On 18 July 1469 Queen Elizabeth Woodville entered the City of Norwich via the Westwyk Gate (later renamed St Benedict's Gate) on the west side of the city. Upon hearing of her impending visit from the ‘shirreve of Norffolk hym silf’, John Aubry, the Mayor of Norwich, had written to ‘the right reuerent Ser Henry Spelman, Recordour of the cité of Norwich’ on 6 July to ask his advice about appropriate measures for the Queen's visit: ‘And I desired to haue knowe of hym [the sheriff of Norfolk], by cause this shuld be hir first comyng hedir, how we shuld be rulyd, as well in hir resseyuyng, as in hir abidyng here’. The ‘shirreve of Norffolk’ had impressed upon Aubry that the Queen ‘wooll desire to ben resseyued and attendid as wurshepfully as euir was quene a-forn hir’.

The principal information concerning the visit of Elizabeth Woodville to Norwich is recorded in the Chamberlains’ Account Books (1469–90), held in the archives of the Norfolk Record Office, Norwich. The accounts occupy folios 10r–14r and give full details of the financial outlay for the Queen's Entry. They were written by Geoffrey Spirleng, who was one of the Norwich Chamberlains heavily involved in the Queen's reception. These costs and expenses were accounted for by John Coke and William Henstede Junior, Chamberlains of the city. Folios 10r–11r consist of payments made by Coke and Henstede, and folios 11v–12v present invoices from people engaged in the preparations. Itemised accounts from the notebook of Henstede occur in folios 12v–14r. Since selections from the accounts have often been alluded to previously but not transcribed or translated in full, we have provided a full transcription and translation in our Appendix 1.

Our purpose in analysing the document is to investigate the nature and character of the reception and the role of William Parnell in creating the event. Many other people were involved in the creation and preparation of the reception but Parnell was engaged for his undoubted skill in providing the theatrical flair and colour to the proceedings. Other records beyond those of NCR 18a–2 offer additional information concerning Parnell's range of theatrical projects which enable us to consider him as what was later to be designated a ‘property player’.