Wikipedia - Kings of England
Wikipedia - Kings of England
Wikipedia - Kings of England
PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:49:53 UTC
Contents
Articles
Edward II of England Henry VII of England Henry VIII of England Edward VI of England Lady Jane Grey Mary I of England Philip II of Spain Elizabeth I of England James I of England Charles I of England 1 13 24 50 70 76 92 107 131 152
References
Article Sources and Contributors Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 178 185
Article Licenses
License 189
Edward II of England
Edward II of England
Edward II
Edward II, depicted in Cassell's History of England, published circa 1902 Edward II, depicted in Cassell's History of England, published circa 1902 King of England (more...) Reign Coronation Predecessor Successor Spouse Issue Edward III of England John of Eltham, Earl of Cornwall Eleanor, Countess of Guelders Joan, Queen of Scots Adam FitzRoy House Father Mother Born Died Burial House of Plantagenet Edward I of England Eleanor of Castile 25 April 1284 Caernarfon Castle, Gwynedd 21 September 1327 (aged43) Berkeley Castle, Gloucestershire Gloucester Cathedral, Gloucestershire 7 July 1307 25 January 1327 25 February 1308 Edward I Edward III Isabella of France
Edward II (25 April 1284 21 September 1327), called Edward of Caernarfon, was King of England from 1307 until he was deposed by his wife Isabella in January 1327. He was the sixth Plantagenet king, in a line that began with the reign of Henry II. Interspersed between the strong reigns of his father Edward I and son Edward III, the reign of Edward II was considered by some to be disastrous for England, marked by alleged incompetence, political squabbling and military defeats. Widely rumoured to have been either homosexual or bisexual, Edward fathered at least five children by two women. His inability to deny even the most grandiose favours to his male favourites (first a Gascon knight named Piers Gaveston, later a young English lord named Hugh Despenser) led to constant political unrest and his eventual deposition. Edward I had pacified Gwynedd and some other parts of Wales and the Scottish lowlands, but never exerted a comprehensive conquest. However the army of Edward II was devastatingly defeated at Bannockburn, freeing Scotland from English control and allowing Scottish forces to raid unchecked throughout the north of England. In addition to these disasters, Edward II is remembered for his probable death in Berkeley Castle, allegedly by murder, and for being the first monarch to establish colleges at Oxford and Cambridge: Oriel College at Oxford and King's Hall, a predecessor of Trinity College, at Cambridge.
Edward II of England
Prince of Wales
The fourth son of Edward I by his first wife Eleanor of Castile, Edward II was born at Caernarfon Castle. He was the first English prince to hold the title Prince of Wales, which was formalised by the Parliament of Lincoln of 7 February 1301.
Edward II of England
The story that his father presented Edward II as a newborn to the Welsh as their future native prince did not appear until the 16th century. The Welsh purportedly asked the King to give them a prince who spoke Welsh, and, the story goes, he answered he would give them a prince that spoke no English at all. This was no great concession as the Plantagenets spoke Norman French rather than English.[1] [2] Edward became heir apparent at just a few months of age, following the death of his elder brother Alphonso. His father, a notable military leader, trained his heir in warfare and statecraft starting in his childhood, yet the young Edward preferred boating and craftwork, activities considered beneath kings at the time.
Shield as heir-apparent
The prince took part in several Scots campaigns, but despite these martial engagements, "all his father's efforts could not prevent his acquiring the habits of extravagance and frivolity which he retained all through his life".[3] The king attributed his sons preferences to his strong attachment to Piers Gaveston, a Gascon knight, and Edward I exiled Gaveston from court after Prince Edward attempted to bestow on his friend a title reserved for royalty. Ironically, it was the king who had originally chosen Gaveston in 1298 to be a suitable friend for his son due to his wit, courtesy and abilities. Edward I knighted his son in a major ceremony in 1306 called the Feast of the Swans whereby all present swore to continue the war in Scotland.
Edward II of England
King of England
Edward I died on 7 July 1307 en route to another campaign against the Scots, a war that had become the hallmark of his reign. One chronicler relates that Edward had requested his son "boil his body, extract the bones and carry them with the army until the Scots had been subdued." His son ignored the request, however, and had his father buried in Westminster Abbey.[4] Edward II immediately recalled Gaveston, created him Earl of Cornwall, gave him the hand of the king's niece, Margaret of Gloucester, and withdrew from the Scottish campaign.
Edward was as physically impressive as his father, yet he lacked the drive and ambition of his forebear. It was written that Edward II was "the first king after the Conquest who was not a man of business".[3] His main interest was in entertainment, though he also took pleasure in athletics and mechanical crafts. He had been so dominated by his father that he had little confidence in himself, and was often in the hands of a court favourite with a stronger will than his own. On 25 January 1308, Edward married Isabella of France, the daughter of King Philip IV of France, known as "Philip the Fair," and sister to three French kings, in an attempt to bolster an alliance with France. On 25 February the pair were crowned in Westminster Abbey.
Edward's Coat of Arms as King
The marriage, however, was doomed to failure almost from the beginning. Isabella was frequently neglected by her husband, who spent much of his time conspiring with his favourites regarding how to limit the powers of the Peerage in order to consolidate his father's legacy for himself. Nevertheless, their marriage produced two sons, Edward, who would succeed his father on the throne as Edward III, and John of Eltham (later created Earl of Cornwall), and two daughters, Eleanor and Joanna, wife of David II of Scotland. Edward had also fathered at least one illegitimate son, Adam FitzRoy, who accompanied his father in the Scottish campaigns of 1322 and died shortly afterwards.
Edward II of England other beheaded him. A monument called Gaveston's Cross remains on the site, south of Leek Wootton near Warwick. Edward's grief over the death of Gaveston was profound. He kept the remains of his body close to him for a number of weeks before the Church forcibly arranged a burial. Immediately following this, Edward focused on the destruction of those who had betrayed him, while the barons themselves lost impetus (with Gaveston dead, they saw little need to continue). By mid-July, Aymer de Valence, 2nd Earl of Pembroke was advising the king to make war on the barons who, unwilling to risk their lives, entered negotiations in September 1312. In October, the Earls of Lancaster, Warwick, Arundel and Hereford were forced to beg Edward's pardon.
Defeat in Scotland
Robert the Bruce had been steadily reconquering Scotland. Each campaign begun by Edward, from 1307 to 1314, had ended in Robert clawing back more of the land that Edward I had taken during his long reign. Robert's military successes against Edward II were due to a number of factors, not the least of which was the Scottish king's strategy. He used small forces to trap an invading English army, took castles by stealth to preserve his troops and he used the land as a weapon against Edward by attacking quickly and then disappearing into the hills instead of facing the superior numbers of the English.
Edward II of England Bruce united Scotland against its common enemy and is quoted as saying that he feared more the dead king's bones (Edward I) than his living heir (Edward II).[9] By June 1314, only Stirling Castle and Berwick remained under English control. On 23 June 1314, Edward and an army of 20,000foot soldiers and 3,000 cavalry faced Robert and his army of foot soldiers and farmers wielding 14-foot-long pikes. Edward knew he had to keep the critical stronghold of Stirling Castle if there was to be any chance for English military success. The castle, however, was under a constant state of siege, and the English commander, Sir Phillip de Mowbray, had advised Edward that he would surrender the castle to the Scots unless Edward arrived by 24 June 1314, to relieve the siege. Edward could not afford to lose his last forward castle in Scotland. He decided therefore to gamble his entire army to break the siege and force the Scots to a final battle by putting its army into the field. However, Edward had made a serious mistake in thinking his vastly superior numbers alone would provide enough of a tactical advantage to defeat the Scots. Robert not only had the advantage of prior warning, as he knew the actual day that Edward would come north and fight, he also had the time to choose the field of battle most advantageous to the Scots and their style of combat. As Edward moved forward on the main road to Stirling, Robert placed his army on either side of the road north, one in the dense woods and the other placed on a bend on the river, a spot hard for the invading army to see. Robert also ordered his men to dig potholes and cover them with bracken in order to help break any cavalry charge. By contrast, Edward did not issue his writs of service, calling upon 21,540 men, until 27 May 1314. Worse, his army was ill-disciplined and had seen little success in eight years of campaigns. On the eve of battle, he decided to move his entire army at night and placed it in a marshy area, with its cavalry laid out in nine squadrons in front of the foot soldiers. The following battle, the Battle of Bannockburn, is considered by contemporary scholars to be the worst defeat sustained by the English since the Battle of Hastings in 1066.
Edward II of England
On 14 August at Westminster Hall, accompanied by the Earls of Pembroke and Richmond, the king declared the Despenser father and son both banished. The victory of the barons proved their undoing. With the removal of the Despensers, many nobles, regardless of previous affiliation, now attempted to move into the vacuum left by the two. Hoping to win Edward's favour, these nobles were willing to aid the king in his revenge against the barons and thus increase their own wealth and power. In following campaigns, many of the king's opponents were murdered, the Earl of Lancaster being beheaded in the presence of Edward himself. With all opposition crushed, the king and the Despensers were left the unquestioned masters of England. At the York Parliament of 1322, Edward issued a statute which revoked all previous ordinances designed to limit his power and to prevent any further encroachment upon it. The king would no longer be subject to the will of Parliament, and the Lords, Prelates, and Commons were to suffer his will in silence. Opposition to Edward and the Despensers rule continued; in 1324 there was a foiled assassination attempt on their lives, and in early 1325 John of Nottingham was placed on trial for involvement in a plot to kill them with magic.[11]
Seal of Edward II
Edward II of England
Edward II of England
Hugh Despenser the Younger was brutally executed and a huge crowd gathered in anticipation at seeing him die a public spectacle for public entertainment. They dragged him from his horse, stripped him, and scrawled Biblical verses against corruption and arrogance on his skin. They then dragged him into the city, presenting him (in the Execution of Hugh Despenser the Younger market square) to Queen Isabella, Roger Mortimer, and the Lancastrians. He was then condemned to hang as a thief, be castrated, and then to be drawn and quartered as a traitor, his quarters to be dispersed throughout England. Despenser's vassal Simon of Reading was also hanged next to him, on charges of insulting Queen Isabella.[16] Edward II's Chancellor, Robert Baldock, was placed under house arrest in London, but a London mob broke into the house, severely beat him, and threw him into Newgate Prison, where he was murdered by some of the inmates.[17]
Abdication
With the King imprisoned, Mortimer and the Queen faced the problem of what to do with him. The simplest solution would be execution: his titles would then pass to Edward of Windsor, whom Isabella could control, while it would also prevent the possibility of his being restored. Execution would require the King to be tried and convicted of treason: and while most Lords agreed that Edward had failed to show due attention to his country, several Prelates argued that, appointed by God, the King could not be legally deposed or executed; if this happened, they said, God would punish the country. Thus, at first, it was decided to have Edward imprisoned for life instead. However, the fact remained that the legality of power still lay with the King. Isabella had been given the Great Seal, and was using it to rule in the names of the King, herself, and their son as appropriate; nonetheless, these actions were illegal, and could at any moment be challenged. In these circumstances, Parliament chose to act as an authority above the King. Representatives of the House of Commons were summoned, and debates began. The Archbishop of York, William Melton and others declared themselves fearful of the London mob, loyal to Roger Mortimer. Others wanted the King to speak in Parliament and openly abdicate, rather than be deposed by the Queen and her General. Mortimer responded by commanding the Lord Mayor of London, Richard de Betoyne, to write to Parliament, asking them to go to the Guildhall to swear an oath to protect the Queen and Prince Edward, and to depose the King. Mortimer then called the great lords to a secret meeting that night, at which they gave their unanimous support to the deposition of the King. Eventually Parliament agreed to remove the King. However, for all that Parliament had agreed that the King should no longer rule, they had not deposed him. Rather, their decision made, Edward was asked to accept it.
Edward II of England
9 On 20 January 1327, Edward II was informed at Kenilworth Castle of the charges brought against him: The King was guilty of incompetence; allowing others to govern him to the detriment of the people and Church; not listening to good advice and pursuing occupations unbecoming to a monarch; having lost Scotland and lands in Gascony and Ireland through failure of effective governance; damaging the Church, and imprisoning its representatives; allowing nobles to be killed, disinherited, imprisoned and exiled; failing to ensure fair justice, instead governing for profit and allowing others to do likewise; and of fleeing in the company of a notorious enemy of the realm, leaving it without government, and thereby losing the faith and
trust of his people. Edward, profoundly shocked by this judgment, wept while listening. He was then offered a choice: he might abdicate in favour of his son; or he might resist, and relinquish the throne to one not of royal blood, but experienced in governmentthis, presumably, being Roger Mortimer. The King, lamenting that his people had so hated his rule, agreed that if the people would accept his son, he would abdicate in his favour. The lords, through the person of Sir William Trussell, then renounced their homage to him, and the reign of Edward II ended. The abdication was announced and recorded in London on 24 January 1327, and the following day was proclaimed the first of the reign of Edward IIIwho, at 14, was still controlled by Isabella and Mortimer. Edward II remained imprisoned. A poem, the "Lament of Edward II", traditionally credited to Edward, may have been written during his imprisonment.[18]
Death
The government of Isabella and Mortimer was so precarious that they dared not leave the deposed king in the hands of their political enemies. On 3 April, Edward II was removed from Kenilworth and entrusted to the custody of two subordinates of Mortimer, then later imprisoned at Berkeley Castle in Gloucestershire where, it was generally believed, he was murdered by an agent of Isabella and Mortimer on 11 October 1327. The closest chronicler to the scene in time and distance, Adam Murimuth, stated that it was 'popularly rumoured' that he had been suffocated. The Lichfield chronicle, equally reflecting local opinion, stated that he had been strangled. Most chronicles did not offer a cause of death other than natural causes. The popular story that the king was assassinated by having a red-hot poker thrust into his anus has no basis in accounts recorded by Edward's contemporaries. Thomas de la Moore's account of Edward's murder was not written until after 1352 and is uncorroborated by other contemporary sources. Not until the relevant sections of the longer Brut chronicle were composed by an anti-Mortimer Lancastrian polemicist in the mid-1430s was the story widely circulated.[19]
Edward II of England
10
Ian Mortimer has put forward the argument that Edward II was not killed at Berkeley but was still alive at least until 1330.[20] In his biography of Edward III[21] he explores the implications of this, using evidence including the Fieschi Letter, concluding Edward II may have died in Italy around 1341. In her biography of Isabella, Alison Weir also considers the Fieschi Letter narrative that Edward escaped imprisonment and lived the rest of his life in exile. Other historians, however, including David Carpenter[22] have criticised Mortimer's methodology and disagree with his conclusions. Nevertheless a public funeral was held in 1327, Edward II's tomb at Gloucester Cathedral attended by Isabella, after which Edward's body was said to be laid in Gloucester Cathedral. An elaborate tomb was set up by his son which attracted pilgrims from far and wide. Following the public announcement of the king's death, the rule of Isabella and Mortimer did not last long. They made peace with the Scots in the Treaty of Northampton, but this move was highly unpopular. Consequently, when Edward III came of age in 1330, he executed Roger Mortimer on fourteen charges of treason, most significantly the murder of Edward II (thereby removing any public doubt about his father's survival). Edward III spared his mother and gave her a generous allowance, but ensured that she retired from public life for several years. She died at Hertford on 23 August 1358.
Edward II of England
11
References
[1] Crofton, Ian (2007). "[[Edward I of England|Edward I (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=GdMzXfsKioAC& printsec=frontcover& dq=The+ Kings+ and+ Queens+ of+ England& sig=w8EE1-yEaj12vl785WPCeDpLj6Y#PPA84,M1)]"]. The Kings and Queens of England. 21 Bloomsbury Square, London: Quercus. pp.84. ISBN1847240658. . Retrieved 23 June 2008. [2] This story first appeared in the work of 16th-century Welsh "antiquary" David Powel. [3] "King Edward II" (http:/ / www. nndb. com/ people/ 710/ 000093431/ ). NNDB. . Retrieved 23 June 2008. [4] Hudson, M.E.; Mary Clark (1978). Crown of a Thousand Years. Crown Publishers, Inc.. pp.48. ISBN0-517-534525. [5] Fritze, Ronald H.; William Baxter Robison (2002). "Boulogne Document (1308)" (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=INmdwCSkvIgC& pg=PA68). Historical dictionary of late medieval England, 12721485. Westport, London: Greenwood Publishing Group. pp.689. ISBN0313291241. . Retrieved 1 August 2009. [6] Flores Historiarum [7] Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University, 2004 [8] Ian Mortimer: "Barriers to the Truth" History Today: 60:12: December 2010: 23 [9] P.C.Doherty,Isabella and the strange death of Edward II, Constable, 2003 [10] Doherty, Paul. (2003) Isabella and the Strange Death of Edward II. London: Robinson, p.61; Weir, Alison. (2006) Isabella: She-Wolf of France, Queen of England. London: Pimlico, p.117. [11] Doherty, pp80-1. [12] Ian Mortimer The Greatest Traitor: The Life of Sir Roger Mortimer, Ruler of England 13271330 (London, 2004) pp. 155156 [13] Ian Mortimer The Greatest Traitor' p.154' [14] The Magna Charta Sureties, 1215; Adams and Weis; pg 111 [15] Ian Mortimer The Greatest Traitor'pp. 160162 ' [16] Ian Mortimer The Greatest Traitor pp. 159162. [17] Ian Mortimer The Greatest Traitor p. 162. [18] For a sceptical comment, see V.H. Galbraith, "The literacy of the medieval English kings", Proceedings of the British Academy, 21 (1935:221 note 6); May McKisack, The Fourteenth Century (Oxford History of England) 1959:2, reserves judgement: "if he was indeed the author of the Anglo-Norman lament ascribed to him, he knew something of versification;" M. Smallwood, "The Lament of Edward II", Modern Language Review 68 (1973:52129) pp. 528f, feels that "the authorship question has not been settled"; Claire Valente, "The 'Lament of Edward II': religious lyric, political propaganda", Speculum 77 (2002:422ff) writes "I think it unlikely that Edward II wrote the poem" (p. 422) [19] http:/ / www. timeshighereducation. co. uk/ story. asp?storycode=176011 [20] Ian Mortimer, 'The Death of Edward II in Berkeley castle', English Historical Review cxx (2005), pp. 11751224 [21] Mortimer, The Perfect King [22] http:/ / www. lrb. co. uk/ v29/ n15/ letters. html#letter9 [23] Saul, Nigel (24 August 2010), "Edward II" (http:/ / www. historytoday. com/ blog/ books-blog/ nigel-saul/ edward-ii), History Today (London, UK), , retrieved 3 March 2011 [24] Phillips, Seymour (2010), Edward II, Yale University Press, ISBN9780300156577
Sources
This articleincorporates text from a publication now in the public domain:Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). Encyclopdia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. Blackley, F.D. Adam, the Bastard Son of Edward II, 1964. Davies, James Conway (1967) [1918]. The Baronial Opposition to Edward II: Its Character and Policy, a Study in Administrative History. London: Cass. Doherty, Paul. Isabella and the Strange Death of Edward II. Constable and Robinson, 2003. ISBN 1841193011 Fryde, Natalie. The Tyranny and Fall of Edward II: 13211326 Haines, Roy Martin (2003). King Edward II: Edward of Caernarfon, His Life, His Reign, and Its Aftermath, 12841330. Montreal, London: McGill-Queens University Press. ISBN9780773524323. McKisack, M. (1959). The Fourteenth Century: 13071399. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN0-19-821712-9. OCLC183353136. Maddicot, J.R. (1970). Thomas of Lancaster, 13071322. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN0198218370. OCLC132766. Mortimer, Ian. The Greatest Traitor: the Life of Sir Roger Mortimer, 1st Earl of March, Ruler of England 13271330. Thomas Dunne Books, 2003. ISBN 0-312-34941-6
Edward II of England Mortimer, Ian. The Perfect King: The Life of Edward III Father of the English Nation. Jonathan Cape, 2006. ISBN 9780224073011 Appendix 2: The fake death of Edward II; Appendix 3: A note on the later life of Edward II Mortimer, Ian. 'Note on the deaths of Edward II' (http://www.ianmortimer.com/EdwardII/death.htm) (2008) Phillips, Seymour. Edward II (Yale University Press; 2010) 679 pages; $45). Full biography; considers the question of whether or not he was murdered in 1327, or lived on as a captive and later wanderer. Phillips, J.R.S. (1972). Aymer de Valence, Earl of Pembroke 13071324. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN0198223595. OCLC426691. Prestwich, M.C. (1980). The Three Edwards: War and State in England 12721377. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. ISBN0297777300. OCLC185679701. Prestwich, Michael (2007). Plantagenet England: 12251360 (new ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN0198228449. Tuck, Anthony (1985). Crown and Nobility 12721461: Political Conflict in Late Medieval England. London: Fontana. ISBN0006860842. Weir, Alison, 'Isabella, She-Wolf of France', Jonathan Cape, 2005, ISBN 0224063200
12
External links
Edward II of England (http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00000810&tree=LEO) at Genealogics
13
Henry VII (Welsh: Harri Tudur; 28 January 1457 21 April 1509) was King of England and Lord of Ireland from his seizing the crown on 22 August 1485 until his death on 21 April 1509, as the first monarch of the House of Tudor. Henry won the throne when he defeated Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field. He was the last king of England to win his throne on the field of battle. He was successful in restoring the power and stability of the English monarchy after the political upheavals of the Wars of the Roses. He founded a long-lasting dynasty and was peacefully succeeded by his son, Henry VIII, after a reign of nearly 24 years. Although Henry can be credited with the restoration of political stability in England, and a number of commendable administrative, economic and diplomatic initiatives, the latter part of his reign was characterised by a financial
Henry VII of England rapacity which stretched the bounds of legality. According to the contemporary historian Polydore Vergil, simple "greed" in large part underscored the means by which royal control was over-asserted in Henry's final years.[1]
14
Henry's paternal grandfather, Owen Tudor, originally from the Isle of Anglesey in Wales, had been a page in the court of Henry V. He rose to become one of the "Squires to the Body to the King" after military service at Agincourt.[2] Owen is said to have secretly married the widow of Henry V, Catherine of Valois. One of their sons was Edmund Tudor, father of Henry VII. Edmund was created Earl of Richmond in 1452, and "formally declared legitimate by Parliament".[3] Henry's claim to the throne, however, derived from his mother through the House of Beaufort. Henry's mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort, was a great-granddaughter of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, third son of Edward III, and his third wife Katherine Groat of Henry VII Swynford. Katherine was Gaunt's mistress for about 25 years; when they married in 1396, they already had four children, including Henry's great-grandfather John Beaufort. Thus Henry's claim was somewhat tenuous: it was from a woman, and by illegitimate descent. In theory, the Portuguese and Spanish royal families, as descendants of Catherine of Lancaster, the daughter of John of Gaunt and his second wife Constance of Castile, had a better claim. Gaunt's nephew Richard II legitimised Gaunt's children by Katherine Swynford by Letters Patent in 1397. In 1407, Henry IV, who was Gaunt's son by his first wife, issued new Letters Patent confirming the legitimacy of his half-siblings, but also declaring them ineligible for the throne.[4] Henry IV's action was of doubtful legality, as the Beauforts were previously legitimised by an Act of Parliament, but it further weakened Henry's claim. Nonetheless, by 1483 Henry was the senior male Lancastrian claimant remaining, after the deaths in battle or by murder or execution of Henry VI, his son Edward of Westminster, Prince of Wales, and the other Beaufort line of
Henry VII of England descent through Lady Margaret's uncle, the 2nd Duke of Somerset. Henry also made some political capital out of his Welsh ancestry, for example in attracting military support and safeguarding his army's passage through Wales on its way to the Battle of Bosworth.[5] [6] He came from an old-established Anglesey family which claimed descent from Cadwaladr (in legend, the last ancient British king)[7] and on occasion, Henry displayed the red dragon of Cadwaladr.[5] He took it, as well as the standard of St George, on his procession through London after victory at Bosworth.[8] A contemporary writer and Henry's biographer, Bernard Andr, also made much of Henry's Welsh descent.[7] In reality, however, his hereditary connections to Welsh aristocracy were not strong. He was descended by the paternal line, through several generations, from Ednyfed Fychan, the seneschal (steward) of Gwynedd and through this seneschal's wife from Rhys ap Tewdwr, the King of Deheubarth in South Wales.[9] [10] [11] His more immediate ancestor Tudur ap Goronwy had aristocratic land rights, but his sons, who were first cousins to Owain Glyndwr, sided with Owain in his revolt. One son was executed and the family land was forfeited. Another son, Henry's great-grandfather, became a butler to the Bishop of Bangor.[8] Owen Tudor, the son of the butler, like the children of other rebels, was provided for by Henry V, a circumstance which precipitated his access to Queen Catherine of Valois.[12] Notwithstanding this lineage, to the bards of Wales, Henry was a candidate for Y Mab Darogan "The son of Prophecy" who would free the Welsh from oppression. In 1456, Henry's father Edmund Tudor was captured while fighting for Henry VI in South Wales against the Yorkists. He died in Carmarthen Castle, three months before Henry was born. Henry's uncle Jasper Tudor, the Earl of Pembroke and Edmund's younger brother, undertook to protect the young widow, who was 13 years old when she gave birth to Henry.[13] When Edward IV became King in 1461, Jasper Tudor went into exile abroad. Pembroke Castle, and later the Earldom of Pembroke, were granted to the Yorkist William Herbert, who also assumed the guardianship of Margaret Beaufort and the young Henry.[14] Henry lived in the Herbert household until 1469, when Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick (the "Kingmaker"), went over to the Lancastrians. Herbert was captured fighting for the Yorkists and executed by Warwick.[15] When Warwick restored Henry VI in 1470, Jasper Tudor returned from exile and brought Henry to court.[15] When the Yorkist Edward IV regained the throne in 1471, Henry fled with other Lancastrians to Brittany, where he spent most of the next 14 years.
15
16
Henry was aware that his best chance to seize the throne was to engage Richard quickly and defeat him immediately, as Richard had reinforcements in Nottingham and Leicester. Richard only needed to avoid being killed in order to keep his throne. Though outnumbered, Henry's Lancastrian forces decisively defeated Richard's Yorkist army at the Battle of Bosworth Field on 22 August 1485. Several of Richard's key allies, such as the Earl of Northumberland and William and Thomas Stanley, crucially switched sides or left the battlefield. Richard III's death at Bosworth Field effectively ended the Wars of the Roses, although it was not the last battle Henry had to fight.
Reign
The first concern Henry had was to secure his hold on the throne. His claim to the throne was that he was the last reasonably legitimate male descendant of Edward III. He honoured his pledge of December 1483 to marry Elizabeth of York.[16] They were third cousins, as both were [21] great-great-grandchildren of John of Gaunt. The marriage took place on 18 January 1486 at Westminster. The marriage unified the warring houses and gave his children a strong claim to the throne. The unification of the houses of York and Lancaster by this marriage is symbolised by the heraldic emblem of the Tudor rose, a combination of the white rose of York and the red rose of Lancaster. It also ended future discussion as to whether the descendants of the fourth son of
The Tudor Rose: a combination of the Red Rose of Lancaster and the White Rose of York
Henry VII of England Edward III, Edmund, Duke of York, through marriage to Phillipa, heiress of the second son, Lionel, Duke of Clarence, had a superior or inferior claim to those of the third son John of Gaunt, who had held the throne for three generations. In addition, Henry had Parliament repeal Titulus Regius, the statute that declared Edward IV's marriage invalid and his children illegitimate, thus legitimising his wife. Amateur historians Bertram Fields and Sir Clements Markham have claimed that he may have been involved in the murder of the Princes in the Tower, as the repeal of Titulus Regius gave the Princes a stronger claim to the throne than his own. Alison Weir, however, points out that the Rennes ceremony, two years earlier, was possible only if Henry and his supporters were certain that the Princes were already dead.[22] Henry's second action was to declare himself king retroactively from the day before Bosworth Field. This meant that anyone who had fought for Richard against him would be guilty of treason. Thus, Henry could legally confiscate the lands and property of Richard III while restoring his own. However, he spared Richard's nephew and designated heir, the Earl of Lincoln. He also created Margaret Plantagenet, a Yorkist heiress, Countess of Salisbury sui juris. He took great care not to address the baronage, or summon Parliament, until after his coronation. Almost immediately afterwards, he issued an edict that any gentleman who swore fealty to him would, notwithstanding any previous attainder, be secure in his property and person. Henry secured his crown principally by dividing and undermining the power of the nobility, especially through the aggressive use of bonds and recognisances to secure loyalty. He also enacted laws against livery and maintenance, the great lords' practice of having large numbers of "retainers" who wore their lord's badge or uniform and formed a potential private army. Henry was threatened by several rebellions in the next few years. The first was the Stafford and Lovell Rebellion of 1486, which collapsed without fighting. In 1487, Yorkists led by Lincoln rebelled in support of Lambert Simnel, a boy who was claimed to be the Earl of Warwick, son of Edward IV's brother Clarence (who was actually a prisoner in the Tower). The rebellion was defeated and Lincoln killed at the Battle of Stoke. Henry made the boy Simnel a servant in the royal kitchen.[23] In 1490, a young Fleming, Perkin Warbeck, appeared and claimed to be Richard, the younger of the "Princes in the Tower". Warbeck won the support of Edward IV's sister Margaret of Burgundy. He led attempted invasions of Ireland in 1491 and England in 1495, and persuaded James IV of Scotland to invade England in 1496. In 1497 Warbeck landed in Cornwall with a few thousand troops, but was soon captured and executed. In 1499, Henry had the Earl of Warwick executed. However, he spared Warwick's elder sister Margaret. She survived until 1541, when she was executed by Henry VIII. Henry married Elizabeth of York with the hope of uniting the Yorkist and Lancastrian sides of the Plantagenet dynastic disputes. In this he was largely successful. However, such a level of paranoia persisted that anyone with blood ties to the Plantagenets was suspected of coveting the throne.
17
18 Henry VII's policy was both to maintain peace and to create economic prosperity. Up to a point, he succeeded. He was not a military man and had no interest in trying to regain French territories lost during the reigns of his predecessors; he was therefore ready to conclude a treaty with France at Etaples that brought money into the coffers of England, and ensured the French would not support pretenders to the English throne, such as Perkin Warbeck. However, this treaty came at a slight price, as Henry mounted a minor invasion of Brittany in November 1492. This act of war was a bluff by Henry, as he had no intention of fighting over the winter. However, as France was becoming more concerned with the Italian Wars, the French were happy to agree to the Treaty of Etaples.
Henry had been under the financial and physical protection of the French throne or its vassals for most of his life, prior to his ascending the throne of England. To strengthen his position, however, he Henry VII (centre), with his advisors Sir Richard subsidised shipbuilding, so strengthening the navy (he commissioned Empson and Sir Edmund Dudley Europe's first ever and the world's oldest surviving dry dock at Portsmouth in 1495) and improving trading opportunities. By the time of his death, he had amassed a personal fortune of 1.25million (648million as of 2011).[24] [25] Henry VII was one of the first European monarchs to recognise the importance of the newly-united Spanish kingdom and concluded the Treaty of Medina del Campo (1489), by which his son, Arthur Tudor, was married to Catherine of Aragon. He also concluded the Treaty of Perpetual Peace with Scotland (the first treaty between England and Scotland for almost two centuries), which betrothed his daughter Margaret to King James IV of Scotland. By means of this marriage, Henry VII hoped to break the Auld Alliance between Scotland and France. Though this was not achieved, the marriage led to the union of the English and Scottish crowns under Margaret's great-grandson, James VI and I. He also formed an alliance with Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I (14931519) and persuaded Pope Innocent VIII to issue a Bull of Excommunication against all pretenders to Henry's throne. Henry's most successful economic-related diplomatic achievement was the Magnus Intercursus ("great agreement") of 1496. In 1494, Henry embargoed trade (mainly in wool) with the Netherlands as retaliation for Margaret of Burgundy's support of Perkin Warbeck. The Merchant Adventurers, the company which enjoyed the monopoly of the Flemish wool trade, relocated from Antwerp to Calais. At the same time, Flemish merchants were ejected from England. The stand-off eventually paid off for Henry. Both parties realised they were mutually disadvantaged by the reduction in commerce. Its restoration by the Magnus Intercursus was very much to England's benefit in removing taxation for English merchants and significantly increasing England's wealth. In turn, Antwerp became an extremely important trade entrepot, through which, for example, goods from the Baltic, spices from the east and Italian silks were exchanged for English cloth.[26] In 1506, Henry extorted the Treaty of Windsor from Philip the Handsome of Burgundy. Philip had been shipwrecked on the English coast, and while Henry's guest, was bullied into an agreement so favourable to England at the expense of the Netherlands that it was dubbed the Malus Intercursus ("evil agreement"). France, Burgundy, the Holy Roman Empire, Spain and the Hanseatic League all rejected the treaty, which was never in force. Philip died shortly after the negotiations.[27]
19
20
Scene at deathbed of Henry VII at Richmond Palace, 1509. Drawn contemporaneously from witness accounts by the courtier Sir Thomas Wriothesley(d.1534), who wrote an account of the proceedings. BL Add.MS 45131,f.54
Henry made half-hearted plans to remarry and beget more heirs, but these never came to anything. In 1505 he was sufficiently interested in a potential marriage to Joan, the recently widowed Queen of Naples, that he sent ambassadors to Naples to report on the 27-year old's physical suitability.[30] He died at Richmond Palace on 21 April 1509 of tuberculosis and was succeeded by his second son, Henry VIII (150947). He was buried at Westminster Abbey.[31]
Henry's titles
Up to 1485 The Earl of Richmond (disputed) 22 August 1485 21 April 1509: His Highness The King of England and France, Lord of Ireland Henry's full style as king was: Henry, by the Grace of God, King of England, France and Lord of Ireland
Arms
Upon his succession as king, Henry became entitled to bear the arms of his kingdom. After his marriage, he used the red-and-white rose as his emblem this continued to be his dynasty's emblem, known as the Tudor rose.
Issue
Henry and Elizabeth's children were:-
21
Margaret Tudor, wife of King James IV of Scotland and great grandmother of James I of England.
Name
Birth
Notes
Arthur Tudor, 19 Prince of Wales September 1486 Margaret Tudor 28 November 1489 Henry VIII, King of England 28 June 1491
18 October 1541
Married (1) James IV, King of Scotland (14731513) in 1503. Married (2) Archibald Douglas, 6th Earl of Angus (14891557) in 1514. Grandmother of both Mary, Queen of Scots and Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, the parents of James I. Married (1) Catherine of Aragon (14851536) in 1509; had issue. Married (2) Anne Boleyn (15011536) in 1533; had issue. Married (3) Jane Seymour (15031537) in 1536; had issue. Married (4) Anne of Cleves (15151557) in 1540. Married (5) Catherine Howard (15201542) in 1540. Married (6) Catherine Parr (15121548) in 1543. Died young.
28 January 1547
Mary Tudor
18 March 1496
Married (1) Louis XII, King of France (14621515) in 1514. Married (2) Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk (14841545) in 1515. Mary was the grandmother of Lady Jane Grey. Died young.
Edmund Tudor, 21 February Duke of 1499 Somerset Katherine Tudor 2 February 1503
2 February 1503
Died shortly after birth. Mother, Elizabeth of York, died as a result of Katherine's birth.
An illegitimate son has also been attributed to Henry by "a Breton Lady":
Name Sir Roland de Velville or Veleville Birth 1474 Death 25 June 1535 Notes He was knighted in 1497 and was Constable of Beaumaris Castle. If de Velville was in fact Henry's son, he was born during the period of Henry's exile in France. Roland de Velville's descendants included Katheryn of [32] Berain, hence she is sometimes referred to as "Katherine Tudor".
22
Further descendants
Henry VII's elder surviving daughter Margaret was married first to James IV of Scotland (reigned 14881513). Their son became James V of Scotland (reigned 151342), whose daughter became Mary, Queen of Scots (reigned 154267). Margaret Tudor's second marriage was to Archibald Douglas; their grandson, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley married Mary, Queen of Scots. Their son, James VI of Scotland (reigned 15671625), inherited the throne of England as James I (reigned 160325) after the death of Elizabeth I. Henry VII's other surviving daughter, Mary first married King Louis XII of France (reigned 14981515), who died after only about three months of marriage. She then married the Duke of Suffolk without the permission of her brother, now King Henry VIII. Their daughter Frances married Henry Grey, and her children included Lady Jane Grey, in whose name her parents and in-laws tried to seize the throne after Edward VI of England (reigned 154753) died.
Notes
[1] [2] [3] [4] Guy, John (1988), "The Tudor Age (14851603)", The Oxford History of Britain, pp.272273 Kendall, Paul Murray. Richard the Third. p.13. Williams, Neville. The Life and Times of Henry VII. p.17. Kendall, Paul Murray. Richard the Third. p.156.
[5] Chrimes, S.B.. Henry VII. p.3. [6] Davies, Norman. The Isles A History. pp.337379. [7] Mackie, J.D.. The Earlier Tudors 14851558. p.47. [8] Mackie, J.D.. The Earlier Tudors 14851558. p.54. [9] Chrimes, S.B.. Henry VII. p.4. [10] Ashley, Mike. The Mammoth Book of British Kings and Queens. p.331. [11] Garmon Jones, W. Welsh Nationalism and Henry Tudor. p.30. [12] Chrimes, S.B.. Henry VII. pp.45. [13] Starkey, David. Monarchy: From the Middle Ages to Modernity. p.4. [14] EnglishHistory.net (http:/ / englishhistory. net/ tudor/ monarchs/ henry7. html) [15] Williams, Neville. The Life and Times of Henry VII. p.19. [16] Williams, Neville. The Life and Times of Henry VII. p.25. [17] Kendall, Paul Murray. Richard the Third. p.297. [18] Henry's return to Wales was regarded by some as the fulfilment of a Messianic prophecy. Rees, David (1985). The Son of Prophecy: Henry Tudor's Road to Bosworth. London: Black Raven Press. ISBN0-85159-005-5. [19] Kendall, Paul Murray. Richard the Third. p.361. [20] Estimates of the size of Henry's army at Bosworth vary. Williams, Neville. The Life and Times of Henry VII. p.31., gives a figure of 'perhaps' 6,000. [21] Genealogical tables in Morgan, Kenneth O.. The Oxford History of Britain. p.709. [22] Weir, Alison (1995). The Princes in the Tower. New York: Ballantine. p.190. ISBN0-345-39178-0. [23] Williams, Neville. The Life and Times of Henry VII. p.62. [24] UK CPI inflation numbers based on data available from Lawrence H. Officer (2010) " What Were the UK Earnings and Prices Then? (http:/ / www. measuringworth. org/ ukearncpi/ )" MeasuringWorth. [25] Weir, Alison. Henry VIII: King and Court. p.13. [26] Williams, Neville. The Life and Times of Henry VII. pp.167168. [27] Williams, Neville. The Life and Times of Henry VII. pp.198201. [28] Williams, Neville. The Life and Times of Henry VII. p.178. [29] MacCulloch, Diarmaid (1996), "The Consolidation of England 14851603", The Oxford Illustrated History of Tudor and Stuart Britain, pp.3942 [30] Schwarz, Arthur L., VIVAT REX! An Exhibition Commemorating the 500th Anniversary of the Accession of Henry VIII (http:/ / www. amazon. com/ dp/ 1605830178) (The Grolier Club, 2009), p. 58 "Henry's Father Searches for a New Wife". [31] Weir, Alison. Henry VIII: King and Court. p.1. [32] About Henry VII TUDOR (King of England) (http:/ / www. tudorplace. com. ar/ aboutHenryVII. htm)
23
References
Ashley, Mike (2002). British Kings & Queens. Carroll & Graf. pp.280286. ISBN0-7867-1104-3. Chrimes, Stanley B. (1972). Henry VII. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN0-520-02266-1. Cunningham, Sean (2007). Henry VII. New York: Routledge. ISBN0-415-26620-3. Guy, John (1988), "The Tudor Age (14851603)", in Morgan, Kenneth O., The Oxford History of Britain, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN0-19-285202-7 Kendall, Paul Murray (1973). Richard the Third. Sphere Books. ISBN0-351-17095-2. MacCulloch, Diarmaid (1996), "The Consolidation of England 14851603", in Morrill, John, The Oxford Illustrated History of Tudor and Stuart Britain, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN0-19-289327-0 Morgan, Kenneth O. (1988). The Oxford History of Britain. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. ISBN0-19-285202-7. Morrill, John (1996). The Oxford Illustrated History of Tudor and Stuart Britain. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. Rogers, Caroline; Turvey, Roger (2000). Henry VII. London: Hodder & Stoughton Educational. ISBN0-340-75381-1. Starkey, David (2006). Monarchy: From the Middle Ages to Modernity. New York, NY: Harper Perennial. ISBN0-00-724766-4. Towle, Carolyn; Hunt, Jocelyn (1998). Henry VII. New York: Longman. ISBN0-582-29691-9. Weir, Alison (2002). Henry VIII: King and Court. London: Pimlico. ISBN0-7126-6451-3. Weir, Alison (1995). The Princes in the Tower. New York: Ballantine. ISBN0-345-39178-0. Williams, Neville (1973). The Life and Times of Henry VII. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. ISBN0-297-76517-5.
External links
Illustrated history of Henry VII (http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/tudor.htm) Wars of the Roses (http://www.wars-of-the-roses.com) Information on Henry and Bosworth Tudor Place page on Henry VII (http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/aboutHenryVII.htm) Dictionary of National Biography excerpt (http://www.thepeerage.com/e65.htm)
24
Among others Issue Mary I of England Henry FitzRoy, 1st Duke of Richmond and Somerset Elizabeth I of England Edward VI of England House Father Mother Born Died Burial Signature Religion Christian (Anglican, previously Roman Catholic) House of Tudor Henry VII of England Elizabeth of York 28 June 1491 Greenwich Palace, Greenwich 28 January 1547 (aged55) Palace of Whitehall, London 4 February 1547 St. George's Chapel, Windsor Castle
Henry VIII (28 June 1491 28 January 1547) was King of England from 21 April 1509 until his death. He was Lord, and later King, of Ireland, as well as being a claimant to the Kingdom of France. Henry was the second monarch of the House of Tudor, succeeding his father, HenryVII. Besides his six marriages, Henry VIII is known for his role in the separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church. Henry's struggles with Rome led to the separation of the Church of England from papal authority, the Dissolution of the Monasteries, and establishing himself as the Supreme Head of the Church of England. Yet he remained a believer in core Catholic theological teachings, even after his excommunication from the Catholic Church.[3] Henry oversaw the legal union of England and Wales with the Laws in Wales Acts 153542.
Henry VIII of England Henry was an attractive and charismatic man in his prime, educated and accomplished.[4] He was an author and a composer. He ruled with absolute power. His desire to provide England with a male heirwhich stemmed partly from personal vanity and partly because he believed a daughter would be unable to consolidate the Tudor Dynasty and the fragile peace that existed following the Wars of the Roses[5] led to the two things that Henry is remembered for: his wives, and the English Reformation that made England a mostly Protestant nation. In later life he became morbidly obese and his health suffered; his public image is frequently depicted as one of a lustful, egotistical, harsh, and insecure king.[6]
25
The impatience of Catherine's mother, Queen Isabella I, induced Pope Julius II to grant dispensation in the form of a Papal bull. So, 14 months after her young husband's death, Catherine was betrothed to his even younger brother, Henry. Yet by 1505, Henry VII lost interest in a Spanish alliance and the younger Henry declared that his betrothal had been arranged without his consent. Continued diplomatic manoeuvring over the fate of the proposed marriage lingered until the death of Henry VII in 1509. Only 17 years old, Henry married Catherine on 11 June 1509 and, on 24 June 1509, the two were crowned at Westminster Abbey.
26
Henry cultivated the image of a Renaissance Man and his court was a centre of scholarly and artistic innovation and glamorous excess, epitomised by the Field of the Cloth of Gold. He was an accomplished musician, author, and poet. His best known musical composition is "Pastime with Good Company" or "The Kynges Ballade". He was an avid gambler and dice player, and excelled at sports, especially jousting, hunting, and real tennis. He was known for his strong defence of conventional Christian piety.[7] :129 Meeting Francis I on 7 June 1520 near Calais, he entertained the French king with a fortnight of lavish entertainment to establish a closer diplomatic relationship after the military conflicts of the previous decade.
27
Henry VIII's suit of armour designed by Hans Holbein the Younger made at Greenwich, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
Henry VIII's suit of armour, c.1544, Italian made. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
28
Henry began his reign with heavy reliance on advisors and ended with complete control. From 1514 to 1529, Thomas Wolsey (14731530), a Catholic cardinal, served as lord chancellor and practically controlled domestic and foreign policy for the young king. He negotiated the truce with France that was signalled by the dramatic display of amity on the Field of the Cloth of Gold (1520). He switched England back and forth as an ally of France and the Holy Roman Empire. Wolsey centralised the national government and extended the jurisdiction of the conciliar courts, particularly the Star Chamber. His use of forced loans to pay for foreign wars angered the rich, who were annoyed as well by his enormous wealth and ostentatious living. Wolsey disappointed the king when he failed to secure a quick divorce from Henry VIII with Charles Quint (right) and Pope Queen Catherine. The treasury was empty after years of extravagance; Leo X (center), circa 1520. the peers and people were dissatisfied and Henry needed an entirely new approach; Wolsey had to be replaced. After 16 years at the top he lost power in 1529 and in 1530 was arrested on false charges of treason and died in custody. Wolsey's fall was a warning to the Pope and to the clergy of England of what might be expected for failure to comply with the king's wishes. Henry then took full control of his government, although at court numerous complex factions continued to try to ruin and destroy each other. Elton (1962) argues there was a major Tudor revolution in government. While crediting Henry with intelligence and shrewdness, Elton finds that much of the positive action, especially the break with Rome, was the work of Thomas Cromwell and not the king. Elton sees Henry as competent, but too lazy to take direct control of affairs for any extended period; that is, the king was an opportunist who relied on others for most of his ideas and to do most of the work. Henry's marital adventures are part of Elton's chain of evidence; a man who marries six wives, Elton notes, is not someone who fully controls his own fate. Elton shows that Thomas Cromwell had conceived of a commonwealth of England that included popular participation through Parliament and that this was generally expressed in the preambles to legislation. Parliamentary consent did not mean that the king had yielded any of his authority; Henry VIII was a paternalistic ruler who did not hesitate to use his power. Popular "consent" was a means to augment rather than limit royal power.[16]
29
Reformation
Henry never formally repudiated the doctrines of the Catholic Church, but he declared himself supreme head of the church in England in 1534. This, combined with subsequent actions, eventually resulted in a separated church, the Church of England. Henry and his advisors felt the pope was acting in the role of an Italian prince involved in secular affairs, which obscured his religious role. They said Rome treated England as a minor stepchild, allowing it one cardinal out of fifty, and no possibility of that cardinal becoming pope. For reasons of state it was increasingly intolerable to Henry that major decisions in England were settled by Italians. The divorce issue exemplified the problem but was not itself the cause of the problem.[17] Henry's reformation of the English church involved more complex motives and methods than his desire for a new wife and an heir. Henry asserted that his first marriage had never been valid, but the divorce issue was only one factor in Henry's desire to reform the church. In 153237, he instituted a number of statutes the act of appeal (Statute in Restraint of Appeals, 1533), the various Acts of Succession (1533, 1534, and 1536), the first Act of Supremacy (1534), and others that dealt with the relationship between the king and the pope and the structure of the Church of England. During these years, Henry suppressed monasteries and pilgrimage shrines in his attempt to reform the church. The king was always the dominant force in the making of religious policy; his policy, which he pursued skilfully and consistently, is best characterised as a search for the middle way.[18] Questions over what was the true faith were resolved with the adoption of the orthodox "Act of Six Articles" (1539) and a careful holding of the balance between extreme factions after 1540. Even so, the era saw movement away from religious orthodoxy, the more so as the pillars of the old beliefs, especially Thomas More and John Fisher, had been unable to accept the change and had been executed in 1535 for refusing to renounce papal authority. Critical for the Henrician reformation was the new political theology of obedience to the prince that was enthusiastically adopted by the Church of England in the 1530s. It reflected Martin Luther's new interpretation of the fourth commandment ("Honor thy father and mother") and was mediated to an English audience by William Tyndale. The founding of royal authority on the Ten Commandments, and thus on the word of God, was a particularly attractive feature of this doctrine, which became a defining feature of Henrician religion. Rival tendencies within the Church of England sought to exploit it in the pursuit of their particular agendas. Reformers strove to preserve its connections with the broader framework of Lutheran theology, with the emphasis on faith alone and the word of God, while conservatives emphasised good works, ceremonies, and charity. The Reformers linked royal supremacy and the word of God to persuade Henry to publish the Great Bible in 1539, an English translation that was a formidable prop for his new-found dignity.[19] Response to the reforms was mixed. The reforms, which closed down monasteries that were the only support of the impoverished,[20] :2546 alienated most of the population outside of London and helped provoke the great northern rising of 153637, known as the Pilgrimage of Grace.[20] :26972 It was the only real threat to Henry's security on the throne in all his reign. Some 30,000 rebels in nine groups were led by the charismatic Robert Aske, together with most of the northern nobility. Aske went to London to negotiate terms; once there he was arrested, charged with treason and executed. About 200 rebels were executed and the disturbances ended.[21] Elsewhere the changes were accepted and welcomed, and those who clung to Catholic rites kept quiet or moved in secrecy. They would reemerge in the reign of Henry's daughter Mary (155358).
30
Mistresses
Contrary to popular belief, Henry may not have had very many affairs outside marriage. Apart from women he later married, the identities of only two mistresses are completely undisputed: Elizabeth Blount and Mary Boleyn.[22] However, it is unlikely that they were the only two; Alison Weir has argued that, aside from the affairs listed below, there were numerous other short-term and secret liaisons, most of them conducted in the king's river-side mansion of Jordan House.[23] Elizabeth "Bessie" Blount gave birth in June 1519 to Henry's illegitimate son, Henry FitzRoy. The young boy was made Duke of Richmond in June 1525 in what some thought was one step on the path to legitimising him. In 1533, FitzRoy married Mary Howard, Anne Boleyn's first cousin, but died three years later without any children. At the time of FitzRoy's death (July 1536), Parliament was enacting the Second Succession Act, which could have allowed Henry's illegitimate son to become king. Mary Boleyn was Henry's mistress before her sister, Anne, became his second wife. She is thought to have been Catherine's lady-in-waiting at some point between 1519 and 1526. There has been speculation that Mary's two children, Catherine and Henry, were fathered by Henry, but this has never been proved and the King never acknowledged them as he did Henry FitzRoy. In 1510 it was reported that Henry was conducting an affair with one of the sisters of Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham, either Elizabeth or Anne Hastings, Countess of Huntingdon.[24] Her brother, the Duke of Buckingham, became enraged and Lord George Hastings, her husband, sent her to a convent. Eustace Chapuys wrote, "the husband of that lady went away, carried her off and placed her in a convent sixty miles from here, that no one may see her.".[25] Biographer Antonia Fraser has claimed that Henry had an affair with Mary Shelton in 1535, in opposition to the traditional belief that Margaret ("Madge") Shelton was Henry's lover.[26]
Henry VIII of England annulment. The grounds were that the bull of Pope Julius II was obtained by false pretences, because Catherine's brief marriage to the sickly Arthur had been consummated. Henry petitioned, in the event of annulment, a dispensation to marry again to any woman even in the first degree of affinity, whether the affinity was contracted by lawful or unlawful connection. This clearly had reference to Anne.[29] However, as the pope was at that time imprisoned by Catherine's nephew, Emperor Charles V, Knight had difficulty in getting access to him, and so only managed to obtain the conditional dispensation for a new marriage. Henry now had no choice but to put the matter into the hands of Wolsey. Wolsey did all he could to secure a decision in the King's favour, going so far as to arrange an ecclesiastical court to meet in England, with a representative from the Pope.[29] Shakespeare's play, Henry VIII, accurately records Catherine of Aragon's astounding coup in that remarkable courtroom in Act II, scene iv. She bows low to Henry, put herself at his mercy, states her case with irrefutable eloquence and then sweeps out of the courtroom, a woman both formidable and clearly wronged. However much this moment swayed those present and the rest of the world to her side, the Pope had never had any intention of empowering his Catherine of Aragon, first queen of Henry VIII legate. Charles V resisted the annulment of his aunt's marriage, but it is not clear how far this influenced the pope. But it is clear that Henry saw that the Pope was unlikely to give him an annulment from the Emperor's aunt.[31] The pope forbade Henry to proceed to a new marriage before a decision was given in Rome, not in England. Wolsey bore the blame. Convinced that he was treacherous, Anne Boleyn maintained pressure until Wolsey was dismissed from public office in 1529. After being dismissed, the cardinal begged her to help him return to power, but she refused. He then began a plot to have Anne forced into exile and began communication with Queen Catherine and the Pope to that end. When this was discovered, Henry ordered Wolsey's arrest and had it not been for his death from illness in 1530, he might have been executed for treason.[32] His replacement, Sir Thomas More, initially cooperated with the king's new policy, denouncing Wolsey in Parliament and proclaiming the opinion of the theologians at Oxford and Cambridge that the marriage of Henry to Catherine had been unlawful. As Henry began to deny the authority of the Pope, More's qualms grew. A year later, Queen Catherine was banished from court and her rooms were given to Anne. With Wolsey gone, Anne had considerable power over political matters. She was an unusually educated and intellectual woman for her time, and was keenly absorbed and engaged with the ideas of the Protestant Reformers. When Archbishop of Canterbury William Warham died, Anne had the Boleyn family's chaplain, Thomas Cranmer, appointed to the vacant position. Through the intervention of the King of France, this was conceded by Rome, the pallium being granted to him by Clement.[33] Breaking the power of Rome in England proceeded slowly. In 1532, a lawyer who was a supporter of Anne, Thomas Cromwell, brought before Parliament a number of acts including the Supplication against the Ordinaries and the Submission of the Clergy, which recognised Royal Supremacy over the church. Following these acts, Thomas More resigned as Chancellor, leaving Cromwell as Henry's chief minister.[34] :136
31
32
Second marriage
In the winter of 1532 Henry attended a meeting with Francis I of France at Calais in which he enlisted the support of the French king for his new marriage.[34] :123 Immediately upon returning to Dover in England, Henry and Anne went through a secret wedding service.[35] She soon became pregnant and there was a second wedding service in London on 25 January 1533. On 23 May 1533, Cranmer, sitting in judgment at a special court convened at Dunstable Priory to rule on the validity of the king's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, declared the marriage of Henry and Catherine null and void. Five days later, on 28 May 1533, Cranmer declared the marriage of Henry and Anne to be valid.[34] :124 Catherine was formally stripped of her title as queen, and Anne was crowned queen consort on 1 June 1533. The queen gave birth to a daughter slightly prematurely on 7 September 1533. The child was christened Elizabeth, in honour Portrait of Anne Boleyn, Henry's [34] :12831 second queen; a later copy of an of Henry's mother, Elizabeth of York. Rejecting the decisions of the original painted in about 1534 Pope, Parliament validated the marriage of Henry and Anne with the First Succession Act (Act of Succession 1533). Catherine's daughter, Mary, was declared illegitimate, and Anne's issue were declared next in the line of succession. Most notable in this declaration was a clause repudiating "any foreign authority, prince or potentate". All adults in the Kingdom were required to acknowledge the Act's provisions by oath; those who refused were subject to imprisonment for life. Any publisher or printer of any literature alleging that the marriage was invalid was automatically guilty of high treason and could be punished by death.
33
Personal troubles
The king and queen were not pleased with married life. The royal couple enjoyed periods of calm and affection, but Anne refused to play the submissive role expected of her. The vivacity and opinionated intellect that had made her so attractive as an illicit lover made her too independent for the largely ceremonial role of a royal wife, given that Henry expected absolute obedience from those who interacted with him in an official capacity at court. It made her many enemies. For his part, Henry disliked Annes constant irritability and violent temper. After a false pregnancy or miscarriage in 1534, he saw her failure to give him a son as a betrayal. As early as Christmas 1534, Henry was discussing with Cranmer and Cromwell the chances of leaving Anne without having to return to Catherine.[34] :138 Opposition to Henry's religious policies was quickly suppressed in England. A number of dissenting monks were tortured and executed. The most prominent resisters included John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, and Sir Thomas More, Henry's former Lord Chancellor, both of whom refused to take the oath to the King and were subsequently convicted of high treason and beheaded at Tower Hill, just outside the Tower of London. These suppressions, including the Dissolution of the Lesser Monasteries Act of 1536, in turn contributed to further resistance among the English people, most notably in the Pilgrimage of Grace, a large uprising in northern England in October, 1536. Henry VIII The Tower of London, the site of many royal executions. promised the rebels he would pardon them and thanked them for raising the issues to his attention, then invited the rebel leader, Robert Aske to a royal banquet. At the banquet, Henry asked Aske to write down what had happened so he could have a better idea of the problems he would "change." Aske did what the King asked, although what he had written was later used against him as a confession. The King's word could not be questioned (as he was held as God's chosen, and second only to God himself) so Aske told the rebels they had been successful and they could disperse and go home. However, because Henry saw the rebels as traitors, he did not feel obliged to keep his promises. The rebels realised that the King was not keeping his promises and rebelled again later that year, but their strength was less in the second attempt and the King ordered the rebellion crushed. The leaders, including Aske, were arrested and executed for treason.
34
Five men, including Anne's own brother, were arrested on charges of incest and treason, accused of having sexual relationships with the queen.[34] :1434 On 2 May 1536 Anne was arrested and taken to the Tower of London. She was accused of adultery, incest and high treason.[40] :545 Although the evidence against them was unconvincing, the accused were found guilty and condemned to death by the peers. George Boleyn and the other accused men were executed on 17 May 1536. At 8am on 19 May 1536, the queen was executed on Tower Green. She knelt upright, in the French style of executions. The execution was swift and consisted of a single stroke.[40] :60
35
Birth of a prince
One day after Anne's execution in 1536 Henry became engaged to Jane Seymour, one of the Queen's ladies-in-waiting to whom the king had been showing favour for some time. They were married 10 days later. At about the same time as this, his third marriage, Henry granted his assent to the Laws in Wales Act 1535, which legally annexed Wales, uniting England and Wales into one unified nation. This was followed by the Second Succession Act (Act of Succession 1536), which declared Henry's children by Queen Jane to be next in the line of succession and declared both the Lady Mary and the Lady Elizabeth illegitimate, thus excluding them from the throne. The king was granted the power to further determine the line of succession in his will. In 1537, Jane gave birth to a son, Prince Edward, the future Edward VI. The birth was difficult and the queen died at Hampton Court Palace on 24 October 1537 from an infection. After Jane's death, the entire court mourned with Henry for an extended period. Henry considered Jane to be his "true" wife, being the only one who had given him the male heir he so desperately sought. He was later to be buried next to her at his death.
Henry VIII with Jane Seymour and the young Prince Edward, c.1545, by unknown artist, Royal Collection, Hampton Court (detail)
36 Henry wished to annul the marriage so he could marry another. The Duke of Cleves had become engaged in a dispute with the Holy Roman Emperor, with whom Henry had no desire to quarrel. Queen Anne was intelligent enough not to impede Henry's quest for an annulment. Upon the question of marital sex, she testified that her marriage had never been consummated. Henry was said to have come into the room each night and merely kissed his new bride on the forehead before retiring. All impediments to an annulment were thus removed. The marriage was subsequently dissolved and Anne received the title of "The King's Sister", and was granted Hever Castle, the former residence of the Boleyn family. Cromwell, meanwhile, fell out of favour for his role in arranging the marriage and was subsequently attainted and beheaded. The office of Vicegerent in Spirituals, which had been specifically created for him, was not filled.
On 28 July 1540 (the same day Cromwell was executed), Henry married the young Catherine Howard, Anne Boleyn's first cousin and a lady-in-waiting of Anne's.[41] He was absolutely delighted with his new queen. Soon after her marriage, however, Queen Catherine had an affair with the courtier Thomas Culpeper. She employed Francis Dereham, who was previously informally engaged to her and had an affair with her prior to her marriage, as her secretary. Thomas Cranmer, who was opposed to the powerful Roman Catholic Howard family, brought evidence of Queen Catherine's activities to the king's notice. Though Henry originally refused to believe the allegations, he allowed Cranmer to conduct an investigation, which resulted in Queen Catherine's implication. When questioned, the queen could have admitted a prior contract to marry Dereham, which would have made her subsequent marriage to Henry invalid, but she instead claimed that Miniature Portrait of Catherine Howard by Hans Dereham had forced her to enter into an adulterous relationship. Holbein the Younger, 1540. Dereham, meanwhile, exposed Queen Catherine's relationship with Thomas Culpeper. Catherine was executed on 13 February 1542. She was aged between 17 and 22 when she died (opinions differ as to her year of birth). That same year, England's remaining monasteries were all dissolved, and their property transferred to the Crown. Abbots and priors lost their seats in the House of Lords; only archbishops and bishops came to comprise the ecclesiastical element of the body. The Lords Spiritual, as members of the clergy with seats in the House of Lords were known, were for the first time outnumbered by the Lords Temporal.
37
Henry married his last wife, the wealthy widow Catherine Parr, in 1543. She argued with Henry over religion; she was a reformer, but Henry remained a conservative. This behaviour nearly proved her undoing, but she saved herself by a show of submissiveness. She helped reconcile Henry with his first two daughters, the Lady Mary and the Lady Elizabeth. In 1544, an Act of Parliament put the daughters back in the line of succession after Edward, Prince of Wales, though they were still deemed illegitimate. The same act allowed Henry to determine further succession to the throne in his will. A wave of political executions that commenced with Edmund de la Pole, Duke of Suffolk in 1513 ended with Henry Earl of Surrey in January, 1547. Although some sources claim that, according to Holinshed, the number of executions in this reign amounted to 72,000, the figure referred to "great thieves, petty thieves, and rogues," and the source is not Holinshed but the English clergyman William Harrison. This inflated figure came from Gerolamo Cardano who in turn got it from the Roman Catholic Bishop of Lisieux.[42]
38 According to research published in March 2011, his wives' pattern of pregnancies and his mental deterioration suggests that the king may have been Kell positive and suffered from McLeod syndrome.[46] [47]
Henry VIII was Interred in St George's Chapel in Windsor Castle, next to his wife Jane Seymour.[48] Over a hundred years later Charles I was buried in the same vault. Within a little more than a decade after his death, all three of his royal heirs sat on the English throne, but none of the three left any descendants. Under the Act of Succession 1543, Henry's only surviving legitimate son, Edward, inherited the Crown, becoming Edward VI. Since Edward was only nine years old at the time, he could not Meeting of Henry VIII and Maximilian II, Holy exercise actual power. Henry's will designated 16 executors to serve on Roman Emperor. a council of regency until Edward reached the age of 18. The executors chose Edward Seymour, 1st Earl of Hertford, Jane Seymour's elder brother, to be Lord Protector of the Realm. In default of heirs to Edward, the throne was to pass to Henry VIII's daughter by Catherine of Aragon, the Princess Mary, and her heirs. If Mary's issue failed, the crown was to go to Henry's daughter by Anne Boleyn, Princess Elizabeth, and her heirs. Finally, if Elizabeth's line became extinct, the crown was to be inherited by the descendants of Henry VIII's deceased younger sister, Mary. The descendants of Henry's sister Margaret Tudorthe royal family of Scotlandwere therefore excluded from succession according to this act. This final provision failed when James VI of Scotland subsequently became James I of England upon Elizabeth's death.
Henry VIII of England Henry was an intellectual. The first English king with a modern humanist education, who read and wrote English, French, Latin and was thoroughly at home in his well-stocked library; he personally annotated many books and wrote and published his own book. He is also said to have written Helas madam. He founded Christ Church Cathedral School, Oxford, in 1546. To promote the public support for the reformation of the church, Henry had numerous pamphlets and lectures prepared. For example, Richard Sampson's Oratio (1534) was a legalistic argument for absolute obedience to the temporal power as vested in divine law and Christian love ("obey my commandments"). Sampson cited historical precedents (now known to be spurious) to support his claim that the English church had always been independent from Rome.[50] At the popular level theatre and minstrel troupes funded by the crown travelled around the land to promote the new religious practices and ridicule the old. In the polemical plays they presented, the pope and Catholic priests and monks were mocked as foreign devils, while the glorious king was hailed as a brave and heroic defender of the true faith.[51] Henry VIII was an avid gambler and dice player. He was an accomplished musician, author, and poet; his best known piece of music is "Pastime with Good Company" ("The Kynges Ballade"). He is often reputed to have written "Greensleeves" but probably did not. The King was involved in the original construction and improvement of several significant buildings, including Nonsuch Palace, King's College Chapel, Cambridge and Westminster Abbey in London. Many of the existing buildings Henry improved were properties confiscated from Wolsey, such as Christ Church, Oxford, Hampton Court Palace, the Palace of Whitehall, and Trinity College, Cambridge. The only surviving piece of clothing worn by Henry VIII is a cap of maintenance awarded to the Mayor of Waterford, along with a bearing sword, in 1536. It currently resides in the Waterford Museum of Treasures. A suit of Henry's armour is on display in the Tower of London. In the centuries since his death, Henry has inspired or been mentioned in numerous artistic and cultural works.
39
Royal finances
Henry inherited a vast fortune from his father Henry VII who had, in contrast to his son, been frugal and careful with money. This fortune was estimated to 1,250,000 (375million by today's standards).[23] :13 Much of this wealth was spent by Henry on maintaining his court and household, including many of the building works he undertook on royal palaces. Tudor monarchs had to fund all the expenses of government out of their own income. This income came from the Crown lands that Henry owned as well as from customs duties like tonnage and poundage, granted by parliament to the king for life. During Henry's reign the revenues of the Crown remained constant (around 100,000),[23] :64 but were eroded by inflation and rising prices brought about by war. Indeed it was war and Henry's dynastic ambitions in Europe that meant that the surplus he had inherited from his father was exhausted by the mid-1520s. Whereas Henry VII had not involved Parliament in his affairs very much, Henry VIII had to turn to Parliament during his reign for money, in particular for grants of subsidies to fund his wars. The Dissolution of the Monasteries provided a means to replenish the treasury and as a result the Crown took possession of monastic lands worth 120,000 (36million) a year.[23] :393 But Henry had to debase the coinage in 1526 and 1539 in order to solve his financial problems, and despite his ministers efforts to reduce costs and waste at court, Henry died in debt.
Legacy
Though mainly motivated by dynastic and personal concerns, and despite never really abandoning the fundamentals of the Catholic Church, Henry ensured that the greatest act of his reign would be one of the most radical and decisive of any English monarch. His break with Rome in 153334 was an act with enormous consequences for the subsequent course of English history beyond the Tudor dynasty. Not only in making possible the transformation of England into a powerful (albeit very distinctive) nation; but in the seizing of economic and political power from the Church by the aristocracy, chiefly through the acquisition of monastic lands and assets a short-term strategy with long-term social consequences. Henry's decision to entrust the regency of his son Edward's minor years to a decidedly reform-oriented regency council, dominated by Edward Seymour, most likely for the simple tactical
Henry VIII of England reason that Seymour seemed likely to provide the strongest leadership for the kingdom, ensured that the English Reformation would be consolidated and even furthered during his son's reign. Such ironies marked other aspects of his legacy. He fostered humanist learning and yet was responsible for the deaths of several outstanding English humanists. Obsessed with securing the succession to the throne, he left as his only heirs a young son (who died before his 16th birthday) and two daughters adhering to different religions. The power of the state was magnified. Henry worked with some success to make England once again a major player on the European scene but depleted his treasury in the course of doing so, a legacy that has remained an issue for English monarchs ever since.
40
Scarisbrick (1968) concludes that Henry was a formidable, captivating man who "wore regality with a splendid conviction." But unpredictably his overpowering charm could turn into anger and shouting, for he was high-strung and unstable; hypochondriac and possessed of a strong streak of cruelty. Smith (1971) considered him an egotistical border-line neurotic given to great fits of temper and deep and dangerous suspicions, with a mechanical and conventional, but deeply held piety, having at best "a mediocre intellect" to hold these contradictory forces in harness.
Silver groat of Henry VIII, minted c. 1540. The reverse depicts the quartered arms of England and France.
English navy
Together with Alfred the Great and Charles II, Henry is traditionally cited as one of the founders of the Royal Navy. His reign featured some naval warfare and, more significantly, large royal investment in shipbuilding (including a few spectacular great ships such as Mary Rose), dockyards (such as HMNB Portsmouth) and naval innovations (such as the use of cannon on board ship although archers were still deployed on medieval-style forecastles and bowcastles as the ship's primary armament on large ships, or co-armament where cannon were used). However, in some ways this is a misconception since Henry did not bequeath to his immediate successors a navy in the sense of a formalised organisation with structures, ranks, and formalised munitioning structures but only in the sense of a set of ships. Elizabeth I still had to cobble together a set of privately owned ships to fight off the Spanish Armada (which consisted of about 130 warships and converted merchant ships) and in the former, formal sense the modern British navy, the Royal Navy, is largely a product of the Anglo-Dutch naval rivalry of the 17th century. Still, Henry's reign marked the birth of English naval power and was a key factor in England's later victory over the Spanish Armada. Henry's break with Rome incurred the threat of a large-scale French or Spanish invasion. To guard against this he strengthened existing coastal defence fortresses such as Dover Castle and, at Dover, Moat Bulwark and Archcliffe Fort, which he personally visited for a few months to supervise. He built a chain of new 'castles' (in fact, large bastioned and garrisoned gun batteries) along Britain's southern and eastern coasts from East Anglia to Cornwall, largely built of material gained from the demolition of the monasteries. These were known as Henry VIII's Device Forts.
Henry VIII of England Supreme Head". In 1536, the phrase "of the Church of England" changed to "of the Church of England and also of Ireland". In 1541, Henry had the Irish Parliament change the title "Lord of Ireland" to "King of Ireland" with the Crown of Ireland Act 1542, after being advised that many Irish people regarded the Pope as the true head of their country, with the Lord acting as a mere representative. The reason the Irish regarded the Pope as their overlord was that Ireland had originally been given to the King Henry II of England by Pope Adrian IV in the 12th century as a feudal territory under papal overlordship. The meeting of Irish Parliament that proclaimed Henry VIII as King of Ireland was the first meeting attended by the Gaelic Irish chieftains as well as the Anglo-Irish aristocrats. The style "Henry the Eighth, by the Grace of God, King of England, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith and of the Church of England and also of Ireland in Earth Supreme Head" remained in use until the end of Henry's reign.
41
Henry's motto was "Coeur Loyal" ("true heart") and he had this embroidered on his clothes in the form of a heart symbol and with the word "loyal". His emblem was the Tudor rose and the Beaufort portcullis. As Duke of York, Henry used the arms of his father (i.e. those of the kingdom), differenced by a label of three points ermine. As king, Henry's arms were the same as those used by his predecessors since Henry IV: Quarterly, Azure three fleurs-de-lys Or (for France) and Gules three lions passant guardant in pale Or (for England).
42
43
Name
Birth
Death
Notes
By Catherine of Aragon (married Greenwich Palace 11 June 1509; annulled 23 May 1533) Unnamed Daughter Henry, Duke of Cornwall Henry, Duke of Cornwall 31 January 1510 2 February 1510 1 January 1511 December 1514 22 February 1511 died within one month of birth 17 November 1558 married 1554, Philip II of Spain; no issue
Queen Mary I
Unnamed Daughter
By Anne Boleyn (married Westminster Abbey 25 January 1533; annulled 17 May 1536) beheaded on 19 May 1536 Queen Elizabeth I 7 September 1533 24 March 1603 never married; no issue
By Jane Seymour (married York Place 30 May 1536; Jane Seymour died 24 October 1537) King Edward VI 12 October 1537 6 July 1553 unmarried; no issue
By Anne of Cleves (married Greenwich Palace 6 January 1540; annulled 9 July 1540) no issue By Catherine Howard (married Oatlands Palace 28 July 1540; annulled 23 November 1541) beheaded on 13 February 1542 no issue By Catherine Parr (married Hampton Court Palace 12 July 1543; Henry VIII died 28 January 1547) no issue By Elizabeth Blount Henry FitzRoy, 1st Duke of Richmond and Somerset 15 June 1519 23 July 1536 illegitimate; married 1533, the Lady Mary Howard; no issue
By Mary Boleyn Paternity is debated by historians. Catherine Carey, Lady Knollys Henry Carey, 1st Baron Hunsdon c. 1524 4 March 1526 15 January 1569 23 July 1596 married Sir Francis Knollys; had issue married 1545, Ann Morgan; had issue
44
Granted Henry VIII the title of Defender of the Faith in the last week of his life. Excommunicated Martin Luther.
Leo X 9 March 1513 1 December 1521 Henry VIII between ages of 21 and 30. Henry and the Pope close allies. Adrian VI 9 January 1522 14 September 1523 Henry VIII between ages of 30 and 32. Short pontificate. Clement VII 26 November 1523 25 September 1534 Henry VIII between ages of 32 and 42. Henry formed Anglican Church Paul III 13 October 1534 10 November 1549 Henry VIII between ages of 42 and death. Final break from pope.
[53]
Catherine of Aragon died 15 months after his election. On 17 December 1538, four years into his pontificate, Paul III excommunicated Henry VIII.
References
[1] Fraser, Antonia (1994). The Wives of Henry VIII (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=24UKxUPB5goC). Vintage Books. ISBN9780679730019. . [2] Fraser, Antonia (1994). The Wives of Henry VIII (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=24UKxUPB5goC). Vintage Books. ISBN9780679730019. . [3] J. J. Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, p. 361. [4] Robert M. Adams, The land and literature of England (1986) pp. 11112. [5] Wilkinson, Josephine. Mary Boleyn: The True Story of Henry VIII's Favourite Mistress (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=erO0w4IkOkUC& pg=PA70& dq=henry+ VIII+ -+ wanted+ a+ son+ for+ tudor+ dynasty& hl=en& ei=RF1_TvPsH43Ksgbvt_Ul& sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=4& ved=0CEAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage& q& f=false) p.70. Amberley Publishing, 2009 [6] Eric Ives, "Will the Real Henry VIII Please Stand Up?" History Today 2006 56(2): 2836. [7] Crofton. [8] Churchill, p.29 [9] Hall, Edward, The Triumphant Reign of Henry VIII, p.17. [10] Guicciardini, History of Italy, 280. [11] Elton (1977) [12] MacCulloch (1995) [13] Simon Thurley, "Palaces for a nouveau riche king." History Today, (June 1991), Vol. 41, No.6 in Academic Search Premier [14] Thomas, Andrea, Princelie Majestie, Birlinn (2005), 7980 citing Simon Thurley, The Royal Palaces of Tudor England, 222-4. [15] Jonathan Davies, "'We Do Fynde in Our Countre Great Lack of Bowes and Arrows': Tudor Military Archery and the Inventory of King Henry VIII," Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research 2005 83(333): 1129. Issn: 0037-9700 [16] G. R. Elton, The Tudor Revolution in Government: Administrative Changes in the Reign of Henry VIII (1962) online edition (http:/ / www. questia. com/ read/ 2993196?title=The Tudor Revolution in Government: Administrative Changes in the Reign of Henry VIII); Elton, Reform and Reformation: England, 15091558 (1977) is sharply hostile toward the kingan "ego-centric monstrosity," whose reign "owed its successes and virtues to better and greater men about him; most of its horrors and failures sprang more directly from himself." p. 43 [17] A. F. Pollard, Henry VIII (1905) provides the classic statement of the Henrician position, esp. pp 23038. Pollard argues that that Spain and France stayed loyal because they controlled the papacy. [18] G. W. Bernard, The King's Reformation: Henry VIII and the Remaking of the English Church (2005)
45
46
Sources
The New World by Winston Churchill (1966). The Reformation Parliament, 15291536 by Stanford E. Lehmberg (1970). Henry VIII and his Court by Neville Williams (1971). The Life and Times of Henry VIII by Robert Lacey (1972). The Six Wives of Henry VIII by Alison Weir (1991) ISBN 0802136834. English Reformations by Christopher Haigh (1993). Europe: A history by Norman Davies (1998) ISBN 978-0060974688. Europe and England in the Sixteenth Century by T. A. Morris (1998). New Worlds, Lost Worlds by Susan Brigden (2000). Henry VIII: The King and His Court by Alison Weir (2001). British Kings & Queens by Mike Ashley (2002) ISBN 0-7867-1104-3. Henry VIII: The King and His Court by Alison Weir (2002) ISBN 034543708X. Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII by David Starkey (2003) ISBN 0060005505. The Kings and Queens of England by Ian Crofton (2006).
Bibliography
Biographical
Bowle, John. Henry VIII: a Study of Power in Action. Little, Brown, 1964. Erickson, Carolly. Mistress Anne: the Exceptional Life of Anne Boleyn. (1984) 464 pp. popular biography Cressy, David. "Spectacle and Power: Apollo and Solomon at the Court of Henry VIII." History Today 1982 32(oct): 1622. ISSN: 0018-2753 Fulltext: Ebsco Traces the transition of Henry from Renaissance monarch (the youthful Apollo) to Reformation patriarch (the ageing Solomon) using the graphics and visual images displayed in his court, festivals, and kingdom. Gardner, James. "Henry VIII" in Cambridge Modern History vol 2 (1903), a brief political history online edition (http://www.uni-mannheim.de/mateo/camenaref/cmh/cmh213.html) Graves, Michael. Henry VIII (2003) 217 pp, topical coverage Ives, E. W. "Henry VIII (14911547)", in The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004), online at OUP, a good starting point Pollard, A. F. Henry VIII (1905) 470 pp; the first modern biography, accurate and still valuable online edition (http://books.google.com/books?id=q0cDAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:henry+intitle:viii+ inauthor:pollard&lr=&as_brr=0) Rex, Richard. Henry VIII and the English Reformation. (1993). 205 pp. Ridley, Jasper. Henry VIII. (1985). 473 pp. popular biography Scarisbrick, J. J. Henry VIII (1968) 592 pp, a favourable scholarly biography Smith, Lacey Baldwin. Henry VIII: the Mask of Royalty (1971), a leading scholar writes a psycho-biography online edition (http://www.questia.com/read/85955084?title=Henry VIII: The Mask of Royalty) Starkey, David. Six Wives: the Queens of Henry VIII (2003) excerpt and text search (http://www.amazon.com/ dp/069401043X) Starkey, David. The Reign of Henry VIII: Personalities and Politics (1986). 174 pp Starkey, David, and Susan Doran. Henry VIII: Man and Monarch (2009) 288 pp Tytler, Patrick Fraser (1836). Life of King Henry the Eighth (http://books.google.com/ ?id=lWUDAAAAQAAJ). Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd (published 1837). Retrieved 17 August 2008 Weir, Alison. Henry VIII, King and Court (2001). 640 pp, a flattering portrait excerpt and text search (http:// www.amazon.com/dp/034543708X/)
Henry VIII of England Weir, Alison. The Children of Henry VIII. (1996). 400 pp.
47
Scholarly studies
Bernard, G. W. The King's Reformation: Henry VIII and the Remaking of the English Church. (2005). 712 pp. excerpts and text search (http://books.google.com/books?id=p2MOt53sCCgC&printsec=frontcover& dq=intitle:King's+intitle:Reformation+inauthor:bernard&lr=&num=30&as_brr=0& sig=WTvpwPbd8txXGzbj0RP3pA9Qut8) Bernard, G. W. "The Making of Religious Policy, 15331546: Henry VIII and the Search for the Middle Way." Historical Journal 1998 41(2): 321349. Issn: 0018-246x Fulltext: in Jstor (http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 2640109) Bernard, G. W. War, Taxation, and Rebellion in Early Tudor England: Henry VIII, Wolsey, and the Amicable Grant of 1525. (1986). 164 pp Elton, G. R. The Tudor Revolution in Government: Administrative Changes in the Reign of Henry VIII (1953; revised 1962), major interpretation online edition (http://www.questia.com/read/2993196?title=The Tudor Revolution in Government: Administrative Changes in the Reign of Henry VIII) Coleman, Christoper, and David Starkey, eds. Revolution Reassessed: Revision in the History of Tudor Government and Administration (1986), evaluates Elton thesis Elton, G. R. Reform and Reformation: England, 15091558 (1977), hostile to Henry Fielder, Martha Anne. "Iconographic Themes in Portraits of Henry VIII." PhD dissertation Texas Christian U. 1985. 232 pp. DAI 1985 46(6): 1424-A. DA8517256 Fulltext: ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Fox, Alistair, and John Guy, eds. Reassessing the Henrician Age: Humanism, Politics and Reform 15001550 (1986), 242pp; advanced essays by scholars Head, David M. "Henry VIII's Scottish Policy: a Reassessment." Scottish Historical Review 1982 61(1): 124. Issn: 0036-9241 Argues that if Henry intended to take over Scotland then his 1542 victory at Solway Moss was the opportune moment, for the French were unable to intervene, the Scottish nobility was in disarray, and the infant Mary was in line for Scotland's throne. Instead, Henry adopted a policy similar to that in Ireland, since he could not afford outright conquest or the luxury of diplomacy. Lindsey, Karen. Divorced, Beheaded, Survived: A Feminist Reinterpretation of the Wives of Henry VIII (1995) online edition (http://www.questia.com/read/6981860?title=Divorced, Beheaded, Survived: A Feminist Reinterpretation of the Wives of Henry VIII) Loades, David. Henry VIII: Court, Church and Conflict (2007) 248pp; by a leading scholar excerpt and text search (http://www.amazon.com/dp/1903365996/) MacCulloch, Diarmaid, ed. The Reign of Henry VIII: Politics, Policy, and Piety. (1995). 313 pp. essays by scholars Marshall, Peter. "(Re)defining the English Reformation," Journal of British Studies July 2009, Vol. 48 Issue 3, pp 56485, Mackie, J. D. The Earlier Tudors, 14851558 (1952), a political survey of the era online edition (http://www. questia.com/read/8546253?title=The Earlier Tudors, 1485-1558) Moorhouse, Geoffrey. Great Harry's Navy: How Henry VIII Gave England Seapower (2007) Moorhouse, Geoffrey. The Last Divine Office: Henry VIII and the Dissolution of the Monasteries (2009) Slavin, Arthur J., ed. Henry VIII and the English Reformation (1968), readings by historians. online edition (http:/ /www.questia.com/read/97615501?title=Henry VIII and the English Reformation) Smith, H. Maynard. Henry VIII and the Reformation (1948) online edition (http://www.questia.com/read/ 8851653?title=Henry VIII and the Reformation) Wagner, John A. Bosworth Field to Bloody Mary: An Encyclopedia of the Early Tudors (2003). ISBN 1-57356-540-7. Walker, Greg. Writing under Tyranny: English Literature and the Henrician Reformation. (2005). 556 pp.
