Free Henry VIII by Alison Weir Page B

interior decoration also, and appeared on jewellery, plate, furniture, fabrics, and servants’ liveries. Heraldry was an international code, fully understood by the upper classes—Henry VIII was an expert in this field. In an age when many people could not read, such powerful symbolism proclaimed triumphantly to the world the identity of the owner of a house; in the case of the King, it served as architectural propaganda emphasising his ancient lineage and reinforcing the royal image and authority in the minds of his subjects. During this period, it became fashionable for the upper classes to proclaim their loyalty to the monarch by decorating their own houses with the royal arms and emblems, often in anticipation or commemoration of a royal visit. However, given Henry VIII’s frequent marriages, these decorations often had to be changed.
    The masons who built the Tudor palaces were Englishmen, but many of the craftsmen who adorned them were Flemings, or Doche (Dutch), as they were known, who usually worked as glaziers, and Italians, who were responsible chiefly for sculptural decoration. Foreign craftsmen were greatly resented; they were not allowed to join the English craft guilds, and three acts were passed in Henry’s reign limiting their activities. Members of the royal House were specifically exempted from observing these restrictions; therefore the King was free to employ whom he liked.
    The royal palaces were built to a set plan that changed during the course of Henry VIII’s reign in order to meet the King’s increasing desire for privacy and his conviction that familiarity bred contempt. Until the fourteenth century, kings had lived, eaten, and slept in the great hall and chamber; life had been communal, with little concept of privacy. Throughout the fifteenth century, however, these arrangements had gradually changed, as had the design of royal palaces in order to accommodate the changes, and it was now the custom for the King to act out his public role in a series of increasingly elaborate state rooms yet be able to retreat into smaller, more intimate rooms to eat and sleep or enjoy some privacy in the company of his wife or his favoured gentlemen. Even here, however, he was never alone, and his most intimate functions were attended to by his gentlemen. For other courtiers, and to a greater extent household servants, privacy was an elusive luxury or was nonexistent.
    The King and Queen had separate sets of apartments, often a mirror image of each other; these were known as the King’s Side and the Queen’s Side. Each included a presence (or audience) chamber, a privy chamber, a bedchamber, and usually further private chambers. Early in the reign, following the Burgundian precedent copied by Edward IV and Henry VII, these lodgings were stacked one above the other in a central donjon. The King’s apartments were often built on the south side of the palace, which enjoyed more sunshine.
    The King’s state apartments consisted of a sequence of three rooms: two outward chambers—the great watching chamber, or guard room, and the presence chamber—and one inward chamber, the privy chamber. The outward chambers were public, the inner private. To begin with, these state rooms were accessed from the great hall or approached by a processional or ceremonial stair, and entry to them depended on how much in favour a courtier was with the King. Only the most favoured courtiers ever got as far as the privy chamber.
    The great hall, although built to impress and sometimes used for large-scale entertainments, served first and foremost as a dining room for the household servants, who ate at trestle tables which were taken down after use. Only during the early years of his reign did the King feast here, at the great festivals of the year. By Tudor times, thanks to the increasing desire of monarchs and nobles for privacy, the great hall was declining rapidly in importance; Henry