In Game Of Thrones, it is the King’s Hand who exerts some real power of the Seven Kingdoms. His symbol, appropriately enough, was a pin depicting a hand.
But in yet another example of reality being stranger than fiction, it was the Groom of the Stool—named for the close stool, the king’s 16th-century toilet—who filled a highly coveted position in the royal house. How powerful were they? Well, historians believe that both James I and his successor King Charles I were so swayed by their grooms’ counsel that political discussions of the king’s privy helped fuel the 17th-century English Civil War.
As Natalie Zarrelli of Atlas Obscura observes, every day, as the king sat on his padded, velvet-covered close stool, he revealed secrets. He asked for counsel, and could even hear of the personal and political woes of his personal groom, and offer to help.
The Groom’s Tasks
What were the Groom’s tasks? The 1452 Book of Nurture describes them with this little rhyme:
See the privy-house for easement be fair, sweet, and clean;
And that the boards thereupon be covered with cloth fair in green;
And the hole himself, look there no board be seen;
Thereon a fair cushion, the ordure no man to vex.
Look there be blanket, cotton, or linen to wipe the nether end,
And ever he calls, wait ready and prompt,
Basin and ewer, and on your shoulder a towel.
During the reign of Henry VIII in the 1500s, the king’s closest men of the court were given the title, often as a group. Prestigious gentry and noblemen hung out with the monarch in his privy room, acting as his personal secretaries with his undivided attention while he sat on his close stool. Later kings appointed one person to the task, who would travel with the king and his portable stool if he went on a journey. Only monarchs in exile were denied a Groom of the Stool, though they did get grooms who helped with the general bedchamber.
The Groom of the Stool was in charge of all the activities and affairs of the king’s bedchamber and other private rooms; making sure the king was well-dressed and bathed, his bed was made, and even that his personal finances were in order. Sometimes, the grooms had control to spend cash. Before private rooms and privacy became associated with actually being alone, monarchs were surrounded by servants and attendants at all hours of the day, often sleeping in the same room as attendants. Some kings kept their close stool in “more private” rooms than others, but even private rooms would allow a handful of people, with the Groom of the Stool always among them.
Because of this, Grooms of the Stool were often feared by other members of the court. They held highly confidential knowledge about political and personal affairs and, importantly, the king’s ear. Sir Anthony Denny, groom to Henry VIII, was even given the responsibility of Henry VIII’s stamp, which acted as his signature for documents.
In the early 17th century, Sir Thomas Erskine was King James I’s captain of the yeoman of the guard, and eagerly combined this job with being Groom of the Stool, which gave him crucial influence over the king. Grooms were sometimes embroiled in other areas of political power, too—Henry VIII’s groom Sir Henry Norris was politically involved with the queen, Anne Boleyn, and was executed along with her after she fell from her husband’s favor.
During the mid-1700s, the close stool itself began to fell out of favor. Sir Michael Stanhope for Edward VI was the last to perform the full job; the last Groom of the Stool was technically James Hamilton for the Prince of Wales in the 1800s, though by then the position had shifted to dressing duties, and was renamed “Groom of the Stole” referring to the latin word for clothing, stola. Victorians, it seems, were a little more interested in true privacy.
As for the symbol of all this power, it wasn’t a pin of the king’s, erm, you know what. Instead, the Groom of the Stool got a special golden key attached to a blue ribbon. As you might expect, no other copies of this key, which would open the king’s personal rooms, could be made.
Of course, you’re free to substitute this for anything else you have in mind in your own fantasy work…
gibsonauthor said:
Reblogged this on s a gibson.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Pingback: A Fantasy Tip From History: Doo-Dooing The King | Fantasy Sources: Art, Gifts, Ideas, Article Resources, News
The Story Reading Ape said:
Reblogged this on Chris The Story Reading Ape's Blog.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Charles Yallowitz said:
Wow. Important work and decisions have always been made in the bathroom. Might as well have every war room in the world be set up with toilet stalls and intercoms.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nicholas C. Rossis said:
Sounds ideal for a certain dystopic book a friend has written. Bedlam, anyone?
LikeLike
Charles Yallowitz said:
Not really a war room type of place. Might be a warlord with a toilet throne though. Just don’t want to go that disgusting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nicholas C. Rossis said:
Lol – but cannibalism is OK, right? 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Charles Yallowitz said:
Par for the course with dystopias. I think it stems more from scat scenes being a lot more disgusting than gore for people. Like having a warlord sitting on a toilet and describing what he/she is doing on there.
For example: ‘He stopped his gloating to grunt and push, the smell making his guards’ eyes water. He should not have had so much corn the night before.’
Funny, but comes off grosser than ‘He cracked open the body’s ribs to get at the heart, which he casually devoured with glee.’
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nicholas C. Rossis said:
People are weird 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Charles Yallowitz said:
Thinking more about this, there does seem to be a bigger taboo on bathroom stuff than gore. Just look at how people enjoyed the ‘Saw’ movies and they were in the theaters. Total gore-fests that people indulged in without shame. Then, you have ‘The Human Centipede’, which even the concept of disgusts people and became a punchline/guilty pleasure/method of pranking friends. One reason is because it involved defecation, which is completely nauseating.
Part of this could be psychology. I can write about a cannibalistic scene, but most readers have no experience with real human organs. Describe the liver as much as I want, there will always be some distance from the scene because there’s no real world context. It isn’t the same for bathroom stuff. Whether it be changing a disgusting diaper or eating something that made us suffer later, we all have some visceral memories in this arena. So, it’s easier to set that off and lose the distance, which can disgust a reader a lot more than a Thanksgiving dinner where Uncle Cletus is carving up Mr. Johnson from next door.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Terry J. Gilbert-Fellows said:
Hi Nicholas, I always enjoy your Nodules of History. Perhaps Nodules was not a totally correct word to use in this instance, but let’s face it the availability of the King’s ear has to be one of the most influential positions in any story encompassing the power of the ‘Throne’.
I have a people that could be interested to hear this and have posted it on Blackheath Dawn.
Keep it going we love to hear from you.
Terry
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nicholas C. Rossis said:
Thank you much, Terry! Much appreciated 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
patriciaruthsusan said:
Interesting. I wonder if reading in the bathroom came from this way of living. It’s still a type of library for some. Good post, Nicholas. 😀 — Suzanne
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nicholas C. Rossis said:
Lol – with the wee one running around, it’s the only place where I can find any peace 😀
LikeLiked by 2 people
patriciaruthsusan said:
😀
LikeLiked by 2 people
Pingback: A Fantasy Tip From History: Doo-Dooing The King | Campbells World
aurorajeanalexander said:
Reblogged this on Writer's Treasure Chest and commented:
Nicholas Rossis provides us with a fascinating fantasy tip from history. Thank you very much, Nicholas!
LikeLiked by 1 person
ericlahti said:
Just when I thought I couldn’t be surprised anymore. Makes sense, though. If you’re going to hang out with something while using the alternative throne, you’re probably going to trust them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nicholas C. Rossis said:
Lol – hindsight, huh? 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person