{"id":19633,"date":"2026-01-27T08:30:00","date_gmt":"2026-01-27T08:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/?p=19633"},"modified":"2026-01-26T13:44:43","modified_gmt":"2026-01-26T13:44:43","slug":"power-struggles-and-group-dynamics-in-the-house-of-lords-1584-5","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2026\/01\/27\/power-struggles-and-group-dynamics-in-the-house-of-lords-1584-5\/","title":{"rendered":"Power struggles and group dynamics in the House of Lords, 1584-5"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

At the IHR Parliaments, Politics and People seminar on Tuesday 3 February, Dr Paul Hunneyball of the History of Parliament<\/a>, will be discussing Power Struggles and Group Dynamics in the House of Lords, 1584-5<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The seminar takes place on 3 February 2026, between 5:30 and 6:30 p.m. It is fully \u2018hybrid\u2019, which means you can attend either in-person in London at the IHR, or online via Zoom. Details of how to join the discussion are available here.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Political discourse is rooted in speech, and students of modern parliamentary politics have a wealth of material to draw on \u2013 Hansard, TV broadcasts of debates, newspaper reports, even WhatsApp messages. The picture for the House of Lords in the reign of Elizabeth I<\/a> is very different. The principal source, the Lords\u2019 Journal, was conceived by the Tudor clerks quite narrowly as a record of business transacted and decisions reached, but with a veil drawn over the accompanying discussions, which were, after all, meant to be confidential.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A typical page in the manuscript Journal has the date of the current sitting at the top, the date of the next sitting at the bottom, and three columns down the rest of the page; of these, two are used for recording which bishops and lay peers attended that day, while the third column, on the right-hand side, is reserved for any actual proceedings. (Not until 1597 was it thought necessary to allocate more than one page per sitting, to allow for a more detailed account of events.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The final column might list bills read, and the verdicts agreed on them, reports of conferences with the Commons or audiences with the queen, or such mundane matters as apologies for absence. Or it might not \u2013 for some sittings no business is listed at all, creating the impression that the peers were twiddling their thumbs or perhaps nodding off to sleep.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A
Manuscript Lords’ Journal, 6 February 1585 (formerly Parliamentary Archives, HL\/PO\/JO\/1\/5): image, Paul Hunneyball<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

By comparison, the Commons\u2019 Journal, augmented in the latter years of Elizabeth\u2019s reign by several private diaries, is full of summarised speeches, disputes and other incidents which give a good sense of the moods, initiatives and objectives of the lower House. Unsurprisingly, historians have tended to rely on these sources to reconstruct the political narrative of the Elizabethan parliaments, in the process exaggerating the importance of the Commons at the expense of the poorly reported Lords.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In recent decades some effort has been made to correct this imbalance, utilising a variety of different approaches. During the 1980s and 1990s the Lords\u2019 management of legislation was examined in great detail by Sir Geoffrey Elton and David Dean. In conjunction with their research, T. E. Hartley published three volumes of material supplementing the Lords\u2019 and Commons\u2019 Journals, including a few actual speeches made by bishops or lay peers. Around the same time, a ground-breaking study of the 1559 Parliament by Norman Jones demonstrated how manoeuvrings in the Lords could be illuminated through reports from outside Parliament, close reading of the chronology of events at Westminster, and careful examination of the wider political context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What was missing from these endeavours was a detailed understanding of the individuals who sat in the upper House, a gap in our knowledge which is now close to being filled by the History of Parliament\u2019s project on the Elizabethan Lords. Since 2020 nearly 250 new biographies have been researched and written, reconstructing the lives of the bishops and lay peers who participated in Elizabeth\u2019s 13 parliamentary sessions, identifying their political networks and personal objectives at Westminster, and pondering the place that Parliament occupied in their wider careers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In following these men\u2019s careers in the Lords over several decades, it has become possible to develop a sense of what \u2018normal\u2019 business may have involved and the routine patterns by which things got done. That in turn allows us to observe anomalies in those patterns, and to consider the political forces which operated in those grey areas for which we have only patchy documentation.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A
Unknown Artist, John Whitgift (c.1530-1604), Archbishop of Canterbury. \u00a9 Lambeth Palace<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