48
Primary sources
Williams, C. M. A. H. English Historical Documents, 14851558 (1996) online sources (http://www.questia. com/read/104189416) Letters and papers, foreign and domestic, of the reign of Henry VIII: preserved in the Public Record Office, the British Museum and elsewhere, Volume 1 edited by John S. Brewer, Robert H. Brodie, James Gairdner. (1862), full text online vol 1 (http://books.google.com/books?id=q4Y9AAAAcAAJ); full text vol 3 (http://books. google.com/books?id=Udk9AAAAcAAJ) see James Gairdner for more detail
External links
Henry VIII (http://www.dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/England/Society_and_Culture/ History/Monarchy/Tudor/Henry_VIII/) at the Open Directory Project Tudor bio (http://www.luminarium.org/renlit/tudorbio.htm) Jokinen, A. (2004). Henry VIII (14911547). (http://www.luminarium.org/renlit/tudor.htm) Eakins, L. E. (2004). "The Six Wives of Henry VIII". (http://tudorhistory.org/wives/) Public Broadcasting Service. (2003). "The Six Wives of Henry VIII". (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/sixwives/) Vallieres, S. (1999). "Tudor Succession Problems" (http://www.luminarium.org/renlit/vallieres.htm) Ask About Ireland: Waterford Museum of Treasures Collection: Cap of Maintenance (http://web.archive.org/ web/20080214103619/http://www.askaboutireland.ie/show_narrative_page.do?page_id=2863) Henry VIII of England (http://genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00008146&tree=LEO) at Genealogics Luminarium: King Henry VIII (http://www.luminarium.org/renlit/tudor.htm) Life, works, essays, study resources Henry VIII Podcast Show (http://historicalpodcasts.googlepages.com/henryviii) Henry VIII and his wives (http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/henry8.htm) Buehler, Edward. (2004). "Tudor Portraits: Henry VIII". (http://web.archive.org/web/20070522020910/www. tudor-portraits.com/Henry_VIII.htm) Castelli, Jorge H. (2004). "Henry VIII". (http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/aboutHenryVIII.htm) Stevens, Garry. (2003). "Henry VIII: Intrigue in the Tudor Court" (http://www.archsoc.com/games/Henry. html) Perrott, Terry. (2004). "Sir John Perrott". (http://web.archive.org/web/20060917151400/http://members. ozemail.com.au/~tperrott/sirjohn.htm) Illustrated history of Henry VIII. (http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/tudor_4.htm) Henry VIII of England (http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=473) at Find a Grave Martin Luther to Henry VIII, 1 September 1525 (http://books.google.com/books?id=oEy_3aDT61sC& vid=OCLC02338418&dq=" Luther's+Correspondence+and+Other+Contemporary+Letters"&jtp=333)
Henry VIII of England Henry VIII to Martin Luther. August, 1526 (http://books.google.com/books?id=oEy_3aDT61sC& vid=OCLC02338418&dq=" Luther's+Correspondence+and+Other+Contemporary+Letters"&jtp=374) Henry VIII to Frederic, John, and George, Dukes of Saxony. January. 20, 1523 (http://books.google.com/ books?id=oEy_3aDT61sC&vid=OCLC02338418&dq=" Luther's+Correspondence+and+Other+ Contemporary+Letters"&jtp=160) re: Luther. "Henry VIII Revealed" (http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/walker/exhibitions/henry/default.asp), Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool, 2003. A discussion of the Holbein's 1536 portrait of Henry VIII and related portraits Free scores (http://icking-music-archive.org/ByComposer/Henry_VIII.php) by Henry VIII of England in the Werner Icking Music Archive (WIMA) Free scores by Henry VIII of England in the Choral Public Domain Library (ChoralWiki) Henry VIII.: The Family Tree of the Tudors and the Stuarts in Pictures (http://www.kleio.org/en/history/ famtree/tudors_stuarts/abb2r.html)
49
Edward VI of England
50
Edward VI of England
Edward VI
Edward VI, by William Scrots, c. 1550 Edward VI, by William Scrots, c. 1550 King of England and Ireland (more...) Reign Coronation 28 January 1547 6 July 1553 20 February 1547 (aged 9)
Predecessor Henry VIII Successor Regent Jane (Disputed) or Mary I Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset (15471549) John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland (15491553) House of Tudor Henry VIII of England Jane Seymour 12 October 1537 Hampton Court Palace, Middlesex, England 6 July 1553 (aged 15) Greenwich Palace, Kent, England 8 August 1553 Henry VII Lady Chapel, Westminster Abbey, England
Edward VI (12 October 1537 6 July 1553) became King of England and Ireland on 28 January 1547 and was crowned on 20 February at the age of nine.[1] The son of Henry VIII and Jane Seymour, Edward was the third monarch of the Tudor dynasty and England's first monarch that was raised as a Protestant. During Edward's reign, the realm was governed by a Regency Council, because he never reached maturity. The Council was led by his uncle Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset, (15471549), and then by John Dudley, 1st Earl of Warwick, (15501553), who later became Duke of Northumberland. Edward's reign was marked by economic problems and social unrest that, in 1549, erupted into riot and rebellion. An expensive war with Scotland, at first successful, ended with military withdrawal from there and Boulogne-sur-Mer in exchange for peace. The transformation of the Anglican Church into a recognisably Protestant body also occurred under Edward, who took great interest in religious matters. Although Henry VIII had severed the link between the Church of England and Rome, he never permitted the renunciation of Catholic doctrine or ceremony. It was during Edward's reign that Protestantism was established for the first time in England with reforms that included the abolition of clerical celibacy and the Mass and the imposition of compulsory services in English. The architect of these reforms was Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, whose Book of Common Prayer has proved lasting. In February 1553, at age 15, Edward fell ill. When his sickness was discovered to be terminal, he and his Council drew up a "Devise for the Succession", attempting to prevent the country being returned to Catholicism. Edward named his cousin Lady Jane Grey as his heir and excluded his half sisters, Mary and Elizabeth. However, this was disputed following Edward's death and Jane was queen for only nine days before Edward's half-sister, Mary, was
Edward VI of England proclaimed Queen. She reversed Edward's Protestant reforms, which became however the basis of the Elizabethan Religious Settlement of 1559.
51
Early life
Birth
Prince Edward was born on 12 October 1537 in his mother's room inside Hampton Court Palace, in Middlesex.[3] He was the son of King Henry VIII by his third wife, Jane Seymour. Throughout the realm, the people greeted the birth of a male heir, "whom we hungered for so long",[4] with joy and relief. Te Deums were sung in churches, bonfires lit, and "their was shott at the Tower that night above two thousand gonnes".[5] Jane, appearing to recover quickly from the birth, sent out pre-signed letters announcing the birth of "a Prince, conceived in most lawful matrimony between my Lord the King's Majesty and us". Edward was christened on 15 October, with his half-sisters, the Lady Mary as godmother and the Lady Elizabeth carrying the chrism;[5] and the Garter King of Arms proclaimed him as Duke of Cornwall and Earl of Chester.[6] Jane Seymour, however, fell ill on 23 October from presumed postnatal complications, and died the following night. Henry VIII wrote to Francis I of France that "Divine Providence... hath mingled my joy with bitterness of the death of her who brought me this happiness".[7]
Prince Edward in 1539, by Hans Holbein the Younger. He holds a golden rattle that resembles a sceptre; and the Latin inscription urges him to [2] equal or surpass his father.
Edward as Prince of Wales, 1546. He wears the Prince of Wales's feathers and crown on the [8] pendant jewel.
Edward VI of England wife, Anne Stanhope. Henry demanded exacting standards of security and cleanliness in his son's household, stressing that Edward was "this whole realm's most precious jewel".[14] Visitors described the prince, who was lavishly provided with toys and comforts, including his own troupe of minstrels, as a contented child.[15] From the age of six, Edward began his formal education under Richard Cox and John Cheke, concentrating, as he recalled himself, on "learning of tongues, of the scripture, of philosophy, and all liberal sciences";[16] He received tuition from Elizabeth's tutor, Roger Ascham, and Jean Belmain, learning French, Spanish and Italian. In addition, he is known to have studied geometry and learned to play musical instruments, including the lute and the virginals. He collected globes and maps and, according to coinage historian C. E. Challis, developed a grasp of monetary affairs that indicated a high intelligence. Edward's religious education is assumed to have favoured the reforming agenda.[17] His religious establishment was probably chosen by Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, a leading reformer. Both Cox and Cheke were "reformed" Catholics or Erasmians and later became Marian exiles. By 1549, Edward had written a treatise on the pope as Antichrist and was making informed notes on theological controversies.[18] Many aspects of Edward's religion were essentially Catholic in his early years, including celebration of the mass and reverence for images and relics of the saints.[19] Both Edward's sisters were attentive to their brother and often visited him on one occasion, Elizabeth gave him a shirt "of her own working".[20] Edward "took special content" in Mary's company, though he disapproved of her taste for foreign dances; "I love you most", he wrote to her in 1546.[21] In 1543, Henry invited his children to spend Christmas with him, signalling his reconciliation with his daughters, whom he had previously illegitimised and disinherited. The following spring, he restored them to their place in the succession with a Third Succession Act, which also provided for a regency council during Edward's minority.[22] This unaccustomed family harmony may have owed much to the influence of Henry's new wife Catherine Parr,[23] of whom Edward soon became fond. He called her his "most dear mother" and in September 1546, wrote to her: "I received so many benefits from you that my mind can hardly grasp them".[24] Other children were brought to play with Edward, including the granddaughter of Edward's chamberlain, Sir William Sidney, who in adulthood recalled the prince as "a marvellous sweet child, of very mild and generous condition".[25] Edward was educated with sons of nobles, "appointed to attend upon him" in what was a form of miniature court. Among these, Barnaby Fitzpatrick, son of an Irish peer, became a close and lasting friend.[26] Edward was more devoted to his schoolwork than his classmates and seems to have outshone them, motivated to do his "duty" and compete with his sister Elizabeth's academic prowess. Edward's surroundings and possessions were regally splendid: his rooms were hung with costly Flemish tapestries, and his clothes, books, and cutlery were encrusted with precious jewels and gold.[27] Like his father, Edward was fascinated by military arts, and many of his portraits show him wearing a gold dagger with a jewelled hilt, in imitation of Henry.[28] Edward's Chronicle enthusiastically details English military campaigns against Scotland and France, and adventures such as John Dudley's near capture at Musselburgh in 1547.[29]
52
Edward VI of England and "put all to fire and sword, burn Edinburgh town, so razed and defaced when you have sacked and gotten what ye can of it, as there may remain forever a perpetual memory of the vengeance of God lightened upon [them] for their falsehood and disloyalty".[32] Seymour responded with the most savage campaign ever launched by the English against the Scots.[33] The war, which continued into Edward's reign, has become known as "The Rough Wooing".
53
Accession
The nine-year-old Edward wrote to his father and Catherine Parr on 10 January 1547 from Hertford thanking them for his new year's gift of their portraits from life.[34] By 28 January 1547 Henry VIII was dead. Those close to the throne, led by Edward Seymour and William Paget, agreed to delay the announcement of the king's death until arrangements had been made for a smooth succession. Seymour and Sir Anthony Browne, the Master of the Horse, rode to collect Edward from Hertford and brought him to Enfield, where Princess Elizabeth was living. He and Elizabeth were then told of the death of their father and heard a reading of the will.[35] The Lord Chancellor, Thomas Wriothesley, announced Henry's death to parliament on 31 January, and general proclamations of Edward's succession were ordered.[36] The new king was taken to the Tower of Coat of arms of King Edward VI London, where he was welcomed with "great shot of ordnance in all places there about, as well out of the [37] Tower as out of the ships". The following day, the nobles of the realm made their obeisance to Edward at the Tower, and Seymour was announced as Protector.[36] Henry VIII was buried at Windsor on 16 February, in the same tomb as Jane Seymour, as he had wished. Edward VI was crowned at Westminster Abbey four days later on Sunday 20 February, the first coronation in England for almost 40 years.[38] The ceremonies were shortened, because of the "tedious length of the same which should weary and be hurtsome peradventure to the King's majesty, being yet of tender age", and also because the Reformation had rendered some of them inappropriate.[39] On the eve of the coronation, Edward progressed on horseback from the Tower to the Palace of Westminster through thronging crowds and pageants, many based on the pageants for a previous boy king, Henry VI.[40] He laughed at a Spanish tightrope walker who "tumbled and played many pretty toys" outside St Paul's Cathedral.[41] At the coronation service, Cranmer affirmed the royal supremacy and called Edward a second Josiah,[42] urging him to continue the reformation of the Church of England, "the tyranny of the Bishops of Rome banished from your subjects, and images removed".[43] After the service, Edward presided at a banquet in Westminster Hall, where, he recalled in his Chronicle, he dined with his crown on his head.[44]
Edward VI of England
54
Somerset's Protectorate
Council of Regency
Henry VIII's will named sixteen executors, who were to act as Edward's Council until he reached the age of 18. These executors were supplemented by twelve men "of counsail" who would assist the executors when called on.[45] The final state of Henry VIII's will has been the subject of controversy. Some historians suggest that those close to the king manipulated either him or the will itself to ensure a shareout of power to their benefit, both material and religious. In this reading, the composition of the Privy Chamber shifted towards the end of 1546 in favour of the reforming faction.[46] In addition, two leading conservative Privy Councillors were removed from the centre of power. Stephen Gardiner was refused access to Henry during his last months. Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk, found himself accused of treason; the day before the king's death his vast estates were seized, making them available for redistribution, and he spent the whole of Edward's reign in the Tower of London.[47] Other historians have argued that Gardiner's exclusion was based on non-religious matters, that Norfolk was not noticeably conservative in religion, that conservatives remained on the Council, and that the radicalism of men such as Sir Anthony Denny, who controlled the dry stamp that replicated the king's signature, is debatable.[48] Whatever the case, Henry's death was followed by a lavish hand-out of lands and honours to the new power group.[49] The will contained an "unfulfilled gifts" clause, added at the last minute, which allowed Henry's executors to freely distribute lands and honours to themselves and the court,[50] particularly to Edward Seymour, 1st Earl of Hertford, who became the Lord Protector of the Realm, Governor of the King's Person, and the Duke of Somerset.[49] In fact, Henry VIII's will did not provide for the appointment of a Protector. It entrusted the government of the realm during his son's minority to a Regency Council that would rule collectively, by majority decision, with "like and equal charge".[52] Nevertheless, a few days after Henry's death, on 4 February, the executors chose to invest almost regal power in Edward Seymour.[53] Thirteen out of the sixteen (the others being absent) agreed to his appointment as Protector, which they justified as their joint decision "by virtue of the authority" of Henry's will.[54] Seymour may have done a deal with some of the executors, who almost all received hand-outs.[55] He is known to have done so with William Paget, private secretary to Henry VIII,[56] and to have secured the support of Sir Anthony Browne
Edward VI and the Pope: An Allegory of the Reformation. This Elizabethan work of propaganda depicts the handing over of power from Henry VIII, who lies dying in bed, to Edward VI, seated beneath a cloth of state with a slumping pope at his feet. In the top right of the picture is an image of men pulling down and smashing idols. At Edward's side are his uncle the Lord Protector Edward Seymour and [51] members of the Privy Council.
of the Privy Chamber.[57] Seymour's appointment was in keeping with historical precedent,[58] and his eligibility for the role was reinforced by his military successes in Scotland and France. In March 1547, he secured letters patent from King Edward granting him the almost monarchical right to appoint members to the Privy Council himself and to consult them only when he wished.[59] In the words of historian G. R. Elton, "from that moment his autocratic system was complete".[60] He proceeded to rule largely by proclamation, calling on the Privy Council to do little more than rubber-stamp his decisions.[61]
Edward VI of England Somerset's takeover of power was smooth and efficient. The imperial ambassador, Van der Delft, reported that he "governs everything absolutely", with Paget operating as his secretary, though he predicted trouble from John Dudley, Viscount Lisle, who had recently been raised to Earl of Warwick in the share-out of honours.[62] In fact, in the early weeks of his Protectorate, Somerset was challenged only by the Chancellor, Thomas Wriothesley, whom the Earldom of Southampton had evidently failed to buy off, and by his own brother.[63] Wriothesley, a religious conservative, objected to Somerset's assumption of monarchical power over the Council. He then found himself abruptly dismissed from the chancellorship on charges of selling off some of his offices to delegates.[64]
55
Thomas Seymour
Somerset faced less manageable opposition from his younger brother Thomas Seymour, who has been described as a "worm in the bud".[65] As King Edward's uncle, Thomas Seymour demanded the governorship of the king's person and a greater share of power.[66] Somerset tried to buy his brother off with a barony, an appointment to the Lord Admiralship, and a seat on the Privy Councilbut Thomas was bent on scheming for power. He began smuggling pocket money to King Edward, telling him that Somerset held the purse strings too tight, making him a "beggarly king".[67] He also urged him to throw off the Protector within two years and "bear rule as other kings do"; but Edward, schooled to defer to the Council, failed to co-operate.[68] In April, using Edward's support to circumvent Somerset's opposition, Thomas Seymour secretly married Henry VIII's widow Catherine Parr, whose Protestant household included the 11-year-old Lady Jane Grey and the 13-year-old Lady Elizabeth.[69] In summer 1548, a pregnant Catherine Parr discovered Thomas Seymour embracing Lady Elizabeth.[70] As a result, Elizabeth was removed from Catherine Parr's household and transferred to Sir Anthony Denny's. That September, Catherine Parr died in childbirth, and Thomas Seymour promptly resumed his attentions to Elizabeth by letter, planning to marry her. Elizabeth was receptive, but, like Edward, unready to agree to anything unless permitted by the Council.[71] In January 1549, the Council had Thomas Seymour arrested on various charges, including embezzlement at the Bristol mint. King Edward, whom Seymour was accused of planning to marry to Lady Jane Grey, himself testified about the pocket money.[72] Lack of clear evidence for treason ruled out a trial, so Seymour was condemned instead by an Act of Attainder and beheaded on 20 March 1549.[73]
War
Somerset's only undoubted skill was as a soldier, which he had proven on expeditions to Scotland and in the defence of Boulogne-sur-Mer in 1546. From the first, his main interest as Protector was the war against Scotland.[74] After a crushing victory at the Battle of Pinkie Cleugh in September 1547, he set up a network of garrisons in Scotland, stretching as far north as Dundee.[75] His initial successes, however, were followed by a loss of direction, as his aim of uniting the realms through conquest became increasingly unrealistic. The Scots allied with France, who sent reinforcements for the defence of Edinburgh in 1548,[76] while Mary, Queen of Scots, was removed to France, where she was betrothed to the dauphin.[77] The cost of maintaining the Protector's massive armies and his permanent garrisons in Scotland also placed an unsustainable burden on the royal finances.[78] A French attack on Boulogne in August 1549 at last forced Somerset to begin a withdrawal from Scotland.[79]
Edward VI of England
56
Rebellion
During 1548, England was subject to social unrest. After April 1549, a series of armed revolts broke out, fuelled by various religious and agrarian grievances. The two most serious rebellions, which required major military intervention to put down, were in Devon and Cornwall and in Norfolk. The first, sometimes called the Prayer Book Rebellion, arose mainly from the imposition of church services in English, and the second, led by a tradesman called Robert Kett, mainly from the encroachment of landlords on common grazing ground.[80] A complex aspect of the social unrest was that the protesters believed they were acting legitimately against enclosing landlords with the Protector's support, convinced that the landlords were the lawbreakers.[81] The same justification for outbreaks of unrest was voiced throughout the country, not only in Norfolk and the west. The origin of the popular Edward VI's uncle, Edward Seymour, Duke of view of Somerset as sympathetic to the rebel cause lies partly in his Somerset, ruled England in the name of his series of sometimes liberal, often contradictory, proclamations,[82] and nephew as Lord Protector from 1547 to 1549. partly in the uncoordinated activities of the commissions he sent out in 1548 and 1549 to investigate grievances about loss of tillage, encroachment of large sheep flocks on common land, and similar issues.[83] Somerset's commissions were led by an evangelical M.P. called John Hales, whose socially liberal rhetoric linked the issue of enclosure with Reformation theology and the notion of a godly commonwealth.[84] Local groups often assumed that the findings of these commissions entitled them to act against offending landlords themselves.[85] King Edward wrote in his Chronicle that the 1549 risings began "because certain commissions were sent down to pluck down enclosures".[86] Whatever the popular view of Somerset, the disastrous events of 1549 were taken as evidence of a colossal failure of government, and the Council laid the responsibility at the Protector's door.[87] In July 1549, Paget wrote to Somerset: "Every man of the council have misliked your proceedings... would to God, that, at the first stir you had followed the matter hotly, and caused justice to be ministered in solemn fashion to the terror of others...".[88]
Fall of Somerset
The sequence of events that led to Somerset's removal from power has often been called a coup d'tat.[87] By 1 October 1549, Somerset had been alerted that his rule faced a serious threat. He issued a proclamation calling for assistance, took possession of the king's person, and withdrew for safety to the fortified Windsor Castle, where Edward wrote, "Me thinks I am in prison".[89] Meanwhile, a united Council published details of Somerset's government mismanagement. They made clear that the Protector's power came from them, not from Henry VIII's will. On 11 October, the Council had Somerset arrested and brought the king to Richmond.[87] Edward summarised the charges against Somerset in his Chronicle: "ambition, vainglory, entering into rash wars in mine youth, negligent looking on Newhaven, enriching himself of my treasure, following his own opinion, and doing all by his own authority, etc."[90] In February 1550, John Dudley, Earl of Warwick, emerged as the leader of the Council and, in effect, as Somerset's successor. Although Somerset was released from the Tower and restored to the Council, he was executed for felony in January 1552 after scheming to overthrow Dudley's regime.[91] Edward noted his uncle's death in his Chronicle: "the duke of Somerset had his head cut off upon Tower Hill between eight and nine o'clock in the morning".[92] Historians contrast the efficiency of Somerset's takeover of power, in which they detect the organising skills of allies such as Paget, the "master of practices", with the subsequent ineptitude of his rule.[93] By autumn 1549, his costly wars had lost momentum, the crown faced financial ruin, and riots and rebellions had broken out around the country.
Edward VI of England Until recent decades, Somerset's reputation with historians was high, in view of his many proclamations that appeared to back the common people against a rapacious landowning class.[94] More recently, however, he has often been portrayed as an arrogant and aloof ruler, lacking in political and administrative skills.[95]
57
Northumberland's regime
In contrast, Somerset's successor John Dudley, Earl of Warwick, made Duke of Northumberland in 1551, was once regarded by historians merely as a grasping schemer who cynically elevated and enriched himself at the expense of the crown.[96] Since the 1970s, the administrative and economic achievements of his regime have been recognised, and he has been credited with restoring the authority of the royal Council and returning the government to an even keel after the disasters of Somerset's protectorate.[97] The Earl of Warwick's rival for leadership of the new regime was Thomas Wriothesley, 1st Earl of Southampton, whose conservative supporters had allied with Dudley's followers to create a unanimous Council, which they, and observers such as the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V's ambassador, expected to reverse Somerset's policy of religious reform.[98] Warwick, on the other hand pinned his hopes on the king's strong Protestantism and, claiming that Edward was old enough to rule in person, moved himself and his people closer to the king, taking control of the Privy Chamber.[99] Paget, accepting a barony, joined Warwick when he realised that a conservative policy would not bring the Emperor onto the English side over Boulogne.[100] Southampton prepared a case for executing Somerset, aiming to discredit Warwick through Somerset's statements that he had done all with Warwick's cooperation. As a counter-move, Warwick convinced John Dudley, Earl of Warwick, later 1st Duke of parliament to free Somerset, which it did on 14 January 1550. Warwick Northumberland, led the Privy Council after the then had Southampton and his followers purged from the Council after downfall of Somerset. winning the support of Council members in return for titles, and was made Lord President of the Council and great master of the king's household.[101] Although not called a Protector, he was now clearly the head of the government.[102] As Edward was growing up, he was able to understand more and more government business. However, his actual involvement in decisions has long been a matter of debate, and during the 20th century historians have presented the whole gamut of possibilities, "balanc[ing] an articulate puppet against a mature, precocious, and essentially adult king", in the words of Stephen Alford.[103] A special "Counsel for the Estate" was created when Edward was fourteen. Edward chose the members himself.[104] In the weekly meetings with this Council, Edward was "to hear the debating of things of most importance".[105] A major point of contact with the king was the Privy Chamber, and there Edward worked closely with William Cecil and William Petre, the Principal Secretaries.[106] The king's greatest influence was in matters of religion, where the Council followed the strongly Protestant policy that Edward favoured.[107] The Duke of Northumberland's mode of operation was very different from Somerset's. Careful to make sure he always commanded a majority of councillors, he encouraged a working council and used it to legitimate his authority. Lacking Somerset's blood relationship with the king, he added members to the Council from his own faction in order to control it. He also added members of his family to the royal household.[108] He saw that to achieve personal dominance, he needed total procedural control of the Council.[109] In the words of historian John Guy, "Like Somerset, he became quasi-king; the difference was that he managed the bureaucracy on the pretence that Edward had assumed full sovereignty, whereas Somerset had asserted the right to near-sovereignty as Protector".[110]
Edward VI of England Warwick's war policies were more pragmatic than Somerset's, and they have earned him criticism for weakness. In 1550, he signed a peace treaty with France that agreed to withdrawal from Boulogne and recalled all English garrisons from Scotland. In 1551 Edward was betrothed to Elisabeth of Valois, King Henry II's daughter .[111] In practice, he realised that England could no longer support the cost of wars.[112] At home, he took measures to police local unrest. To forestall future rebellions, he kept permanent representatives of the crown in the localities, including lords lieutenant, who commanded military forces and reported back to central government.[113] Working with William Paulet and Walter Mildmay, Warwick tackled the disastrous state of the kingdom's finances.[114] However, his regime first succumbed to the temptations of a quick profit by further debasing the coinage.[115] The economic disaster that resulted caused Warwick to hand the initiative to the expert Thomas Gresham. By 1552, confidence in the coinage was restored, prices fell, and trade at last improved. Though a full economic recovery was not achieved until Elizabeth's reign, its origins lay in the Duke of Northumberland's policies.[116] The regime also cracked down on widespread embezzlement of government finances, and carried out a thorough review of revenue collection practices, which has been called "one of the more remarkable achievements of Tudor administration".[117]
58
Reformation
In the matter of religion, the regime of Northumberland followed the same policy as that of Somerset, supporting an increasingly vigorous programme of reform.[118] Although Edward VI's practical influence on government was limited, his intense Protestantism made a reforming administration obligatory; his succession was managed by the reforming faction, who continued in power throughout his reign. The man Edward trusted most, Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, introduced a series of religious reforms that revolutionised the English church from one thatwhile rejecting papal supremacyremained essentially Catholic, to one that was institutionally Protestant. The confiscation of church property that had begun under Henry VIII resumed under Edwardnotably with the dissolution of the chantriesto the great monetary advantage of the crown and the new owners of the seized property.[119] Church reform was therefore as much a political as a religious policy under Edward VI.[120] By the end of his reign, the church had been financially ruined, with much of the property of the bishops transferred into lay hands.[121] The religious convictions of both Somerset and Northumberland have proved elusive for historians, who are divided on the sincerity of their Protestantism.[122] There is less doubt, however, about the religious devotionsome have called it bigotry[123] of King Edward, who was said to have read twelve chapters of scripture daily and enjoyed sermons, and was commemorated by John Foxe as a "godly imp".[124] Edward was depicted during his life and afterwards as a new Josiah, the biblical king who destroyed the idols of Baal.[125] He could be priggish in his anti-Catholicism and once asked Catherine Parr to persuade Princess Mary "to attend no longer to foreign dances and merriments which do not become a most Christian princess".[19] Edward's biographer Jennifer Loach cautions, however, against accepting too readily the pious image of Edward handed down by the reformers, as in John Foxe's influential Acts and Monuments, where a woodcut depicts the young king listening to a sermon by Hugh Latimer.[126] In the early part of his life, Edward conformed to the prevailing Catholic practices, including attendance at mass: but he became convinced, under the influence of Cranmer and the reformers among his tutors and courtiers, that "true" religion should be imposed in England.[127]
Edward VI of England
59
The English Reformation advanced under pressure from two directions: from the traditionalists on the one hand and the zealots on the other, who led incidents of iconoclasm (image-smashing) and complained that reform did not go far enough. Reformed doctrines were made official, such as justification by faith alone and communion for laity as well as clergy in both kinds, of bread and wine.[128] The Ordinal of 1550 replaced the divine ordination of priests with a government-run appointment system, authorising ministers to preach the gospel and administer the sacraments rather than, as before, "to offer sacrifice and celebrate mass both for the living and the dead".[129] Cranmer set himself the task of writing a uniform liturgy in English, detailing all weekly and daily services and religious festivals, to be made compulsory in the first Act of Uniformity of 1549.[130] The Book of Common Prayer of 1549, intended as a compromise, was attacked by traditionalists for dispensing with many cherished rituals of the Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, liturgy, such as the elevation of the bread and wine,[131] while some exerted a powerful influence on Edward's reformers complained about the retention of too many "popish" Protestantism. elements, including vestiges of sacrificial rites at communion.[130] The prayer book was also opposed by many senior Catholic clerics, including Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, and Edmund Bonner, Bishop of London, who were both imprisoned in the Tower and, along with others, deprived of their sees.[99] After 1551, the Reformation advanced further, with the approval and encouragement of Edward, who began to exert more personal influence in his role as Supreme Head of the church.[132] The new changes were also a response to criticism from such reformers as John Hooper, Bishop of Gloucester, and the Scot John Knox, who was employed as a minister in Newcastle under the Duke of Northumberland and whose preaching at court prompted the king to oppose kneeling at communion.[133] Cranmer was also influenced by the views of the continental reformer Martin Bucer, who died in England in 1551, by Peter Martyr, who was teaching at Oxford, and by other foreign theologians.[134] The progress of the Reformation was further speeded by the consecration of more reformers as bishops.[135] In the winter of 155152, Cranmer rewrote the Book of Common Prayer in less ambiguous reformist terms, revised canon law, and prepared a doctrinal statement, the Forty-two Articles, to clarify the practice of the reformed religion, particularly in the divisive matter of the communion service.[136] Cranmer's formulation of the reformed religion, finally divesting the communion service of any notion of the real presence of God in the bread and the wine, effectively abolished the mass.[137] According to Elton, the publication of Cranmer's revised prayer book in 1552, supported by a second Act of Uniformity, "marked the arrival of the English Church at protestantism".[138] The prayer book of 1552 remains the foundation of the Church of England's services.[139] However, Cranmer was unable to implement all these reforms once it became clear in spring 1553 that King Edward, upon whom the whole Reformation in England depended, was dying.[140]
Edward VI of England
60
Succession crisis
Devise for the succession
In February 1553, Edward VI became ill, and by June, after several improvements and relapses, he was in a hopeless condition.[141] The king's death and the succession of his Catholic half-sister Mary would jeopardise the English Reformation and Edward's Council and officers had many reasons to fear it.[142] Edward himself opposed Mary's succession, not only on religious grounds but also on those of legitimacy and male inheritance, which also applied to Elizabeth.[143] He composed a draft document, headed "My devise for the succession", in which he undertook to change the succession, most probably inspired by his father Henry VIII's precedent.[144] He passed over the claims of his half-sisters and, at last, settled the Crown on his first cousin once removed, the 16-year-old Lady Jane Grey, who on 21 May 1553 had married Guildford Dudley, a younger son of the Duke of Northumberland.[145]
In his "devise for the succession", Edward passed over his sisters' claims to the throne in favour of Lady Jane Grey. In the fourth line, he altered "L Janes heires masles" to "L Jane and her heires masles".
