In return for restoration to royal grace

The Ditchley portrait of Queen Elizabeth I is generally known to have been a gift from Sir Henry Lee to commemorate her 2-day visit to his estate at Ditchley, which visit in turn served to mark the end of her 2-year long displeasure with him.

Sir Henry Lee was her Master General of Ordnance, a Queen’s Champion and the organizer of the annual festivities commemorating her ascension into power (Accession Day Tilts). In 1590, Sir Henry Lee fell in love with Anne Vavasour, then one of the principal ladies-in-waiting to the queen. Anne had been the mistress of the Earl of Oxford with whom she had a child. This was a much publicised scandal which saw both of them in prison for a time. It would seem that Anne’s beauty far surpassed her ill fame because Sir Henry took her in as his mistress after his wife’s death (Amussen, Seeff. Attending to Early Modern Women. p. 40.) In view of Anne’s reputation and Sir Henry’s exalted office, Elizabeth, who was particularly wary of the popular feeling about her and her court, was compelled to withdraw royal favour from Sir Henry in the interest of public policy. Two years later, in 1592, after the scandal had resolved itself in people’s minds, she restored him to royal grace. To publicise his return to favour, Sir Henry spared no cost. He entertained the queen lavishly for two days in his estate at Ditchley and commissioned Marcus Gheeraerts to compose what we know today as the Ditchley painting which Lee, as mentioned, presented to the queen as a gift.

The traditional symbolism in the painting
The portrait is fairly well publicized about. It is notable for its use of symbols to represent historical circumstances. In it, the Queen is shown standing on a map of the British Isles, the tips of her shoes standing on the Ditchley estate, her figure looking southwards and light emanating from her illuminating England and Wales, the two territories over which her authority was uncontested. The symbolism is transparent, through the power and authority vested in Sir Henry, she was the source of light for her faithful subjects. At the upper portion of the background, two-fifths of the way from the right hand side of the painting, a very dark sky, torn in places by jagged shafts of lightning, is portrayed. The other three-fifths of the background towards the left hand side represent a fair blue sky and white clouds bathed in pure sunlight. The background has two levels of meaning: on the larger scale, it represents that fact that Elizabeth’s reign had brought England into a bright day progress and wealth from a dark and troubled past; on the more personal level, it signified the reconciliation between Elizabeth and Sir Henry. As we examine the portrait, we find two roses pinned onto her standing lace collar, a statement about her lineage. The rose was the symbol of the Tudor dynasty. On her left ear we notice what seems to be an armillary sphere, a star finder (Shea. Armillary Sphere.) This sphere, which can give the coordinates of stars, was as a symbol of wisdom and wise counsel, hence it was placed on her ear.

The queen was apparently not happy about the first version of the portrait. We know that the painting was trimmed on the vertical sides such that portions of lines of poetry in her honor were truncated. It was also redone to soften the lines on her face (Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger.) The reasons are obvious. The wide hoop of her skirt and the bulky and long proportions of her sleeves gave the gown an exaggeration of overwhelming power and breadth. Fitted into this unlikely robe, the original portrait is said to have exposed the features of her aging face (she was 59 at the time) with uncomfortable candor. The overall impression would have been that of an old and thin lady compromised inside a bulky and ill-fitting gown, and the immediate thought of the viewer might well have been that Elizabeth was too old for her clothes. Cutting the margins off the vertical sides served to remove some of the wideness from the costume, easing out the details of her face, which made her look younger.

The real import of the painting - the molestations of old age
We suspect to know what Sir Henry was thinking about, when he represented Elizabeth as an aging lady in the portrait. This was in contempt of her instinct for propaganda which was directed at the perpetration of her youthful vigour and beauty, at least in publicly displayed images. Was this meant as a subtle but emphatic reminder for Elizabeth of her declining situation and the crises besetting England once again during the last years of her reign. She was aged, childless and ailing; yet she refused to nominate her successor. Her reign was growing old and debilitated like her. And there were no prospects for a fitting successor to it. Lawlessness was on the rise and criminals were rampant. Periods of famine were becoming frequent. All was unsure ahead. But such matters could not be broached in so many words. Using allegories in art was the only way to convey otherwise unspeakable topics to her majesty. Three decades later Shakespeare would publish a play in which Elizabeth’s childlessness would be hinted at. In the Midsummer Night’s Dream, Titania would forfeit her adopted boy to Oberon because of her passion for an ass. The analogy is clear. And no less clear was the fact that the people "bled" for a new, younger and more vigorous ruler.

The Ditchley portrait was an appreciation of gratitude for favours regained, but more important than that, it may have been a statement of genuine and frank concern (with considerable sympathy) from a true friend. Sir Henry may have intended for it to open Elizabeth’s eyes to things the poorest peasant in her kingdom knew, ideas she could not accept. Her raiments had become too heavy for her frail condition and her golden age was about to run its course.

Works cited

Amussen, Susan Dwyer, Seeff, Adele F. "Attending to Early Modern Women." 40-41.

Books.Google.com. Google Books. Web. 09, November, 2009.

Shea, Marilyn. "Armillary Sphere." September, 2007. Web. 09, November, 2009.

 http://hua.umf.maine.edu/China/astronomy/tianpage/0025Armilla9252w.html

"Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger." Wikipedis.org. Wikipedia. 08 July, 2009. Web.

09 November, 2009

Any further questions?  Please use our question section and we will supply you with the answer.
If you want to join our online publishing site please register.  Our site endeavours to reward both the reader and the author. Online publishing is a very rewarding profession, why not publish your articles and essays.   

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites