Literature Review 6 Dismantling the Cult of Elizabeth I: The Manipulation of Posthumous
Representations
The past half-century has witnessed a shift in focus from Elizabeth I the woman to studying Elizabeth the myth,
and the creation, manipulation and effectiveness of the ‘cult of Elizabeth.’ Roy Strong’s work and ‘continuing
efforts’1 on this task of separating reality from myth have inspired others to re-assess what we think we know of
‘Good Queen Bess’ and led to a wide historiography concerned with evaluating how her cult image was created
and maintained and whom it served in the process.
Most commonly, scholars reflect upon early modern representations of Elizabeth, while few dare to venture
towards assessing modern depictions. Though Elizabeth’s memory continues to hold on to our imaginations 2
little work has been undertaken to assess how this is still achieved over four-hundred years since her reign. The
proposed project, ‘Dismantling the cult of Elizabeth’ aims to shed some light on this by evaluating both
contemporary and modern sources to build from the current historiography and assess to what extent the ‘cult of
Elizabeth I’ is still active and effective today.
Firstly, it is essential to define the term ‘cult of Elizabeth’. Strong used this term as the title of his 1977 work
which addressed the iconography of Elizabethan portraiture and how along with lavish pageantry, the ‘myth’ of
Elizabeth was skilfully created3. This work stood out at the time of its publication for suggesting that the
creation of a ‘cult’ around a royal public figure was possible – this study was produced before the era of
Princess Diana, and so to use the term ‘cult’ seemed over-exaggerated when applied to the monarchy. However,
as Helen Hackett has since commented, ‘in the wake of Diana’s public life and death, talk of a cult of a Princess
does not seem so far-fetched’ and the term has since been adopted when addressing representations of
Elizabeth.4 Strong goes so far as to suggest that the ‘cult of Gloriana’ aimed to deliberately ‘replace the preReformation externals of religion’ including the cult of the Virgin Mary, and evoke patriotic worship among
Elizabeth’s subjects. 5 Being an art-historian, Strong’s aim is to teach us to “read” portraiture so that we might
understand how it created a ‘mythology which transcends single meaningless and a single moment of time.’6 His
1
Ardolino. F, ‘The Cult of Elizabeth: Review’, The Sixteenth Century Journal, 10, (1979), pp. 122-123, p.122
Garrett. C, ‘The Heart and Stomach of a King: Review’, Renaissance Quarterly, 49, (1996), pp. 150-151, p.151
3
Cross. C, ‘The Cult of Elizabeth: Review’, The English Historical Review, 94, (1979), p.184
4
Hackett., ‘Dreams or Designs’, p. 818
5
Strong. R, The Cult of Elizabeth: Elizabethan Portraiture and Pageantry, (University of California Press, 1977),
p.16
6
Ardolino., ‘Review’, p.122
2
1
work particularly addresses the use of deification – such as Elizabeth’s continuing comparisons with the
goddesses of Greek mythology.
Building from Strong’s discussion of Elisabeth’s comparison to Goddesses, John King highlights the narrative
shift in this association which he suggests is reflective of its own political context. In the 1569 portrait “Queen
Elizabeth and the Three Goddesses” for example, Elizabeth is pictured with Venus, Juno and Athena –
suggesting she parallels their virtues of wisdom, beauty and control over state. However, after the failed Anjou
marriage negotiations, and the realisation that the Queen would not bear an heir, King notes the subtle change to
comparisons with Cynthia and Diana, as virginal goddesses. 7 In this way Elizabeth’s image as a marriageable
virgin is slyly transformed to that of the perpetual virgin, married to her kingdom, and the disadvantage of
remaining single became an iconic virtue. 8 Hackett has also built upon this hypothesis, stating that Elizabeth’s
ability to claim her people as her metaphorical children was uniquely effective ‘precisely because she had no
real children to compete with them’ and through the construction of the virgin cult, she remained both desirable
and an iconic metaphor; following the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 the idea of Elizabeth as a perpetual
virgin reflected the concept that both Queen and Kingdom were impenetrable. 9
This twisting of negatives has been recognised as a core element of the Elizabeth cult. As Strong summarises
‘the gap between idea and reality was truly enormous’ 10 and yet the powerful image of Elizabeth remains with
us today– surely the best testament that the cult achieved its aims in creating a mythological icon. Rather than
limited by the negatives of her gender, Elizabeth became a symbol of ‘womanhood supreme.’11
Notably, scholars contest the long held view that Elizabeth catalysed the cult image herself, out of vanity or for
her own devices. Rather, Strong discusses the patrons of her portraiture, and shows how each of the paintings
were ‘embedded in a thick network of detailed social and political circumstances’ 12 while King reinforces the
concept that ‘Elizabethan iconography was closely tied to the life history of the monarch and to political events
of her reign.’ 13 Louis Montrose has recently picked up this notion and firmly established its authenticity in his
work ‘The Subject of Elizabeth’ in which he explains ‘subject’ refers to both Elizabeth the historical agent, and
Elizabeth the subject of discourse amongst her courtiers. He states simply that ‘Queen Elizabeth was as much
7
King. J, ‘Queen Elizabeth I: Representations of the Virgin Queen’, Renaissance Quarterly, 43, (1990), pp. 3074, p.44
8
Greenblatt. S, ‘The Cult of Elizabeth: Review’, Renaissance Quarterly, 4, (1978), pp. 642-644, p.642
9
Hackett., ‘Dreams or Designs’.