In his document Edward provided, in case of "lack of issue of my body", for the succession of male heirs only, that is, Jane Grey's mother's, Jane's or her sisters'.[146] As his death approached and possibly persuaded by Northumberland,[147] he altered the wording so that Jane and her sisters themselves should be able to succeed. Yet Edward conceded Jane's right only as an exception to male rule, demanded by reality, an example not to be followed if Jane or her sisters had only daughters.[148] In the final document both Mary and Elizabeth were excluded because of bastardy;[149] since both had been declared bastards under Henry VIII and never made legitimate again, this reason could be advanced for both sisters.[150] The provisions to alter the succession directly contravened Henry VIII's Third Succession Act of 1543 and have been described as bizarre and illogical.[151] In early June, Edward personally supervised the drafting of a clean version of his devise by lawyers, to which he lent his signature "in six several places."[152] Then, on 15 June he summoned high ranking judges to his sickbed, commanding them on their allegiance "with sharp words and angry countenance" to prepare his devise as letters patent and announced that he would have these passed in parliament.[153] His next measure was to have leading councillors and lawyers sign a bond in his presence, in which they agreed faithfully to perform Edward's will after his death.[154] A few months later, Chief Justice Edward Montagu recalled that when he and his colleagues had raised legal objections to the devise, Northumberland had threatened them "trembling for anger, and ... further said that he would fight in his shirt with any man in that quarrel".[155] Montagu also overheard a group of lords standing behind him conclude "if they refused to do that, they were traitors".[156] At last, on 21 June, the devise was signed by Lady Jane Grey, who was proclaimed queen four over a hundred notables, including councillors, peers, archbishops, days after Edward's death bishops, and sheriffs;[157] many of them later claimed that they had been bullied into doing so by Northumberland, although in the words of Edward's biographer Jennifer Loach, "few of them gave any clear indication of reluctance at the time".[158]
Edward VI of England It was now common knowledge that Edward was dying and foreign diplomats suspected that some scheme to debar Mary was under way. France found the prospect of the emperor's cousin on the English throne disagreeable and engaged in secret talks with Northumberland, indicating support.[159] The diplomats were certain that the overwhelming majority of the English people backed Mary, but nevertheless believed that Queen Jane would be successfully established.[160] For centuries, the attempt to alter the succession was mostly seen as a one-man-plot by the Duke of Northumberland.[161] Since the 1970s, however, many historians have attributed the inception of the "devise" and the insistence on its implementation to the king's initiative.[162] Diarmaid MacCulloch has made out Edward's "teenage dreams of founding an evangelical realm of Christ",[163] while David Starkey has stated that "Edward had a couple of co-operators, but the driving will was his".[164] Among other members of the Privy Chamber, Northumberland's intimate Sir John Gates has been suspected of suggesting to Edward to change his devise so that Lady Jane Grey herselfnot just any sons of herscould inherit the Crown.[165] Whatever the degree of his contribution, Edward was convinced that his word was law[166] and fully endorsed disinheriting his half-sisters: "barring Mary from the succession was a cause in which the young King believed."[167]
61
Edward VI of England "suppurating pulmonary infection" or lung abscess, septicaemia, and kidney failure.[180]
62
Northumberland soon realised that he had miscalculated drastically, not least in failing to secure Mary's person before Edward's death.[186] Although many of those who rallied to Mary were conservatives hoping for the defeat of Protestantism, her supporters also included many for whom her lawful claim to the throne overrode religious considerations.[187] Northumberland was obliged to relinquish control of a nervous Council in London and launch an unplanned pursuit of Mary into East Anglia, from where news was arriving of her growing support, which included a number of nobles and gentlemen and "innumerable companies of the common people".[188] On 14 July Northumberland marched out of London with three thousand men, reaching Cambridge the next day; meanwhile, Mary rallied her forces at Framlingham Castle in Suffolk, gathering an army of nearly twenty thousand by 19 July.[189] It now dawned on the Privy Council that it had made a terrible mistake. Led by the Earl of Arundel and the Earl of Pembroke, on 19 July the Council publicly proclaimed Mary as queen; Jane's nine-day reign came to an end. The proclamation triggered wild rejoicing throughout London.[190] Stranded in Cambridge, Northumberland proclaimed Mary himselfas he had been commanded to do by a letter from the Council.[191] William Paget and the Earl of Arundel rode to Framlingham to beg Mary's pardon, and Arundel arrested Northumberland on 24 July. Northumberland was beheaded on 22 August, shortly after renouncing Protestantism.[192] His recantation dismayed his daughter-in-law, Jane, who followed him to the scaffold on 12 February 1554, after her father's involvement in Wyatt's rebellion.[193]
Edward VI of England
63
Protestant legacy
Although Edward reigned for only six years and died at the age of 15, his reign made a lasting contribution to the English Reformation and the structure of the Church of England.[195] The last decade of Henry VIII's reign had seen a partial stalling of the Reformation, a drifting back to more conservative values.[196] By contrast, Edward's reign saw radical progress in the Reformation. In those six years, the Church transferred from an essentially Roman Catholic liturgy and structure to one that is usually identified as Protestant.[197] In particular, the introduction of the Book of Common Prayer, the Ordinal of 1550, and A contemporary woodcut of Hugh Latimer preaching to King Cranmer's Forty-two Articles formed the basis for Edward and a crowd of courtiers from a pulpit in the privy garden at English Church practices that continue to this day.[198] the Palace of Whitehall. Published in John Foxe's Acts and [194] Edward himself fully approved these changes, and Monuments in 1563. though they were the work of reformers such as Thomas Cranmer, Hugh Latimer, and Nicholas Ridley, backed by Edward's determinedly evangelical Council, the fact of the king's religion was a catalyst in the acceleration of the Reformation during his reign.[199] Queen Mary's attempts to undo the reforming work of her brother's reign faced major obstacles. Despite her belief in the papal supremacy, she ruled constitutionally as the Supreme Head of the English Church, a contradiction under which she bridled.[200] She found herself entirely unable to restore the vast number of ecclesiastical properties handed over or sold to private landowners.[201] Although she burned a number of leading Protestant churchmen, many reformers either went into exile or remained subversively active in England during her reign, producing a torrent of reforming propaganda that she was unable to stem.[202] Nevertheless, Protestantism was not yet "printed in the stomachs" of the English people,[203] and had Mary lived longer, her Catholic reconstruction might have succeeded, leaving Edward's reign, rather than hers, as a historical aberration.[204] On Mary's death in 1558, the English Reformation resumed its course, and most of the reforms instituted during Edward's reign were reinstated in the Elizabethan Religious Settlement. Queen Elizabeth replaced Mary's councillors and bishops with ex-Edwardians, such as William Cecil, Northumberland's former secretary, and Richard Cox, Edward's old tutor, who preached an anti-Catholic sermon at the opening of parliament in 1559.[205] Parliament passed an Act of Uniformity the following spring that restored, with modifications, Cranmer's prayer book of 1552;[206] and the Thirty-nine Articles of 1563 were largely based on Cranmer's Forty-two Articles. The theological developments of Edward's reign provided a vital source of reference for Elizabeth's religious policies, though the internationalism of the Edwardian Reformation was never revived.[207]
Edward VI of England
64
Notes
[1] Henry VIII had replaced the style "Lord of Ireland" with "King of Ireland" in 1541; Edward also maintained the English claim to the French throne but did not rule France. See Scarisbrick 1971, pp.54849, and Lydon 1998, p.119. [2] Foister 2006, p.100 [3] Loach 1999, p.4 [4] Hugh Latimer, bishop of Worcester, quoted by Erickson 1978, p.181 [5] Loach 1999, pp.56 [6] Erickson 1978, p.182 [7] Skidmore 2007, p.20 [8] Strong 1969, p.92; Hearn 1995, p.50. [9] Loach 1999, p.8 [10] e.g.: Elton 1977, p.372; Loach 1999, p.161; MacCulloch 2002, p.21 [11] Skidmore 2007, p.27. A fever recurring about every four days, today usually associated with malaria. [12] Skidmore 2007, pp.33, 177, 22334, 260. Edward was also ill in 1550 and "of the measles and the smallpox" in 1552. [13] Skidmore 2007, p.22; Jordan 1968, pp.3738 [14] Skidmore 2007, p.23; Jordan 1968, pp.3839 [15] Loach 1999, pp.911 [16] Loach 1999, pp.1112; Jordan 1968, p.42. For example, he read biblical texts, Cato, Aesop's Fables, and Vives's Satellitium Vivis, which were written for his sister, Mary. [17] Jordan 1968, p.40; MacCulloch 2002, p.8 [18] Loach 1999, pp.1316; MacCulloch 2002, pp.2630 [19] Skidmore 2007, p.38 [20] Skidmore 2007, p.26 [21] Skidmore 2007, pp.3837; Loach 1999, p.16 [22] Mackie 1952, pp.41314; Guy 1988, p.196. Mary and Elizabeth remained technically illegitimate, succeeding to the crown due to Henry's nomination. They could lose their rights, for example by marrying without the consent of the Privy Council: Ives 2009, pp.142143; Loades 1996, p.231. [23] Starkey 2004, p.720 [24] Skidmore 2007, p.34 [25] Skidmore 2007, pp.2829 [26] Jordan 1968, p.44 [27] Skidmore 2007, pp.3536 [28] Skidmore 2007, p.36; Strong 1969, p.92. Such portraits were modelled on Holbein's depiction of Henry VIII for a wall-painting at Whitehall in 1537, in which Henry confronts the viewer, wearing a dagger. See Remigius van Leemput's 1667 copy of the mural, which was destroyed in a fire in 1698. [29] Loach 1999, pp.5354 see Jordan 1966 for full text [30] This miniature, formerly attributed to Hans Holbein the Younger and one of several versions derived from the same pattern, is now thought likely to be by a follower of William Scrots. The background inscription gives Edward's age as six, but this has been doubted after x-rays of the underpainting. See Strong 1969, pp.9293, and Rowlands 1985, pp.23536. [31] Skidmore 2007, p.30 [32] Wormald 2001, p.58 [33] "His detailed reports to his master are a hideous record of fire and bloodshed, chronicled in the most factual and laconic manner." Wormald 2001, p.59 [34] Strype, John, Ecclesiastical Memorials, vol 2,part 2, (1822), 507509, 'tua effigies ad vivum expressa.' [35] Jordan 1968, pp.5152; Loades 2004, p.28 [36] Loach 1999, p.29 [37] Jordan 1968, p.52 [38] Loach 1999, pp.3038 [39] Jordan 1968, pp.6566; Loach 1999, pp.3537 [40] Loach 1999, p.33 [41] Skidmore 2007, p.59 [42] Skidmore 2007, p.61; MacCulloch 2002, p.62 [43] Jordan 1968, p.67 [44] Jordan 1968, pp.6569; Loach 1999, pp.2938 [45] Loach 1999, pp.1718; Jordan 1968, p.56 [46] Starkey 2002, pp.130145 [47] Starkey 2002, pp.130145; Elton 1977, pp.33031
Edward VI of England
[48] Loach 1999, pp.1925. In addressing these views, Loach cites, among others: G. Redworth, In Defence of the Church Catholic: the Life of Stephen Gardiner (Oxford, 1990), 23137; Susan Brigden, "Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey, and the Conjoured League", Historical Journal, xxxvii (1994), 50737; and Eric Ives, "Henry VIII's Will: A Forensic Conundrum", Historical Journal (1992), 79299. [49] Loach 1999, pp.1925 [50] Starkey 2002, p.142; Elton 1977, p.332. David Starkey describes this distribution of benefits as typical of "the shameless back-scratching of the alliance"; G. R. Elton calls the changes to the will "convenient". [51] Aston 1993; Loach 1999, p.187; Hearn 1995, pp.7576 [52] Starkey 2002, pp.13839; Alford 2002, p.69. The existence of a council of executors alongside the Privy Council was rationalised in March when the two became one, incorporating the executors and most of their appointed assistants and adding Thomas Seymour, who had protested at his exclusion from power. [53] MacCulloch 2002, p.7; Alford 2002, p.65 [54] Starkey 2002, pp.13839; Alford 2002, p.67 [55] Loach 1999, pp.2627; Elton 1962, p.203 [56] In 1549, Paget was to remind Seymour: "Remember what you promised me in the gallery at Westminster before the breath was out of the body of the king that dead is. Remember what you promised immediately after, devising with me concerning the place which you now occupy... and that was to follow mine advice in all your proceedings more than any other man's". Quoted in Guy 1988, p.211 [57] Alford 2002, pp.6768 [58] Alford 2002, pp.4950, 9192; Elton 1977, p.333. Uncles of the king had been made Protector in 1422 and 1483 during the minorities of Henry VI and Edward V (though not also Governor of the King's Person, as Seymour's brother Thomas, who coveted the role for himself, pointed out). [59] Alford 2002, p.70 ; Jordan 1968, pp.7375. In 1549, William Paget described him as king in all but name. [60] Elton 1977, pp.334, 338 [61] Alford 2002, p.66 [62] Jordan 1968, pp.69, 7677; Skidmore 2007, pp.6365 [63] Elton 1977, p.333 [64] Loades 2004, pp.3334; Elton 1977, p.333 [65] Loades 2004, p.34 [66] Elton 1977, pp.333, 346. [67] Loades 2004, p.36 [68] Loades 2004, pp.3637; Brigden 2000, p.182 [69] Erickson 1978, p.234 [70] Somerset 1997, p.23 [71] Loades 2004, pp.3738 [72] Loades 2004, pp.4041; Alford 2002, pp.9697 [73] Alford 2002, pp.9197 [74] Brigden 2000, p.183; MacCulloch 2002, p.42 [75] Mackie 1952, p.484 [76] Mackie 1952, p.485 [77] Wormald 2001, p.62; Loach 1999, pp.5253. The dauphin was the future Francis II of France, son of Henry II of France. [78] Brigden 2000, p.183 [79] Elton 1977, pp.34041 [80] Loach 1999, pp.7083 [81] Elton 1977, pp.347350; Loach 1999, pp.6667, 86. For example, in Hereford, a man was recorded as saying that "by the king's proclamation all enclosures were to be broken up". [82] Loach 1999, pp.6061, 6668, 89; Elton 1962, p.207. Some proclamations expressed sympathy for the victims of enclosure and announced action; some condemned the destruction of enclosures and associated riots; another announced pardons for those who had destroyed enclosures by mistake ("of folly and of mistaking") after misunderstanding the meaning of proclamations, so long as they were sorry. [83] Loach 1999, pp.6166. [84] MacCulloch 2002, pp.4951; Dickens 1967, p.310 [85] "Their aim was not to bring down government, but to help it correct the faults of local magistrates and identify the ways in which England could be reformed." MacCulloch 2002, p.126 [86] Loach 1999, p.85 [87] Elton 1977, p.350 [88] Loach 1999, p.87 [89] Brigden 2000, p.192 [90] Quoted in Loach 1999, p.91. By "Newhaven" is meant Ambleteuse, near Boulogne. [91] Guy 1988, pp.21215; Loach 1999, pp.101102 [92] Loach 1999, p.102 [93] MacCulloch 2002, p.104; Dickens 1967, p.279
65
Edward VI of England
[94] Elton 1977, p.333n; Alford 2002, p.65. A. F. Pollard took this line in the early 20th century, echoed later by Edward VI's 1960s biographer W. K. Jordan. A more critical approach was initiated by M. L. Bush and Dale Hoak in the 1970s. [95] Elton 1977, pp.334350 [96] Hoak 1980, pp.3132; MacCulloch 2002, p.42 [97] Alford 2002, p.25; Hoak 1980, pp.42, 51 [98] Loach 1999, p.92 [99] Brigden 2000, p.193 [100] Elton 1977, p.351 [101] Guy 1988, p.213; Hoak 1980, pp.3839. Hoak explains that the office of Lord President gave its holder the right to create and dismiss councillors, as well as to call and dissolve Council meetings. [102] Elton 1977, pp.350352 [103] Alford 2002, p.157 [104] Alford 2002, pp.162165 [105] Alford 2002, p.162 [106] Alford 2002, pp.165166 [107] Elton 1977, pp.354, 371 [108] Loach 1999, p.94. [109] Hoak 1980, pp.3637 [110] Guy 1988, p.215 [111] Guy 1988, pp.21819; Loach 1999, p.108. Edward sent Elisabeth a "fair diamond" from Catherine Parr's collection. [112] Loach 1999, p.113; MacCulloch 2002, p.55 [113] Elton 1977, p.355; Loach 1999, p.105 [114] Elton 1977, p.355 [115] Loach 1999, p.110; Hoak 1980, p.41 [116] Elton 1977, p.356 [117] Elton 1977, pp.35758 [118] MacCulloch 2002, p.56 [119] Dickens 1967, pp.28793 [120] Elton 1962, pp.204205; MacCulloch 2002, p.8 [121] Elton 1962, p.210 [122] Haigh 1993, pp.169171; Elton 1962, p.210; Guy 1988, p.219; Loades 2004, p.135; Skidmore 2007, pp.28687. [123] Mackie 1952, p.524; Elton 1977, p.354 [124] Brigden 2000, p.180; Skidmore 2007, p.6 [125] MacCulloch 2002, p.14 [126] Loach 1999, pp.18081; MacCulloch 2002, pp.2129. Loach points out, following Jordan, that Edward's Chronicle records nothing of his religious views and mentions no sermons; MacCulloch counters that Edward's notebook of sermons, which was once archived and documented, has since been lost. [127] Brigden 2000, pp.18081 [128] Brigden 2000, pp.18889 [129] Mackie 1952, p.517; Elton 1977, p.360; Haigh 1993, p.168 [130] Elton 1977, p.345 [131] Brigden 2000, p.190; Haigh 1993, p.174; Dickens 1967, p.305. One of the grievances of the western prayer-book rebels in 1549 was that the new service seemed "like a Christmas game". [132] Brigden 2000, p.195 [133] Elton 1977, pp.361, 365 [134] Elton 1977, pp.36162; Haigh 1993, pp.17980; Dickens 1967, pp.31825, 4042 [135] Haigh 1993, p.178. Notable among the new bishops were John Ponet, who succeeded Gardiner at Winchester, Myles Coverdale at Exeter, and John Hooper at Gloucester. [136] Dickens 1967, pp.34049 [137] Brigden 2000, pp.19697; Elton 1962, p.212 [138] " The Prayer Book of 1552, the Ordinal of 1550, which it took over, the act of uniformity which made the Prayer Book the only legal form of worship, and the Forty-two Articles binding upon all Englishmen, clerical and laythese between them comprehended the protestant Reformation in England." Elton 1962, p.212 [139] Elton 1977, p.365 [140] Elton 1977, p.366. Edward approved the Forty-two Articles in June 1553, too late for them to be introducedthey later became the basis of Elizabeth I's Thirty-nine Articles of 1563. Cranmer's revision of canon law, Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum, was never authorised by king or parliament. [141] Loach 1999, pp.159162 [142] Starkey 2001, pp.111112
66
Edward VI of England
[143] Starkey 2001, pp.112113; Loades 1996, p.232 [144] Ives 2009, pp.142144 [145] Loades 1996, pp.238239 [146] Ives 2009, pp.137, 139140. In case there were no male heirs at the time of his death, England should have no king, but Jane's mother, Frances Grey, Duchess of Suffolk, should act as regent until the birth of a royal male. Edward made detailed provisions for a minority rule, stipulated at what age the male rulers were to take power, and left open the possibility of his having children. Ives 2009, pp.137139; Alford 2002, pp.172173; Loades 1996, p.231. [147] Loades 1996, p.240 [148] Ives 2009, pp.147, 150. By the logic of the devise, Frances Grey, Duchess of Suffolk, Jane's mother and Henry VIII's niece, should have been named as Edward's heir, but she, who had already been passed over in favour of her children in Henry's will, seems to have waived her claim after a visit to Edward.Ives 2009, pp.157, 35 [149] Ives 2009, p.167 [150] Jordan 1970, p.515; Elton 1977, p.373n16 [151] Loach 1999, p.163; Jordan 1970, p.515 [152] Ives 2009, pp.145, 314 [153] Loach 1999, p.164; Dale Hoak. "Edward VI (15371553)" (http:/ / www. oxforddnb. com/ view/ article/ 8522). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, Jan 2008. . Retrieved 4 April 2010. (subscription required) [154] Ives 2009, pp.160161 [155] Ives 2009, pp.105, 147; Loades 1996, p.241 [156] Ives 2009, p.160 [157] Ives 2009, p.161 [158] Loach 1999, p.165 [159] Loach 1999, p.166; Loades 1996, pp.254255 [160] Loades 1996, pp.256257 [161] Ives 2009, p.128 [162] e.g.: Jordan 1970, pp.514517; Loades 1996, pp.239241; Starkey 2001, pp.112114; MacCulloch 2002, pp.3941; Alford 2002, pp.171174; Skidmore 2007, pp.247250; Ives 2009, pp.136142, 145148; Dale Hoak. "Edward VI (15371553)" (http:/ / www. oxforddnb. com/ view/ article/ 8522). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press, 2004; online edn, Jan 2008. . Retrieved 4 April 2010. (subscription required) [163] MacCulloch 2002, p.41 [164] Starkey 2001, p.112 [165] Dale Hoak (2004). "Edward VI (15371553)" (http:/ / www. oxforddnb. com/ view/ article/ 8522). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press; online edn, Jan 2008. . Retrieved 4 April 2010. (subscription required) [166] Mackie 1952, p.524 [167] Hoak 1980, p.49. [168] Skidmore 2007, pp.24445 [169] Loades 1996, p.238 [170] Loach 1999, p.159 [171] Loach 1999, p.160; Skidmore 2007, p.254 [172] Skidmore 2007, p.254 [173] Skidmore 2007, p.258; Loach 1999, p.167. See Foxe's Acts and monuments, VI, 352. [174] Loach 1999, pp.16769 [175] Loach 1999, p.160; Jordan 1970, p.520n1 [176] Dickens 1967, p.352 [177] Skidmore 2007, pp.25859 [178] Skidmore 2007, p.260 [179] Loach 1999, p.161 [180] Loach 1999, pp.15962 [181] Loades 1996, pp.239240, 237 [182] Loades 1996, pp.257, 258 [183] Jordan 1970, p.521 [184] Erickson 1978, pp.29091; Tittler 1991, p.8 [185] Jordan 1970, p.522 [186] Elton 1977, p.375; Dickens 1967, p.353 [187] Jordan 1970, p.524; Elton 1977, p.375 [188] Erickson 1978, p.291 [189] Tittler 1991, p.10; Erickson 1978, pp.29293 [190] Jordan 1970, pp.52930 [191] Loades 2004, p.134
67
Edward VI of England
[192] Loades 2004, pp.13435 [193] Tittler 1991, p.11; Erickson 1978, pp.35758 [194] MacCulloch 2002, pp.2125, 107 [195] MacCulloch 2002, p.12 [196] Scarisbrick 1971, pp.54547 [197] The article follows the majority of historians in using the term "Protestant" for the Church of England as it stood by the end of Edward's reign. However, a minority prefer the terms "evangelical" or "new". In this view, as expressed by Diarmaid MacCulloch, it is "premature to use the label 'Protestant' for the English movement of reform in the reigns of Henry and Edward, even though its priorities were intimately related to what was happening in central Europe. A description more true to the period would be 'evangelical', a word which was indeed used at the time in various cognates". MacCulloch 2002, p.2 [198] Elton 1962, p.212; Skidmore 2007, pp.89 [199] MacCulloch 2002, p.8 [200] Elton 1977, pp.378, 383 [201] Elton 1962, pp.216219 [202] Haigh 1993, p.223; Elton 1977, pp.38283 [203] Loach 1999, p.182; Haigh 1993, p.175 [204] Haigh 1993, p.235 [205] Haigh 1993, p.238 [206] Somerset 1997, p.101 [207] Loach 1999, p.182; MacCulloch 2002, p.79
68
Bibliography
Alford, Stephen (2002), Kingship and Politics in the Reign of Edward VI, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN0-521-03971-1. Aston, Margaret (1993), The King's Bedpost: Reformation and Iconography in a Tudor Group Portrait, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN0-521-48457-X. Brigden, Susan (2000), New Worlds, Lost Worlds: The Rule of the Tudors, 14851603, London: Allen Lane/Penguin, ISBN0-7139-9067-8. Davis, Catharine (2002), A Religion of the Word: The Defence of the Reformation in the Reign of Edward VI, Manchester: Manchester University Press, ISBN978-0-7190-5730-4. Dickens, A. G. (1967), The English Reformation, London: Fontana, ISBN0-00-686115-6. Elton, G. R. (1962), England Under the Tudors, London: Methuen, OCLC154186398. Elton, G. R. (1977), Reform and Reformation, London: Edward Arnold, ISBN0-7131-5953-7. Erickson, Carolly (1978), Bloody Mary, New York: Doubleday, ISBN0-385-11663-2. Foister, Susan (2006), Holbein in England, London: Tate Publishing, ISBN1-85437-645-4. Guy, John (1988), Tudor England, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN0-19-285213-2. Haigh, Christopher (1993), English Reformations: Religion, Politics and Society Under the Tudors, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN978-0-19-822162-3. Hearn, Karen (1995), Dynasties: Painting in Tudor and Jacobean England 15301630, New York: Rizzoli, ISBN0-8478-1940-X. Hoak, Dale (1980), "Rehabilitating the Duke of Northumberland: Politics and Political Control, 154953", in Loach, Jennifer; Tittler, Robert, The Mid-Tudor Polity c. 15401560, London: Macmillan, pp.2951, ISBN0-333-24528-8. Ives, Eric (2009), Lady Jane Grey. A Tudor Mystery, Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN978-1-4051-9413-6. Jordan, W. K. (1966), The Chronicle and Political Papers of King Edward VI, London: George Allen & Unwin Jordan, W. K. (1970), Edward VI: The Threshold of Power. The Dominance of the Duke of Northumberland, London: George Allen & Unwin, ISBN0-04-942083-6. Jordan, W. K. (1968), Edward VI: The Young King. The Protectorship of the Duke of Somerset, London: George Allen & Unwin, OCLC40403.
Edward VI of England Loach, Jennifer (1999), Bernard, George; Williams, Penry, eds., Edward VI, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, ISBN0-300-07992-3. Loades, David (2004), Intrigue and Treason: The Tudor Court, 15471558, London: Pearson Longman, ISBN0-582-77226-5 Loades, David (1996), John Dudley Duke of Northumberland 15041553, Oxford: Clarendon Press, ISBN0-19-820193-1. Lydon, James (1998), The Making of Ireland: A History, London: Routledge, ISBN978-0-415-01347-5. MacCulloch, Diarmaid (2002), The Boy King: Edward VI and the Protestant Reformation, Berkeley: University of California Press, ISBN0-520-23402-2. MacCulloch, Diarmaid (1996), Thomas Cranmer, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, ISBN0-300-07448-4. Mackie, J. D. (1952), The Earlier Tudors, 14851558, Oxford: Clarendon Press, OCLC186603282. Richardson, R. E. (2007), Mistress Blanche, Queen Elizabeth I's Confidante, Logaston Press, ISBN978-1-904396-86-4. Rowlands, John (1985), Holbein: The Paintings of Hans Holbein the Younger, Boston: David R. Godine, ISBN0-87923-578-0. Scarisbrick, J. J. (1971), Henry VIII, London: Penguin, ISBN0-14-021318-X. Skidmore, Chris (2007), Edward VI: The Lost King of England, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN978-0-297-84649-9. Somerset, Anne (1997), Elizabeth I, London: Phoenix, ISBN1-84212-624-5. Starkey, David (2001), Elizabeth. Apprenticeship, London: Vintage, ISBN0-09-928657-2. Starkey, David (2004), Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII, London: Vintage, ISBN0-09-943724-4. Starkey, David (2002), The Reign of Henry VIII, London: Vintage, ISBN0-09-944510-7. Strong, Roy (1969), Tudor and Jacobean Portraits, London: HMSO, OCLC71370718. Tittler, Robert (1991), The Reign of Mary I, London: Longman, ISBN0-582-06107-5. Wormald, Jenny (2001), Mary, Queen of Scots: Politics, Passion and a Kingdom Lost, London: Tauris Parke, ISBN1-86064-588-7.
69
Further reading
Bush, M. L. (1975), The Government Policy of Protector Somerset, London: Edward Arnold, OCLC60005549. Hoak, Dale (1976), The King's Council in the Reign of Edward VI, New York: Cambridge University Press, ISBN0-521-20866-1. Jordan, W. K., ed. (1966), The Chronicle and Political Papers of Edward VI, Ithaca, NY: Folger Shakespeare Library/Cornell University Press, OCLC398375. Pollard, A. F. (1900), England Under Protector Somerset, London: K. Paul, Trench, Trbner, OCLC4244810.
External links
Tytler, Patrick Fraser (1839), England under the Reigns of Edward VI and Mary (http://books.google.com/ ?id=414JAAAAIAAJ), I, London: Richard Bentley, retrieved 17 August 2008 Tytler, Patrick Fraser (1839), England under the Reigns of Edward VI and Mary (http://books.google.com/ ?id=tl4JAAAAIAAJ), II, London: Richard Bentley, retrieved 17 August 2008
70
Lady Jane Grey (1536/1537 12 February 1554), also known as The Nine Days' Queen,[1] was an English noblewoman who was de facto monarch of England from 10 July until 19 July 1553 and was subsequently executed. A great-granddaughter of Henry VII by his younger daughter Mary, Jane was a first-cousin-once-removed of Edward VI. In May 1553 Jane was married to Lord Guildford Dudley, a younger son of Edward's chief minister, John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland. When the 15-year-old King lay dying in June 1553, he nominated Jane as successor to the Crown in his will, thus subverting the claims of his half-sisters Mary and Elizabeth under the Third Succession Act. During her short reign, Jane resided in the Tower of London. She became a prisoner there when the Privy Council decided to change sides and proclaim Mary as Queen on 19 July 1553. She was convicted of high treason in November 1553, though her life was initially spared. Wyatt's rebellion in January and February 1554 against Queen Mary's plans of a Spanish match led to her execution at the age of 16 or 17, and that of her husband. Lady Jane Grey had an excellent humanist education and a reputation as one of the most learned young women of her day.[2] A committed Protestant, she was posthumously regarded as not only a political victim but also a martyr.
Lady Jane Grey Michelangelo Florio.[5] Through the influence of her father and her tutors, she became a committed Protestant and also corresponded with the Zrich reformer, Heinrich Bullinger.[6] Jane preferred book studies to hunting parties[8] and regarded her strict upbringing, which was certainly well-meant and typical of the time,[9] as harsh. To the visiting scholar Roger Ascham, who found her reading Plato, she complained: "For when I am in the presence either of father or mother, whether I speak, keep silence, sit, stand or go, eat, drink, be merry or sad, be sewing, playing, dancing, or doing anything else, I must do it as it were in such weight, measure and number, even so perfectly as God made the world; or else I am so sharply taunted, so cruelly threatened, yea presently sometimes with pinches, nips and bobs and other ways (which I will not name for the honour I bear them) ... that I think myself in hell."[10]
Lady Jane Grey, engraving published 1620, possibly based on an earlier [7] painting
71
In early February 1547 Jane was sent to live in the household of Thomas Seymour, who soon married Henry VIII's widow, Catherine Parr. Jane lived with the couple until the death of Queen Catherine in childbirth in September 1548.[11]
72
"My devise for the Succession" by Edward VI. The draft will was the basis for the letters patent which declared Lady Jane Grey successor to the [17] Crown. Edward's autograph shows his alteration of his text, from "L Janes heires [18] masles" to "L Jane and her heires masles".
When the 15-year-old Edward VI lay dying in the early summer of 1553, his Catholic half-sister Mary was still the heiress presumptive to the throne. However, Edward, in a draft will composed earlier in 1553, had first restricted the succession to (non-existent) male descendants of Frances Brandon and her daughters, before he named his Protestant cousin Jane Grey as his successor on his deathbed,[20] perhaps under the persuasion of Northumberland.[21] Edward VI personally supervised the copying of his will which was finally issued as letters patent on 21June and signed by 102 notables, among them the whole Privy Council, peers, bishops, judges, and London aldermen.[22] Edward also announced to have his "declaration" passed in parliament in September, and the necessary writs were prepared.[23] Many contemporary legal theorists believed the monarch could not contravene an Act of Parliament without passing a new one that would have established the altered succession; Jane's claim to the throne therefore remained weak. The King died on 6 July 1553. On 9 July Jane was informed that she was now queen, and according to her own later claims accepted the crown only with reluctance. The next day, she was officially proclaimed Queen of England after she had taken up secure residence in the Tower of London, where English monarchs customarily resided from the time of accession until coronation. Jane refused to name her husband Dudley as king by letters patent and deferred to Parliament. She offered to make him Duke of Clarence instead. Northumberland faced a number of key tasks to consolidate his power after Edward's death. Most importantly, he had to isolate and, ideally, capture Lady Mary to prevent her from gathering support. As soon as Mary was sure of King Edward's demise, she left her residence at Hunsdon and set out to East Anglia, where she began to rally her supporters. Northumberland set out from London with troops on 14July; in his absence the Privy Council switched their allegiance from Jane to Mary, and proclaimed her queen in London on 19July among great jubilation of the populace. Jane was imprisoned in the Tower's Gentleman Gaoler's apartments, her husband in the Beauchamp Tower. The new queen entered London in a triumphal procession on 3August, and the Duke of Northumberland was executed on 22 August 1553. In September, Parliament declared Mary the rightful queen and denounced and revoked Jane's proclamation as that of a usurper.
Official letter of Lady Jane Grey signing herself as "Jane the Quene"
73
Good people, I am come hither to die, and by a law I am condemned to the same. The fact, indeed, against the Queen's highness was unlawful, and the consenting thereunto by me: but touching the procurement and desire thereof by me or on my behalf, I do wash my hands thereof in innocency, before God, and the face of you, good Christian people, this day. She then recited Psalm 51 (Have mercy upon me, O God) in English,[26] and handed her gloves and handkerchief to her maid. John Feckenham, a Catholic chaplain sent by Mary who had failed to convert Jane, stayed with her during the execution. The executioner asked her forgiveness, and she gave it.[26] She pleaded the axeman, "I pray you dispatch me quickly." Referring to her head, she asked, "Will you take it off before I lay me down?" and the axeman answered, "No, madam." She then blindfolded herself. Jane had resolved to go to her death with dignity, but once blindfolded, failing to find the block with her hands, began to panic and cried, "What shall I do? Where is it?"[26] An unknown hand, possibly Sir Thomas Brydges', then helped her find her way and retain her dignity at the end. With her head on the block, Jane spoke the last words of Jesus as recounted by Luke: "Lord, into thy hands I commend my spirit!"[26] She was then beheaded. Jane and Guilford are buried in the Chapel of St Peter ad Vincula on the north side of Tower Green. Jane's father, Duke of Suffolk, was executed a week after Jane, on 19 February 1554. Her mother, the Duchess of Suffolk, married her Master of the Horse and chamberlain, Adrian Stokes in March 1555 (not as often said, three weeks after the execution of the Duke of Suffolk).[27] She was fully pardoned by Mary and allowed to live at Court with her two surviving daughters. She died in 1559.
74
Legacy
"The traitor-heroine of the Reformation", as historian Albert Pollard called her,[28] was merely 16 or 17 years old at the time of her execution. During and in the aftermath of the Marian persecutions, Jane became viewed as a Protestant martyr for centuries, featuring prominently in the several editions of the Book of Martyrs by John Foxe. The tale of Lady Jane grew to legendary proportions in popular culture, producing a flood of romantic biographies, novels, plays, paintings, and films, one of which was the 1986 production Lady Jane, starring Helena Bonham Carter.
References
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] Ives 2009, p.2 Ascham 1863, p.213 Ives 2009, pp.36, 299 de Lisle 2008, pp.58 Ives 2009, pp.51, 65 Ives 2009, pp.6367 Ives 2009, p.15 Ives 2009, p.51 Ives 2009, p.53
[10] Ives 2009, p.52 [11] Ives 2009, pp.4245 [12] Ives 2009, pp.4547 [13] Ives 2009, pp.4749 [14] Ives 2009, pp.47 [15] Loades 1996, pp.238239 [16] Loades 1996, p.179 [17] Ives 2009, p.137 [18] Alford 2002, pp.171172 [19] Ives 2009, p.35 [20] Alford 2002, pp.171172 [21] Loades 1996, p.240 [22] Ives 2009, pp.145, 165166 [23] Dale Hoak: "Edward VI (15371553)" (http:/ / www. oxforddnb. com/ view/ article/ 8522), Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004, online edn. Jan 2008, Retrieved 2010-04-04 (subscription required) [24] Ives 2009, pp.251252, 334 [25] Plowden, Alison (2004-09-23). "Grey, Lady Jane (15341554), noblewoman and claimant to the English throne". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN0198613628. [26] Anonymous (1997) [1850], "1554, The Execution of Lady Jane Grey and Lord Guildford Dudley" (http:/ / englishhistory. net/ tudor/ exjane. html), in Nichols, John Gough, Chronicle of Queen Jane and of Two Years of Queen Mary, The Camden Society; Marilee Hanson, [27] Ives 2009, p.38 [28] Pollard, Albert J. (1911). The History of England (http:/ / www. questia. com/ read/ 58544100). London: Longmans, Green. p.111. .
Bibliography
Alford, Stephen (2002), Kingship and Politics in the Reign of Edward VI, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN9780521039710 Ascham, Roger. Mayor, John E. B.. ed. The Scholemaster (http://www.archive.org/details/ scholemasterorp00aschgoog) (1863 ed.). London: Bell and Daldy. OCLC251212421. de Lisle, Leanda (2008). The Sisters who would be Queen - the Tragedy of Mary, Katherine and Lady Jane Grey. London: Harper Press. ISBN978-0-00-721906-3. Ives, Eric (2009). Lady Jane Grey: A Tudor Mystery. Malden MA; Oxford UK: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN978-1-4051-9413-6. Loades, David (1996), John Dudley Duke of Northumberland 15041553, Oxford: Clarendon Press, ISBN0198201931
75
External links
Edwards, J. Stephan. "Somegreymatter.com" (http://www.somegreymatter.com/index.html). Works by or about Lady Jane Grey (http://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n79-45478) in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
Mary I of England
76
Mary I of England
Mary I
Queen Mary by Hans Eworth Queen Mary by Hans Eworth Queen of England and Ireland (more...) Reign Coronation Predecessor Successor 19 July 1553 17 November 1558 1 October 1553 Jane (disputed) or Edward VI Elizabeth I
[1]
Co-monarch Philip Queen consort of Spain Tenure Spouse House Father Mother Born Died Burial 16 January 1556 17 November 1558 Philip II of Spain House of Tudor Henry VIII of England Catherine of Aragon 18 February 1516 Palace of Placentia, Greenwich 17 November 1558 (aged42) St James's Palace, London 14 December 1558 Westminster Abbey, London
[2]
Mary I (18 February 1516 17 November 1558) was queen regnant of England and Ireland from July 1553 until her death. She was the only surviving child born of the ill-fated marriage of Henry VIII and his first wife Catherine of Aragon. Her younger half-brother, Edward VI, succeeded Henry in 1547. By 1553, Edward was mortally ill and because of religious differences between them attempted to remove Mary from the line of succession. On his death, their cousin Lady Jane Grey was, at first, proclaimed queen. Mary assembled a force in East Anglia, and successfully deposed Jane, who was ultimately beheaded. In 1554, Mary married Philip of Spain, and as a result became queen consort of Habsburg Spain on his accession in 1556. As the fourth crowned monarch of the Tudor dynasty, Mary is remembered for her restoration of Roman Catholicism after the short-lived Protestant reign of her brother. During her five year reign, she had over 280 religious dissenters burned at the stake in the Marian Persecutions. Her Protestant opponents gave her the sobriquet of "Bloody Mary". Her re-establishment of Roman Catholicism was reversed after her death in 1558 by her successor and younger half-sister, ElizabethI.
Mary I of England
77
Mary I of England
78
Throughout Mary's childhood, Henry negotiated potential future marriages for her. When she was only two years old she was promised to the Dauphin, the infant son of King Francis I of France, but after three years the contract was repudiated.[20] In 1522, at the age of six, she was instead contracted to marry her 22-year-old first cousin, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V.[21] However, within a few years, the engagement was broken off by Charles with Henry's agreement.[22] Cardinal Wolsey, Henry's chief adviser, then resumed marriage negotiations with the French, and Henry suggested that Mary marry the Dauphin's father, King Francis I himself, who was eager for an alliance with England.[23] A marriage treaty was signed which provided that Mary marry either Francis I or his second son Henry, Duke of Orleans,[24] but Wolsey secured an alliance with France without the marriage.
Portrait miniature of Mary at the time of her engagement to Charles V. She is wearing a square brooch inscribed with "The [19] Emperour".
Adolescence
Meanwhile, the marriage of Mary's parents was in jeopardy. Disappointed at the lack of a male heir, and eager to re-marry, Henry attempted to have his marriage to Catherine annulled, but Pope Clement VII refused his requests. Henry claimed, citing biblical passages (Leviticus 20:21), that his marriage to Catherine was unclean because she was previously married, at age 16 and briefly, to his late brother Arthur. Catherine claimed that her marriage to Arthur was never consummated, and so was not a valid marriage. Indeed, her first marriage had been annulled by a previous Pope, Julius II, on that basis. Clement may have been reluctant to act because he was influenced by Charles V, Catherine's nephew and Mary's former betrothed, whose troops had surrounded and occupied Rome in the War of the League of Cognac.[25] From 1531, Mary was often sick with irregular menstruation and depression, although it is not clear whether this was caused by stress, puberty or a more deep-seated disease.[26] She was not permitted to see her mother, who was sent by Henry to live away from court.[27] In 1533, Henry married Anne Boleyn, who was pregnant with his child. Shortly thereafter, Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury, formally declared the marriage with Catherine void, and the marriage to Anne valid. Henry broke with the Roman Catholic Church and declared himself head of the Church of England and the Church of Ireland. Catherine was demoted to Dowager Princess of Wales (a title she would have held as the widow of Arthur), and Mary was deemed illegitimate. She was styled "The Lady Mary" rather than Princess, and her place in the line of succession was transferred to her newborn half-sister, Elizabeth, Anne's daughter.[28] Mary's own household was dissolved;[29] she was expelled from Court; her servants (including the Countess of Salisbury and Mary's favourite maid Susan Clarencieux) were dismissed from her service, and in December 1533 she was sent to serve as a lady-in-waiting to Elizabeth.[30] Mary determinedly refused to acknowledge that Anne was the Queen or that Elizabeth was a princess, further enraging the King.[31] Under strain and with her movements restricted, Mary was frequently ill, which the royal physician attributed to her "ill treatment".[32] Circumstances between Mary and her father worsened; they did not speak to each other for three years.[33] Although both she and her mother were ill, Mary was refused permission to visit Catherine.[34] When Catherine died in 1536, Mary was "inconsolable".[35] Catherine was interred in Peterborough Cathedral while Mary grieved in semi-seclusion at Hunsdon in Hertfordshire.[36]
Mary I of England
79
Womanhood
In 1536, Anne Boleyn fell from the King's favour and was beheaded. Elizabeth, like Mary, was downgraded to the status of Lady and removed from the line of succession.[37] Within two weeks of Anne's execution, Henry married Jane Seymour. Queen Jane urged her husband to make peace with Mary.[38] Henry insisted that Mary recognise him as head of the Church of England, repudiate papal authority, acknowledge that the marriage between her parents was unlawful, and accept her own illegitimacy. She attempted to reconcile with him by submitting to his authority as far as "God and my conscience" permitted, but she was eventually bullied into signing a document agreeing to all of Henry's demands.[39] Reconciled with her father, Mary resumed her place at court.[40] Rebels in the North of England, including Lord Hussey, Mary's former chamberlain, campaigned against Henry's religious reforms, and one of their demands was that Mary be made legitimate. The rebellion, known as the Pilgrimage of Grace, was ruthlessly suppressed.[41] Along with other rebels, Hussey was executed. The following year, 1537, Queen Jane died after giving birth to a son, Edward. Mary was made godmother to her half-brother Edward and acted as chief mourner at the Queen's funeral.[42] Henry granted her a household (which included the reinstatement of Mary's favourite Susan Clarencieux), and Mary was permitted to reside in royal palaces. Her privy purse expenses for nearly the whole of this period have been published and show that Hatfield House, the Palace of Beaulieu (also called Newhall), Richmond and Hunsdon were among her principal places of residence. Her expenses included fine clothes and gambling, which was one of her favourite pastimes.[43] She was courted by Duke Philip of Bavaria, but Philip was Lutheran and his suit for her hand was unsuccessful.[44] Over 1539, the King's chief minister, Thomas Cromwell, negotiated a potential alliance with the Duchy of Cleves. Suggestions that Mary marry the Duke of Cleves, who was the same age as her, came to nothing, but a match between Henry VIII Henry and the Duke of Cleves' sister Anne was agreed.[45] When the King saw Anne for the first time in late December 1539, a week before the scheduled wedding, he did not find her attractive but was unable, for diplomatic reasons and in the absence of a suitable pretext, to cancel the marriage.[46] Cromwell fell from favour and was arrested for treason in June 1540; one of the unlikely charges against him was that he had plotted to marry Mary himself.[47] Anne consented to the annulment of the marriage, which had not been consummated, and Cromwell was beheaded.[48] In 1541, Henry had Mary's old governess and godmother, Margaret Pole, 8th Countess of Salisbury, executed on the pretext of a Catholic plot, in which Margaret's son (Reginald Pole) was implicated. Her executioner was "a wretched and blundering youth" who "literally hacked her head and shoulders to pieces".[49] In 1542, following the execution of Henry's fifth wife, Catherine Howard, the unmarried Henry invited Mary to oversee the royal Christmas festivities "in default of a Queen". At court, while her father was between marriages and without a consort, Mary acted as hostess.[50] In 1543, Henry married his sixth and last wife, Catherine Parr, who was able to bring the family closer together.[51] Henry returned Mary and Elizabeth to the line of succession, through the Act of Succession 1543, placing them after Edward. However, both women remained legally illegitimate.[52]
Mary in 1544
Mary I of England In 1547, Henry died and Edward succeeded as Edward VI. Mary inherited estates in Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex, and was granted Hunsdon and Beaulieu as her own.[53] Since Edward was still a child, rule passed to a regency council dominated by Protestants, who attempted to establish their faith throughout the country. For example, the Act of Uniformity 1549 prescribed Protestant rites for church services, such as the use of Thomas Cranmer's new Book of Common Prayer. Mary remained faithful to Roman Catholicism, and appealed to her cousin Charles V for protection so that she was able to practise her religion privately in her own chapel.[54] For most of Edward's reign, Mary remained on her own estates, and rarely attended court.[55] A plan between May and July 1550 to smuggle her out of England to the safety of the European mainland came to nothing.[56] Religious differences between Mary and Edward continued. When Mary was in her thirties, she attended a reunion with Edward and Elizabeth for Christmas 1550, where 13-year-old Edward embarrassed Mary, and reduced both her and himself to tears in front of the court, by publicly reproving her for ignoring his laws regarding worship.[57] Mary repeatedly refused Edward's demands that she abandon Catholicism, and Edward repeatedly refused to drop his demands.[58]
80
Accession
On 6 July 1553, at the age of 15, Edward VI died from a lung infection, possibly tuberculosis.[59] Edward did not want the crown to go to Mary, who he feared would restore Catholicism and undo his reforms, as well as those of Henry VIII. For this reason, he planned to exclude her from the line of succession. However, his advisors told him that he could not disinherit only one of his sisters, but that he would have to disinherit Elizabeth as well, even though she embraced the Church of England. Guided by John Dudley, 1st Duke of Northumberland, and perhaps others, Edward excluded both of his sisters from the line of succession in his will.[60] In contradiction of the Succession Act, which restored Mary and Elizabeth to the line of succession, Edward VI and his advisors devised that he be succeeded by Dudley's daughter-in-law Lady Jane Grey, the granddaughter of Henry VIII's younger sister Mary Tudor, Queen of France. Lady Jane's mother was Frances Brandon, who was Mary's cousin and goddaughter. Just before Edward VI's death, Mary was summoned to London to visit her dying brother. She was warned, however, that the summons was a pretext on which to capture her and thereby facilitate Lady Jane's accession to the throne.[61] Instead of heading to London from her residence at Hunsdon, Mary fled into East Anglia, where she owned extensive estates and Dudley had ruthlessly Queen Mary enters London with Lady Elizabeth put down Kett's Rebellion. Many adherents to the Catholic faith, opponents of Dudley, lived there.[62] On 9 July, from Kenninghall, Norfolk, she wrote to the privy council with orders for her proclamation as Edward's successor.[63]
Mary I of England
81
On 10 July 1553, Lady Jane was proclaimed Queen by Dudley and his supporters, and on the same day Mary's letter to the council arrived in London. By 12 July, Mary and her supporters had assembled a military force at Framlingham Castle, Suffolk.[64] Dudley's support collapsed, and Mary's grew.[65] Jane was deposed on 19 July.[66] She and Dudley were imprisoned in the Tower of London. Mary rode triumphantly into London on 3 August 1553 on a wave of popular support. She was accompanied by her half-sister Elizabeth, and a procession of over 800 other nobles and gentlemen.[67] One of Mary's first actions as Queen was to order the release of the Roman Catholic Duke of Norfolk and Stephen Gardiner from imprisonment in the Tower of London, as well as her kinsman Edward Courtenay.[68] Mary understood that the young Lady Jane was essentially a pawn in Dudley's scheme, and Dudley was the only conspirator of rank executed for high treason in the immediate Mary by Hans Eworth, 1554. She wears a aftermath of the coup. Lady Jane and her husband, Lord Guildford jewelled pendant bearing the pearl known as La Dudley, though found guilty, were kept under guard in the Tower Peregrina set beneath two diamonds. rather than executed, while Lady Jane's father, Henry Grey, 1st Duke of Suffolk, was released.[69] Mary was left in a difficult position, as almost all the Privy Counsellors had been implicated in the plot to put Jane on the throne.[70] She appointed Gardiner to the council and made him both Bishop of Winchester and Lord Chancellor, offices he held until his death in November 1555. Susan Clarencieux became Mistress of the Robes.[71] On 1 October 1553, Gardiner formally crowned Mary Queen of England at Westminster Abbey.[72]
Reign
Mary I of England
82
Spanish marriage
At age 37, Mary turned her attention to finding a husband and producing an heir, thus preventing the Protestant Elizabeth (still her successor under the terms of Henry VIII's will and the Act of Succession of 1544), from succeeding to the throne. Edward Courtenay and Reginald Pole were both mentioned as prospective suitors, but her cousin Charles V suggested she marry his only son, Prince Philip of Spain.[73] Philip had a son from a previous marriage, and was heir apparent to vast territories in Continental Europe and the New World. It is said that upon viewing the full-length portrait of Philip by Titian, now in the Prado,[74] which was sent to her in September 1553,[75] Mary declared herself to be in love with him. Lord Chancellor Gardiner and the House of Commons unsuccessfully petitioned her to consider marrying an Englishman, fearing that England would be relegated to a dependency of the Habsburgs.[76] The marriage was as unpopular in England as it was in Spain. Philip's courtiers and servants had no desire to follow him to a "chilly land of Philip and Mary barbarous heretics", whereas his other subjects did not desire to see him go. Those who were aware of the terms of the marriage thought that Philip's honour had been disparaged. It is probable that Philip himself felt so;[77] Gardiner and his allies opposed it on the basis of patriotism, while Protestants were motivated by a fear of Catholicism.[78] When Mary insisted on marrying Philip, insurrections broke out. Thomas Wyatt the younger led a force from Kent to depose Mary in favour of Elizabeth, as part of a wider conspiracy now known as Wyatt's rebellion, which involved the Duke of Suffolk, the father of Lady Jane.[79] Mary declared publicly that she would summon Parliament to discuss the marriage, and if Parliament decided that the marriage was not to the advantage of the kingdom, she would refrain from pursuing it.[80] On reaching London, Wyatt was defeated and captured. Wyatt, the Duke of Suffolk, his daughter Lady Jane, and her husband Guildford Dudley, were executed. Courtenay, who was implicated in the plot, was imprisoned, and then exiled. Elizabeth, though protesting her innocence in the Wyatt affair, was imprisoned in the Tower of London for two months, then was put under house arrest at Woodstock Palace.[81] Mary wasexcluding the brief, disputed reigns of Jane and Empress MatildaEngland and Ireland's first Queen regnant. Further, under the English common law doctrine of jure uxoris, the property and titles belonging to a woman became that of her husband upon marriage, and it was feared that any man she married would thereby become King of England and Ireland in fact and in name.[82] While Mary's grandparents, Ferdinand and Isabella, had retained sovereignty of their own realms during their marriage, there was no precedent to follow in England.[83] Under the terms of the marriage treaty, Philip was to be styled "King of England", all official documents (including Acts of Parliament) were to be dated with both their names, and Parliament was to be called under the joint authority of the couple, for Mary's lifetime only. Coins were to show the heads of both Mary and Philip. England would not be obliged to provide military support to Philip's father in any war, and Philip could not act without his wife's consent or appoint foreigners to office in England.[84] Philip was unhappy at the conditions imposed, but his view of the affair was entirely political, and he was ready to agree for the sake of securing the marriage.[85] He had no amorous feelings toward Mary and sought the marriage for its political and strategic gains; he wrote to a correspondent in Brussels, "the marriage was concluded for no fleshly consideration, but to remedy the disorders of this kingdom and to preserve the Low Countries."[86] To elevate his son to Mary's rank, Emperor Charles V ceded the crown of Naples, as well as his claim to the Kingdom of Jerusalem, to Philip. Therefore, Mary became Queen of Naples and titular Queen of Jerusalem upon
Mary I of England marriage.[87] Their marriage at Winchester Cathedral on 25 July 1554 took place just two days after their first meeting.[88] Philip could not speak English, and so they spoke in a mixture of Spanish, French, and Latin.[89]
83
Pregnancy
In September 1554, Mary stopped menstruating. She gained weight, and felt nauseated in the mornings. Virtually the whole court, including her doctors, thought she was pregnant.[90] In the last week of April 1555, Elizabeth was released from house arrest, and called to court as a witness to the birth, which was expected imminently.[91] According to Giovanni Michiel, the Venetian ambassador, Philip may have planned to marry Elizabeth in the event of Mary's death in childbirth,[92] but in a letter to his brother-in-law, Maximilian of Austria, Philip expressed uncertainty as to whether his wife was pregnant.[93] Thanksgiving services in the diocese of London were held at the end of April after false rumours that Mary had given birth to a son spread across Europe.[94] Through May and June, the apparent delay in delivery fed gossip that Mary was not pregnant.[95] Susan Clarencieux revealed her doubts to the French ambassador, Antoine de Noailles.[96] Mary continued to exhibit signs of pregnancy until July 1555, when her abdomen receded. There was no baby. Michiel dismissively ridiculed the pregnancy as more likely to "end in wind rather than anything else".[97] It was most likely a phantom pregnancy, perhaps induced by Mary's overwhelming desire to have a child.[98] In August, soon after the disgrace of the false pregnancy, Philip left England to command his armies against France in Flanders.[99] Mary was heartbroken and fell into a deep depression. Michiel was touched by the Queen's grief; he wrote she was "extraordinarily in love" with her husband, and was disconsolate at his departure.[100] Elizabeth remained at court until October, apparently restored to favour.[101] In the absence of any children, Philip was concerned that after Mary and Elizabeth, one of the next claimants to the English throne was the Queen of Scotland, who was betrothed to the Dauphin of France. Philip persuaded Mary that Elizabeth should marry his cousin, Emmanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy, to secure the Catholic succession and preserve the Habsburg interest in England, but Elizabeth refused to comply and parliamentary consent was unlikely.[102]
Religious policy
In the month following her accession, Mary issued a proclamation that she would not compel any of her subjects to follow her religion, but by the end of September leading reforming churchmen, such as John Bradford, John Rogers, John Hooper, Hugh Latimer and Thomas Cranmer were imprisoned.[103] Mary's first Parliament, which assembled in early October 1553, declared the marriage of Henry and Catherine valid, and abolished Edward's religious laws.[104] Church doctrine was restored to the form it had taken in the 1539 Six Articles, which, for example, re-affirmed clerical celibacy. Married priests were deprived of their benefices.[105]
Mary I of England
84 Mary had always rejected the break with Rome instituted by her father and the establishment of Protestantism by Edward VI. She and her husband wanted England to reconcile with Rome. Philip persuaded Parliament to repeal the Protestant religious laws passed by Mary's father, thus returning the English church to Roman jurisdiction. Getting agreement took many months, and Mary had to make a major concession: the monastery lands confiscated under Henry were not returned to the church but remained in the hands of the new landowners, who were very influential.[106] Pope Julius III approved the deal in 1554; the same year the Heresy Acts were revived.
