could not have submitted to, had not his feelings of a man been lost in the greatness and hurry of that day's solemnity.

The royal and honourable guests who were invited to these solemnities, shew the honour and esteem they were held in. At the great feast of archbishop Winchelsea in 1294, there were present, king Edward, prince Edward the king's son, Edmund the king's brother, the bishops of London, Lincoln, Ely, Hereford, Norwich, Rochester, and Durham; the earls of Gloucester, Pembroke, Marshal, Hereford and Warwick, and a great number of other prelates, nobles, and inferior persons. (fn. 7) At the feast of archbishop Walter Reynolds, there were present, king Edward, the bishops of Winchester, Bath and Wells, Chichester, Coventry and Lichfield, Ely, and Worcester; the earls of Hereford, Pembroke, &c. At the feast of archbi shop Warham, there were entertained, the duke of Buckingham, (fn. 8) earl of Essex, lords Cobham, Bergavenny, Brook, and Clynton; the bishop of Mayo, suffragan, the prior of Christ-church, the abbot of St. Augustine's, Sir Edward Poynings, Sir John Fineux, chief justice; Sir William and Sir Thomas Scot, Master Boteler, sergeant at law, the master of the rolls, the several archdeacons and doctors, the mayor and citizens of Canterbury, the barons of the five ports, besides a number of others of quality, private gentlemen and a multitude of inferior persons.

In imitation of the inthroning and coronation of royal personages, the archbishops was attended at these feasts by his great officers, who performed their services by a kind of grand sergeantry, and were persons of distinguished rank and title; for which purpose, the day before this solemnity, the high court of stewardship was held in the archbishop's palace, to judge and admit the several claims to these tenures. These are particularly described in a printed roll in the archives of this church, so early as the 42d year of king Henry III.'s reign, anno 1264, by which it appears, that the offices of high steward and butler were then executed by the earl of Gloucester, as holding the manor and castle of Tunbridge and other manors of the archbishop, by the performance of such service at his inthronization. (fn. 9)

The office of chief panterer on that day was executed by the lord Conyars and Mr. Strangwish, as holding the manors of Whyvelton and others. (fn. 10) The office of chamberlain for that day was claimed and allowed to Bartholomew, lord Badlesmere, as holding the manor of Hothfield, near Charing. (fn. 11) The office of carver, by the son and heir of Roger de Mereworth, as holding the manor of Ceriston, (fn. 12) and the office of cupbearer, by Roger de Kirkbye, as holding the manor of Horton, (fn. 13) each by the performance of those respective services.

There is an account of the inthronization of archbishop Morton, in a manuscript in the Cotton library, in which we learn, that after Christmas in the year 1487, anno 2 Henry VII. the archbishop was, on a Sunday, in the month of January, inthronized at Canterbury, greatly accompanied with lords, both spiritual and temporal. In his journey towards this place from Lambeth, after the king's licence, he rode greatly accompanied, first to Croydon, and from thence to Knowle; from thence to Maidstone, to Charing, and to Chartham, where he lay on the Saturday at night, and on the Sunday, when he entered Canterbury, all the bells in the city were rang, and he alighted and went on foot. At the great gate (south within) met him, the procession of Christ-church, and censed him, and when he was entered a little within the west door, there was placed a stool with a rich cloth of silk and cushions, where he kneeled some time and wept much, and after proceeded to the high altar. The Te Deum was sung, and he and all the prelates had on them rich copes and with procession went and met the pall, sent from the pope, which was borne by the bishop of Rochester; then they returned before the high altar, where the bishop of Worcester read and declared the pope's bulls, and made a great proposition of them, shewing the virtue and meaning of the pall, which being so delivered to the archbishop, who sat in a chair, all the prelates who were there kissed the relic or pall, and after the cheek of the archbishop, and in the same manner after them all the religious people of that house; this done, the archbishop and all other prelated, went into the vestry, the bishop of Ely was deacon, and read the gospel, the bishop of Rochester bore the cross and read the epistle; the bishop of Salisbury was chaunter, and began the office of the mass. As for all the solemnity of that mass and the feast, it was written, says the author, in a large book made for that purpose, but it was the best ordered and served, that he ever saw, or that could be compared to, and the king's servants and officers of arms, that were there on the morning, when they took their leave, were well and worshipfully rewarded; there was likewise the marquis of Dorset with eight or nine other barons, besides knights and esquires which were in marvellous great number, and all in his livery of Mustredeveles. (fn. 14)

