The Alchemical Patronage of Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley
The Alchemical Patronage of Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley
The Alchemical Patronage of Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Image 3:<br />
An Elizabethan Map <strong>of</strong> the north Anglesey coast, showing the distance to Medley‘s<br />
copper works, entitled ‗A ploote <strong>of</strong> the woorkes and havens now fit for that purpose‘<br />
139<br />
Source: Anon., undated, TNA, SP 45/36 MPF11.<br />
<strong>The</strong> renewed project attracted a far wider range <strong>of</strong> patronage than Medley‘s earlier<br />
scheme. <strong>The</strong> copper samples dispatched to various members <strong>of</strong> the nobility created the<br />
most enthusiasm among Leicester‘s followers: his brother, the Earl <strong>of</strong> Warwick, <strong>Sir</strong> Henry<br />
Sidney, and Edward Dyer all investing heavily in the project. 114 Others such as Leicester‘s<br />
friend <strong>Sir</strong> John Perrot, an influential courtier who had temporarily retired to his Welsh<br />
family home, certainly took an interest in the scheme. 115 Leicester showed his personal<br />
support by appointing his retainer <strong>Sir</strong> John Hubaud to assess and supervise the works. 116<br />
Despite his sometimes rivalry with Leicester, <strong>Cecil</strong> had a good relationship with many <strong>of</strong><br />
these men. <strong>Cecil</strong> particularly favoured Dyer, whose alchemical interests were already well<br />
known.<br />
<strong>Cecil</strong>, prudent as ever and likely stung by the failure <strong>of</strong> the previous venture, chose<br />
<strong>William</strong> Humfrey, the assay master <strong>of</strong> the Royal Mint and <strong>Cecil</strong>‘s foremost metallurgical<br />
expert, as his assessor. 117 While little is known <strong>of</strong> Humfrey‘s background or training, his<br />
position at the Mint was prestigious. 118 <strong>Cecil</strong> had previously used Humfrey to assay the<br />
114 Ibid; Thomas Smith and Leicester to <strong>Cecil</strong>, 7 March 1575, Lansdowne Vol. 19, No. 84.<br />
115 <strong>The</strong> catalogue‘s misdating <strong>of</strong> this manuscript to 1579 has been the cause <strong>of</strong> a great deal <strong>of</strong> confusion<br />
amongst historians over the chronology <strong>of</strong> the project; Thomas Smith to <strong>Cecil</strong>, 8 March 1575, Lansdowne<br />
Vol. 29, No. 619.<br />
116 Ibid.<br />
117 <strong>William</strong> Humfrey to <strong>Cecil</strong>, 9 December 1574, BL, Lansdowne Vol. 18, No. 47.<br />
118 Ash, Power, Knowledge and Expertise, pp. 34-35.