Under the Heresy Acts, numerous Protestants were executed in the Marian Persecutions. Many rich Protestants, including John Foxe, chose exile, and around 800 left the country.[107] The first executions occurred over a period of five days in early February 1555: John Rogers on 4 February, Laurence Saunders Mary by (after) Mor, Sir Anthonis on 8 February, and Rowland Taylor and John Hooper on 9 February.[108] The (Antonio Moro) imprisoned Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Cranmer was forced to watch Bishops Ridley and Latimer being burned at the stake. Cranmer recanted, repudiated Protestant theology, and rejoined the Catholic faith.[109] Under the normal process of the law, he should have been absolved as a repentant. Mary, however, refused to reprieve him. On the day of his burning, he dramatically withdrew his recantation.[110] All told 283 were executed, most by burning.[111] The burnings proved so unpopular, that even Alfonso de Castro condemned them,[112] and Philip's advisor, Simon Renard, warned him that such "cruel enforcement" could "cause a revolt".[113] Mary persevered with the policy, which continued until her death and exacerbated anti-Catholic and anti-Spanish feeling among the English people.[114] The victims of the persecutions became lauded as martyrs.[115] Reginald Pole, the son of Mary's executed governess, Margaret Pole, 8th Countess of Salisbury, and once considered a suitor, arrived as papal legate in November 1554.[116] He was ordained a priest and appointed as Archbishop of Canterbury immediately after Cranmer's death in March 1556.[117] [118] Mary came to rely on him for advice.
Foreign policy
Henry VIII's creation of the Kingdom of Ireland in 1542 was not recognised by Europe's Catholic powers. In 1555 Mary obtained a papal bull confirming that she and Philip were the monarchs of Ireland, and thereby the Church accepted the personal link between the kingdoms of Ireland and England. Furthering the Tudor conquest of Ireland, the midlands counties of Laois and Offaly were shired and named after the new monarchs respectively as "Queen's County" and "King's County". Their principal towns were respectively named Maryborough (now Portlaoise) and Philipstown (now Daingean). Under Mary's reign, English colonists were settled in the Irish Midlands to reduce the attacks on the Pale (the colony around Dublin). In January 1556, Mary's father-in-law abdicated and Philip became King of Spain, with Mary as his consort. They were still apart; Philip was declared King in Brussels, but Mary stayed in England. Philip negotiated an unsteady truce with the French in February 1556. The following month, the French ambassador in England, Antoine de Noailles, was implicated in a plot against Mary when Sir Henry Dudley, a second cousin of the executed Duke of Northumberland, attempted to assemble an invasion force in France. The plot, known as the Dudley conspiracy, was betrayed, and the conspirators in England were rounded up. Dudley remained in exile in France, and Noailles prudently left Britain.[119]
Mary, circa 1555, unknown artist
Mary I of England Philip returned to England from March to July 1557 to persuade Mary to support Spain in a renewed war against France. Mary was in favour of declaring war, but her councillors opposed it because French trade would be jeopardised, it contravened the marriage treaty, and a bad economic legacy from Edward VI's reign and a series of poor harvests meant England lacked supplies and finances.[120] War was only declared after Reginald Pole's nephew, Thomas Stafford, invaded England with French help in an attempt to depose Mary.[121] As a result of the war, relations between England and the Papacy became strained, since Pope Paul IV was allied with Henry II of France.[122] In January 1558, French forces took Calais, England's sole remaining possession on the European mainland. Although the territory was financially burdensome, it was an ideological loss that damaged Mary's prestige.[123] Mary later lamented that when she died the words "Philip" and "Calais" would be found inscribed on her heart. England became full of factions and seditious pamphlets of Protestant origin inflaming the country against the Spaniards.
85
Mary I of England
86
Death
After Philip's visit in 1557, Mary thought herself pregnant again with a baby due in March 1558.[130] She decreed in her will that her husband be the regent during the minority of her child.[131] However, no child was born, and Mary was forced to accept that Elizabeth was her lawful successor.[132] Mary was weak and ill from May 1558,[133] and died aged 42 at St. James's Palace during an influenza epidemic that claimed the life of Reginald Pole later the same day, 17 November 1558. She was in pain, possibly from ovarian cysts or uterine cancer.[134] She was succeeded by her half-sister, who became Elizabeth I. Philip, who was in Brussels, wrote in a letter, "I felt a reasonable regret for her death."[135] Although her will stated that she wished to be buried next to her mother, Mary was interred in Westminster Abbey on 14 December in a tomb she eventually shared with Elizabeth. The Latin inscription on their tomb, Regno consortes & urna, hic obdormimus Elizabetha et Maria sorores, in spe resurrectionis (affixed there by James VI of Scotland when he succeeded Elizabeth as King James I of England) translates to "Consorts in realm and tomb, here we sleep, Elizabeth and Mary, sisters, in hope of resurrection". The Latin plays on the multiple meanings of consorts, which can mean either sibling or sharer in common.
Legacy
At her funeral service John White, Bishop of Winchester, praised Mary: "She was a King's daughter; she was a King's sister; she was a King's wife. She was a Queen, and by the same title a King also."[136] She was the first woman to successfully claim the throne of England, despite competing claims and determined opposition, and enjoyed popular support and sympathy during the earliest parts of her reign, especially from the Roman Catholic population. However, her marriage to Philip was unpopular among her subjects, and her religious policies resulted in deep-seated resentment.[137] The failed harvests, poor weather and military losses of her reign increased public discontent. Philip spent most of his time abroad, while his wife remained in England, leaving her depressed at his absence and undermined by their inability to have children. After Mary's death, he sought to marry Elizabeth, but she refused him.[138] Thirty years later, Philip sent the Spanish Armada to overthrow Elizabeth, without success. By the seventeenth century, Mary's persecution of Protestants had led them to call her Bloody Mary.[139] John Knox attacked her in The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regimen of Women, published in 1558, and she was prominently featured and vilified in Foxe's Book of Martyrs, published by John Foxe in 1563, six years after Mary's death. Subsequent editions of the book remained popular with Protestants throughout the following centuries, and helped shape perceptions of her as a bloodthirsty tyrant.[140]
Mary I of England
87
Under Mary's marriage treaty with Philip, the couple were jointly styled Queen and King. Philip became Mary's co-ruler, while she became merely his consort as Duchess of Brabant, Limburg, Lothier, Guelders and Luxemburg, Marquise of Namur, Countess Palatine of Burgundy and Countess of Artois, Flanders, Charolais, Hainaut, Zutphen, Holland and Zeeland. The official joint style reflected not only Mary's but Philip's dominions and claims; it was "Philip and Mary, by the grace of God, King and Queen of England, France, Naples, Jerusalem, and Ireland, Defenders of the Faith, Princes of Spain and Sicily, Archdukes of Austria, Dukes of Milan, Burgundy and Brabant, Counts of Habsburg, Flanders and Tyrol".[87] This style, which had been in use since 1554, was replaced when Philip inherited the Spanish Crown in 1556 with "Philip and Mary, by the Grace of God King and Queen of England, Spain, France, both the Sicilies, Jerusalem and Ireland, Defenders of the Faith, Archdukes of Austria, Dukes of Burgundy, Milan and Brabant, Counts of Habsburg, Flanders and Tyrol".[142] Mary I's arms were the same as those used by all her predecessors since Henry IV: Quarterly, Azure three fleurs-de-lys Or [for France] and Gules three lions passant guardant in pale Or [for England]. Sometimes, her arms were impaled (depicted side-by-side) with those of her husband. She adopted "Truth, the Daughter of Time" (Latin: Veritas Temporis Filia) as her personal motto.[143] Mary's marital title Queen of Spain carried with it, the title "Queen of the Spanish East and West Indies and of the Islands and Mainland of the Ocean Sea". This titulary held by Philip came from his father, her cousin, Charles, under the original form "Rex Hispaniarum et Indiarum" (i.e., King of the Spaniards and the Indians). The shorthand for this is usually rendered as the Viceroyalty of New Spain.
Ancestry
Both Mary and Philip were descended from John of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster, a relationship which was used to portray Philip as an English king.[144] John had once claimed lands in Spain jure uxoris by the Infanta Constance of Castile. John's Lancastrian descendents in Spain and Portugal honoured the English Royal Family by naming several children Eduardo or Duarte (Edward) after John's father, Edward III of England. Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York, from which the Yorkist party derived (as well as her father Henry VIII's maternal line), married Infanta Isabella of Castile, so the Anglo-Castilian connection in right of Portugal had certainly influenced not only Mary's parental background, but her own marriage to Philip, whose own heritage was not simply Habsburg (which at that time was novel), but Burgundian and important for the Yorkist factor, as well as the Anglo-French wars in general.
Mary I of England
88
Notes
[1] Her half-brother died on 6 July; she was proclaimed his successor in London on 19 July; her regnal years were dated from 24 July (Weir, p. 160). [2] The Gentleman's magazine. F. Jefferies. 1886. p.233. [3] Waller, p. 16; Whitelock, p. 8 [4] Weir, pp. 152153 [5] Porter, p. 13; Waller, p. 16; Whitelock, p. 7 [6] Porter, pp. 13, 37; Waller, p. 17 [7] Porter, p. 13; Waller, p. 17; Whitelock, p. 7 [8] Porter, p. 15 [9] Porter, p. 16; Waller, p. 20; Whitelock, p. 21 [10] Hoyle, p. 407 [11] Whitelock, p. 27 [12] Porter, p. 21 [13] Porter, p. 30 [14] Porter, p. 28; Whitelock, p. 27 [15] Domine Orator, per Deum immortalem, ista puella nunquam plorat, quoted in Whitelock, p. 17 [16] Farquhar, Michael, 'A Treasure of Royal Scandals (Penguin Books, New York, 2001, ISBN 0739420259) p. 101 [17] Porter, pp. 3839; Whitelock, pp. 3233 [18] Waller, p. 23 [19] Whitelock, p. 23 [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] Porter, pp. 2021; Waller, pp. 2021; Whitelock, pp. 1823 Porter, pp. 2124; Waller, p. 21; Whitelock, p. 23 Whitelock, pp. 3031 Whitelock, pp. 3637 Whitelock, pp. 3738 Porter, pp. 56, 78; Whitelock, p. 40 Waller, p. 27 Porter, p. 76; Whitelock, p. 48 Porter, p. 92; Whitelock, pp. 5556 Porter, p. 92; Whitelock, p. 57 Whitelock, p. 57 Porter, pp. 97101; Whitelock, pp. 5569 Dr William Butts, quoted in Waller, p. 31 Porter, p. 100 Porter, pp. 103104; Whitelock, pp. 6769, 72 Letter from Emperor Charles V to Empress Isabella, quoted in Whitelock, p. 75 Porter, p. 107; Whitelock, p. 7677 Whitelock, p. 91 Porter, p. 121; Waller, p. 33; Whitelock, p. 81 Porter, pp. 119123; Waller, pp. 3436; Whitelock, pp. 8389 Porter, pp. 119123; Waller, pp. 3436; Whitelock, pp. 9091 Porter, pp. 124125 Porter, pp. 126127; Whitelock, pp. 9596 Porter, pp. 129132; Whitelock, p. 28 Porter, pp. 135136; Waller, p. 39; Whitelock, p. 101 Whitelock, p. 101 Whitelock, pp. 103104 Whitelock, p. 105 Whitelock, pp. 105106 Contemporary Spanish and English reports, quoted in Whitelock, p. 108 Waller, p. 37 Porter, pp. 143144; Whitelock, p. 110 Waller, p. 39; Whitelock, p. 112 Whitelock, p. 130
[54] Porter, pp. 160162; Whitelock, pp. 133134 [55] Porter, p. 154; Waller, p. 40 [56] Porter, pp. 169176; Waller, pp. 4142; Whitelock, pp. 144147
Mary I of England
[57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74] [75] [76] [77] [78] Porter, p. 178; Whitelock, p. 149 Porter, pp. 179182; Whitelock, pp. 148160 Porter, p. 187 Porter, pp. 188189 Waller, pp. 4849; Whitelock, p. 165 Waller, pp. 5153; Whitelock, p. 165, 138 Porter, p. 195; Whitelock, p. 168 Porter, p. 203; Waller, p. 52 Porter, pp. 213214; Waller, p. 54; Whitelock, pp. 170174 Porter, p. 210; Weir, pp. 159160 Waller, pp. 5759 Waller, p. 59; Whitelock, p. 181 Waller, pp. 5960; Whitelock, pp. 185186 Whitelock, p. 182 Whitelock, p. 183 Porter, pp. 257261; Whitelock, pp. 195197 Porter, pp. 265267 Museo del Prado, Catlogo de las pinturas, 1996, pp. 398399 (#411), Ministerio de Educacin y Cultura, Madrid, ISBN 8487317537 Porter, p. 310 Porter, pp. 279284; Waller, p. 72; Whitelock, pp. 202209 Loades, p. 75 Waller, p. 73
89
[79] Porter, pp. 288299; Whitelock, pp. 212213 [80] Porter, p. 300; Waller, pp. 7475; Whitelock, p. 216 [81] Porter, pp. 311313; Whitelock, pp. 217225 [82] Waller, pp. 8485; Whitelock, pp. 202, 227 [83] Porter, p. 269; Waller, p. 85 [84] Porter, pp. 291292; Waller, p. 85; Whitelock, pp. 226227 [85] Porter, pp. 308309; Whitelock, p. 229 [86] Letter of 29 July 1554, quoted in Porter, p. 320 [87] Porter, pp. 321, 324; Waller, p. 90; Whitelock, p. 238 [88] Porter, pp. 318, 321; Waller, pp. 8687; Whitelock, p. 237 [89] Porter, p. 319; Waller, pp. 87, 91 [90] Porter, p. 333; Waller, pp. 9293 [91] Porter, p. 338; Waller, p. 95; Whitelock, p. 255 [92] Waller, p. 96 [93] "The queen's pregnancy turns out not to have been as certain as we thought": Letter of 25 April 1554, quoted in Porter, p. 337 and Whitelock, p. 257 [94] Waller, p. 95; Whitelock, p. 256 [95] Whitelock, pp. 257259 [96] Whitelock, p. 258 [97] Waller, p. 97; Whitelock, p. 259 [98] Porter, pp. 337338; Waller, pp. 9798 [99] Porter, p. 342 [100] Waller, pp. 9899; Whitelock, p. 268 [101] Antoine de Noailles quoted in Whitelock, p. 269 [102] Whitelock, p. 284 [103] Whitelock, p. 187 [104] Waller, p. 65; Whitelock, p. 198 [105] Porter, p. 241; Whitelock, pp. 200201 [106] Porter, p. 331 [107] Waller, p. 113 [108] Whitelock, p. 262 [109] Porter, pp. 355356; Waller, pp. 104105 [110] Waller, pp. 104105; Whitelock, p. 274 [111] Duffy, p. 79; Waller, p. 104 [112] Porter, pp. 358359; Waller, p. 103; Whitelock, p. 266 [113] Waller, p. 102 [114] Waller, pp. 101, 103, 105; Whitelock, p. 266
Mary I of England
[115] [116] [117] [118] [119] [120] [121] [122] [123] [124] [125] [126] [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] [138] [139] [140] [141] [142] [143] [144] See for example, the Oxford Martyrs Waller, p. 94 Porter, p. 357 Although he had been a cardinal since 22 December 1536, Pole was not ordained until the day of his appointment. Porter, pp. 381387 Whitelock, p. 288 Porter, p. 389; Waller, p. 111; Whitelock, p. 289 Whitelock, pp. 293295 Porter, pp. 392395; Whitelock, pp. 291292 Porter, pp. 229, 375; Whitelock, p. 277 Porter, p. 371 Porter, p. 373 Porter, p. 372 Porter, p. 375 Porter, p. 376 Porter, p.398; Waller, pp. 106, 112; Whitelock, p. 299 Whitelock, pp. 299300 Whitelock, p. 301 Whitelock, p. 300 Waller, p. 108 Quoted in Waller, p. 109 and Whitelock, p. 303 Whitelock, p. 305 Waller, p. 116 Porter, p. 400 Waller, p. 115 Porter, pp. 361362, 418; Waller, pp. 113115 England: Kings and Queens: 10661649 (http:/ / www. archontology. org/ nations/ england/ king_england/ ). Retrieved 11-03-2010. e.g. Waller, p. 106 Waller, p. 60; Whitelock, p. 310 Whitelock, p. 242
90
References
Duffy, Eamon (2009) Fires of Faith: Catholic England Under Mary Tudor. Yale University Press. ISBN 0300152167 Hoyle, R. W. (2001) The Pilgrimage of Grace and the Politics of the 1530s. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0199259062 Porter, Linda (2007) Mary Tudor: The First Queen. London: Little, Brown. ISBN 978-0-749-90982-6 Waller, Maureen (2006) Sovereign Ladies: The Six Reigning Queens of England. New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 0312338015 Weir, Alison (1996) Britain's Royal Families: The Complete Genealogy. London: Pimlico. ISBN 0712674489 Whitelock, Anna (2009) Mary Tudor: England's First Queen. London: Bloomsbury. ISBN 978-1-408-80078-2
Further reading
Deary, Terry. "The Terrible Tudors". ISBN 0-590-55290-2 Deary, Terry. "Even More Terrible Tudors". ISBN 0-590-11254-6 Erickson, Carolly. Bloody Mary: The Life of Mary Tudor. (June 1993) ISBN 0-688-11641-8 Hugo, Victor Mary Tudor: A Drama. ISBN 1-58963-478-0 Loades, David M. Mary Tudor: A Life. (March 1992) ISBN 0-631-18449-X Loades, David M. The Reign of Mary Tudor: Politics, Government & Religion in England, 155358. (May 1991) ISBN 0-582-05759-0
McHarque, Georgess. Queen in Waiting: A Life of "Bloody Mary" Tudor. (June 2004) ISBN 0-595-31254-3 Prescott, H. F. M. Mary Tudor: The Spanish Tudor. (October 2003) ISBN 1-84212-625-3
Mary I of England Ridley, Jasper. Bloody Mary's Martyrs: The Story of England's Terror. (July 2002) ISBN 0-7867-0986-3 Simpson, Helen. The Spanish Marriage, at Project Gutenberg Australia (http://gutenberg.net.au/plusfifty-n-z. html#simpsonh) Slavicek, Louise Chipley. Bloody Mary (History's Villains). (July 2005) ISBN 1-4103-0581-3 Tytler, Patrick Fraser (1839). England Under the Reigns of Edward VI and Mary (http://books.google.com/ ?id=414JAAAAIAAJ). I. London: Richard Bentley. Retrieved 2008-08-17 Tytler, Patrick Fraser (1839). England Under the Reigns of Edward VI and Mary (http://books.google.com/ ?id=tl4JAAAAIAAJ). II. London: Richard Bentley. Retrieved 2008-08-17 Waldman, Milton. The Lady Mary: a biography of Mary Tudor, 15161558. (1972) ISBN 0-00-211486-0
91
External links
"The Tudors: Mary I" (http://www.royal.gov.uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensofEngland/ TheTudors/MaryI.aspx). The Royal Household. Eakins, Lara E. (19952009). "Mary I Queen of England" (http://tudorhistory.org/mary/). Tudor History Web Ring. "Queen Mary I" (http://www.hrp.org.uk/learninganddiscovery/Discoverthehistoricroyalpalaces/monarchs/ maryI.aspx). Historic Royal Palaces. 20042009.
Philip II of Spain
92
Philip II of Spain
Philip II
King of Naples Reign 25 July 1554 13 September 1598
Predecessor Charles V Successor Philip III King of Spain Reign 16 January 1556 13 September 1598
Predecessor Charles I Successor Philip III King of Portugal Reign 25 March 1581 13 September 1598
Predecessor Henry or Anthony Successor Spouse Philip II Maria Manuela of Portugal Mary I of England Elizabeth of Valois Anna of Austria
more Issue Carlos, Prince of Asturias Isabella Clara Eugenia, Duchess of Luxembourg Catherine Michelle, Duchess of Savoy Ferdinand, Prince of Asturias Diego, Prince of Asturias Philip III of Spain House Father Mother Born Died Burial Signature Religion Roman Catholicism House of Habsburg Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor Isabella of Portugal 21 May 1527 Valladolid, Spain 13 September 1598 (aged71) Madrid, Spain El Escorial
Philip II (Spanish: Felipe II; Portuguese: Filipe I ; 21 May 1527 13 September 1598) was King of Spain, Portugal, Naples, Sicily, and, while married to Mary I, King of England and Ireland.[1] [2] He was lord of the Seventeen Provinces from 1556 until 1581, holding various titles for the individual territories such as duke or count.
Philip II of Spain Also known as Philip the Prudent, he ruled one of the world's largest empires which included territories in every continent then known to Europeans. Philip was born in Valladolid, the son of Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire, and his consort, Isabella of Portugal. During his reign, Spain was the foremost Western European power. Under his rule, Spain reached the height of its influence and power, directing explorations all around the world and settling the colonization of territories in all the known continents. He was described by the Venetian ambassador Paolo Fagolo in 1563 as "slight of stature and roundfaced, with pale blue eyes, somewhat prominent lip, and pink skin, but his overall appearance is very attractive." The Ambassador went on to say "He dresses very tastefully, and everything that he does is courteous and gracious."[3]
93
Domestic policy
After living in the Netherlands in the early years of his reign,[4] Philip II decided to return to Spain. Although sometimes described as an absolute monarch, Philip faced many constitutional constraints on his authority. This was largely influenced by the growing strength of the bureaucracy during Philip's reign. The "Spanish" Empire was not a single monarchy with one legal system but a federation of separate realms, each jealously guarding its own rights against those of the House of Habsburg. In practice, Philip often found his authority overruled by local assemblies, and his word less effective than that of local lords.[5] The Crown of Aragon, where Philip was obliged to put down a rebellion in
'The Baptism of Phillip II' in Valladolid, Spain. Historical ceiling preserved in Prado Museum.
159192, was particularly unruly. He also grappled with the problem of the large Morisco population in Spain, who were sometimes forcibly converted to Christianity by his predecessors. In 1569, the Morisco Revolt broke out in the southern province of Granada in defiance of attempts to suppress Moorish customs; and Philip ordered the expulsion of the Moriscos from Granada and their dispersal to other provinces. Despite its immense dominions, Spain was a country with a sparse population that yielded a limited income to the crown (in contrast to France, for example much more populated). Philip faced major difficulties in raising taxes, the collection of which was largely farmed out to local lords. He was able to finance his military campaigns only by taxing and exploiting the local resources of his empire. The flow of income from the New World proved vital to his militant foreign policy, but nonetheless his exchequer several times faced bankruptcy. Philip's reign saw a flourishing of cultural excellence in Spain, the beginning of what is called the Golden Age, creating a lasting legacy in literature, music, and the visual arts.
Philip II of Spain
94
Economy
Charles V had left Philip with a debt of about 36 million ducats and an annual deficit of 1 million ducats. Aside from reducing state revenues for overseas expeditions, the domestic policies of Philip II further burdened Spain, and would, in the following century, contribute to its decline, as maintained by some historians.[6] Spain was subject to different assemblies: the Cortes in Castile along with the assembly in Navarre and one each for the three regions of Aragon, which preserved traditional rights and laws from the time when they were separate kingdoms. This made Spain and its possessions difficult to rule, unlike France which, while divided into regional states, had a single Estates-General. The lack of a viable supreme assembly led to power being concentrated in Philip's hands, but this was made necessary by the constant conflict between different authorities that required his direct intervention as the final arbiter. To deal with the difficulties arising from this situation, authority was administered by local agents appointed by the crown and viceroys carrying out crown instructions. Philip felt it necessary to be involved in the detail and presided over specialized councils for state affairs, finance, war, and the Inquisition. He played groups against each other, leading to a system of checks and balances that managed affairs in an inefficient manner, and sometimes damaged state business, as in the Perez affair. Calls to move the capital to Lisbon from the Castilian stronghold of Madrid the new capital Philip established following the move from Valladolid could have led to a degree of decentralization, but Philip opposed such efforts. Because of the inefficiencies of the Spanish state, industry was overburdened by government regulations, though this was common to many contemporary countries. The dispersal of the Moriscos from Granada motivated by the fear they might support a Muslim invasion - had serious negative economic effects, particularly in that region. Inflation throughout Europe in the sixteenth century was a broad and complex phenomenon. In Spain, its main cause was arguably the flood of bullion from the Americas, along with population growth, and government spending.[7] [8] Under Philip's reign, Spain saw a fivefold increase in prices. Because of inflation and a high tax burden for Spanish manufacturers and merchants, Spanish industry was harmed. Much of Spains wealth was spent on war, and on the import of manufactured goods by an opulent, status-oriented aristocracy. Increasingly the country became dependent on the revenues flowing in from the mercantile empire in the Americas, leading to Spain's first bankruptcy (moratorium) in 1557 due to rising military costs. Dependence on sales taxes from Castile and the Netherlands, Spain's tax base, was too narrow to support Philip's plans. Philip became increasingly dependent on loans from foreign bankers, particularly in Genoa and Augsburg. By the end of his reign, interest payments on these loans alone accounted for 40% of state revenue. Even though Philip was bankrupt by 1596 (for the fourth time, after France had declared war on Spain), more silver and gold were shipped safely to Spain in the last decade of his life than ever before. This allowed Spain to continue its military efforts, but led to an increased dependency on the precious metals and jewels.
Titian's portrait of Philip as prince, aged about twenty-four dressed in a magnificent, lavishly decorated set of armour. The whiteness of his skin corresponds to his white stockings and the greenish golden sheen on his armour. In this way, the prince's pale complexion appears more distinguished.
Philip II of Spain
95
Foreign policy
Philip's foreign policies were determined by a combination of Catholic fervour and dynastic self-interest. He considered himself by default the chief defender of Catholic Europe, both against the Ottoman Turks and against the forces of the Protestant Reformation. He never relented from his war against what he regarded as heresy, preferring to fight on every front at whatever cost rather than countenance freedom of worship within his territories.[9] These territories included his patrimony in the Netherlands, where Protestantism had taken deep root. Following the Revolt of the Netherlands in 1568, Philip waged a bitter campaign against Dutch heresy and secession. It dragged in the English and the French and expanded into the German Rhineland, with the devastating Cologne War and lasted for the rest of his life. Philip's constant involvement in European wars took a significant toll on the treasury and played a huge role in leading the Crown into bankruptcy more than once. In 1588 the English defeated Philip's Spanish Armada, thwarting his planned invasion of the country. But the war continued for the next sixteen years, in a complex series of struggles that included France, Ireland and the main battle zone, the Low Countries. It would not end until all the leading protagonists, including himself, had died. Earlier, however, after several setbacks in his reign and especially that of his father, Philip did achieve a decisive victory against the Turks at the Lepanto in 1571, with the allied fleet of the Holy League, which he had put under the command of his illegitimate brother, John of Austria. He also successfully secured his succession to the throne of Portugal.
Ottoman-Habsburg conflict
Further information: Ottoman-Habsburg wars In the early part of his reign Philip was concerned with the rising power of the Ottoman Empire under Suleiman the Magnificent. Fear of Islamic domination in the Mediterranean caused him to pursue an aggressive foreign policy. In 1558, Turkish admiral Piyale Pasha captured the Balearic Islands, especially inflicting great damage on Minorca and enslaving many, while raiding the coasts of the Spanish mainland. Philip appealed to the Pope and other powers in Flag of Spanish armies under Philip II. Europe to bring an end to the rising Ottoman threat. Since his father's losses against the Ottomans and against Barbarossa Hayreddin Pasha in 1541, the major European sea powers in the Mediterranean, namely Spain and Venice, became hesitant in confronting the Ottomans. The myth of "Turkish invincibility" was becoming a popular story, causing fear and panic among the people. In 1560, Philip II organized a Holy League between Spain and the Republic of Venice, the Republic of Genoa, the Papal States, the Duchy of Savoy and the Knights of Malta. The joint fleet was assembled at Messina and consisted of 200 ships (60 galleys and 140 other vessels) carrying a total of 30,000 soldiers under the command of Giovanni Andrea Doria, nephew of the famous Genoese admiral Andrea Doria. On 12 March 1560, the Holy League captured the island of Djerba which had a strategic location and could control the sea routes between Algiers and Tripoli. As a response, Suleiman the Magnificent sent an Ottoman fleet of 120 ships under the command of Piyale Pasha, which arrived at Djerba on 9 May 1560. The battle lasted until 14 May 1560, and the forces of Piyale Pasha and Turgut Reis (who joined Piyale Pasha on the third day of the battle) had an overwhelming victory at the Battle of Djerba. The Holy League lost 60 ships (30 galleys) and 20,000 men, and Giovanni Andrea Doria was barely able to escape with a small vessel. The Ottomans retook the Fortress of Djerba, whose Spanish commander, D. Alvaro de Sande attempted to escape with a ship but was followed and eventually captured by Turgut Reis. In 1565 the Ottomans sent
Philip II of Spain a large expedition to Malta, which laid siege to several forts on the island, taking some of them. The Spanish sent a relief force, which finally drove the Ottoman army out of the island. The grave threat posed by the increasing Ottoman domination of the Mediterranean was reversed in one of history's most decisive battles, with the destruction of nearly the entire Ottoman fleet at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571, by the Holy League under the command of Philip's half brother, Don Juan of Austria. A fleet sent by Philip, again commanded by Don John, reconquered Tunis from the Ottomans in 1573. However, the Turks soon rebuilt their fleet and in 1574 Ulu Ali Reis managed to recapture Tunis with a force of 250 galleys and a siege which lasted 40 days. However, Lepanto marked a permanent reversal in the balance of naval power in the Mediterranean and the end of the threat of Ottoman control of that sea. In 1585 a peace treaty was signed with the Ottomans.
96
King of Portugal
Philip II of Spain
97
In 1578 young king Sebastian of Portugal died at the Battle of Alccer Quibir without descendants, triggering a succession crisis. His uncle, the elderly Cardinal Henry, succeeded him as King, but as Henry was a clergyman, he also had no descendants. When the Cardinal-King died two years after Sebastian's disappearance, three grandchildren of Manuel I claimed the throne: Infanta Catarina, Duchess of Braganza, Antnio, Prior of Crato, and Philip II of Spain. Antnio was acclaimed King of Portugal in many cities and towns throughout the country, but members of the Council of Governors of Portugal who had supported Philip escaped to Spain and declared him to be the legal successor of Henry. Philip II marched then into Portugal and defeated Prior Antnio's troops in the Battle of Alcntara. The troops commanded by the 3rd Duke of Alba[10] imposed subjection to Philip before entering Lisbon, where he seized an immense treasure.[11] Philip II of Spain was Antnio, Prior of Crato crowned 'Philip I of Portugal in 1581 (recognized as king by the Cortes of Tomar) and a sixty-year personal union under the rule of the Portuguese House of Habsburg began. When Philip left for Madrid in 1583, he made his nephew Albert of Austria his viceroy in Lisbon. In Madrid he established a Council of Portugal to advise him on Portuguese affairs, giving excellent positions to Portuguese nobles in the Spanish courts, and allowing Portugal to maintain autonomous law, currency, and government.
Philip II of Spain Act of Parliament, which gave him the title of king and stated that he "shall aid her Highness ... in the happy administration of her Graces realms and dominions."[12] In other words, Philip was to co-reign with his wife.[13] As the new King of England could not read English, it was ordered that a note of all matters of state should be made in Latin or Spanish.[13] [14] [15] Acts which made it high treason to deny Philip's royal authority were passed in Ireland[16] and England.[17] Philip and Mary appeared on coins together, with a single crown suspended between them as a symbol of joint reign. The Great Seal shows Philip and Mary seated on thrones, holding the crown together.[13] The coat of arms of England was impaled with Philip's to denote their joint reign.[18] [19] Philip's wife had succeeded to the Kingdom of Ireland, but the title of King of Ireland was created in 1542 by Henry VIII after he was excommunicated, so it was not recognised by Catholic monarchs. In 1555, Pope Paul IV rectified this by issuing a Papal Bull recognizing Philip and Mary as rightful King and Queen of Ireland.[20] Their joint royal style after Philip ascended the Spanish throne in 1556 was: Philip and Mary, by the Grace of God King and Queen of England, Spain, France, Jerusalem, both the Sicilies and Ireland, Defenders of the Faith, Archdukes of Austria, Dukes of Burgundy, Milan and Brabant, Counts of Habsburg, Flanders and Tirol.
98
However, they had no children. Mary died in 1558 before the union could revitalize the Roman Catholic Church in England. With her death, Philip lost his rights to the English throne and ceased being King of England and Ireland. However, Phillip's great-grandson, Philippe I, Duke of Orlans, married Princess Henrietta of England; in 1807, the Jacobite claim to the British throne passed to the descendants of their child Anne Marie d'Orlans. During their joint reign, when they attacked the French against their marriage treaty as composed by Parliament, Calais was lost to England forever. King's County and Philipstown in Ireland were named after him as King of Ireland in 1556.
Philip II of Spain English Channel. However, the operation had little chance of success from the beginning, because of lengthy delays, lack of communication between Philip II and his two commanders and the lack of a deep bay for the fleet. At the point of attack, a storm struck the English Channel, already known for its harsh currents and choppy waters, which devastated large numbers of the Spanish fleet. There was a tightly fought battle against the English navy; it was by no means a slaughter, but the Spanish were forced into a retreat. Eventually, three more Armadas were assembled; two were sent to England in 1596 and 1597, but both also failed; the third (1599) was diverted to the Azores and Canary Islands to fend off raids. This Anglo-Spanish War (15851604) would be fought to a grinding end, but not until both Philip II (d. 1598) and Elizabeth I (d. 1603) were dead. The defeat of the Spanish Armada gave great heart to the Protestant cause across Europe. The storm that smashed the armada was seen by many of Philip's enemies as a sign of the will of God. Many Spaniards blamed the admiral of the armada for its failure, but Philip, despite his complaint that he had sent his ships to fight the English, not the elements, was not among them. A year later, Philip remarked:
99
It is impiety, and almost blasphemy to presume to know the will of God. It comes from the sin of pride, Even kings, Brother Nicholas, must submit to being used by God's will without knowing what it is. They must never seek to use it.