10
Strong., The Cult of Elizabeth, p.54
11
Hackett., ‘Dreams or Designs’, p. 817
12
Greenblatt. S, ‘The Cult of Elizabeth: Review’, Renaissance Quarterly, 4, (1978), pp. 642-644, p.643
13
King., ‘Representations ’, p.32
2
the creature of the Elizabethan image as she was its creator.’14 Following from Strong’s earlier observations,
that those who commissioned portraiture hoped to emphasise their own status by flattering that of the Queen’s,
Montrose suggests that this creation of the Elizabethan cult was a ‘core component of Elizabethan statecraft.’ 15
Though he remains ‘sceptical’ that Elizabeth was literally ‘worshipped’16 he successfully argues his hypothesis
that through iconography, Elizabeth and her civic elites were able to negotiate their ‘complex interrelationships’
while ensuring the loyalty and submission of the laity. 17
Tarnya Cooper adds to this when she highlights the important relationship between prestige and portraiture
during the early modern period. While she recognises that within their own context, portraits were perhaps less
valued than silverware, they still played a role in representing the ‘socially advantageous connections’ that their
owner might possess. 18 She states that while on display in a domestic space they provided a ‘mechanism’ to
preserve memories, instruction and a ‘distinct English identity at the heart of home’ and when viewed
collectively they could suggest an allegiance to the Tudor dynasty. 19 In this way, fashionable portraiture can be
seen as reflective of the contemporary mind-set in which it was produced – the high demand of royal portraiture
surely suggests that the cult of Elizabeth inspired admiration and loyalty to the Queen as well as aspirations to
be associated with her.
In terms of defining what we mean by the ‘cult of Elizabeth’, these works lay the groundwork for recognising it
not merely a blanket term for aspects of Elizabethan iconography, but rather an in-depth topic in itself. The
creation and evolution of the ‘cult’ can be conceived as a core element of the Elizabethan state, as well as a
political tool, and a reflection on contemporary popular culture during her reign.
Having established the cult of Elizabeth as separate to Elizabeth I herself, scholars have since pushed the
boundaries a little further by recognising that the cult outlived its central figure and spanned across a wide array
of media, creating a collection of work that focus on this necrography.
‘The Heart and Stomach of a King’ by Carole Levin is worth mentioning here as it provides a summary of
where we were in terms of historiography in the early nineteen-nineties, in the sense it reiterates what we know
14
Montrose, L., The Subject of Elizabeth: Authority, Gender and Representation, (Chicago University Press,
2006), p.2
15
Ibid, p.113
16
Ibid, p.107
17
Ibid, p.113
18
Cooper. T, ‘The Enchantment of the Familiar face: Portraits as Domestic objects in Elizabethan and Jacobean
England’, in Hamling, T and Richardson, C (eds.), Everyday Objects: Medieval and Early Modern Material
Culture and its Meanings, (Ashgate Publishing, 2010), pp. 157-178, p.158
19
Ibid, p.177
3
of Elizabeth’s history and focuses on the courts representation of her, particularly concerning the issue of her
gender. 20 While the study has faced criticism for its chronological approach, and reinforcing of the obvious (that
Elizabeth was indeed a woman) 21 it does stand out as an interdisciplinary study with a diverse range of media
including private diaries and parliamentary speeches, popular ballads and even the works of Shakespeare.
Though she fails to ‘advance a new argument’22 this expansion of sources allows her to present new research
regarding rumours of Elizabeth’s private life and point towards promising areas of further study concerning the
continuation of the cult.
Montrose’s ‘The Subject of Elizabeth’ on the other hand also has an ‘ambitious scope’23 of media it considers
including not only the obvious portraiture but also woodcuts and engravings, as well as literary sources such as
contemporary diaries and diplomatic dispatches. This wide range of sources collectively strengthens his fresh
argument that the cult was part of the Elizabethan statecraft. Where this work falls short however, is that its
focus is limited to Elizabeth’s reign and the very brief period after it. In its conclusion, Montrose touches on the
concept of the posthumous Elizabethan cult, describing the shift in feelings from relief to nostalgia as reflective
of England’s attitudes towards their new male, but Scottish king, James I. The final point of the book states that
while James obviously set out to absorb the ‘late Queen’s charisma’ and take her place in cultural memory, the
measure of his failure to do so ‘is in our enduring attraction to the subject of Elizabeth.’ 24
Other historians have dedicated more time to exploring posthumous representation of Elizabeth, producing a
variety of interpretations. John Watkins’ ‘Representing Elizabeth in Stuart England’ for example, focuses on the
role the cult of Elizabeth played in Jacobean politics. As conflict developed between Crown and Parliament,
Watkins explores how ‘Elizabeth gets claimed by both sides’ as a ‘champion of monarchy’ to the royalists and a
democrat to the parliamentarians25 demonstrating how the cult of Elizabeth remained a political tool long after
her death. In this way it continued to reflect the context in which it was produced, as well as influencing popular
culture; Watkins chooses to draw upon the she-tragedies of John Banks ‘The Island Queens’ (1684) and ‘The
unhappy favourite’ (1682) to illustrate this. 26
20
Levin. C, The Heart and Stomach of a King: Elizabeth I and the Politics of Sex and Power, (University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1994), p.3
21
Garrett., ‘Review’, p.151 and Frye., ‘Review’, p.339
22
Ibid, p.150
23
Mears, N., The Subject of Elizabeth: Review, The American Historical Review, 112, (2007), pp. 578- 579, p.279
24
Montrose., The Subject of Elizabeth, p.252
25
Hackett. H, (2010), An Interview with Helen Hackett on Elizabeth I, Available:
http://fivebooks.com/interviews/helen-hackett-on-elizabeth-i
26
Lewis. J, ‘Representing Elizabeth in Stuart England: Review’, Modern Philology, 101, (2004), pp. 441-446, p.
444
4
Similarly, Julia Walker addresses posthumous representations in her collection of essays, ‘Dissing Elizabeth’ in
which she explores critical depictions of Elizabeth and her reign. She too, notes the shift in historiography
during the 1980s from the ‘glitter of the spectacle of Elizabethan England’ towards the pragmatic politics and
cultural dissonances of the period, but argues rather than allowing scholarly understanding to be clouded, such a
change should be recognised as simply adding to the bigger picture. 27 Her own essay in this collection focuses
on the Jacobean manipulation of the Elizabethan cult, comparing Marcus Gheeraerts painting of ‘Elizabeth with
Time and Death’ to the Cecil print ‘Truth presents the Queen with a Lance’. Supporting the concept that such
portraiture reflects their political context, she discusses how both paintings (produced in 1622) expose the
various reactions to the suggested Spanish marriage of a young Prince Charles. The essay progresses to
incorporate other forms of evidence such as memorial poetry, which reflects the continuing admiration of
Elizabeth in the eyes of the laity under Stuart rule, as well as addressing the contested relocation of Elizabeth’s
body by James himself. She effectively picks apart the Latin inscription accompanying Elizabeth’s tomb, and
James I’s motives behind the verse. In the same way the Elizabethan cult was able to tackle her gender
disadvantage, Walker suggest James’ reference to his role as King of Great Britain is an attempt to emphasise
his own legitimacy and confront the weakness of his nationality. The essay concludes by discussing the
limitations of previous historiography; notably that Strong and Yates focus on portraiture, while Hackett ‘limits
herself’ to literary evidence. Walker summarises that ‘each set of representations grows from social and political
circumstance’ and that when concerning the depictions of Elizabeth, there is a difference to be found between
the cult image that holds strong with the laity, and the manipulated recreations of the elite. 28
By the turn of the millennium, the historiography surrounding the cult of Elizabeth had not only established the
meaning of this phrase, but also that evidence of its existence can be found across a scope of media, throughout
the social hierarchy, and transgressing Elizabeth’s own lifetime.