However, it is still enormously helpful to pursue these questions in a scenario where we have enough contextual data to speculate with some confidence on how individual peers may have behaved. Accordingly, the focus of this seminar is the Parliament of 1584-5, and specifically the struggles over religion that gave this session much of its flavour.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A quarter of a century after the Elizabethan church settlement of 1559, English Protestantism had reached another crossroads. The first generation of Elizabethan bishops, many notable for their evangelical fervour, were mostly dead, their hopes of continuing reformation disappointed. Their successors, headed by the recently appointed archbishop of Canterbury, John Whitgift, were mostly content to defend what was now the ecclesiastical status quo, despite the poor quality of many clergy, and numerous abuses in appointments and funding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, upon becoming archbishop, Whitgift had attempted to clamp down on Protestant clergy who refused to conform to those aspects of the Elizabethan settlement that seemed to hark back to Catholicism. In the process, Whitgift incurred the wrath of Elizabeth\u2019s two most powerful advisers, Lord Burghley<\/a> and the earl of Leicester, who believed that the primate\u2019s tactics would weaken the Protestant cause at a time when English Catholic numbers were rising again and the threat of war with Catholic Spain was also increasing. Despite enjoying the continuing support of the queen, Whitgift was forced to scrap his plans. Even so, when Parliament met in November 1584, the archbishop came under attack again, this time from the fervently Protestant House of Commons, which petitioned for major reform of the Church, and introduced numerous bills to the same end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But what of the Lords? When this Parliament opened, only 11 out of a possible 25 other bishops were present to offer the primate their support. On the face of things Whitgift was isolated and on the back foot. He continued to face hostility from Burghley and Leicester, and three of the Commons\u2019 provocative bills were passed by the peers, before being vetoed by Elizabeth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The bare facts look bad \u2013 but they are not the full picture. By exploring the group dynamics of the bishops in 1584-5, and drawing on contextual documentation both from the Commons and from outside Parliament, this paper will argue that Whitgift stood his ground, gathering his closest allies around him, and in the process consolidating the Church hierarchy\u2019s revised priorities. Moreover, although Burghley and Leicester were broadly sympathetic to the demands of the Commons, they also knew that they could not afford to oppose the queen\u2019s own views on the Church too strongly, and were therefore obliged to moderate their attacks on the archbishop. That sense of royal protection for the bishops in turn sheds light on their status within the Lords during Elizabeth\u2019s reign.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The seminar takes place on 3 February 2026, between 5:30 and 6:30 p.m. It is fully \u2018hybrid\u2019, which means you can attend either in-person in London at the IHR, or online via Zoom. Details of how to join the discussion are available here.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

PMH<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further reading:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

G.R. Elton, The Parliament of England 1559-1581<\/em> (1986)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

David Dean, Law-making and Society in Late Elizabethan England<\/em> (1996)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

T. E. Hartley (ed.), Proceedings in the Parliaments of Elizabeth I<\/em> (3 volumes, 1981-95)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Norman L. Jones, Faith by Statute<\/em> (1982)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