Philip II
The Spanish navy was rebuilt, and intelligence networks were improved. A measure of the character of Philip can be gathered by the fact that he personally saw to it that the wounded men of the Armada were treated and received pensions, and that the families of those who died were compensated for their loss, which was highly unusual for the time. While the invasion had been averted, England was unable to take advantage of this success. An attempt to use her newfound advantage at sea with a counter armada the following year failed disastrously. Likewise, English buccaneering and attempts to seize territories in the Caribbean were defeated by Spain's rebuilt navy and her improved intelligence networks (although Cadiz was destroyed by an Anglo-Dutch force after a failed attempt to seize the treasure fleet.) Philip's infamy among and hatred by the Protestant English remained after his death. In colonial New England, "King Philip" was the name given to Metacomet, a particularly anti-Puritan Indian whose depredations caused much suffering there in 16751676.
Philip II of Spain
100
Death
Philip II died in El Escorial, near Madrid, in September 1598. His death, which was very painful, involved a severe attack of gout, fever and dropsy. For 52 horrific days the King deteriorated. He could no longer be moved to be washed due to pain; thus a hole was cut in his mattress for the release of bodily fluids. He was succeeded by his son Philip III.
Family
Philip was married four times and had children with three of his wives. Even so, most of his children died young. Philip's first wife was his first cousin, Maria Manuela, Princess of Portugal. She was a daughter of John III of Portugal (Philip's first cousin once removed, thus making her also his second cousin) and Philip's aunt Catherine of Habsburg. The marriage produced one son, at whose birth Maria died in 1545.
Philip and Anna banqueting with family and courtiers, by Alonso Snchez Coello
Carlos, Prince of Asturias, (8 July 1545 24 July 1568), died unmarried and without issue. Philip's second wife was his first cousin once removed, Queen Mary I of England. The 1554 marriage to Mary was political. By this marriage, Philip became jure uxoris King of England, although the couple was
Philip II of Spain
101
apart more than together as they ruled their respective countries. The marriage produced no children and Mary died in 1558. Philip's third wife was Elisabeth of Valois, the eldest daughter of Henry II of France and Catherine de' Medici. Their marriage (15591568) produced five children. Elisabeth died hours after a miscarriage in 1568. Their children were: Miscarried twin daughters (1564). Isabella Clara Eugenia of Spain (12 August 1566 1 December 1633), married Albert VII, Archduke of Austria, but had no issue. Catherine Michelle of Spain (10 October 1567 6 November 1597), married Charles Emmanuel I, Duke of Savoy, and had issue.
miscarried or stillbirth son (1568). Philip's fourth and final wife was Anna of Austria, who was also his niece and cousin to her stepdaughter Catherine Michelle of Spain. (This marriage would be the first of three uncle-niece marriages that would be in the pedigree of the great grandson of Philip II, Charles II of Spain. Charles's genetically caused diseases would end the Habsburg line in Spain.) By contemporary accounts, this was a convivial and satisfactory marriage (15701580) for both Philip and Anna. This marriage produced four sons and a daughter. Anna died after giving birth to Maria in 1580. Their children were: Ferdinand, Prince of Asturias: 4 December 1571 18 October 1578, died young Carlos Lorenzo: 12 August 1573 30 June 1575, died young Diego, Prince of Asturias: 15 August 1575 21 November 1582, died young Philip: 3 April 1578 31 March 1621 (future king, Philip III of Spain) Maria: 14 February 1580 5 August 1583, died young
Legacy
Under Philip II, Spain reached the peak of its power. However, in spite of the great and increasing quantities of gold and silver flowing into his coffers from the American mines, the riches of the Portuguese spice trade, and the enthusiastic support of the Habsburg dominions for the Counter-Reformation, he would never succeed in suppressing Protestantism or defeating the Dutch rebellion. Early in his reign, the Dutch might have laid down their weapons if he had desisted in trying to suppress Protestantism, but his devotion to Catholicism and the principle of cuius regio, eius religio, as laid down by his father, would not permit him to do so. He was a devout Catholic and exhibited the typical 16th century disdain for religious heterodoxy. As he strived to enforce Catholic orthodoxy through an intensification of the Inquisition, students were barred from studying elsewhere and books printed by Spaniards outside the kingdom were banned. Even a highly respected churchman like Archbishop Carranza, was jailed by the Inquisition for seventeen years for publishing ideas that seemed sympathetic in some degree to Protestant reformism. Such strict enforcement of orthodox belief was successful and Spain avoided the religiously inspired strife tearing apart other European dominions.
Philip II of Spain Yet the School of Salamanca flourished under his reign. Martn de Azpilcueta, highly honoured at Rome by several popes, and looked on as an oracle of learning, published his Manuale sive Enchiridion Confessariorum et Poenitentium (Rome, 1568), long a classical text in the schools and in ecclesiastical practice. Francisco Surez, generally regarded as the greatest scholastic after Thomas Aquinas and regarded during his lifetime as being the greatest living philosopher and theologian, was writing and lecturing, not only in Spain but also in Rome (16801685), where Pope Gregory XIII attended the first lecture that he gave. Luis de Molina published his De liberi arbitrii cum gratiae donis, divina praescientia, praedestinatione et reprobatione concordia (1588), wherein he put forth the doctrine attempting to reconcile the omniscience of God with human free will that came to be known as Molinism, thereby contributing to what was one of the most important intellectual debates of the time; Molinism became the de facto Jesuit doctrine on the aforementioned matters, and is still advocated today by William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga, among others. Because Philip II was the most powerful European monarch in an era of war and religious conflict,[21] evaluating both his reign and the man himself has become a controversial historical subject.[22] Even before his death in 1598, his supporters had started presenting him as an archetypical gentleman, full of piety and Christian virtues, whereas his enemies depicted him as a fanatical and despotic monster, keen in inhuman cruelties and barbarism.[23] This dichotomy, further developed into the so-called Spanish Black Legend and White Legend, was helped by King Philip himself. Philip prohibited any biographical account of his life to be published while he was alive, and he ordered that all his private correspondence be burned shortly before he died.[24] Moreover, Philip did nothing to defend himself after being betrayed by his ambitious secretary Antonio Perez, who published incredible calumnies against his former master; this allowed Perez's tales to spread all around Europe unchallenged.[25] That way, the popular image of the king that survives to today was created on the eve of his death, at a time when many European princes and religious leaders were turned against Spain as a pillar of the Counter-Reformation. This means that many histories depict Philip from deeply prejudiced points of view, usually negative. Even in countries that remained Catholic, primarily France and the Italian states, fear and envy of Spanish success and domination created a wide receptiveness for the worst possible descriptions of Philip II. Statue of Philip II at the Sabatini Gardens in Although some efforts have been made to separate legend from Madrid (F. Castro, 1753). reality,[26] that task has been proven to be extremely hard, since many prejudices are rooted in the cultural heritage of European countries. Spanish-speaking historians tend to assess his political and military achievements, sometimes deliberately avoiding issues such as the king's lukewarmness (or even support) towards Catholic fanaticism.[27] English-speaking historians tend to show Philip II as a fanatical, despotical, criminal, imperialist monster,[28] minimizing his military victories (Battle of Lepanto, Battle of Saint Quentin, etc.) to mere anecdotes, and magnifying his defeats (namely the Invincible Armada[29] ) even though at the time those defeats did not result in great political or military changes in the balance of power in Europe. Moreover, it has been noted that objectively assessing Philip's reign would suppose to re-analyze the reign of his greatest opposers, namely England's Queen Elizabeth I and the Dutch William the Silent, who are popularly regarded as great heroes in their home nations; if Philip II is to be shown to the English or Dutch public in a more favorable light, Elizabeth and William would lose their cold-blooded, fanatical enemy, thus decreasing their own patriotic accomplishments.[30]
102
Philip II of Spain In an example of popular culture, Philip II is portrayed in Fire Over England, a well known 1937 historical drama. Breaking with British artistic tradition, the portrayal of the former English co-monarch is not entirely unsympathetic. He is shown as a very hard working, intelligent, religious, somewhat paranoid ruler whose prime concern is his country. As he orders the Armada to sail to its doom he admits to having no understanding of the English. Philip II's reign can hardly be characterized by its failures. He ended French Valois ambitions in Italy and brought about the Habsburg ascendency in Europe. He commenced settlements in the Philippines, which were named after him, and established the first trans-Pacific trade route between America and Asia. He secured the Portuguese kingdom and empire. He succeeded in massively increasing the importation of silver in the face of English, Dutch, and French privateers, overcoming multiple financial crises and consolidating Spain's overseas empire. Although clashes would be ongoing, he ended the major threat posed to Europe by the Ottoman navy. He dealt successfully with a crisis that threatened to lead to the secession of Aragon. Finally, his efforts contributed substantially to the long-term success of the Catholic Counter-Reformation in checking the religious tide of Protestantism in Europe. The Philippines archipelago was discovered by the west by Magellan, however it was during Philip's reign that Spanish explorer Ruy Lopez de Villalobos;renamed them from the archipelago of St. Lazarus' to 'Las Islas Filipinas in Philip's honor.
103
Historical assessment
Anglo-American societies have generally held a very low opinion of Philip II. The traditional approach is perhaps epitomized by James Johonnot's Ten Great Events in History, in which he describes Philip II as a "vain, bigoted, and ambitious" monarch who "had no scruples in regard to means... placed freedom of thought under a ban, and put an end to the intellectual progress of the country".[31] However, some historians classify this anti-Spanish analysis as part of the Black Legend. The defense of the Catholic Church and the defeat of Protestantism was one of his most important goals. Although he A marble bust of Philip II of Spain by Pompeo Leoni, son of Leone Leoni. Currently housed in the did not fully accomplish this (England broke with Rome after the Metropolitan Museum of Art. death of Mary, the Holy Roman Empire remained partly Protestant and the revolt in Holland continued) he prevented Protestantism from gaining a grip in Spain and Portugal and the colonies in the New World, and successfully re-established Catholicism in the reconquered southern half of the Low Countries. More importantly for Christendom as a whole he, via both the Spanish Habsburgs and his Uncle's Austrian Habsburgs, stopped the expansionist phase of the Ottoman Empire. Philip was an austere and intelligent statesman. He was given to suspicion of members of his court, and was something of a meddlesome manager; but he was not the cruel tyrant painted by his opponents and subsequent Anglophile histories. He took great care in administering his vast dominions, and was known to intervene personally on behalf of the humblest of his subjects.
Philip II of Spain
104
Gallery
Maria Manuela, Princess of PortugalMary of Portugal,Philip's first wifePrincess of Asturiasand Princess of GironaGirona
Heraldry
COMMON VERSIONS
15581580
15801598
15541558
15581580
15801598
15541598
Philip II of Spain
105
Notes
[1] Geoffrey Parker. The Grand Strategy of Philip II, (2000) [2] Garret Mattingly. The Armada p. 22, p. 66 ISBN 0-395-08366-4 [3] Davis, James C. (1970). Pursuit of Power: Venetian Ambassadors' Reports on Spain, Turkey, and France in the Age of Philip II 1560-1600. New York: Harper & Row. pp.8182. [4] Parker, Geoffrey. The Dutch Revolt.. London: Penguin. p.41. [5] Parker, The Dutch Revolt. p.42. [6] Elliott, J.H. (2002). Imperial Spain 1469-1716 (Repr. ed.). London [u.a.]: Penguin Books. pp.285291. ISBN0-14-100703-6. [7] Europe and England in the Sixteenth Century, T. A. Morris, 1998, p.121-122 [8] A History of Money from Ancient Times to the Present Day, Glyn Davies, rev. ed. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1996. p211-217. ISBN 0 7083 1351 5 [9] As Philip wrote in 1566 to Luis de Requesens: "You can assure his Holiness that rather than suffer the least injury to religion and the service of God, I would lose all my states and a hundred lives if I had them, for I do not intend to rule over heretics." Pettegree, p.214. [10] Geoffrey Parker The army of Flanders and the Spanish road, London, 1972 ISBN 0-521-08462-8, p. 35 [11] Henry Kamen, The duke of Alba (New HavenLondon: Yale University Press, 2004), Pp. x + 204. [12] 1 Mar. stat. 2 c. 2 (http:/ / rbsche. people. wm. edu/ H111_doc_marriageofqueenmary. html) [13] Louis Adrian Montrose, The subject of Elizabeth: authority, gender, and representation, University of Chicago Press, 2006 [14] A. F. Pollard, The History of England - From the Accession of Edward VI. to the Death of Elizabeth (1547-1603), READ BOOKS, 2007 [15] Wim de Groot, The Seventh Window: The King's Window Donated by Philip II and Mary Tudor to Sint Janskerk in Gouda (1557), Uitgeverij Verloren, 2005 [16] Robert Dudley Edwards, Ireland in the age of the Tudors: the destruction of Hiberno-Norman civilization, Taylor & Francis, 1977 [17] Treason Act 1554 [18] Richard Marks, Ann Payne, British Museum, British Library; British heraldry from its origins to c. 1800; British Museum Publications Ltd., 1978 [19] American Numismatic Association, The Numismatist, American Numismatic Association, 1971 [20] Text of 1555 Bull (http:/ / www. heraldica. org/ topics/ national/ ireland_docs. htm#bull1555) [21] Fernndez lvarez, Manuel. Felipe II y su tiempo. Espasa Calpe, Madrid, 6th Ed. ISBN 84-239-9736-7 In the introduction to this work, Felipe is mentioned as the most powerful European monarch by resources and army, depicting Europe at the time as a world full of unsolved issues and religious conflicts [22] Cfr. Fernndez lvarez, Manuel. Felipe II y su tiempo. Espasa Calpe, Madrid, 6th Ed. ISBN 84-239-9736-7. Yet again, the several points of view towards his reign are mentioned in the Introduction [23] Kamen, Henry. Felipe de Espaa, Madrid, Siglo XXI, 1997. Cultural depictions of the king are mentioned, although Kamen tends to place himself with those favouring the king [24] Fernndez lvarez, Manuel. Felipe II y su tiempo. Espasa Calpe, Madrid, 6th Ed. ISBN 84-239-9736-7. He discusses the lack of correspondence of the king because he ordered it burned, thus avoiding any chance of getting further into Felipe's private life. [25] Vid. Maran, Gregorio. Antonio Prez: el hombre, el drama, la poca. Madrid, Espasa Calpe, 1951, 2 vols. Judiciously argued review on the harm Perez did to the king, analyzing the king's responsibility on the assassination of Escobedo [26] Hume, Martin. Philip II of Spain, London, 1897. Martin tried to retrieve the prejudiced views on the king at his time, something Carl Bratli also tried to do in his Filip of Spanien (Koebenhaven, 1909). Their works oppose to those of Ludwig Pfandl, Felipe II. Bosquejo de una vida y un tiempo, Munich, 1938, who assessed very negatively Felipe's personality [27] In his work, Felipe II (Madrid, 1943) W.T. Walsh depicts Felipe's reign as a prosperous and successful one, tending to make an apology of it. Fernndez lvarez, in Espaa y los espaoles en la Edad Moderna (Salamanca, 1979), points out how White Legend supporters flourished
Philip II of Spain
during the 1940s and 1950s, and how they omitted the darkest issues of Felipe's reign [28] Those kinds of adjectives can be read in M. Van Durme's 1953 El Cardenal Granvela [29] Cabrera de Crdoba, Felipe II rey de Espaa, ed. RAH, 1877, criticizes how Felipe's victories are being minimized by English historians, and points out the small consequences of defeats such as the Invincible Armada [30] This appreciation is noted by Martin Hume in his aforementioned work ("Philip II of Spain", London 1897), pointing out how difficult is to show Philip II in a more favorable light to his fellow Englishmen because of that. [31] (http:/ / www. authorama. com/ ten-great-events-in-history-8. html)
106
External links
"Philip of Spain: Renaissance Man" (http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:hDH1kjcYn3EJ:www.nytimes. com/books/97/08/10/reviews/970810.10thomast.html+Philip+II+of+Spain+>+biography&hl=en& ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=au) The Grand Strategy of Philip II" (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/paper/macpherson.html) Letters of Philip II, King of Spain (http://net.lib.byu.edu/estu/phil2/) Letters of Philip II, King of Spain 1592-1597 (http://www.lib.byu.edu/dlib/phil2/) Philip II of Spain (King of England) (http://www.archontology.org/nations/england/king_england/philip. php) Philip II and the Paracelsian movement (http://www.revistaazogue.com/inquisicion.htm) "Philip II". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
Elizabeth I of England
107
Elizabeth I of England
Elizabeth I
Elizabeth I , "Darnley Portrait", c. 1575 Elizabeth I , "Darnley Portrait", c. 1575 Queen of England and Ireland (more...) Reign Coronation 17 November 1558 24 March 1603 15 January 1559
Predecessor Mary I Successor House Father Mother Born Died Burial Signature James I House of Tudor Henry VIII Anne Boleyn 7 September 1533 Greenwich, England 24 March 1603 (aged69) Richmond, England Westminster Abbey
Elizabeth I (7 September 1533 24 March 1603) was queen regnant of England and Ireland from 17 November 1558 until her death. Sometimes called The Virgin Queen, Gloriana, or Good Queen Bess, Elizabeth was the fifth and last monarch of the Tudor dynasty. The daughter of Henry VIII, she was born a princess, but her mother, Anne Boleyn, was executed two and a half years after her birth, and Elizabeth was declared illegitimate. Her half-brother, Edward VI, bequeathed the crown to Lady Jane Grey, cutting his half-sisters out of the succession. His will was set aside, Lady Jane Grey was executed, and in 1558 Elizabeth succeeded the Catholic Mary I, during whose reign she had been imprisoned for nearly a year on suspicion of supporting Protestant rebels. Elizabeth set out to rule by good counsel,[1] and she depended heavily on a group of trusted advisers led by William Cecil, Baron Burghley. One of her first moves as queen was the establishing of an English Protestant church, of which she became the Supreme Governor. This Elizabethan Religious Settlement later evolved into today's Church of England. It was expected that Elizabeth would marry and produce an heir so as to continue the Tudor line. She never did, however, despite numerous courtships. As she grew older, Elizabeth became famous for her virginity, and a cult grew up around her which was celebrated in the portraits, pageants, and literature of the day. In government, Elizabeth was more moderate than her father, brother and sister had been.[2] One of her mottoes was "video et taceo" ("I see, and say nothing").[3] In religion she was relatively tolerant, avoiding systematic persecution. After 1570, when the pope declared her illegitimate and released her subjects from obedience to her, several conspiracies threatened her life. All plots were defeated, however, with the help of her ministers' secret service. Elizabeth was cautious in foreign affairs, moving between the major powers of France and Spain. She only half-heartedly supported a number of ineffective, poorly resourced military campaigns in the Netherlands, France and Ireland. In the mid-1580s war with Spain could no longer be avoided, and when Spain finally decided to invade and conquer England in 1588, the defeat of the Spanish Armada associated her with what is popularly viewed as one of the greatest victories in English history.
Elizabeth I of England Elizabeth's reign is known as the Elizabethan era, famous above all for the flourishing of English drama, led by playwrights such as William Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe, and for the seafaring prowess of English adventurers such as Sir Francis Drake. Some historians are more reserved in their assessment. They depict Elizabeth as a short-tempered, sometimes indecisive ruler,[4] who enjoyed more than her share of luck. Towards the end of her reign, a series of economic and military problems weakened her popularity. Elizabeth is acknowledged as a charismatic performer and a dogged survivor, in an age when government was ramshackle and limited and when monarchs in neighbouring countries faced internal problems that jeopardised their thrones. Such was the case with Elizabeth's rival, Mary, Queen of Scots, whom she imprisoned in 1568 and eventually had executed in 1587. After the short reigns of Elizabeth's brother and sister, her 44 years on the throne provided welcome stability for the kingdom and helped forge a sense of national identity.[2]
108
Early life
Elizabeth was born at Greenwich Palace and was named after both her grandmothers, Elizabeth of York and Elizabeth Howard.[5] She was the second child of Henry VIII of England born in wedlock to survive infancy. Her mother was Henry's second wife, Anne Boleyn. At birth, Elizabeth was the heiress presumptive to the throne of England. Her older half-sister, Mary, had lost her position as a legitimate heir when Henry annulled his marriage to Mary's mother, Catherine of Aragon, in order to marry Anne and sire a male heir to ensure the Tudor succession.[6] [7] Elizabeth was baptised on 10 September; Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, the Marquess of Exeter, the Duchess of Norfolk and the Dowager Marchioness of Dorset stood as her four godparents.
Elizabeth was the only child of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn, who did not bear a male heir and was executed less than three years after Elizabeth's birth.
When Elizabeth was two years and eight months old her mother was executed on 19 May 1536.[8] Elizabeth was declared illegitimate and deprived of the title of Princess.[9] Eleven days after Anne Boleyn's death, Henry married Jane Seymour, but she died shortly after the birth of their son, Prince Edward, in 1537. Edward now became the undisputed heir to the throne. Elizabeth was placed in Edward's household and carried the chrisom, or baptismal cloth, at his christening.[10] Elizabeth's first Lady Mistress, Margaret, Lady Bryant, wrote that she was as toward a child and as gentle of conditions as ever I knew any in my life.[11] By the autumn of 1537, Elizabeth was in the care of Blanche Herbert, Lady Troy who remained her Lady Mistress until her retirement in late 1545 or early 1546.[12] Catherine Champernowne, better known by her later, married name of Catherine Kat Ashley, was appointed as Elizabeth's governess in 1537, and she remained Elizabeths friend until her death in 1565, when Blanche Parry succeeded her as Chief Gentlewoman of the Privy Chamber.[13] She clearly made a good job of Elizabeths early education: by the time William Grindal became her tutor in 1544, Elizabeth could write English, Latin, and Italian. Under Grindal, a talented and skilful tutor, she also progressed in French and Greek.[14] She is also reputed to have spoken Cornish.[15] After Grindal died in 1548, Elizabeth received her education under Roger Ascham, a sympathetic teacher who believed that learning should be engaging.[16] By the time her
Elizabeth I of England formal education ended in 1550, she was one of the best educated women of her generation.[17]
109
Thomas Seymour
Henry VIII died in 1547; Elizabeth's half-brother, Edward VI became king at age 9. Catherine Parr, Henry's widow, soon married Thomas Seymour of Sudeley, Edward VI's uncle and the brother of the Lord Protector, Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset. The couple took Elizabeth into their household at Chelsea. There Elizabeth experienced an emotional crisis that some historians believe affected her for the rest of her life.[19] Seymour, approaching age 40 but having charm and "a powerful sex appeal",[19] engaged in romps and horseplay with the 14-year-old Elizabeth. These included entering her bedroom in his nightgown, tickling her and slapping her on the buttocks. Catherine Parr, rather than confront her husband over his inappropriate activities, joined in. Twice she accompanied him in tickling Elizabeth, and once held her while he cut her black gown "into a thousand pieces."[20] However, after Catherine Parr discovered the pair in an The Miroir or Glasse of the Synneful embrace, she ended this state of affairs.[21] In May 1548, Elizabeth was sent Soul, a translation from the French, away. Seymour continued scheming to control the royal family and tried to have by Elizabeth, presented to Catherine Parr in 1544. The embroidered himself appointed the governor of the Kings person.[22] [23] When Catherine Parr binding with the monogram KP for died after childbirth on 5 September 1548, he renewed his attentions towards "Katherine Parr" is believed to have [18] Elizabeth, intent on marrying her.[24] The details of his former behaviour towards been worked by Elizabeth. Elizabeth emerged [25] and for his brother and the council, this was the last [26] straw. In January 1549, Seymour was arrested on suspicion of plotting to marry Elizabeth and overthrow his brother. Elizabeth, living at Hatfield House, would admit nothing. Her stubbornness exasperated her interrogator, Sir Robert Tyrwhitt, who reported, "I do see it in her face that she is guilty".[26] Seymour was beheaded on 20 March 1549.
Elizabeth I of England In January and February 1554, Wyatt's rebellion broke out; it was soon suppressed.[29] Elizabeth was brought to court, and interrogated regarding her role, and on 18 March, she was imprisoned in the Tower of London. Elizabeth fervently protested her innocence.[30] Though it is unlikely that she had plotted with the rebels, some of them were known to have approached her. Mary's closest confidant, Charles V's ambassador Simon Renard, argued that her throne would never be safe while Elizabeth lived; and the Chancellor, Stephen Gardiner, worked to have Elizabeth put on trial.[31] Elizabeth's supporters in the government, including Lord Paget, convinced Mary to spare her sister in the absence of hard evidence against her. Instead, on 22 May, Elizabeth was moved from the Tower to Woodstock, where she was to spend almost a year under house arrest in the charge of Sir Henry Bedingfield. Crowds cheered her all along the way.[32] [33] King Philip had little role in England's governance, but he did help protect Elizabeth. On 17 April 1555, Elizabeth was recalled to court to attend the final stages of Mary's apparent pregnancy. If Mary and her child died, Elizabeth would become queen. If, on the other hand, Mary gave birth to a healthy child, Elizabeth's chances of becoming queen would recede sharply. When it became clear that Mary was not pregnant, no one believed any longer that she could have a child.[34] Elizabeth's succession seemed assured.[35] King Philip, who became King of Spain in 1556, acknowledged the new political reality and cultivated Elizabeth. She was a better ally than the chief alternative, Mary, Queen of Scots, who had grown up in France and was betrothed to the Dauphin of France.[36] When his wife Queen Mary fell ill in 1558, King Philip sent the Count of Feria to consult with Elizabeth.[37] This interview was conducted at Hatfield House, where she had returned to live in October 1555. By October 1558, Elizabeth was already making plans for her government. On 6 November, Mary recognised Elizabeth as her heir.[38] On 17 November 1558 Mary died and Elizabeth succeeded to the throne.
The remaining wing of the Old Palace, Hatfield House. It was here that Elizabeth was told of her sister's death in November 1558.
110
Elizabeth I of England
111
Accession
Elizabeth became queen at the age of 25, and Elizabeth declared her intentions to her Council and other peers who had come to Hatfield to swear allegiance. The speech contains the first record of her adoption of the mediaeval political theology of the sovereign's "two bodies": the body natural and the body politic:[39] My lords, the law of nature moves me to sorrow for my sister; the burden that is fallen upon me makes me amazed, and yet, considering I am God's creature, ordained to obey His appointment, I will thereto yield, desiring from the bottom of my heart that I may have assistance of His grace to be the minister of His heavenly will in this office now committed to me. And as I am but one body naturally considered, though by His permission a body politic to govern, so shall I desire you all ... to be assistant to me, that I with my ruling and you with your service may make a good account to Almighty God and leave some comfort to our posterity on earth. I mean to direct all my actions by good advice and counsel.[40] As her triumphal progress wound through the city on the eve of the coronation ceremony, she was welcomed wholeheartedly by the Elizabeth I in her coronation robes, patterned citizens and greeted by orations and pageants, most with a strong with Tudor roses and trimmed with ermine. Protestant flavour. Elizabeth's open and gracious responses endeared her to the spectators, who were "wonderfully ravished".[41] The following day, 15 January 1559, Elizabeth was crowned at Westminster Abbey and anointed by the Catholic bishop of Carlisle. She was then presented for the people's acceptance, amidst a deafening noise of organs, fifes, trumpets, drums, and bells.[42]
Church settlement
Elizabeth's personal religious convictions have been much debated by scholars. She was a Protestant, but kept Catholic symbols (such as the crucifix), and downplayed the role of sermons in defiance of a key Protestant belief.[43] In terms of public policy she favoured pragmatism in dealing with religious matters. The question of her legitimacy was a key concern: Although she was technically illegitimate under both Protestant and Catholic law, her retroactively declared illegitimacy under the English church was not a serious bar compared to having never been legitimate as the Catholics claimed she was. For this reason alone, it was never in serious doubt that Elizabeth would embrace Protestantism. Elizabeth and her advisors perceived the threat of a Catholic crusade against heretical England. Elizabeth therefore sought a Protestant solution that would not offend Catholics too greatly while addressing the desires of English Protestants; she would not tolerate the more radical Puritans though, who were pushing for far-reaching reforms.[44] As a result, the parliament of 1559 started to legislate for a church based on the Protestant settlement of Edward VI, with the monarch as its head, but with many Catholic elements, such as priestly vestments.[45] The House of Commons backed the proposals strongly, but the bill of supremacy met opposition in the House of Lords, particularly from the bishops. Elizabeth was fortunate that many bishoprics were vacant at the time, including the Archbishopric of Canterbury.[46] [47] This enabled supporters amongst peers to outvote the bishops and conservative peers. Nevertheless, Elizabeth was forced to accept the title of Supreme Governor of the Church of England rather than the more contentious title of Supreme Head, which many thought unacceptable for a woman to bear. The new Act of Supremacy became law on 8 May 1559. All public officials were to swear an oath of loyalty to
Elizabeth I of England the monarch as the supreme governor or risk disqualification from office; the heresy laws were repealed, to avoid a repeat of the persecution of dissenters practised by Mary. At the same time, a new Act of Uniformity was passed, which made attendance at church and the use of an adapted version of the 1552 Book of Common Prayer compulsory, though the penalties for recusancy, or failure to attend and conform, were not extreme.[48]
112
Marriage question
From the start of Elizabeth's reign, it was expected that she would marry and the question arose whom. She never did, although she received many offers for her hand; the reasons for this are not clear. Historians have speculated that Thomas Seymour had put her off sexual relationships, or that she knew herself to be infertile.[50] [51] She considered several suitors until she was about fifty. Her last courtship was with Franois, Duke of Anjou, 22 years her junior. While risking possible loss of power like her sister, who played into the hands of King Phillip II of Spain, marriage offered the chance of an heir.[52] However, the choice of a husband might also provoke political instability or even insurrection.[53]
Elizabeth and her favourite, Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, c.1575. Pair of stamp-sized [49] miniatures by Nicholas Hilliard. The Queen's friendship with Dudley lasted for over thirty years, until his death.
Elizabeth I of England
113
Political aspects
Marriage negotiations constituted a key element in Elizabeth's foreign policy.[67] She turned down Philip II's own hand in 1559, and negotiated for several years to marry his cousin Archduke Charles of Austria. By 1569, relations with the Habsburgs had deteriorated, and Elizabeth considered marriage to two French Valois princes in turn, first Henri, Duke of Anjou, and later, from 1572 to 1581, his brother Franois, Duke of Anjou, formerly Duke of Alenon.[68] This last proposal was tied to a planned alliance against Spanish control of the Southern Netherlands.[69] Elizabeth seems to have taken the courtship seriously for a time, and wore a frog-shaped earring that Anjou had sent her.[70] In 1563, Elizabeth told an imperial envoy: "If I follow the inclination of my nature, it is this: beggar-woman and single, far rather than queen and married".[67] Later in the year, following Elizabeth's illness with smallpox, the succession question became a heated issue in Parliament. They urged the queen to marry or nominate an heir, to prevent a civil war upon her death. She refused to do either. In April she prorogued the Parliament, which did not reconvene until she needed its support to raise taxes in 1566. Having promised to marry previously, she told an unruly House:
Franois, Duke of Anjou, by Nicholas Hilliard. Elizabeth called the duke her "frog", finding him "not so deformed" as she had been led to [66] expect.
I will never break the word of a prince spoken in public place, for my honour's sake. And therefore I say again, I will marry as soon as I can conveniently, if God take not him away with whom I mind to marry, or myself, or else some other great let happen.[71] By 1570, senior figures in the government privately accepted that Elizabeth would never marry or name a successor. William Cecil was already seeking solutions to the succession problem.[67] For her failure to marry, Elizabeth was often accused of irresponsibility.[72] Her silence, however, strengthened her own political security: she knew that if she named an heir, her throne would be vulnerable to a coup; she remembered that the way "a second person, as I have been" had been used as the focus of plots against her sister, Queen Mary.[73]
Elizabeth I of England
114 Elizabeth's unmarried status inspired a cult of virginity. In poetry and portraiture, she was depicted as a virgin or a goddess or both, not as a normal woman.[75] At first, only Elizabeth made a virtue of her virginity: in 1559, she told the Commons, "And, in the end, this shall be for me sufficient, that a marble stone shall declare that a queen, having reigned such a time, lived and died a virgin".[76] Later on, poets and writers took up the theme and turned it into an iconography that exalted Elizabeth. Public tributes to the Virgin by 1578 acted as a coded assertion of opposition to the queen's marriage negotiations with the Duc d'Alenon.[77] Putting a positive spin on her marital status, Elizabeth insisted she was married to her kingdom and subjects, under divine protection. In 1599, Elizabeth spoke of "all my husbands, my good people".[78]
Elizabeth I of England
115
Sir Francis Walsingham, Principal Secretary 15731590. Being Elizabeth's spymaster, he uncovered several plots against her life.
Regnans in Excelsis gave English Catholics a strong incentive to look to Mary Stuart as the true sovereign of England. Mary may not have been told of every Catholic plot to put her on the English throne, but from the Ridolfi Plot of 1571 (which caused Mary's suitor, the Duke of Norfolk, to lose his head) to the Babington Plot of 1586, Elizabeth's spymaster Sir Francis Walsingham and the royal council keenly assembled a case against her.[94] At first, Elizabeth resisted calls for Mary's death. By late 1586 she had been persuaded to sanction her trial and execution on the evidence of letters written during the Babington Plot.[95] Elizabeth's proclamation of the sentence announced that "the said Mary, pretending title to the same Crown, had compassed and imagined within the same realm divers things tending to the hurt, death and destruction of our royal person."[96] On 8 February 1587, Mary was beheaded at Fotheringhay Castle, Northamptonshire.[97]
Elizabeth I of England
116
Netherlands expedition
After the occupation and loss of Le Havre in 15621563, Elizabeth avoided military expeditions on the continent until 1585, when she sent an English army to aid the Protestant Dutch rebels against Philip II.[102] This followed the deaths in 1584 of the allies William the Silent, Prince of Orange, and Franois, Duke of Anjou, and the surrender of a series of Dutch towns to Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma, Philip's governor of the Spanish Netherlands. In December 1584, an alliance between Philip II and the French Catholic League at Joinville undermined the ability of Anjou's brother, Henry III of France, to counter Spanish domination of the Netherlands. It also extended Spanish influence along the channel coast of France, where the Catholic League was strong, and exposed England to invasion.[102] The siege of Antwerp in the summer of 1585 by the Duke of Parma necessitated some reaction on the part of the English and the Dutch. The outcome was the Treaty of Nonsuch of August 1585, in which Elizabeth promised military support to the Dutch.[103] The treaty marked the beginning of the Anglo-Spanish War, which lasted until the Treaty of London in 1604. The expedition was led by her former suitor, Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. Elizabeth from the start did not really back this course of action. Her strategy, to support the Dutch on the surface with an English army, while beginning secret peace talks with Spain within days of Leicester's arrival in Holland,[104] had necessarily to be at odds with Leicester's, who wanted and was expected by the Dutch to fight an active campaign. Elizabeth on the other hand, wanted him "to avoid at all costs any decisive action with the enemy".[105] He enraged Elizabeth by accepting the post of Governor-General from the Dutch States-General. Elizabeth saw this as a Dutch ploy to force her to accept sovereignty over the Netherlands,[106] which so far she had always declined. She wrote to Leicester: We could never have imagined (had we not seen it fall out in experience) that a man raised up by ourself and extraordinarily favoured by us, above any other subject of this land, would have in so contemptible a sort broken our commandment in a cause that so greatly touches us in honour....And therefore our express pleasure and commandment is that, all delays and excuses laid apart, you do presently upon the duty of your allegiance obey and fulfill whatsoever the bearer hereof shall direct you to do in our name. Whereof fail you not, as you will answer the contrary at your utmost peril.[107] Elizabeth's "commandment" was that her emissary read out her letters of disapproval publicly before the Dutch Council of State, Leicester having to stand nearby.[108] This public humiliation of her "Lieutenant-General" combined with her continued talks for a separate peace with Spain,[109] irreversibly undermined his standing among the Dutch. The military campaign was severely hampered by Elizabeth's repeated refusals to send promised funds for her starving soldiers. Her unwillingness to commit herself to the cause, Leicester's own shortcomings as a political and military leader and the faction-ridden and chaotic situation of Dutch politics were reasons for the campaign's failure.[110] Leicester finally resigned his command in December 1587.
Elizabeth I of England
117
Spanish Armada
Meanwhile, Sir Francis Drake had undertaken a major voyage against Spanish ports and ships to the Caribbean in 1585 and 1586, and in 1587 had made a successful raid on Cadiz, destroying the Spanish fleet of war ships intended for the Enterprise of England:[111] Philip II had decided to take the war to England at last.[112] On 12 July 1588, the Spanish Armada, a great fleet of ships, set sail for the channel, planning to ferry a Spanish invasion force under the Duke of Parma to the coast of southeast England from the Netherlands. A combination of miscalculation,[113] misfortune, and an attack of English fire ships on 29 July off Gravelines which dispersed the Spanish ships to the northeast defeated the Armada.[114] The Armada straggled home to Spain in shattered remnants, after disastrous losses on the coast of Ireland (after some ships had tried to struggle back to Spain via the North Sea, and then back south past the west coast of Portrait of Elizabeth to commemorate the defeat of the Spanish Armada (1588), Ireland).[115] Unaware of the Armada's fate, depicted in the background. Elizabeth's hand rests on the globe, symbolising her English militias mustered to defend the international power. country under the Earl of Leicester's command. He invited Elizabeth to inspect her troops at Tilbury in Essex on 8 August. Wearing a silver breastplate over a white velvet dress, she addressed them in one of her most famous speeches: My loving people, we have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourself to armed multitudes for fear of treachery; but I assure you, I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people ... I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a King of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any Prince of Europe should dare to invade the borders of my realm.[116] When no invasion came, the nation rejoiced. Elizabeth's procession to a thanksgiving service at St Paul's Cathedral rivalled that of her coronation as a spectacle.[115] The defeat of the armada was a potent propaganda victory, both for Elizabeth and for Protestant England. The English took their delivery as a symbol of God's favour and of the nation's inviolability under a virgin queen.[99] However, the victory was not a turning point in the war, which continued and often favoured Spain.[117] The Spanish still controlled the Netherlands, and the threat of invasion remained.[112] Sir Walter Raleigh claimed after her death that Elizabeth's caution had impeded the war against Spain: If the late queen would have believed her men of war as she did her scribes, we had in her time beaten that great empire in pieces and made their kings of figs and oranges as in old times. But her Majesty did all by halves, and by petty invasions taught the Spaniard how to defend himself, and to see his own weakness.[118] Though some historians have criticised Elizabeth on similar grounds,[119] Raleigh's verdict has more often been judged unfair. Elizabeth had good reason not to place too much trust in her commanders, who once in action tended, as she put it herself, "to be transported with an haviour of vainglory".[120]
Elizabeth I of England
118
Ireland
Although Ireland was one of her two kingdoms, Elizabeth faced a hostileand in places virtually autonomous[124] Irish population that adhered to Catholicism and was willing to defy her authority and plot with her enemies. Her policy there was to grant land to her courtiers and prevent the rebels from giving Spain a base from which to attack England.[125] In the course of a series of uprisings, Crown forces pursued scorched-earth tactics, burning the land and slaughtering man, woman and child. During a revolt in Munster led by Gerald FitzGerald, Earl of Desmond, in 1582, an estimated 30,000 Irish people starved to death. The poet and colonist Edmund Spenser wrote that the victims "were brought to such wretchedness as that any stony heart would have rued the same".[126] Elizabeth advised her commanders that the Irish, "that rude and barbarous nation", be well treated; but she showed no remorse when force and bloodshed were deemed necessary.[127] Between 1594 and 1603, Elizabeth faced her most severe test in Ireland during the Nine Years War, a revolt that took place at the height of hostilities with Spain, who backed the rebel leader, Hugh O'Neill, Earl of Tyrone.[128] In spring 1599, Elizabeth sent Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex, to put the revolt down. To her frustration,[129] he made little progress and returned to England in defiance of her orders. He was replaced by Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy, who took three years to defeat the rebels. O'Neill finally surrendered in 1603, a few days after Elizabeth's death.[130] Soon after a peace treaty was signed between England and Spain.