At the feast of the inthronization of archbishop Warham, above-mentioned, the solemnity was equally grand and splendid, to any which had been before, when the archbishop sat in the middle of the high table or board, as it was then termed, alone; for the archbishop's state on that day was too great to admit of any to be of his mess, or at the table at which he sat. The duke of Buckingham, lord high steward, came in on horseback, bareheaded, habited in his scarlet robe, having the white staff, the badge of his office, in his hand, being followed by two heralds at arms; then came the chief sewer, and after him the dishes of the first course were brought up; whilst these were placing on the table, the high steward lighting from off his horse, stood on foot before the archbishop, till the first course being served, he retired to his own diningroom, where the duke's and the messes or services at the ends of the archbishop's board were served up. (fn. 15) At the first mess of the duke's table sat the duke himself, lord Clinton, Sir Edward Poynings, and the lord chief justice Fineux; at his second board sat Sir William Scot, Sir Thomas Kemp and Mr. Butler, sergeant at law; at the archbishop's board's end sat, on the right hand, the earl of Essex, the bishop of Mayo, suffragan, and the prior of Christ-church; on the left hand, the lords Bergavenny and Brook, and the abbot of St. Augustine's; the rest of the messes and services for the several degrees of the numerous guests being served and conducted in the several rooms, with equal solemnity and decorum, according to their several degrees. (fn. 16)

After the solemnity of the day was over, and these great officers attendant on it were dismissed, the number of the archbishop's household, his officers and servants that attended upon him, were sometimes more, sometimes fewer, according as he was disposed to appear in a greater or lesser state; but for the most part, his retinue was like his rank, and his revenue great and princelike; and the officers of his palace were so constituted, as in some measure to bear the resemblance to those of a prince's palace. Of late, the archbishops have usually been inthronized by proxy, and that with a very scanty ceremony; for now, on the day appointed for the inthronization, the archbishop, or his proxy, the members of the church attending in procession, is placed in his patriarchal chair, at the east end of the church, when the proper instruments are read and obeizance made by the members of it; and by this ceremony the archbishop is put into the formal possession of his metropolitical dignity, with the authority and profits belonging to it; and this finished the ceremonies of the day.