At the IHR Parliaments, Politics and People seminar on Tuesday 3 February, Dr Paul Hunneyball of the History of Parliament, will be discussing Power Struggles and Group Dynamics in the House of Lords, 1584-5. The seminar takes place on 3 February 2026, between 5:30 and 6:30 p.m. It is fully \u2018hybrid\u2019, which means you can attend either in-person in London at the IHR, or online … Continue reading Power struggles and group dynamics in the House of Lords, 1584-5<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":135730683,"featured_media":19640,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"_wpas_customize_per_network":false},"categories":[774275534,103464271,407218,774275564,11942052,774276090,774275741],"tags":[35890,774276222,774276221,31184],"class_list":["post-19633","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-tudor","category-16th-century-history","category-conferencesseminars","category-elizabeth-i","category-history-of-parliament-trust","category-legislative-history","category-parliamentary-life","tag-featured","tag-john-whitgift","tag-lords-journals","tag-parliament"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/MS-LJ-6-Feb-1585-featured.png?fit=2201%2C1269&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2QYNW-56F","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":12767,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2024\/02\/06\/house-of-commons-1640-60-discussion\/","url_meta":{"origin":19633,"position":0},"title":"The History of Parliament, House of Commons, 1640-60: a roundtable discussion","author":"Alex Beeton","date":"February 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Ahead of next Tuesday\u2019s Parliaments, Politics and People roundtable seminar, we hear from\u00a0Alex Beeton and Patrick Little\u00a0of the History of Parliament. On 13 February Alex and Patrick will join Andrew Barclay, Vivienne Larminie and David Scott to discuss the recently published History of Parliament, House of Commons, 1640-60 volumes The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "17th Century history"","block_context":{"text":"17th Century history","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/centuries\/17th-century-history\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/oliver-cromwell-samuel-cooper-npg.jpeg?fit=988%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/oliver-cromwell-samuel-cooper-npg.jpeg?fit=988%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/oliver-cromwell-samuel-cooper-npg.jpeg?fit=988%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/oliver-cromwell-samuel-cooper-npg.jpeg?fit=988%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":463,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2013\/09\/26\/autumn-events-from-the-history-of-parliament\/","url_meta":{"origin":19633,"position":1},"title":"Autumn events from the History of Parliament","author":"Emma Peplow","date":"September 26, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"Here at the History of Parliament we have number of events to tell you about ready for the start of the new academic term. Firstly, our 9th annual lecture will take place on the evening of Wednesday, 6th November at Portcullis House, Westminster. Baroness Patricia Hollis will lecture on \u2018The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Social history"","block_context":{"text":"Social history","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/topics\/social-history\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":309,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2013\/05\/23\/precedent-in-early-stuart-parliaments\/","url_meta":{"origin":19633,"position":2},"title":"Parliaments, Politics and People \u2013 Simon Healy \u2018The Significance (and Insignificance) of Precedent in Early Stuart Parliaments\u2019","author":"Emma Peplow","date":"May 23, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"Last week our Parliaments, Politics and People seminar returned for the summer term, with the HOP\u2019s own Simon Healy. His paper, \u2018The Significance (and Insignificance) of Precedent in Early Stuart Parliaments\u2019 was a longer version of one presented at April\u2019s \u2018Writing the History of Early Modern Parliament\u2019 colloquium in Oxford.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Stuart"","block_context":{"text":"Stuart","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/periods\/stuart\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":901,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2015\/03\/24\/parliaments-politics-and-people-seminar-rebekah-moore-contested-spaces-temporary-houses-of-parliament-and-government-1834-52\/","url_meta":{"origin":19633,"position":3},"title":"Parliaments, Politics and People seminar: Rebekah Moore, ‘Contested spaces: temporary houses of Parliament and government, 1834-52’","author":"History of Parliament","date":"March 24, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"At our last \u2018Parliaments, Politics and People\u2019 seminar, Rebekah Moore, holder of an AHRC collaborative doctoral award with the History of Parliament and Institute of Historical Research, gave a paper on the temporary Houses of Parliament after the fire of 1834. Here Rebekah gives an overview of her paper\u2026 From\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Conferences, Seminars and Events"","block_context":{"text":"Conferences, Seminars and Events","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/topics\/conferencesseminars\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1108,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2015\/11\/19\/parliament-ordinances\/","url_meta":{"origin":19633,"position":4},"title":"Parliaments, Politics and People seminar: Victoria Anker, ‘Parliament Ordinances and Remonstrances: legislative attacks on executive authority in the early 1640s’","author":"History of Parliament","date":"November 19, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"At the second \u2018Parliaments, Politics and People\u2019 seminar of the term Victoria Anker, from the University of Edinburgh, spoke on 'Parliament Ordinances and Remonstrances: legislative attacks on executive authority in the early 1640s.' Here she gives us an overview of her paper... Whilst the language and rhetoric of speakers in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Conferences, Seminars and Events"","block_context":{"text":"Conferences, Seminars and Events","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/topics\/conferencesseminars\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":19716,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2026\/02\/10\/representations-of-women-and-sovereign-power-at-the-new-palace-of-westminster-1841-1870\/","url_meta":{"origin":19633,"position":5},"title":"‘Unobtrusive But Not Unimportant’: Representations of Women and Sovereign Power at the New Palace of Westminster, 1841-1870","author":"History of Parliament","date":"February 10, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"At the IHR Parliaments, Politics and People seminar on Tuesday 17 February,\u00a0Dr Cara Gathern of UK Parliament Heritage Collections, will be discussing\u00a0representations of women and sovereign power at the New Palace of Westminster, 1841-1870. The seminar takes place on 17 February 2026, between 5:30 and 6:30 p.m. It is fully\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "19th Century history"","block_context":{"text":"19th Century history","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/centuries\/19th-century-history\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"A statue of a queen on a throne with two women to either side","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/OR-WOA-S088-Victoria-Statue-Gibson-622x862-featured.png?fit=615%2C337&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/OR-WOA-S088-Victoria-Statue-Gibson-622x862-featured.png?fit=615%2C337&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/OR-WOA-S088-Victoria-Statue-Gibson-622x862-featured.png?fit=615%2C337&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19633","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/135730683"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19633"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19633\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19648,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19633\/revisions\/19648"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/19640"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19633"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19633"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19633"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}