Elizabeth I of England
119
Russia
Elizabeth continued to maintain the diplomatic relations with the Tsardom of Russia originally established by her deceased brother. She often wrote to its then ruler, Tsar Ivan IV, on amicable terms, though the Tsar was often annoyed by her focus on commerce rather than on the possibility of a military alliance. The Tsar even proposed to her once, and during his later reign, asked for a guarantee to be granted asylum in England should his rule be jeopardised. Upon Ivan's death, he was Ivan the Terrible shows his treasures to Elizabeth's ambassador. Painting by succeeded by his simple-minded son Alexander Litovchenko, 1875 Feodor. Unlike his father, Feodor had no enthusiasm in maintaining exclusive trading rights with England. Feodor declared his kingdom open to all foreigners, and dismissed the English ambassador Sir Jerome Bowes, whose pomposity had been tolerated by the new Tsar's late father. Elizabeth sent a new ambassador, Dr. Giles Fletcher, to demand from the regent Boris Godunov that he convince the Tsar to reconsider. The negotiations failed, due to Fletcher addressing Feodor with two of his titles omitted. Elizabeth continued to appeal to Feodor in half appealing, half reproachful letters. She proposed an alliance, something which she had refused to do when offered one by Feodor's father, but was turned down.[131]
(for cannon-casting) and ammunitions to the Ottoman Empire, and Elizabeth seriously discussed joint military operations with Murad III during the outbreak of war with Spain in 1585, as Francis Walsingham was lobbying for a
Elizabeth I of England direct Ottoman military involvement against the common Spanish enemy.[143]
120
Later years
The period after the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 brought new difficulties for Elizabeth that lasted the fifteen years until the end of her reign.[117] The conflicts with Spain and in Ireland dragged on, the tax burden grew heavier, and the economy was hit by poor harvests and the cost of war. Prices rose and the standard of living fell.[144] [145] During this time, repression of Catholics intensified, and Elizabeth authorised commissions in 1591 to interrogate and monitor Catholic householders.[146] To maintain the illusion of peace and prosperity, she increasingly relied on internal spies and propaganda.[144] In her last years, mounting criticism reflected a decline in the public's affection for her.[147] One of the causes for this "second reign" of Elizabeth, as it is sometimes called,[148] was the different character of Elizabeth's governing body, the privy council in the 1590s. A new generation was in power. With the exception of Lord Burghley, the most important politicians had died around 1590: The Earl of Leicester in 1588, Sir ElizabethI being carried in a procession, c.1600 Francis Walsingham in 1590, Sir Christopher Hatton in 1591.[149] Factional strife in the government, which had not existed in a noteworthy form before the 1590s,[150] now became its hallmark.[151] A bitter rivalry between the Earl of Essex and Robert Cecil, son of Lord Burghley, and their respective adherents, for the most powerful positions in the state marred politics.[152] The queen's personal authority was lessening,[153] as is shown in the affair of Dr. Lopez, her trusted physician. When he was wrongly accused by the Earl of Essex of treason out of personal pique, she could not prevent his execution, although she had been angry about his arrest and seems not to have believed in his guilt (1594).[154] Elizabeth, during the last years of her reign, came to rely on granting monopolies as a cost-free system of patronage rather than ask Parliament for more subsidies in a time of war.[155] The practice soon led to price-fixing, the enrichment of courtiers at the public's expense, and widespread resentment.[156] This culminated in agitation in the House of Commons during the parliament of 1601.[157] In her famous "Golden Speech" of 30 November 1601, Elizabeth professed ignorance of the abuses and won the members over with promises and her usual appeal to the emotions:[158] Who keeps their sovereign from the lapse of error, in which, by ignorance and not by intent they might have fallen, what thank they deserve, we know, though you may guess. And as nothing is more dear to us than the loving conservation of our subjects' hearts, what an undeserved doubt might we have incurred if the abusers of our liberality, the thrallers of our people, the wringers of the poor, had not been told us![159]
Elizabeth I of England
121 This same period of economic and political uncertainty, however, produced an unsurpassed literary flowering in England.[160] The first signs of a new literary movement had appeared at the end of the second decade of Elizabeth's reign, with John Lyly's Euphues and Edmund Spenser's The Shepheardes Calender in 1578. During the 1590s, some of the great names of English literature entered their maturity, including William Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe. During this period and into the Jacobean era that followed, the English theatre reached its highest peaks.[161] The notion of a great Elizabethan age depends largely on the builders, dramatists, poets, and musicians who were active during Elizabeth's reign. They owed little directly to the queen, who was never a major patron of the arts.[162]
As Elizabeth aged her image gradually changed. She was portrayed as Belphoebe or Astraea, and after the Armada, as Gloriana, the eternally youthful Faerie Queene of Edmund Spenser's poem. Her painted portraits became less realistic and more a set of enigmatic icons that made her look much younger than she was. In fact, her skin had been Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex, by William Segar, 1588 scarred by smallpox in 1562, leaving her half bald and dependent on wigs and cosmetics.[163] Sir Walter Raleigh called her "a lady whom time had surprised".[164] However, the more Elizabeth's beauty faded, the more her courtiers praised it.[163] Elizabeth was happy to play the part,[165] but it is possible that in the last decade of her life she began to believe her own performance. She became fond and indulgent of the charming but petulant young Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, who was Leicester's stepson and took liberties with her for which she forgave him.[166] She repeatedly appointed him to military posts despite his growing record of irresponsibility. After Essex's desertion of his command in Ireland in 1599, Elizabeth had him placed under house arrest and the following year deprived him of his monopolies.[167] In February 1601, the earl tried to raise a rebellion in London. He intended to seize the queen but few rallied to his support, and he was beheaded on 25 February. Elizabeth knew that her own misjudgements were partly to blame for this turn of events. An observer reported in 1602 that "Her delight is to sit in the dark, and sometimes with shedding tears to bewail Essex".[168]
Elizabeth I of England
122
Death
Elizabeth's senior advisor, Burghley, died on 4 August 1598. His political mantle passed to his son, Robert Cecil, who soon became the leader of the government.[169] One task he addressed was to prepare the way for a smooth succession. Since Elizabeth would never name her successor, Cecil was obliged to proceed in secret.[170] He therefore entered into a coded negotiation with James VI of Scotland, who had a strong but unrecognised claim.[171] Cecil coached the impatient James to humour Elizabeth and "secure the heart of the highest, to whose sex and quality nothing is so improper as either needless expostulations or over much curiosity in her own actions".[172] The advice worked. James's tone delighted Elizabeth, who responded: "So trust I that you will not doubt but that your last letters are so acceptably taken as my thanks cannot be lacking for the same, but yield them to you in grateful sort".[173] In historian J. E. Neale's view, Elizabeth may not have declared her wishes openly to James, but she made them known with "unmistakable if veiled phrases".[174]
Elizabeth I. The "Rainbow Portrait", c.1600, an allegorical representation of the Queen, become The Queen's health remained fair until the autumn of 1602, when a ageless in her old age series of deaths among her friends plunged her into a severe depression. In February 1603, the death of Catherine Howard, Countess of Nottingham, the niece of her cousin and close friend Catherine, Lady Knollys, came as a particular blow. In March, Elizabeth fell sick and remained in a "settled and unremovable melancholy".[175] She died on 24 March 1603 at Richmond Palace, between two and three in the morning. A few hours later, Cecil and the council set their plans in motion and proclaimed James VI of Scotland as king of England.[176]
Elizabeth's coffin was carried downriver at night to Whitehall, on a barge lit with torches. At her funeral on 28 April, the coffin was taken to Westminster Abbey on a hearse drawn by four horses hung with black velvet. In the words of the chronicler John Stow: Westminster was surcharged with multitudes of all sorts of people in their streets, houses, windows, leads and gutters, that came out to see the obsequy, and when they beheld her statue lying upon the coffin, there was such a general sighing, groaning and weeping as the like hath not been seen or known in the memory of man.[177] Elizabeth was interred in Westminster Abbey in a tomb she shares with her half-sister, Mary. The Latin inscription on their tomb, "Regno consortes & urna, hic obdormimus Elizabetha et Maria sorores, in spe resurrectionis", translates to "Consorts in realm and tomb, here we sleep, Elizabeth and Mary, sisters, in hope of [178] resurrection".
Elizabeth I of England
123
Elizabeth I, painted after 1620, during the first revival of interest in her reign. Time sleeps on her right and Death looks over her left shoulder; two [185] putti hold the crown above her head.
Elizabeth established an English church that helped shape a national identity and remains in place today.[196] [197] [198] Those who praised her later as a Protestant heroine overlooked her refusal to drop all practices of Catholic origin from the Church of England.[199] Historians note that in her day, strict Protestants regarded the Acts of Settlement and Uniformity of 1559 as a compromise.[200] [201] In fact, Elizabeth believed that faith was personal and did not wish, as Francis Bacon put it, to "make windows into men's hearts and secret thoughts".[202] [203] Though Elizabeth followed a largely defensive foreign policy, her reign raised England's status abroad. "She is only a woman, only mistress of half an island," marvelled Pope Sixtus V, "and yet she makes herself feared by Spain, by France, by the Empire, by all".[204] Under Elizabeth, the nation gained a new self-confidence and sense of sovereignty, as Christendom fragmented.[180] [205] [206] Elizabeth was the first Tudor to recognise that a monarch ruled by popular consent.[207] She therefore always worked with parliament and advisers she could trust to tell her the trutha style of government that her Stuart successors failed to follow. Some historians have called her lucky;[204] she believed that God was protecting her.[208] Priding herself on being "mere English",[209] Elizabeth trusted in God, honest advice, and the love of her subjects for the success of her rule.[210] In a prayer, she offered
Elizabeth I of England thanks to God that: [At a time] when wars and seditions with grievous persecutions have vexed almost all kings and countries round about me, my reign hath been peacable, and my realm a receptacle to thy afflicted Church. The love of my people hath appeared firm, and the devices of my enemies frustrate.[204]
124
Notes
[1] "I mean to direct all my actions by good advice and counsel." Elizabeth's first speech as queen, Hatfield House, 20 November 1558. Loades, 35. [2] Starkey Elizabeth: Woman, 5. [3] Neale, 386. [4] Somerset, 729. [5] Somerset, 4. [6] [7] [8] [9] Loades, 35 Somerset, 45. Loades, 67. In the Act of July 1536, it was stated that Elizabeth was "illegitimate... and utterly foreclosed, excluded and banned to claim, challenge, or demand any inheritance as lawful heir...to [the King] by lineal descent". Somerset, 10. [10] Loades, 78. [11] Somerset, 11. [12] Richardson, 3946. [13] Richardson, 56, 7582, 136 [14] Our knowledge of Elizabeths schooling and precocity comes largely from the memoirs of Roger Ascham, also the tutor of Prince Edward. Loades, 810. [15] "Maps of Cornwall (Kernow) showing a Celtic or Distinct Identity" (http:/ / www. bbc. co. uk/ dna/ h2g2/ A10686710). BBC. . Retrieved 12 December 2010. [16] Somerset, 25. [17] Loades, 21. [18] Davenport, 32. [19] Loades, 11. [20] Starkey Elizabeth: Apprenticeship, p. 69 [21] Loades, 14. [22] Haigh, 8. [23] Neale, 32. [24] Williams Elizabeth, 24. [25] Loades, 14, 16. [26] Neale, 33. [27] Elizabeth had assembled 2,000 horsemen, "a remarkable tribute to the size of her affinity". Loades 24-25. [28] Loades, 27. [29] Neale, 45. [30] Loades, 28. [31] Somerset, 51. [32] Loades, 29. [33] "The wives of Wycombe passed cake and wafers to her until her litter became so burdened that she had to beg them to stop." Neale, 49. [34] Loades, 32. [35] Somerset, 66. [36] Neale, 53. [37] Loades, 33. [38] Neale, 59. [39] Kantorowicz, ix [40] Full document reproduced by Loades, 3637.
Elizabeth I of England
[41] Somerset, 8990. The "Festival Book" account, from the British Library (http:/ / special-1. bl. uk/ treasures/ festivalbooks/ BookDetails. aspx?strFest=0231) [42] Neale, 70. [43] Patrick Collinson, "Elizabeth I (15331603)" in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2008) accessed 23 Aug 2011 (http:/ / www. oxforddnb. com/ view/ article/ 8636,) [44] Lee, Christopher (1995, 1998). "Disc 1". This Sceptred Isle 15471660. ISBN0-563-55769-9. [45] Loades, 46. [46] "It was fortunate that ten out of twenty-six bishoprics were vacant, for of late there had been a high rate of mortality among the episcopate, and a fever had conveniently carried off Mary's Archbishop of Canterbury, Reginald Pole, less than twenty-four hours after her own death". Somerset, 98. [47] "There were no less than ten sees unrepresented through death or illness and the carelessness of 'the accursed cardinal' [Pole]". Black, 10. [48] Somerset, 101103. [49] "Stamp-sized Elizabeth I miniatures to fetch 80.000", Daily Telegraph, 17 November 2009 (http:/ / www. telegraph. co. uk/ culture/ art/ art-news/ 6582953/ Stamp-sized-Elizabeth-I-miniatures-to-fetch-80000. html) Retrieved 16 May 2010 [50] Loades, 38. [51] Haigh, 19. [52] Loades, 39. [53] Retha Warnicke, "Why Elizabeth I Never Married," History Review, Sept 2010, Issue 67, pp 15-20 [54] Loades, 42; Wilson, 95 [55] Wilson, 95 [56] Skidmore, 162, 165, 166168 [57] Chamberlin, 118 [58] Somerset, 166167. Most modern historians have considered murder unlikely; breast cancer and suicide being the most widely accepted explanations (Doran Monarchy, 44). The coroner's report, hitherto believed lost, came to light in The National Archives in the late 2000s and is compatible with a downstairs fall as well as other violence (Skidmore, 230233). [59] Wilson, 126128 [60] Doran Monarchy, 45 [61] Doran Monarchy, 212. [62] Adams, 384, 146. [63] Jenkins, 245, 247; Hammer, 46. [64] Doran Queen Elizabeth I, 61. [65] Wilson, 303. [66] Frieda, 397. [67] Haigh, 17. [68] Loades, 5354. [69] Loades, 54. [70] Somerset, 408. [71] Doran Monarchy, 87 [72] Haigh, 2021. [73] Haigh, 2223. [74] Anna Dowdeswell (28 November 2007). "Historic painting is sold for 2.6million" (http:/ / www. bucksherald. co. uk/ news/ Historic-painting-is-sold-for. 3532557. jp). bucksherald.co.uk. . Retrieved 17 December 2008.. [75] John N. King, "Queen Elizabeth I: Representations of the Virgin Queen," Renaissance Quarterly Vol. 43, No. 1 (Spring, 1990), pp. 30-74 in JSTOR (http:/ / www. jstor. org/ stable/ 2861792) [76] Haigh, 23. [77] Susan Doran, "Juno Versus Diana: The Treatment of Elizabeth I's Marriage in Plays and Entertainments, 1561-1581," Historical Journal 38 (1995): 257-74 in JSTOR (http:/ / www. jstor. org/ stable/ 2639984) [78] Haigh, 24. [79] Haigh, 131. [80] Mary's position as heir derived from her great-grandfather Henry VII of England, through his daughter Margaret Tudor. In her own words, "I am the nearest kinswoman she hath, being both of us of one house and stock, the Queen my good sister coming of the brother, and I of the sister". Guy, 115. [81] On Elizabeth's accession, Mary's Guise relatives had pronounced her Queen of England and had the English arms emblazoned with those of Scotland and France on her plate and furniture. Guy, 9697. [82] By the terms of the treaty, both British and French troops withdrew from Scotland. Haigh, 132. [83] Loades, 67. [84] Loades, 68. [85] Simon Adams: "Dudley, Robert, earl of Leicester (1532/31588)" (http:/ / www. oxforddnb. com/ view/ article/ 8160) Oxford Dictionary of National Biography online edn. May 2008 (subscription required) Retrieved 3 April 2010
125
Elizabeth I of England
[86] Letter to Mary, Queen of Scots, 23 June 1567." Quoted by Loades, 6970. [87] Loades, 7273. [88] Loades, 73 [89] Williams Norfolk, p. 174 [90] McGrath, 69 [91] Collinson p. 67 [92] Collinson pp. 6768 [93] Collinson p. 68 [94] Loades, 73. [95] Guy, 483484. [96] Loades, 7879. [97] Guy, 111. [98] Frieda, 191. [99] Loades, 61. [100] Flynn and Spence, 126128. [101] Somerset, 607611. [102] Haigh, 135. [103] Strong and van Dorsten, 2026 [104] Strong and van Dorsten, 43 [105] Strong and van Dorsten, 72 [106] Strong and van Dorsten, 50 [107] Letter to Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, 10 February 1586, delivered by Sir Thomas Heneage. Loades, 94. [108] Chamberlin, 263264 [109] Elizabeth's ambassador in France was actively misleading her as to the true intentions of the Spanish king, who only tried to buy time for his great assault upon England: Parker, 193. [110] Haynes, 15; Strong and van Dorsten, 7279 [111] Parker, 193194 [112] Haigh, 138. [113] When the Spanish naval commander, the Duke of Medina Sidonia, reached the coast near Calais, he found the Duke of Parma's troops unready and was forced to wait, giving the English the opportunity to launch their attack. Loades, 64. [114] Black, 349. [115] Neale, 300. [116] Somerset, 591; Neale, 29798. [117] Black, 353. [118] Haigh, 145. [119] For example, C. H. Wilson castigates Elizabeth for half-heartedness in the war against Spain. Haigh, 183. [120] Somerset, 655. [121] Haigh, 142. [122] Haigh, 143. [123] Haigh, 143144. [124] One observer wrote that Ulster, for example, was "as unknown to the English here as the most inland part of Virginia". Somerset, 667. [125] Loades, 55 [126] Somerset, 668. [127] Somerset, 668669. [128] Loades, 98. [129] In a letter of 19 July 1599 to Essex, Elizabeth wrote: "For what can be more true (if things be rightly examined) than that your two month's journey has brought in never a capital rebel against whom it had been worthy to have adventured one thousand men". Loades, 98. [130] Loades, 9899. [131] Russia and Britain by Crankshaw, Edward, published by Collins, 126 p. The Nations and Britain series [132] Tate Gallery exhibition "East-West: Objects between cultures", Tate.org.uk (http:/ / www. tate. org. uk/ britain/ exhibitions/ eastwest/ rooms/ room1. htm) [133] Vaughan, Performing Blackness on English Stages, 15001800 Cambridge University Press 2005 p.57 Google Books (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=19_SIlq3ZvsC& pg=PA57) [134] Nicoll, Shakespeare Survey. The Last Plays Cambridge University Press 2002, p.90 Google Books (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=OeakAOji13EC& pg=PA90) [135] ''Speaking of the Moor'', Emily C. Bartels p.24 (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=S6Z9J0OJmmQC& pg=PA24). Google Books. . Retrieved 2 May 2010. [136] Vaughan, p.57 (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=19_SIlq3ZvsC& pg=PA57). Google Books. . Retrieved 2 May 2010.
126
Elizabeth I of England
[137] University of Birmingham Collections Mimsy.bham.ac.uk (http:/ / mimsy. bham. ac. uk/ detail. php?t=objects& type=related& kv=101212) [138] Vaughan, p.57 [139] Kupperman, p. 39 [140] Nicoll, p.96 [141] The Encyclopedia of world history by Peter N. Stearns, p.353 (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=MziRd4ddZz4C& pg=PA353). Google Books. . Retrieved 2 May 2010. [142] Kupperman, p.40 [143] Kupperman, p.41 [144] Haigh, 155. [145] Black, 355356. [146] Black, 355. [147] This criticism of Elizabeth was noted by Elizabeth's early biographers William Camden and John Clapham. For a detailed account of such criticisms and of Elizabeth's "government by illusion", see chapter 8, "The Queen and the People", Haigh, 149169. [148] Adams, 7; Hammer, 1; Collinson, 89 [149] Collinson, 89 [150] Doran Monarchy, 216 [151] Hammer, 12 [152] Hammer, 1, 9 [153] Hammer, 910 [154] Lacey, 117120 [155] A Patent of Monopoly gave the holder control over an aspect of trade or manufacture. See Neale, 382. [156] Williams Elizabeth, 208. [157] Black, 192194. [158] She gave the speech at Whitehall Palace to a deputation of 140 members, who afterwards all kissed her hand. Neale, 383384. [159] Loades, 86. [160] Black, 239. [161] Black, 239245. [162] Haigh, 176. [163] Loades, 92. [164] Haigh, 171. [165] "The metaphor of drama is an appropriate one for Elizabeth's reign, for her power was an illusionand an illusion was her power. Like Henry IV of France, she projected an image of herself which brought stability and prestige to her country. By constant attention to the details of her total performance, she kept the rest of the cast on their toes and kept her own part as queen." Haigh, 179. [166] Loades, 93. [167] Loades, 97. [168] Black, 410. [169] After Essex's downfall, James VI of Scotland referred to Cecil as "king there in effect". Croft, 48. [170] Cecil wrote to James, "The subject itself is so perilous to touch amongst us as it setteth a mark upon his head forever that hatcheth such a bird". Willson, 154. [171] James VI of Scotland was a great-great-grandson of Henry VII of England, and thus Elizabeth's first cousin twice removed since Henry VII was Elizabeth's paternal grandfather. [172] Willson, 154. [173] Willson, 155. [174] Neale, 385. [175] Black, 411. [176] Black, 410411. [177] Weir, 486. [178] Stanley, Arthur Penrhyn (1868). "The royal tombs". Historical memorials of Westminster Abbey. London: John Murray. p.178. OCLC24223816. [179] Loades, 100101. [180] Somerset, 726. [181] Strong, 164. [182] Haigh, 170. [183] Weir, 488. [184] Dobson and Watson, 257. [185] Strong, 163164. [186] Haigh, 175, 182. [187] Dobson and Watson, 258.
127
Elizabeth I of England
[188] The age of Elizabeth was redrawn as one of chivalry, epitomised by courtly encounters between the queen and sea-dog "heroes" such as Drake and Raleigh. Some Victorian narratives, such as Raleigh laying his cloak before the queen or presenting her with a potato, remain part of the myth. Dobson and Watson, 258. [189] Haigh, 175. [190] In his preface to the 1952 reprint of Queen Elizabeth I, J. E. Neale observed: "The book was written before such words as "ideological", "fifth column", and "cold war" became current; and it is perhaps as well that they are not there. But the ideas are present, as is the idea of romantic leadership of a nation in peril, because they were present in Elizabethan times". [191] Haigh, 182. [192] Kenyon, 207 [193] Haigh, 183. [194] Black, 408409. [195] Haigh, 142147, 174177. [196] Loades, 4650. [197] Weir, 487. [198] Hogge, 910. [199] The new state religion was condemned at the time in such terms as "a cloaked papistry, or mingle mangle". Somerset, 102. [200] Haigh, 4546, 177. [201] Black, 1415. [202] Williams Elizabeth, 50. [203] Haigh, 42. [204] Somerset, 727. [205] Hogge, 9n. [206] Loades, 1. [207] As Elizabeth's Lord Keeper, Sir Nicholas Bacon, put it on her behalf to parliament in 1559, the queen "is not, nor ever meaneth to be, so wedded to her own will and fantasy that for the satisfaction thereof she will do anything...to bring any bondage or servitude to her people, or give any just occasion to them of any inward grudge whereby any tumults or stirs might arise as hath done of late days". Starkey Elizabeth: Woman, 7. [208] Somerset, 7576. [209] Edwards, 205. [210] Starkey Elizabeth: Woman, 67.
128
References
Adams, Simon (2002), Leicester and the Court: Essays in Elizabethan Politics, Manchester: Manchester University Press, ISBN0-7190-5325-0. Black, J. B. (1945) [1936], The Reign of Elizabeth: 15581603, Oxford: Clarendon, OCLC5077207. Chamberlin, Frederick (1939), Elizabeth and Leycester, Dodd, Mead & Co.. Collinson, Patrick. "Elizabeth I (15331603)" in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2008) accessed 23 Aug 2011 (http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/8636) Collinson, Patrick (2007), Elizabeth I, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN978-0-19-921356-6. Croft, Pauline (2003), King James, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN0-333-61395-3. Davenport, Cyril (1899), Pollard, Alfred, ed., English Embroidered Bookbindings, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trbner and Co., OCLC705685. Dobson, Michael & Watson, Nicola (2003), "Elizabeth's Legacy", in Doran, Susan, Elizabeth: The Exhibition at the National Maritime Museum, London: Chatto and Windus, ISBN0-7011-7476-5. Doran, Susan (1996), Monarchy and Matrimony: The Courtships of Elizabeth I, London: Routledge, ISBN0-415-11969-3. Doran, Susan (2003), Queen Elizabeth I, London: British Library, ISBN0-7123-4802-6. Doran, Susan (2003), "The Queen's Suitors and the Problem of the Succession", in Doran, Susan, Elizabeth: The Exhibition at the National Maritime Museum, London: Chatto and Windus, ISBN0-7011-7476-5. Edwards, Philip (2004), The Making of the Modern English State: 14601660, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN0-312-23614-X. Flynn, Sian & Spence, David (2003), "Elizabeth's Adventurers", in Doran, Susan, Elizabeth: The Exhibition at the National Maritime Museum, London: Chatto and Windus, ISBN0-7011-7476-5.
Elizabeth I of England Frieda, Leonie (2005), Catherine de Medici, London: Phoenix, ISBN0-7538-2039-0. Guy, John (2004), My Heart is My Own: The Life of Mary Queen of Scots, London and New York: Fourth Estate, ISBN1-84115-752-X. Haigh, Christopher (2000), Elizabeth I (2nd ed.), Harlow (UK): Longman Pearson, ISBN0-582-43754-7. Hammer, P. E. J. (1999), The Polarisation of Elizabethan Politics: The Political Career of Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex, 15851597, Cambridge University Press, ISBN0-521-01941-9. Haynes, Alan (1987), The White Bear: The Elizabethan Earl of Leicester, Peter Owen, ISBN0720606721. Hogge, Alice (2005), God's Secret Agents: Queen Elizabeth's Forbidden Priests and the Hatching of the Gunpowder Plot, London: HarperCollins, ISBN0-00-715637-5. Jenkins, Elizabeth (2002) [1961], Elizabeth and Leicester, The Phoenix Press, ISBN1-84212-560-5. Kantorowicz, Ernst Hartwig (1997). The king's two bodies: a study in mediaeval political theology (2 ed.). Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press. ISBN0-691-01704-2. Kenyon, John P. (1983), The History Men: The Historical Profession in England since the Renaissance, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN0-297-78254-1. Kupperman, Karen Ordahl (2007), The Jamestown Project, Harvard University Press, ISBN0674024745. Lacey, Robert (1971), Robert Earl of Essex: An Elizabethan Icarus, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN0-297-00320-8. Loades, David (2003), Elizabeth I: The Golden Reign of Gloriana, London: The National Archives, ISBN1-903365-43-0. McGrath, Patrick (1967), Papists and Puritans under Elizabeth I, London: Blandford Press. Neale, J. E. (1954) [1934], Queen Elizabeth I: A Biography (reprint ed.), London: Jonathan Cape, OCLC220518. Parker, Geoffrey (2000), The Grand Strategy of Philip II, New Haven: Yale University Press, ISBN0-300-08273-8. Richardson, Ruth Elizabeth (2007), Mistress Blanche: Queen Elizabeth I's Confidante, Woonton: Logaston Press, ISBN978-1-904396-86-4. Rowse, A. L. (1950), The England of Elizabeth, London: Macmillan, OCLC181656553. Skidmore, Chris (2010), Death and the Virgin: Elizabeth, Dudley and the Mysterious Fate of Amy Robsart, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN978-0-297-84650-5. Somerset, Anne (2003), Elizabeth I. (1st Anchor Books ed.), London: Anchor Books, ISBN0-385-72157-9. Starkey, David (2001), Elizabeth: Apprenticeship, London: Vintage, ISBN0099286572. Starkey, David (2003), "Elizabeth: Woman, Monarch, Mission", in Doran, Susan, Elizabeth: The Exhibition at the National Maritime Museum, London: Chatto and Windus, ISBN0-7011-7476-5. Strong, Roy C. (2003) [1987], Gloriana: The Portraits of Queen Elizabeth I, London: Pimlico, ISBN0-7126-0944-X. Strong, R. C. & van Dorsten, J. A. (1964), Leicester's Triumph, Oxford University Press. Weir, Alison (1999), Elizabeth the Queen, London: Pimlico, ISBN0-7126-7312-1. Williams, Neville (1964), Thomas Howard, Fourth Duke of Norfolk, London: Barrie & Rockliff. Williams, Neville (1972), The Life and Times of Elizabeth I, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN0-297-83168-2. Willson, David Harris (1963) [1956], King James VI & I, London: Jonathan Cape, ISBN0-224-60572-0. Wilson, Derek (1981), Sweet Robin: A Biography of Robert Dudley Earl of Leicester 15331588, London: Hamish Hamilton, ISBN0-241-10149-2. Woodward, Jennifer (1997), The Theatre of Death: The Ritual Management of Royal Funerals in Renaissance England, 15701625, Boydell & Brewer, ISBN978-0-85115-704-7
129
Elizabeth I of England
130
Further reading
Beem, Charles. The Foreign Relations of Elizabeth I (2011) excerpt and text search (http://www.amazon.com/ Foreign-Relations-Elizabeth-Queenship-Power/dp/0230112145/) Bridgen, Susan (2001). New Worlds, Lost Worlds: The Rule of the Tudors, 14851603. New York, NY: Viking Penguin. ISBN9780670899852. Jones, Norman. The Birth of the Elizabethan Age: England in the 1560s (Blackwell, 1993) MacCaffrey Wallace T. Elizabeth I (1993), political biography summarizing his multivolume study: MacCaffrey Wallace T. The Shaping of the Elizabethan Regime: Elizabethan Politics, 1558-1572 (1969) MacCaffrey Wallace T. Queen Elizabeth and the Making of Policy, 1572-1588 (1988) MacCaffrey Wallace T. Elizabeth I: War and Politics, 1588-1603 (1994) McLaren, A. N. Political Culture in the Reign of Elizabeth I: Queen and Commonwealth, 1558-1585 (Cambridge University Press, 1999) excerpt and text search (http://www.amazon.com/ Political-Culture-Reign-Elizabeth-Commonwealth/dp/0521024838/) Palliser, D. M. The Age of Elizabeth: England Under the Later Tudors, 1547-1603 (1983) survey of social and economic history Ridley, Jasper. Elizabeth I: The Shrewdness of Virtue. New York : Fromm International, 1989. ISBN 0-88064-110-X.
Elizabeth I of England Watkins, John. Representing Elizabeth in Stuart England: Literature, History, Sovereignty (2002) 264pp Watson, Nicola J., and Michael Dobson. England's Elizabeth: An Afterlife in Fame and Fantasy (2002) ISBN 0-19-818377-1. Woolf, D.R. "Two Elizabeths? James I and the Late Queen's Famous Memory," Canadian Journal of History, Aug 1985, Vol. 20 Issue 2, pp 167-91
131
External links
Tudor and Elizabeth Portraits. (http://www.elizabethan-portraits.com/) Tudor and Elizabethan portraits and other works of art, provided for research and education. Retrieved 15 December 2007. Archival material relating to Elizabeth I of England (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/nra/searches/ subjectView.asp?ID=P9129) listed at the UK National Register of Archives Works by or about Elizabeth I of England (http://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n79-81709) in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
James I of England
James VI and I
Portrait by Daniel Mytens, 1621 King of Scots (more...) Reign Coronation 24 July 1567 27 March 1625 29 July 1567
Predecessor Mary, Queen of Scots Successor Regents Charles I James Stewart, Earl of Moray Matthew Stewart, Earl of Lennox John Erskine, Earl of Mar James Douglas, Earl of Morton
King of England and Ireland (more...) Reign Coronation 24 March 1603 27 March 1625 25 July 1603
James I of England
132
among others... Issue Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia Charles I of England, Scotland and Ireland House Father Mother Born Died House of Stuart Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley Mary, Queen of Scots 19 June 1566 Edinburgh Castle, Scotland 27 March 1625 (aged58) (N.S.: 6 April 1625) Theobalds House, England 7 May 1625 Westminster Abbey
Burial Signature
James VI and I (19 June 1566 27 March 1625) was King of Scots as JamesVI and King of England and Ireland as JamesI. Upon inheriting the English and Irish crown, James united the Crown of the Kingdom of Scotland with the crown of the Kingdoms of England and Ireland. The states of England and Scotland retained their individual sovereignty, with their own parliaments, judiciary, and laws, though both were ruled by James. He became King of Scots on 24 July 1567, when he was just thirteen months old, succeeding his mother Mary, Queen of Scots, who had been compelled to abdicate in his favour. Four different regents governed during his minority, which ended officially in 1578, though he did not gain full control of his government until 1583. On 24 March 1603, he succeeded the last Tudor monarch of England and Ireland, Elizabeth I, who died without issue.[1] He continued to reign in all three kingdoms for 22 years, often using the title King of Great Britain and Ireland, until his death in 1625 at the age of 58.[2] He based himself in England (the largest of the three realms) from 1603. James began the Plantation of Ulster and of the New World. At 57 years and 246 days, his reign in Scotland was longer than any of his predecessors. He achieved most of his aims in Scotland but faced great difficulties in England, including the Gunpowder Plot in 1605 and repeated conflicts with the English Parliament. Under James, the "Golden Age" of Elizabethan literature and drama continued, with writers such as William Shakespeare, John Donne, Ben Jonson, and Sir Francis Bacon contributing to a flourishing literary culture.[3] James himself was a talented scholar, the author of works such as Daemonologie (1597), True Law of Free Monarchies (1598), and Basilikon Doron (1599). He sponsored the translation of the bible that was named after him: the Authorised King James Version.[4] Sir Anthony Weldon claimed that James had been termed "the wisest fool in Christendom", an epithet associated with his character ever since.[5] Recent historians, however, have revised James's reputation and have treated him as a serious and thoughtful monarch.[6]
James I of England
133
Childhood
Birth
James was the only son of Mary, Queen of Scots, and her second husband, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley. Both Mary and Darnley were great-grandchildren of Henry VII of England through Margaret Tudor, the older sister of Henry VIII. Mary's rule over Scotland was insecure, for both she and her husband, being Roman Catholics, faced a rebellion by Protestant noblemen. During Mary's and Darnley's difficult marriage,[7] Darnley secretly allied himself with the rebels and conspired in the murder of the Queen's private secretary, David Rizzio, just three months before James's birth.[8] James was born on 19June 1566 at Edinburgh Castle, and as the eldest son and heir apparent of the monarch automatically became Duke of Rothesay and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland. He was baptised "Charles James" on 17 December 1566 in a Catholic ceremony held at Stirling Castle. His godparents were Charles IX of France (represented by John, Count of Brienne), Elizabeth I of England (represented by the Earl of Bedford), and Emmanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy (represented by ambassador Philibert du Croc).[9] Mary refused to let the Archbishop of St Andrews, whom she referred to as "a pocky priest", spit in the child's mouth, as was then the custom.[10] James's father, Darnley, was murdered on 10February 1567 during an unexplained explosion at Kirk o' Field, Edinburgh, perhaps in revenge for Rizzio's death. James inherited his father's titles of Duke of Albany and Earl of Ross. Mary was already unpopular, and her marriage on 15May 1567 to James Hepburn, 4th Earl of Bothwell, who was widely suspected of murdering Darnley, Portrait of James as a boy, after heightened widespread bad feeling towards her.[11] In June 1567, Protestant Arnold Bronckorst, 1574 rebels arrested Mary and imprisoned her in Loch Leven Castle; she never saw her son again. She was forced to abdicate on 24July in favour of the infant James and to appoint her illegitimate half-brother, James Stewart, Earl of Moray, as regent.[12]
Regencies
The care of James was entrusted to the Earl and Countess of Mar, "to be conserved, nursed, and upbrought"[13] in the security of Stirling Castle.[14] James was crowned King of Scots at the age of thirteen months at the Church of the Holy Rude, Stirling, by Adam Bothwell, Bishop of Orkney, on 29 July 1567.[15] The sermon at the coronation was preached by John Knox. In accordance with the religious beliefs of most of the Scottish ruling class, James was brought up as a member of the Protestant Church of Scotland. The Privy Council selected George Buchanan, Peter Young, Adam Erskine (lay abbot of Cambuskenneth), and David Erskine (lay abbot of Dryburgh) as James's preceptors or tutors.[16] As the young king's senior tutor, Buchanan subjected James to regular beatings but also instilled in him a lifelong passion for literature and learning.[17] Buchanan sought to turn James into a God-fearing, Protestant king who accepted the limitations of monarchy, as outlined in his treatise De Jure Regni apud Scotos.[18] In 1568 Mary escaped from prison, leading to several years of violence. The Earl of Moray defeated Mary's troops at the Battle of Langside, forcing her to flee to England, where she was subsequently imprisoned by Elizabeth. On 23 January 1570, Moray was assassinated by James Hamilton of Bothwellhaugh.[19] The next regent was James's paternal grandfather, Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of Lennox, who a year later was carried fatally wounded into Stirling Castle after a raid by Mary's supporters.[20] His successor, the Earl of Mar, died soon after banqueting at the estate of James Douglas, 4th Earl of Morton, where he "took a vehement sickness", dying on 28 October 1572 at Stirling. Morton, who now took Mar's office, proved in many ways the most effective of James's regents,[21] but he made enemies by his rapacity.[22] He fell from favour when the Frenchman Esm Stewart, Sieur d'Aubigny, first
James I of England cousin of James's father Lord Darnley, and future Earl of Lennox, arrived in Scotland and quickly established himself as the first of James's powerful male favourites.[23] Morton was executed on 2 June 1581, belatedly charged with complicity in Lord Darnley's murder.[24] On 8 August, James made Lennox the only duke in Scotland.[25] Then fifteen years old, the king was to remain under the influence of Lennox for about one more year.[26]
134
Rule in Scotland
Although a Protestant convert, Lennox was distrusted by Scottish Calvinists, who noticed the physical displays of affection between favourite and king and alleged that Lennox "went about to draw the King to carnal lust".[22] In August 1582, in what became known as the Ruthven Raid, the Protestant earls of Gowrie and Angus lured James into Ruthven Castle, imprisoned him,[27] and forced Lennox to leave Scotland. After James was liberated in June 1583, he assumed increasing control of his kingdom. He pushed through the Black Acts to assert royal authority over the Kirk, and denounced the writings of his former tutor Buchanan.[28] Between 1584 and 1603, he established effective royal government and relative peace among the lords, ably assisted by John Maitland of Thirlestane, who led the government until 1592.[29] An eight-man commission, known as the Octavians, brought some control over the ruinous state of James's finances in 1596, but it drew opposition from vested interests. It James in 1586, age 20 was disbanded within a year after a riot in Edinburgh, stoked by anti-Catholicism, led the court to withdraw to Linlithgow temporarily.[30] One last Scottish attempt against the king's person occurred in August 1600, when James was apparently assaulted by Alexander Ruthven, the Earl of Gowrie's younger brother, at Gowrie House, the seat of the Ruthvens.[31] Since Ruthven was run through by James's page John Ramsay and the Earl of Gowrie was himself killed in the ensuing fracas, there were few surviving witnesses. Given his history with the Ruthvens, and that he owed them a great deal of money, James's account of the circumstances was not universally believed.[32] In 1586, James signed the Treaty of Berwick with England. That and the execution of his mother in 1587, which he denounced as a "preposterous and strange procedure", helped clear the way for his succession south of the border.[33] Queen Elizabeth was unmarried and childless, and James was her most likely successor. Securing the English succession became a cornerstone of his policy.[34] During the Spanish Armada crisis of 1588, he assured Elizabeth of his support as "your natural son and compatriot of your country".[35]
James I of England
135
Marriage
Throughout his youth, James was praised for his chastity, since he showed little interest in women; after the loss of Lennox, he continued to prefer male company.[36] A suitable marriage, however, was necessary to reinforce his monarchy, and the choice fell on the fourteen-year-old Anne of Denmark, younger daughter of the Protestant Frederick II. Shortly after a proxy marriage in Copenhagen in August 1589, Anne sailed for Scotland but was forced by storms to the coast of Norway. On hearing the crossing had been abandoned, James, in what Willson calls "the one romantic episode of his life",[37] sailed from Leith with a three-hundred-strong retinue to fetch Anne personally.[38] The couple were married formally at the Bishop's Palace in Oslo on 23 November and, after stays at Elsinore and Copenhagen and a meeting with Tycho Brahe, returned to Scotland on 1 May 1590. By all accounts, James was at first infatuated with Anne, and in the early years of their marriage seems always to have showed Anne of Denmark, by John de Critz, c. 1605 her patience and affection.[39] The royal couple produced three surviving children: Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales, who died of typhoid fever in 1612, aged 18; Elizabeth, later Queen of Bohemia; and Charles, the future King. Anne died before her husband in March 1619.