The historical gap that remains to be explored effectively is the concept that this cult is still in existence today.
Scholars such as Hackett, Betteridge, Dobson and Watson have touched upon this notion briefly in recent
research, though there remains work to be done. Hackett has drawn comparisons between Elizabeth and Queen
Victoria in her study concerning the imagery of monarchs, exploring how both Queen’s navigated around the
disadvantage of their gender and perceptions of being ‘a contradiction in terms’ as female rulers. Drawing
strong similarities between the two, such as their representations as ‘dutiful custodians of the memory of dead
27
28
5
Walker. J, (ed.), Dissing Elizabeth: Negative Representations of Gloriana, (Duke University Press, 1998), p.3
Ibid, p.263
patriarchs (Henry VIII for Elizabeth, Albert for Victoria)’, she notes how both took on the role of mother to their
kingdom, inspiring ‘fantasies of immortality in their subjects, who found it simultaneously exhilarating and
unthinkable to imagine living without them.’29 Though a compelling read, this article does not address
Elizabeth’s modern iconography, instead simply noting how modern women of power, Victoria and Margaret
Thatcher, were often compared to her.
The project produced by the team of Michael Dobson and Nicola Watson, ‘England’s Elizabeth: An afterlife in
fame and fantasy’, takes a much more promising step in this direction. This work is unique as it shows little
interest in discovering the ‘real’ Elizabeth behind the cult, but instead aims to review ‘how and why such
embellishments evolved.’30 The book’s focus is centred on exploring the many lives Elizabeth has lived since
her death, through drama, myth and fantasy.31 It addresses peaks in the “Elizabethan industry” including the
early 17th century, under Victoria and more recently in the later twentieth-century when ‘women in power had
become familiar, but the problems of female priorities remained.’ 32 Similarly to Montrose it concludes by
suggesting that the cult of Elizabeth remains a reflection of the context in which it is executed and of our own
ever changing preoccupations – and so is likely to ‘run and run’. 33
Most recently, Susan Doran has picked up the gauntlet in her collection of essays that aim to pick apart ‘The
Myth of Elizabeth’. She introduces Elizabeth as a figure whose familiarity continues to breed admiration;
referring to two recent polls concerning ‘the key figures of the last millennium, organised by Radio 4, and the
other of the greatest Britons, organised by BBC 2’ in which Elizabeth reaches the top ten, and is one of only two
women to do so. 34 She similarly notes though the myth of Elizabeth is centuries old, it has continued to flourish
‘for reasons which changed over the decades’ and examinations of it is ‘a product of twentieth-century
scholarship’. 35 Though this collection makes for a stimulating read, it is the final essay that is of particular
concern in relation to the proposed project. Thomas Betteridge’s ‘A Queen for all seasons’ addresses
representations of Elizabeth on film. Presenting a compelling argument that gender stereotypes leak in to
cinematography he explains that because the social role of women in a given period is mirrored in film, this
29
Hackett., ‘Dreams or Designs’, p. 816
Martin. C, ‘Dobson and Watson, ‘England’s Elizabeth: an afterlife in fame and fantasy’: Review’, The Sixteenth
century Journal, 35, (2004), pp. 595-597, p. 596
31
Ibid, p. 596
32
Loades. D, ‘Dobson and Watson, ‘England’s Elizabeth: an afterlife in fame and fantasy’: Review’, The
American Historical Review, 109, (2004), pp. 604-605, p. 605
33
Ibid, p. 605
34
Doran, S. Freeman, T., The Myth of Elizabeth, (Palgrave MacMillan, 2003), p. 1
35
Ibid, p. 3
30
6
effects modern depictions of Elizabeth. 36 He describes how the need to entertain, means reality is often replaced
with myth, creating films that make up for their lack of historical truth with the thrill of secret love affairs. 37 It is
such analysis that provides the springboard for the proposed project.