Footnotes

1 Viz. of the popes Innocent III. and Gregory IX. the following bulls, corroborating this privilege and right of electing an archbishop, are still extant, in the registers of this church, viz. of Adrian IV. anno 1158; of Alexander III. anno 1170; of Urban II. anno 1187; of Celestine III. anno 1191; of Innocent III. anno 1206; and of Honorius III. anno 1219. See Battely, pt. ii. p. 46.
2 Pope Innocent the IIId. anno 1206, pronounced a defenitive sentence, in relation to this controversy. See Spelman's Councils, tom. ii. p. 130.
3 Battely, pt. ii. p. 56. There was an antient custom which the earl of Boleyne claimed, which was, that the first time any archbishop of Canterbury crossed the sea from Dover to Whitsand, in his journey to Rome, there was due to the earl as his see, as lord of that place, the best sumptuary horse which the archbishop had with him, together with all his lading and harness; and that the archbishop should lay before the bailiff of Whitsand, a heap of sterling money, of which the bailiff should have as much as he could take up at twice, in both hands together; upon which, the archbishop, with his family, his servants and messengers were to pass, free from all toll and custom, throughout the earl's territories during the archbishop's life. Archbishop Winchelsea in 1306, compounded with the earl for forty marcs sterling, and afterwards passed with his family, as well as his servants and messengers, free of all toll and customs; for which purpose, he had the earl's acquittance, under the seal of his principal seneschal, and of the community of Wythsand, dated the 14th kal. June, that year. Batt. pt. ii. appendix, p. 19, No. viii.
4 At what price this honourable badge of authority was rated in the bills of fees to an archbishop, I don't find; but it was certainly at no very easy rate; for the archbishop of Meniz, as Fox tells us, in his Acts and Monuments, was forced to pay 27,000 florins for it.
5 The form of petitioning for the pall, and of delivering it, and the oath which the archbishop took when he received it, are added, in Battely's Appendix, pt. ii. No. ix. a, b, c; and some of them are printed in Fox's Acts and Monuments, vol. i. The pall was a pontifical ornament, much of the figure as it is now borne in the coat of arms of the archbishopric of Canterbury, and of Dublin in Ireland; it was made of lamb's wool only, and was purfled with closses of black; in breadth about three fingers, and having two labels, which parting like a Yon the upper part of the breast, were pinned on the shoulders; the other, or perpendicular part of it, hung down on the body before, and it was worn over all other vestments. These palls were made with great ceremony, and at Rome only, on the particular feast day of St. Agnes the virgin, at the time of chaunting the Agnes Dei in the mass, when two white lambs were laid on the altar, and after remaining there during that part of it, were afterwards delivered to the sub-deacon of St. Peter's church, who put them out to graze till sheering time, and then of their wool mingled with other, there was made fine thread, of which the palls were woven. At each end of the pall were thin pieces of lead of the same breadth with them; when they were thus finished, they were carried to the bodies of St. Peter and St. Paul, and after certain prayers were said over them they were left there all night, and the next day the sub-deacon received them again, and kept them till some archbishop wanted one, and either went himself to fetch it, or sent his proxy to sue for it, when it was delivered with many ceremonies, and at a most extravagant price; as one instance, when Walter Grey was translated from Worcester to York in 1215, his pall cost him 10,000l. equal perhaps to 30,000l. of our money as at present.
6 Appendix, No. xb—xc.
7 See Somner's Appendix, No. xlvii. See the provisions and expences of this feast, which amounted to 513l. 3s. in the whole, in Drake's edition of Parker's Antiq. Brit. Eccles. p. lxiii.
8 The order and form of the coming of Edward Stafford, duke of Buckingham, to Canterbury, on the day before the in thronization of the archbishop, is in the Harleian MSS. No. 532—8.
9 By a composition made in the 42d year of king Hen. III. anno 1264, between archbishop Boniface and Richard de Clare, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, it appears, that the archbishop claimed homage, and the service of four knights sees, and suit to the court of the archbishop, for the manors of Tunbridge, Vielston, Horsemonden, Meliton and Pettis, and that he should be high steward and high butler of the archbishop and his successors, whenever the archbishop should be inthroned, with divers other services for those manors; and the earl claimed and was allowed for him and his heirs for the office of stewardship, seven robes of scarlet, thirty gallons of wine, fifty pounds of wax for his lights during the whole feast; the livery of bay and oats for eighty horses, for two nights only, the dishes and salts which should stand before the archbishop at his high table, and after the feast the sojourning for three days with fifty horses, at the sole expence of the archbishop, at the nearest manors of the archbishop, at the choice of the earl, ad sanguinem minuendum, says the record; and for his office of butler, seven robes of fearlet, fifty pounds of wax, twenty gallons of wine, the livery of hay and oats for sixty horses, for two nights only; the cup which he served before the archbishop on the day of the feast, and all the empty casks.
