Scholars used advanced imaging to read crossed-out, pasted-over passages in the first official account of the Tudor queen’s time on the English throne
Twelve years after Elizabeth I’s death at age 69 in 1603, the English antiquarian William Camden published the first official account of the Tudor queen’s reign. Commonly nicknamed Camden’s Annals, the text laid the groundwork for future scholars’ assessments of Elizabeth’s 45 years in power. As historian Hugh Trevor-Roper argued in 1971, “It is thanks to Camden that we ascribe to Queen Elizabeth a consistent policy of via media,” or a middle way between two religious extremes, “rather than an inconsequent series of unresolved conflicts and paralyzed indecisions.”
In the Annals, Camden acknowledged the personal bias that shaped his account, writing, “Things doubtful I have interpreted favorably; things secret and abstruse I have not pried into.” Yet modern scholars have largely treated the text as an impartial record. Now, reports Dalya Alberge for the Guardian, new enhanced imaging reveals how much self-censorship went into the Annals’ creation, suggesting Camden reworked his biography to win the favor of Elizabeth’s successor, James VI of Scotland and I of England.
The British Library’s handwritten manuscripts of the Annals contain dozens of pages with pasted-over or crossed-out text that can’t be read by the naked eye. According to a statement, Helena Rutkowska, the University of Oxford graduate student leading the research, used transmitting light technology to uncover these passages, discovering key instances when Camden revised his account to present James in a more flattering light.
1 comment
Scholars used advanced imaging to read crossed-out, pasted-over passages in the first official account of the Tudor queen’s time on the English throne
Twelve years after Elizabeth I’s death at age 69 in 1603, the English antiquarian William Camden published the first official account of the Tudor queen’s reign. Commonly nicknamed Camden’s Annals, the text laid the groundwork for future scholars’ assessments of Elizabeth’s 45 years in power. As historian Hugh Trevor-Roper argued in 1971, “It is thanks to Camden that we ascribe to Queen Elizabeth a consistent policy of via media,” or a middle way between two religious extremes, “rather than an inconsequent series of unresolved conflicts and paralyzed indecisions.”
In the Annals, Camden acknowledged the personal bias that shaped his account, writing, “Things doubtful I have interpreted favorably; things secret and abstruse I have not pried into.” Yet modern scholars have largely treated the text as an impartial record. Now, reports Dalya Alberge for the Guardian, new enhanced imaging reveals how much self-censorship went into the Annals’ creation, suggesting Camden reworked his biography to win the favor of Elizabeth’s successor, James VI of Scotland and I of England.
The British Library’s handwritten manuscripts of the Annals contain dozens of pages with pasted-over or crossed-out text that can’t be read by the naked eye. According to a statement, Helena Rutkowska, the University of Oxford graduate student leading the research, used transmitting light technology to uncover these passages, discovering key instances when Camden revised his account to present James in a more flattering light.