As we have established, the cult of Elizabeth is a newly developed topic which has moved away from simply
examining the images of Elizabeth in portraiture, and expanded the study to include posthumous representations
across a broad network of interacting media. There is still however, room for exploration which ‘Dismantling
the cult of Elizabeth’ aims to address. Though an extensive amount of scholarship has focused upon the image
of Elizabeth during her reign, recent discoveries of contemporary portraiture provides new material for this
research38. Similarly, the image of Elizabeth continues to be reproduced and altered. Betteridge, Dobson and
Watson may have touched upon a few examples of cinematography and television 39 but there remains a vast
array of recent representations to be explored including historical fiction such as Phillipa Gregory’s ‘The Virgins
Lover’, BBC’s TV mini-series ‘The Virgin Queen’ (2005), or David Starkey’s historical series ‘Elizabeth’
(2000), all of which shape a modern concept of Elizabeth I. The proposed project therefore, aims to advance the
historiography by examining such depictions and evaluating to what extent the cult of Elizabeth still exists
today, and how it has been maintained and manipulated.
36
De La Torre, ‘The Myth of Elizabeth: Review’, Journal of British Studies, 44, (2005), pp.609-611
Betteridge., ‘Elizabeth I on Film’, p.258
38
Jones, J. (2013). Elizabeth I's portrait brings us face to face with the ravages of age. Available:
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2013/feb/13/elizabeth-first-portrait-face-ageunhappiness. Date accessed 24th March 2014.
39
Loades., ‘Review’, p. 605 – England’s Elizabeth briefly provides an academic criticism of Rowan Atkinson’s
Blackadder II.
37
7
Bibliography
Ardolino. F, ‘The Cult of Elizabeth: Review’, The Sixteenth Century Journal, 10, (1979), pp. 122-123
Betteridge. T., ‘A Queen for All Seasons: Elizabeth I on Film’, in Doran, S. Freeman, T., (eds.) The Myth of
Elizabeth, (Palgrave MacMillan, 2003), pp. 242-259
Cooper. T, ‘The Enchantment of the Familiar face: Portraits as Domestic objects in Elizabethan and Jacobean
England’, in Hamling, T and Richardson, C (eds.), Everyday Objects: Medieval and Early Modern Material
Culture and its Meanings, (Ashgate Publishing, 2010), pp. 157-178
Cross. C, ‘The Cult of Elizabeth: Review’, The English Historical Review, 94, (1979)
Doran, S. Freeman, T., The Myth of Elizabeth, (Palgrave MacMillan, 2003)
Garrett. C, ‘The Heart and Stomach of a King: Review’, Renaissance Quarterly, 49, (1996), pp. 150-151
Greenblatt. S, ‘The Cult of Elizabeth: Review’, Renaissance Quarterly, 4, (1978), pp. 642-644
Hackett. H, (2010), An Interview with Helen
http://fivebooks.com/interviews/helen-hackett-on-elizabeth-i
Hackett
on
Elizabeth
I,
Available:
Hackett. H, ‘Dreams or Designs, Cults or Constructions? The study of images of monarchs’, The Historical
Journal, 44, (2001), pp.811-823
Jones, J. (2013). Elizabeth I's portrait brings us face to face with the ravages of age. Available:
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2013/feb/13/elizabeth-first-portrait-face-ageunhappiness - Date Accessed 24th March 2014
King. J, ‘Queen Elizabeth I: Representations of the Virgin Queen’, Renaissance Quarterly, 43, (1990), pp. 3074
Levin. C, The Heart and Stomach of a King: Elizabeth I and the Politics of Sex and Power, (University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1994)
Lewis. J, ‘Representing Elizabeth in Stuart England: Review’, Modern Philology, 101, (2004), pp. 441-446
Loades. D, ‘Dobson and Watson, ‘England’s Elizabeth: an afterlife in fame and fantasy’: Review’, The
American Historical Review, 109, (2004), pp. 604-605
Martin. C, ‘Dobson and Watson, ‘England’s Elizabeth: an afterlife in fame and fantasy’: Review’, The Sixteenth
century Journal, 35, (2004), pp. 595-597
Montrose, L., The Subject of Elizabeth: Authority, Gender and Representation, (Chicago University Press,
2006)
Strong. R, The Cult of Elizabeth: Elizabethan Portraiture and Pageantry, (University of California Press, 1977)
Walker. J, (ed.), Dissing Elizabeth: Negative Representations of Gloriana, (Duke University Press, 1998)
8