Memorandum, that on the inthronization of Robert Kilewardbye, archbishop, the earl had in the first place, the abovementioned fees, and then he had one mantle with a cloak; and afterwards, on the inthronization of J. de Peckham, archbishop, he had two mantles; the earl held these manors for performing his office of steward, viz. Tonebregg with the castle, and Handlo with its appurtenances, and the whole lowy. The earl held these manors for the office of butler, viz. Bradestede, Vieleston, Horsmandenne, Melton and Pettes. See Somner, appendix, No. xiv. Battely, pt. ii. appendix, No. xa. Harleran MSS. No. 357, 12. After that, Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, received in 1295, his whole fee of Robert Winchelsea, archbishop, as by composition, for his stewardship and butlership; and he likewise received of archbishop Walter, for his fee, 200 marcs; and Hugh de Awdley, earl of Gloucester, receivea of archbishop Stratford, 100 marcs, and the earl of Stafford, lord of Tunbridge castle, received at the inthronization of archbishop Sudbury, for his fee, 40 marcs, and a cup of silver, gilt. Battely, pt. ii. appendix, p. 20.
10 These manors seem to have been in the county of York; the see due for the performance of this service is not mentioned.
11 His fee for the performance of this service was, the bed and whole of the furniture of the archbishop's chamber; but it seems his right to this was rather in doubt, for though he received this fee, he engaged to return it immediately after the solemnity to the archbishop again, till he had made his claim to it appear more plainly and authentic. It appears by the escheat rolls of the 2d year of king Edward III. anno 1330. that the relict of Bartholomew de Badlesmere held the manor of Hathfield, of the archbishop of Canterbury by sergeantry, viz. by the service of service the said archbishop with water, for the washing of his hands, on the day of his in thronization.
12 His fee was the knives after dinner, with which he had performed his office, not being a knight, another was appointed to execute the service.
13 His fee was the cup in which the archbishop should drink; not being a knight, he was not qualified to perform the office, and the lord high steward appointed another for that purpose in his room.
14 See Leland's Collections, vol. iv. p. 207.
15 The duke's board was served in each course, with one dish less than the archbishop's; and the messes at the end of the archbishop's board, were served each with two dishes in each course less than the duke's had.
16 See the roll describing the several particulars of this feast, the bill of fare, and the several expences of it, printed in Battely, pt. ii. appendix, No. xb; and a much larger and more particular one, printed from the archives in the Bodleian library, and inserted in Leland's Collectanea, vol. vi. p. 16.—In which latter it appears, that the duke of Buckingham sent his secretary and harbingers before him to give notice of his coming, and to have provision for his servants, and seven score horses, according to the composition; after which the duke came into Canterbury, attended by an honourable company with two hundred houses, and was honorably received by the archbishop's officers in the court within the prior's grate, against the south door of the church. The archbishop came into Canterbury on the Sunday morning, March 9, 1504, and was met by the duke with great reverence, and all due apparatus at St. Andrew's church, and there received him honorably; and then he preceded the archbishop with a great multitude of his servants to the great church of the priory of St. Thomas, the archbishop proceeding on foot, with his feet bare as far as the church, where he was honorably received by the prior and convent, and after prayers offered up to St. Thomas, he entered the vestry with his clerks to prepare himself for mass.
Among the names of the officers who gave attendance at this ceremony, all of whom are inserted in the above roll, are the following;—High Steward, Edward, duke of Buckingham; chamberlain, Sir Edw. Poynings; chief butler, Edward, duke of Buckingham, by his deputy, Sir Thomas Burgher, who was steward of the archbishop's liberties by patent; cup-bearer, master Robert Fitzwater; carver, master Thomas Cobham, hæres; sewer, master Richard Carew, miles; almner, M. Mumpesson, D. Jur. Can. under almner, M. Myles Bacchal, in utroq; jure; panterer, Syndham, gent; marshalls, Rich. Minors and William Bulstrode, gent; ewer, John Borne Sergeant, gent. ushers of the chamber, Brookes, William Parise, gent. sewers for the upper end of the board, Edw. Gulforde, gent. sewers for the lower, Geo. Gulforde.—Then follow the names of above hundred others, with their offices of under butlers, sewers, panterers, ewerers, clerks of the kitchens, officers of the surveyors, conveyers, almners, door keepers, officers of the halls, &c. &c. belonging to the different places and parts of the feast.