Witch hunts
James's visit to Denmark, a country familiar with witch hunts, may have encouraged an interest in the study of witchcraft,[40] which he considered a branch of theology.[41] After his return to Scotland, he attended the North Berwick witch trials, the first major persecution of witches in Scotland under the Witchcraft Act 1563. Several people, most notably Agnes Sampson, were convicted of using witchcraft to send storms against James's ship. James became obsessed with the threat posed by witches and, inspired by his personal involvement, in 1597 wrote the Daemonologie, a tract which opposed the practice of witchcraft and which provided background material for Shakespeare's Tragedy of Macbeth.[42] James is known to have personally supervised the torture of women accused of being witches.[43] After 1599, his views became more sceptical.[44] In a later letter written in England to his son Prince Henry, James congratulates the Prince on "the discovery of yon little counterfeit wench. I pray God ye may be my heir in such discoveries... most miracles now-a-days prove but illusions, and ye may see by this how wary judges should be in trusting accusations."[45]
James I of England time of James VI as "Erse" or Irish, implying that it was foreign in nature. The Scottish Parliament decided it had become a principal cause of the Highlanders' shortcomings and sought to abolish it.[48] [49] It was against this background that in 1598 James VI authorised the "Gentleman Adventurers of Fife" to civilise the "most barbarous Isle of Lewis". James wrote that the colonists were to act "not by agreement" with the local inhabitants, but "by extirpation of thame". Their landing at Stornoway was initially successful, but the colonists were driven out by local forces commanded by Murdoch and Neil MacLeod. The colonists tried again in 1605 with the same result although a third attempt in 1607 was more successful.[49] [50] The Statutes of Iona were enacted in 1609, which required clan chiefs to: send their heirs to Lowland Scotland to be educated in English-speaking Protestant schools; provide support for Protestant ministers to Highland Parishes; outlaw bards; and regularly report to Edinburgh to answer for their actions.[51] So began a process "specifically aimed at the extirpation of the Gaelic language, the destruction of its traditional culture and the suppression of its bearers."[52]
136
Theory of monarchy
In 159798, James wrote two works, The True Law of Free Monarchies and Basilikon Doron (Royal Gift), in which he argued a theological basis for monarchy. In the True Law, he sets out the divine right of kings, explaining that for Biblical reasons kings are higher beings than other men, though "the highest bench is the sliddriest to sit upon".[53] The document proposes an absolutist theory of monarchy, by which a king may impose new laws by royal prerogative but must also pay heed to tradition and to God, who would "stirre up such scourges as pleaseth him, for punishment of wicked kings".[54] Basilikon Doron, written as a book of instruction for the four-year-old Prince Henry, provides a more practical guide to kingship.[55] The work is considered to be well written and perhaps the best example of James's prose.[56] James's advice concerning parliaments, which he understood as merely the king's "head court", foreshadows his difficulties with the English Commons: "Hold no Parliaments," he tells Henry, "but for the necesitie of new Lawes, which would be but seldome".[57] In the True Law James maintains that the king owns his realm as a feudal lord owns his fief, because kings arose "before any estates or ranks of men, before any parliaments were holden, or laws made, and by them was the land distributed, which at first was wholly theirs. And so it follows of necessity that kings were the authors and makers of the laws, and not the laws of the kings."[58]
Literary patronage
James was concerned in the 1580s and 1590s to promote the literature of the country of his birth. His treatise, Some Rules and Cautions to be Observed and Eschewed in Scottish Prosody, published in 1584 at the age of 18, was both a poetic manual and a description of the poetic tradition in his mother tongue, Scots, applying Renaissance principles.[59] He also made statutory provision to reform and promote the teaching of music, seeing the two in connection.[60] In furtherance of these aims he was both patron and head of a loose circle of Scottish Jacobean court poets and musicians, the Castalian Band, which included among others William Fowler and Alexander Montgomerie, the latter being a favourite of the King.[61] James, himself a poet, was happy to be seen as a practising member in the group.[62] By the late 1590s his championing of his native Scottish tradition was to some extent diffused by the increasingly expected prospect of inheritance of the English throne,[63] and some courtier poets who followed the king to London after 1603, such as William Alexander, were starting to anglicise their written language.[64] James's characteristic role as active literary participant and patron in the Scottish court made him in many respects a defining figure for English Jacobean poetry and drama, which would reach a pinnacle of achievement in his reign,[65] but his patronage for the high style in his own Scottish tradition, a tradition which includes his ancestor James I of Scotland, largely became sidelined.[66]
James I of England
137
His English coronation took place on 25 July, with elaborate allegories provided by dramatic poets such as Thomas Dekker and Ben Jonson. Even though an outbreak of plague restricted festivities,[73] "the streets seemed paved with men," wrote Dekker. "Stalls instead of rich wares were set out with children, open casements filled up with women".[74] The kingdom to which James succeeded was, however, not without its problems. Monopolies and taxation had engendered a widespread sense of grievance, and the costs of war in Ireland had become a heavy burden on the government.[75]
The Union of the Crowns was symbolised in James's personal heraldic badge after 1603, the Tudor rose dimidiated with the Scottish thistle ensigned by the royal crown.
James I of England In foreign policy, James achieved more success. Never having been at war with Spain, he devoted his efforts to bringing the long AngloSpanish War to an end, and in August 1604, thanks to skilled diplomacy on the part of Robert Cecil and Henry Howard, now Earl of Northampton, a peace treaty was signed between the two countries, which James celebrated by hosting a great banquet.[81] Freedom of worship for Catholics in England continued, however, to be a major objective of Spanish policy, causing constant dilemmas for James, distrusted abroad for repression of Catholics while at home being encouraged by the Privy Council to show even less tolerance towards them.[82]
138
Gunpowder plot
On the night of 45 November 1605, the eve of the state opening of the second session of James's first English Parliament, a soldier named Guy Fawkes was discovered in the cellars of the parliament buildings. He was guarding a pile of wood not far from 36 barrels of gunpowder with which Fawkes intended to blow up Parliament House the following day and cause the destruction, as James put it, "not only... of my person, nor of my wife and posterity also, but of the whole body of the State in general".[83] The sensational discovery of the Catholic Gunpowder Plot, as it quickly became known, aroused a mood of national relief at the delivery of the king and his sons which Salisbury exploited to extract higher subsidies from the ensuing Parliament than any but one granted to Elizabeth.[84] Fawkes and others implicated in the unsuccessful conspiracy were executed.
James I of England
139
Spanish match
Another potential source of income was the prospect of a Spanish dowry from a marriage between Charles, Prince of Wales, and the Spanish Infanta, Maria.[92] The policy of the Spanish Match, as it was called, was also attractive to James as a way to maintain peace with Spain and avoid the additional costs of a war.[93] Peace could be maintained as effectively by keeping the negotiations alive as by consummating the matchwhich may explain why James protracted the negotiations for almost a decade.[94] The policy was supported by the Howards and other Catholic-leaning ministers and diplomatstogether known as the Spanish Partybut deeply distrusted in Protestant England. James's policy was further jeopardised by the outbreak of the Thirty Years' War, especially after his Protestant son-in-law, Frederick V, Elector Palatine, was ousted from Bohemia by the Catholic Emperor Ferdinand II in 1620, and Spanish troops simultaneously invaded Frederick's Rhineland home Portrait of James by John de Critz, c. territory. Matters came to a head when James finally called a Parliament in 1621 1606 to fund a military expedition in support of his son-in-law.[95] The Commons on the one hand granted subsidies inadequate to finance serious military operations in aid of Frederick,[96] and on the otherremembering the profits gained under Elizabeth by naval attacks on Spanish gold shipmentscalled for a war directly against Spain. In November 1621, roused by Sir Edward Coke, they framed a petition asking not only for war with Spain but also for Prince Charles to marry a Protestant, and for enforcement of the anti-Catholic laws.[97] James flatly told them not to interfere in matters of royal prerogative or they would risk punishment,[98] which provoked them into issuing a statement protesting their rights, including freedom of speech.[99] Urged on by the Duke of Buckingham and the Spanish ambassador Gondomar, James ripped the protest out of the record book and dissolved Parliament.[100] In 1623, Prince Charles, now 23, and Buckingham decided to seize the initiative and travel to Spain incognito,[101] to win the Infanta directly, but the mission proved an ineffectual mistake.[102] The Infanta detested Charles, and the Spanish confronted them with terms that included the repeal of anti-Catholic legislation by Parliament. Though a treaty was signed, the prince and duke returned to England in October without the Infanta and immediately renounced the treaty, much to the delight of the British people.[103] Disillusioned by the visit to Spain, Charles and Buckingham now turned James's Spanish policy upon its head and called for a French match and a war against the Habsburg empire.[104] To raise the necessary finance, they prevailed upon James to call another Parliament, which met in February 1624. For once, the outpouring of anti-Catholic sentiment in the Commons was echoed in court, where control of policy was shifting from James to Charles and Buckingham,[105] who pressured the king to declare war and engineered the impeachment of Lord Treasurer Lionel Cranfield, by now made Earl of Middlesex, when he opposed the plan on grounds of cost.[106] The outcome of the Parliament of 1624 was ambiguous: James still refused to declare war, but Charles believed the Commons had committed themselves to finance a war against Spain, a stance which was to contribute to his problems with Parliament in his own reign.[107]
James I of England
140
Favourites
Throughout his life James had close relationships with male courtiers, which has caused debate among historians about their nature.[121] After his accession in England, his peaceful and scholarly attitude contrasted strikingly with the bellicose and flirtatious behaviour of Elizabeth,[121] as indicated by the contemporary epigram Rex fuit Elizabeth, nunc est regina Jacobus (Elizabeth was King, now James is Queen).[122] Some of James's biographers conclude that Esm Stewart (later Duke of Lennox), Robert Carr (later Earl of Somerset), and George Villiers (later Duke of Buckingham) were his lovers.[123] Restoration of Apethorpe Hall, undertaken in 200408, revealed a previously unknown passage linking the bedchambers of James and Villiers.[124] Others argue that the relationships were not sexual.[125] James's Basilikon Doron lists sodomy among crimes "ye are bound in conscience never to forgive", and James's wife Anne gave birth to seven live children, as well as suffering two stillbirths and at least three other miscarriages.[126]
James I of England
141
When the Earl of Salisbury died in 1612, he was little mourned by those who jostled to fill the power vacuum.[127] Until Salisbury's death, the Elizabethan administrative system over which he had presided continued to function with relative efficiency; from this time forward, however, James's government entered a period of decline and disrepute.[128] Salisbury's passing gave James the notion of governing in person as his own chief Minister of State, with his young Scottish favourite, Robert Carr, carrying out many of Salisbury's former duties, but James's inability to attend closely to official business exposed the government to factionalism.[129] The Howard party, consisting of Northampton, Suffolk, Suffolk's son-in-law Lord George Villiers, 1st Duke Knollys, and Charles Howard, Earl of Nottingham, along with Sir Thomas Lake, soon of Buckingham took control of much of the government and its patronage. Even the powerful Carr, (15921628), by Peter Paul Rubens, 1625 hardly experienced for the responsibilities thrust upon him and often dependent on his intimate friend Sir Thomas Overbury for assistance with government papers,[130] fell into the Howard camp, after beginning an affair with the married Frances Howard, Countess of Essex, daughter of the Earl of Suffolk, whom James assisted in securing an annulment of her marriage to free her to marry Carr.[131] In summer 1615, however, it emerged that Overbury, who on 15 September 1613 had died in the Tower of London, where he had been placed at the King's request,[132] had been poisoned.[133] Among those convicted of the murder were Frances Howard and Robert Carr, the latter having been replaced as the king's favourite in the meantime by Villiers. James pardoned Frances and commuted Carr's sentence of death, eventually pardoning him in 1624.[134] The implication of the King in such a scandal provoked much public and literary conjecture and irreparably tarnished James's court with an image of corruption and depravity.[135] The subsequent downfall of the Howards left Villiers unchallenged as the supreme figure in the government by 1619.[136]
Final year
During the last year of James's life, with Buckingham consolidating his control of Charles to ensure his own future, the king was often seriously ill, leaving him an increasingly peripheral figure, rarely able to visit London.[137] In early 1625, James was plagued by severe attacks of arthritis, gout and fainting fits, and in March fell seriously ill with tertian ague and then suffered a stroke. James finally died at Theobalds House on 27 March during a violent attack of dysentery, with Buckingham at his bedside.[138] James's funeral, a magnificent but disorderly affair, took place on 7 May.[139] Bishop John Williams of Lincoln preached the sermon, observing, "King Solomon died in Peace, when he had lived about sixty years... and so you know did King James".[140]
James I of England
142
Legacy
James was widely mourned. For all his flaws, he had largely retained the affection of his people, who had enjoyed uninterrupted peace and comparatively low taxation during the Jacobean era. "As he lived in peace," remarked the Earl of Kellie, "so did he die in peace, and I pray God our king [Charles I] may follow him".[141] The earl prayed in vain: once in power, Charles and Buckingham sanctioned a series of reckless military expeditions that ended in humiliating failure.[142] James had often neglected the business of government for leisure pastimes, such as the hunt; and his later dependence on male favourites at a scandal-ridden court undermined the respected image of monarchy so carefully constructed by Elizabeth.[143] According to a tradition originating with anti-Stuart historians of the mid-seventeenth-century, James's taste for political absolutism, his financial irresponsibility, and his cultivation of unpopular favourites established the foundations of the English Civil War. James bequeathed Charles a fatal belief in the On the ceiling of the Banqueting House, Rubens depicted James being carried to heaven by angels. divine right of kings, combined with a disdain for Parliament, which culminated in the execution of Charles and the abolition of the monarchy. Over the last three hundred years, the king's reputation has suffered from the acid description of him by Sir Anthony Weldon, whom James had sacked and who wrote treatises on James in the 1650s.[144] Other influential anti-James histories written during the 1650s include: Sir Edward Peyton, Divine Catastrophe of the Kingly Family of the House of Stuarts (1652); Arthur Wilson, History of Great Britain, Being the Life and Reign of King James I (1658); and Francis Osborne, Historical Memoirs of the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King James (1658).[145] The stability of James's government in Scotland, however, and in the early part of his English reign, as well as his relatively enlightened views on religion and war, have earned him a re-evaluation from many recent historians, who have rescued his reputation from this tradition of criticism.[146] Under James the Plantation of Ulster by English and Scots Protestants began, and the English colonisation of North America started its course with the foundation of Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607.[147] Cuper's Cove, Newfoundland, was founded in 1610. During the next 150 years, England would fight with Spain, the Netherlands, and France for control of the continent, while religious division in Ireland between Protestant and Catholic has lasted for 400 years. By actively pursuing more than just a personal union of his realms, he helped lay the foundations for a unitary British state.[148]
James I of England
143
Royal styles of
Royal styles of
In Scotland, James was "James the sixth, King of Scotland", until 1604. He was proclaimed "James the first, King of England, France and Ireland, defender of the faith" in London on 24 March 1603.[149] On 20 October 1604, James issued a proclamation at Westminster changing his style to "King of Great Britain, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc."[150] The style was not used on English statutes, but was used on proclamations, coinage, letters, treaties, and in Scotland.[151] James, in line with other monarchs of England between 1340 and 1800, styled himself "King of France", although he did not actually rule France.
Arms
As King of Scots, James bore the ancient royal arms of Scotland: Or, a lion rampant Gules armed and langued Azure within a double tressure flory counter-flory Gules. The arms were supported by two unicorns Argent armed, crined and unguled Proper, gorged with a coronet Or composed of crosses pate and fleurs de lys a chain affixed thereto passing between the forelegs and reflexed over the back also Or. The crest was a lion sejant affronte Gules, imperially crowned Or, holding in the dexter paw a sword and in the sinister paw a sceptre both erect and Proper.[152] The Union of the Crowns of England and Scotland under James was symbolised heraldically by combining their arms, supporters and badges. Contention as to how the arms should be marshalled, and to which kingdom should take precedence, was solved by having different arms for each country.[153] The arms used in England were: Quarterly, I and IV, quarterly 1st and 4th Azure three fleurs de lys Or (for France), 2nd and 3rd Gules three lions passant guardant in pale Or (for England); II Or a lion rampant within a tressure
James I of England flory-counter-flory Gules (for Scotland); III Azure a harp Or stringed Argent (for Ireland, this was the first time that Ireland was included in the royal arms).[154] The supporters became: dexter a lion rampant guardant Or imperially crowned and sinister the Scottish unicorn. The unicorn replaced the red dragon of Cadwaladr, which was introduced by the Tudors. The unicorn has remained in the royal arms of the two united realms. The English crest and motto was retained. The compartment often contained a branch of the Tudor rose, with shamrock and thistle engrafted on the same stem. The arms were frequently shown with James's personal motto, Beati pacifici.[153] The arms used in Scotland were: Quarterly, I and IV Scotland, II England and France, III Ireland, with Scotland taking precedence over England. The supporters were: dexter a unicorn of Scotland imperially crowned, supporting a tilting lance flying a banner Azure a saltire Argent (Cross of Saint Andrew) and sinister the crowned lion of England supporting a similar lance flying a banner Argent a cross Gules (Cross of Saint George). The Scottish crest and motto was retained, following the Scottish practice the motto In defens (which is short for In My Defens God Me Defend) was placed above the crest.[153] As royal badges James used: the Tudor rose, the thistle (for Scotland; first used by James III of Scotland), the Tudor rose dimidiated with the thistle ensigned with the royal crown, a harp (for Ireland) and a fleur de lys (for France).[154]
144
James I of England
145
List of writings
The Essayes of a Prentise in the Divine Art of Poesie, (also called Some Reulis and Cautelis), 1584 His Maiesties Poeticall Exercises at Vacant Houres, 1591 Lepanto, poem Daemonologie, 1597[155] The True Law of Free Monarchies, 1598 Basilikon Doron, 1599 A Counterblaste to Tobacco, 1604[156] An Apologie for the Oath of Allegiance, 1608
James I of England
146
Issue
Further information: Descendants of James I of England James's wife, Anne of Denmark, gave birth to seven children who survived beyond birth:[157] 1. Henry, Prince of Wales (19 February 1594 6 November 1612). Died, probably of typhoid fever, aged 18.[158] 2. Elizabeth of Bohemia (19 August 1596 13 February 1662). Married 1613, Frederick V, Elector Palatine. Died aged 65. The Hanoverian monarchs and the current House of Windsor are descended from her. 3. Margaret Stuart (24 December 1598 March 1600). Died aged 1. 4. Charles I (19 November 1600 30 January 1649). Married 1625, Henrietta Maria. Succeeded James I. Executed aged 48. 5. Robert Stuart, Duke of Kintyre (18 January 1602 27 May 1602). Died aged 4 months.[159] 6. Mary Stuart (8 April 1605 16 December 1607). Died aged 2. 7. Sophia Stuart (June 1607). Died within 48 hours of birth.[160]
James I and his royal progeny, by Charles Turner, from a mezzotint by Samuel Woodburn (1814), after Willem de Passe
Notes
[1] By the normal rules of succession James had the best claim to the English throne, as the great-great-grandson of Henry VII. However, Henry VIII's will had passed over the Scottish line of his sister Margaret in favour of that of their younger sister Mary Tudor. In the event, Henry's will was disregarded. Stewart, pp 159161; Willson, pp 138141. [2] After the Union of the Crowns James was the first to style himself "King of Great Britain", but the title was opposed by both the English and Scots parliaments, and its legal basis was questionable. Croft, p 67; Willson, pp 249252. See also: the early history of the Union Flag. [3] Milling, p 155. [4] "James VI and I was the most writerly of British monarchs. He produced original poetry, as well as translation and a treatise on poetics; works on witchcraft and tobacco; meditations and commentaries on the Scriptures; a manual on kingship; works of political theory; and, of course, speeches to parliament... He was the patron of Shakespeare, Jonson, Donne, and the translators of the "Authorized version" of the Bible, surely the greatest concentration of literary talent ever to enjoy royal sponsorship in England." Rhodes et al., p 1. [5] "A very wise man was wont to say that he believed him the wisest fool in Christendom, meaning him wise in small things, but a fool in weighty affairs." Sir Anthony Weldon (1651), The Court and Character of King James I, quoted by Stroud, p 27; "The label 'the wisest fool in Christendom', often attributed to Henry IV of France but possibly coined by Anthony Weldon, catches James's paradoxical qualities very neatly." Smith, p 238. [6] "Historians have returned to reconsidering James as a serious and intelligent ruler". Croft, p 6; "In contrast to earlier historians, recent research on his reign has tended to emphasize the wisdom and downplay the foolishness." Smith, p 238. [7] Guy, pp 236237, 241242, 270; Willson, p 13. [8] Guy, pp 248250; Willson, p 16. [9] Willson, p 17. [10] Donaldson, p 99. [11] Elizabeth I wrote to Mary: "My ears have been so astounded, my mind so disturbed and my heart so appalled at hearing the horrible report of the abominable murder of your late husband and my slaughtered cousin, that I can scarcely as yet summon the spirit to write about it... I will not conceal from you that people for the most part are saying that you will look through your fingers at this deed instead of avenging it and that you don't care to take action against those who have done you this pleasure." Historian John Guy nonetheless concludes: "Not a single piece of uncontaminated evidence has ever been found to show that Mary had foreknowledge of Darnley's murder." Guy, pp312313. In historian David Harris Willson's view, however: "That Bothwell was the murderer no one can doubt; and that Mary was his accomplice seems equally certain." Willson, p18. [12] Guy, pp 364365; Willson, p 19. [13] Letter of Mary to Mar, 29 March 1567. "Suffer nor admit no noblemen of our realm or any others, of what condition soever they be of, to enter or come within our said Castle or to the presence of our said dearest son, with any more persons but two or three at the most." Quoted by Stewart, p 27. [14] Willson, p 18; Stewart, p 33. [15] Croft, p 11. [16] Willson, p 19
James I of England
[17] Croft, pp 1213. [18] Croft, pp 13, 18. [19] Spottiswoode, John (1851). History of the Church in Scotland. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd. vol 2, p 120 (http:/ / www. archive. org/ stream/ historyofchurcho02spot#page/ 120/ mode/ 2up) (date in Old Style) [20] Croft, p 13. [21] Stewart, p 45; Willson, pp 2829. [22] Croft, p 15. [23] Stewart, pp 5163. [24] David Calderwood wrote of Morton's death: "So ended this nobleman, one of the chief instruments of the reformation; a defender of the same, and of the King in his minority, for the which he is now unthankfully dealt with." Quoted by Stewart, p 63. [25] Stewart, p 63. [26] Willson, p 35. [27] James's captors forced from him a proclamation, dated 30 August, declaring that he was not being held prisoner "forced or constrained, for fear or terror, or against his will", and that no one should come to his aid as a result of "seditious or contrary reports". Stewart, p 66. [28] Croft, pp 1718; Willson, pp 39, 50. [29] Croft, p 20. [30] Croft, pp 29, 4142; Willson, pp 121124. [31] Stewart, pp 150157. [32] "The two principal characters were dead, the evidence of eyewitnesses was destroyed and only King James version remained". Williams, p 61; George Nicolson reported: "It is begun to be noted that the reports coming from the King should differ". Stewart, p 154. Croft, p 45; Willson, pp 126130. [33] James briefly broke off diplomatic relations with England over Mary's execution, but he wrote privately that Scotland "could never have been without factions if she had beene left alive". Croft, p 22. [34] Willson, p 52. [35] Croft, p 23. [36] Croft, pp 2324. [37] Willson, p 85. [38] James heard on 7 October of the decision to postpone the crossing for winter. Stewart, pp 107110. [39] Willson, pp 8595. [40] Croft, p 26. [41] Willson, p 103. [42] Keay and Keay, p 556; Willson pp 103105. [43] Keay and Keay, p 556. [44] Croft, p 27; Willson, p 105. [45] Akrigg, p 220. [46] Hunter, pp 143, 166. [47] Hunter, p 174. [48] Thompson, pp 4041. [49] Hunter, p 175. [50] Rotary Club, pp 1213. [51] Hunter, p 176. [52] MacKinnon, p 46. [53] "Kings are called gods by the prophetical King David because they sit upon God His throne in earth and have the count of their administration to give unto Him." Quoted by Willson, p131. [54] Croft, pp 131133. [55] Willson, p 133. [56] "The Basilikon Doron is the best prose James ever wrote." Willson, p132; "James wrote well, scattering engaging asides throughout the text." Croft, pp134135. [57] Croft, p 133. [58] Quoted by Willson, p 132. [59] Jack, R. D. S. (1988). "Poetry under King James VI", in The History of Scottish Literature. Craig, Cairns (general editor). Aberdeen University Press. vol 1, pp 126127. [60] One act of his reign urges the Scottish burghs to reform and support the teaching of music in Sang Sculis. See: Jack, R. D. S. (2000). " Scottish Literature: 1603 and all that (http:/ / www. arts. gla. ac. uk/ ScotLit/ ASLS/ RDSJack. html)". Association of Scottish Literary Studies. Retrieved 18 October 2011. [61] Jack, R. D. S. (1985). Alexander Montgomerie. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. pp.12. [62] Jack (1988), p 125. [63] Jack (1988), p 137.
147
James I of England
[64] Spiller, Michael (1988). "Poetry after the Union 16031660", in The History of Scottish Literature. Craig, Cairns (general editor). Aberdeen University Press. vol 1, pp 141152. Spiller points out that the trend, although unambiguous, was generally more mixed. [65] See for example Rhodes, Neil (2004). "Wrapped in the Strong Arm of the Union: Shakespeare and King James" in Shakespeare and Scotland. Maley and Murphy (eds). Manchester University Press. pp 3839. [66] Jack (1988), pp 137138. [67] James described Cecil as "king there in effect". Croft, p48. [68] Willson, pp 154155. [69] Croft, p 49; Willson, p 158. [70] Croft, p 49; Willson, pp 160164. [71] Croft, p 50. [72] Stewart, p 169. [73] Stewart, p 172; Willson, p 165. [74] Stewart, p 173. [75] Croft, pp 5051. [76] Croft, p 51. [77] Croft, p 51; The introduction of Henry Howard, soon to be Earl of Northampton, and of Thomas Howard, soon to be Earl of Suffolk, marked the beginning of the rise of the Howard family to power in England, which was to culminate in their dominance of James's government after the death of Cecil in 1612. Henry Howard, son of poet Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey, had been a diligent correspondent with James in advance of the succession (James referred to him as "long approved and trusted Howard"). His connection with James may have owed something to the attempt by his brother Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk, to free and marry Mary, Queen of Scots, leading to his execution in 1572. Willson, p 156; Guy, pp 461468. For details on the Howards, see The Trials of Frances Howard by David Lindley. On Henry Howard, a traditionally reviled figure (Willson [1956] called him "A man of dark counsels and creeping schemes, learned but bombastic, and a most fulsome flatterer". p 156) whose reputation has been upgraded in recent years (Croft, p 6), see Northampton, by Linda Levy Peck. [78] Croft, pp 5254. [79] English and Scot, James insisted, should "join and coalesce together in a sincere and perfect union, as two twins bred in one belly, to love one another as no more two but one estate". Willson, p 250. [80] Willson, pp 249252. [81] Croft, pp 5253. [82] Croft, p 118. [83] Stewart, p 219. [84] Croft, p 64. [85] Croft, p 63. [86] Quoted by Croft, p 62. [87] "All wise princes, whensoever there was cause to withstand present evils or future perils... have always addressed themselves to their Parliaments." Quoted by Croft, p 76. [88] Croft, pp 7581. [89] Croft, p 80. [90] Croft, p 93; Willson, p 348. [91] Willson, p 409. [92] Willson, p 357. [93] Schama, Simon (2001). A History of Britain. New York: Hyperion. vol II, p 59. [94] Kenyon, J. P. (1978). Stuart England. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books. pp 8889. [95] Willson, pp 408416. [96] Willson, p 417. [97] Willson, p 421. [98] Willson, p 442. [99] James wrote: "We cannot with patience endure our subjects to use such anti-monarchical words to us concerning their liberties, except they had subjoined that they were granted unto them by the grace and favour of our predecessors." Quoted by Willson, p 423. [100] Willson, p 243. [101] They travelled under the names Thomas and John Smith. Croft, p 118. [102] Croft, pp 118119. [103] Schama, p. 64. "There was an immense outbreak of popular joy, with fireworks, bell ringing and street parties." Croft, p 120. [104] Croft, pp 120121. [105] "The aging monarch was no match for the two men closest to him. By the end of the year, the prince and the royal favourite spoke openly against the Spanish marriage and pressured James to call a parliament to consider their now repugnant treaties... with hindsight... the prince's return from Madrid marked the end of the king's reign. The prince and the favourite encouraged popular anti-Spanish sentiments to commandeer control of foreign and domestic policy." Krugler, pp 6364. [106] "The lord treasurer fell not on largely unproven grounds of corruption, but as the victim of an alliance between warmongering elements at court and in Parliament." Croft, p 125.
148
James I of England
[107] "On that divergence of interpretation, relations between the future king and the Parliaments of the years 16259 were to founder." Croft, p 126. [108] Stewart, p 225. [109] Willson, p 228. [110] A crypto-Catholic was someone who outwardly conformed to Protestantism but remained a Catholic in private. [111] Croft, p 162. [112] Akrigg, pp 207208; Willson, pp 148149. [113] Willson, p 201. [114] "In things indifferent," James wrote in a new edition of Basilikon Doron, "they are seditious which obey not the magistrates". Willson, pp 201, 209; Croft, p 156; "In seeking conformity, James gave a name and a purpose to nonconformity." Stewart, p 205. [115] Croft, p 158. [116] Croft, p 157; Willson, pp 213215. [117] Croft, p 157. [118] In March 1605, Archbishop Spottiswood wrote to James warning him that sermons against bishops were being preached daily in Edinburgh. Croft, p 164. [119] Croft, p 166; Willson, p 320. [120] Assessments of the kirk at James's death are divided: some historians argue that the Scots might have accepted James's policies eventually; others that James left the kirk in crisis. Croft, p 167. [121] "...his sexuality has long been a matter of debate. He clearly preferred the company of handsome young men. The evidence of his correspondence and contemporary accounts have led some historians to conclude that the king was homosexual or bisexual. In fact, the issue is murky." Bucholz and Key, p 208 (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?vid=ISBN0631213937& id=1D9VrPfU7msC& pg=PA208& lpg=PA208& ots=e4Eh6hdzcw& dq="James+ I"+ Lennox+ homosexual& ie=ISO-8859-1& output=html& sig=BCnX78l4CF7SiHdmZpzHjl4_W0w). [122] Hyde, H. Montgomery (1970). The Love That Dared Not Speak its Name. London: Heinemann. pp 4344. [123] e.g. Young, Michael B. (2000). King James and the History of Homosexuality. New York: New York University Press. ISBN 978-0-8147-9693-1; Bergeron, David M. (1991). Royal Family, Royal Lovers: King James of England and Scotland. Columbia; London: University of Missouri Press. [124] Graham, Fiona (5 June 2008). " To the manor bought (http:/ / news. bbc. co. uk/ 1/ hi/ magazine/ 7436409. stm)", BBC News Online. Retrieved 18 October 2008. [125] e.g. Lee, Maurice, Jr. (1990). Great Britain's Solomon: James VI and I on His Three Kingdoms. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. [126] Weir, Alison (1996). Britain's Royal Families: The Complete Genealogy. London; Sydney; Auckland: Random House. ISBN 0-7126-7448-9, pp 249251. [127] Northampton, who assumed the day-to-day running of government business, spoke of "the death of the little man for which so many rejoice and few do as much as seem to be sorry." Willson, p 269. [128] "Finances fell into chaos, foreign affairs became more difficult. James exalted a worthless favourite and increased the power of the Howards. As government relaxed and honour cheapened, we enter a period of decline and weakness, of intrigue, scandal, confusion, and treachery." Willson, p 333. [129] Willson, pp 334335. [130] Willson, p 349; "Packets were sent, sometimes opened by my lord, sometimes unbroken unto Overbury, who perused them, registered them, made table-talk of them, as they thought good. So I will undertake the time was, when Overbury knew more of the secrets of state, than the council-table did." Sir Francis Bacon, speaking at Carr's trial. Quoted by Perry, p 105. [131] The commissioners judging the case reached a 55 verdict, so James quickly appointed two extra judges guaranteed to vote in favour, an intervention which aroused public censure. When, after the annulment, the son of Bishop Bilson, one of the added commissioners, was knighted, he was given the nickname "Sir Nullity Bilson". Lindley, p 120. [132] It is very likely that he was the victim of a 'set-up' contrived by the earls of Northampton and Suffolk, with Carr's complicity, to keep him out of the way during the annulment proceedings. Overbury knew too much of Carr's dealings with Frances and, motivated by a deep political hostility to the Howards, he opposed the match with a fervour that made him dangerous. It cannot have been difficult to secure James's compliance, because he disliked Overbury and his influence over Carr. Lindley, p 145; John Chamberlain reported that the King "hath long had a desire to remove him from about the lord of Rochester, as thinking it a dishonour to him that the world should have an opinion that Rochester ruled him and Overbury ruled Rochester". Willson, p 342. [133] Lindley, p 146; "Rumours of foul play involving Rochester and his wife with Overbury had, however, been circulating since his death. Indeed, almost two years later, in September 1615, and as James was in the process of replacing Rochester with a new favourite, George Villiers, the Governor of the Tower of London sent a letter to the king informing him that one of the warders in the days before Overbury had been found dead had been bringing the prisoner poisoned food and medicine." Barroll, p 136. [134] Croft, p 91. [135] "Probably no single event, prior to the attempt to arrest the five members in 1642, did more to lessen the general reverence with which royalty was regarded in England than this unsavoury episode." Davies, p 20. [136] Croft, pp 9899; Willson, p 397.
149
James I of England
[137] Some historians (for example Willson, p 425) consider James, who was 58 in 1624, to have lapsed into premature senility; but he suffered from, among other ailments, an agonising species of arthritis which constantly left him indisposed; and Pauline Croft suggests that in summer 1624, afforded relief by the warm weather, James regained some control over his affairs, his continuing refusal to sanction war against Spain a deliberate stand against the aggressive policies of Charles and Buckingham (Croft, pp 126127); "James never became a cypher." Croft, p 101. [138] A medicine recommended by Buckingham had only served to make the king worse. "The disparity between the foreign policy of the monarch and the favourite was so obvious that there was a widespread rumour that the duke had poisoned him." Croft, pp 127128. [139] John Chamberlain wrote, "All was performed with great magnificence, but... very confused and disorderly." Croft, p 129. [140] John Williams's sermon was later printed as "Great Britain's Salomon" (sic). Croft, pp 129130. [141] Croft, p 130. [142] "A 1627 mission to save the Huguenots of La Rochelle ended in an ignominious siege on the Isle of R, leaving the Duke as the object of widespread ridicule." Stewart, p 348. [143] Croft, p 129. [144] "Often witty and perceptive but also prejudiced and abusive, their status as eye-witness accounts and their compulsive readability led too many historians to take them at face value." Croft, pp 34. [145] See, Lindley, p 44, for more on the influence of Commonwealth historians on the tradition of tracing Charles I's errors back to his father's reign. [146] Much recent scholarship has emphasised James's success in Scotland (though there have been partial dissenters, such as Michael Lynch), and there is an emerging appreciation of James's successes in the early part of his reign in England. Croft, pp 19, 46. [147] Croft, p 146. [148] Croft, p. 67. [149] Proclamation by the King, 24 March 1603 (http:/ / www. heraldica. org/ topics/ britain/ brit-proclamations. htm#James1) [150] Proclamation by the King, 20 October 1604 (http:/ / www. heraldica. org/ topics/ britain/ britstyles. htm#1604) [151] Willson, pp 252253. [152] Pinches, John Harvey; Pinches, Rosemary (1974). The Royal Heraldry of England. Heraldry Today. Slough, Buckinghamshire: Hollen Street Press. ISBN 0-900455-25-X, pp 159160. [153] Pinches and Pinches, pp 168169. [154] Brooke-Little, J.P., FSA ([1950] 1978). Boutell's Heraldry Revised edition. London: Frederick Warne. ISBN 0-7232-2096-4, pp 213, 215. [155] Text (http:/ / www. gutenberg. org/ etext/ 25929) at Project Gutenberg; Facsimile (http:/ / www. folger. edu/ eduPrimSrcDtl. cfm?psid=83) at Folger Shakespeare Library [156] Text (http:/ / www. gutenberg. org/ etext/ 17008) at Project Gutenberg [157] Stewart, pp 140, 142. [158] John Chamberlain recorded: "It was verily thought that the disease was no other than the ordinary ague that had reigned and raged all over England". Alan Stewart writes: "Latter day experts have suggested enteric fever, typhoid fever, or porphyria, but at the time poison was the most popular explanation." Stewart, p 248. [159] Barroll, p 27; Willson, p 452. [160] Croft, p 55; Stewart, p 142; Sophia was buried at King Henry's Chapel in a tiny tomb shaped like a cradle. Willson, p 456.
150
References
Akrigg, G. P. V. (ed.) (1984). Letters of King James VI & I. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California. ISBN 0-520-04707-9. Barroll, J. Leeds (2001). Anna of Denmark, Queen of England: A Cultural Biography. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania. ISBN 0-8122-3574-6. Bucholz, Robert; Key, Newton (2004). Early Modern England, 14851714: A Narrative History. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-21393-7. Croft, Pauline (2003). King James. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-61395-3. Davies, Godfrey ([1937] 1959). The Early Stuarts. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 0-19-821704-8. Donaldson, Gordon (1974). Mary, Queen of Scots. London: English Universities Press. ISBN 0-340-12383-4. Guy, John (2004). My Heart is My Own: The Life of Mary Queen of Scots. London and New York: Fourth Estate. ISBN 1-84115-752-X. Hunter, James (2000). Last of the Free: A History of the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. Edinburgh: Mainstream. ISBN 1-84018-376-4. Keay, J.; Keay, J. (1994). Collins Encyclopaedia of Scotland. London. HarperCollins. ISBN 0-00-255082-2.
James I of England Krugler, John D. (2004). English and Catholic: the Lords Baltimore in the Seventeenth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-7963-9. Lee, Maurice (1990). Great Britain's Solomon: James VI and I in his Three Kingdoms. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. ISBN 0-252-01686-6. Lindley, David (1993). The Trials of Frances Howard: Fact and Fiction at the Court of King James. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-05206-8. MacKinnon, Kenneth (1991) Gaelic A past and Future Prospect. Edinburgh: The Saltire Society. ISBN 0-85411-047-X. Milling, Jane (2004). "The Development of a Professional Theatre", in The Cambridge History of British Theatre. Milling, Jane; Thomson, Peter; Donohue, Joseph W. (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-65040-2. Peck, Linda Levy (1982). Northampton: Patronage and Policy at the Court of James I. Harper Collins. ISBN 0-04-942177-8. Perry, Curtis (2006). Literature and Favoritism in Early Modern England. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-85405-9. Rhodes, Neil; Richards, Jennifer; Marshall, Joseph (2003). King James VI and I: Selected Writings. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 0-7546-0482-9. Rotary Club of Stornoway (1995). The Outer Hebrides Handbook and Guide. Machynlleth: Kittwake. ISBN 0-9511003-5-1. Smith, David L. (2003). "Politics in Early Stuart Britain," in A Companion to Stuart Britain. Coward, Barry (ed). Blackwell Publishing. ISBN 0-631-21874-2. Stewart, Alan (2003). The Cradle King: A Life of James VI & I. London: Chatto and Windus. ISBN 0-7011-6984-2. Stroud, Angus (1999). Stuart England. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-20652-9. Thompson, Francis (1968). Harris and Lewis, Outer Hebrides. Newton Abbot: David & Charles. ISBN 0-7153-4260-6. Williams, Ethel Carleton (1970). Anne of Denmark. London: Longman. ISBN 0-582-12783-1. Willson, David Harris ([1956] 1963). King James VI & I. London: Jonathan Cape Ltd. ISBN 0-224-60572-0.
151
Further reading
Akrigg, G. P. V. (1978). Jacobean Pageant: The Court of King James I. New York: Atheneum. ISBN 0-689-70003-2. Fraser, Antonia (1974). King James VI of Scotland, I of England. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. ISBN 0-297-76775-5. Houston, S. J. (1974). James I. Longman. ISBN 0-582-35208-8. Lockyer, Roger (1998). James VI and I. Longman. ISBN 0-582-27961-5.
External links
Works available online: by James VI and I (http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator:"James+I,+ King+of+England,+1566-1625"); about James VI and I (http://www.archive.org/search. php?query=subject:"James I, King of England, 1566-1625") Works by or about James I of England (http://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n80-35841) in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
Charles I of England
152
Charles I of England
Charles I
Portrait by Anthony van Dyck, 1636 Portrait by Anthony van Dyck, 1636 King of England and Ireland (more...) Reign Coronation 27 March 1625 30 January 1649 2 February 1626
Predecessor James I Successor Charles II (de jure) Council of State (de facto) King of Scots (more...) Reign Coronation 27 March 1625 30 January 1649 18 June 1633
Predecessor James VI Successor Spouse Issue Charles II Mary, Princess Royal and Princess of Orange James II & VII Elizabeth Anne Henry, Duke of Gloucester Henrietta, Duchess of Orlans House Father Mother Born House of Stuart James VI of Scotland and I of England Anne of Denmark 19 November 1600 (N.S.: 29 November 1600) Dunfermline Palace, Dunfermline, Scotland 30 January 1649 (aged48) (N.S.: 9 February 1649) Whitehall, England 7 February 1649 Windsor, England Charles II Henrietta Maria of France
Died
Burial
Charles I (19 November 1600 30 January 1649) was King of England, King of Scotland, and King of Ireland from 27 March 1625 until his execution in 1649.[1] Charles engaged in a struggle for power with the Parliament of England, attempting to obtain royal revenue whilst Parliament sought to curb his Royal prerogative which Charles believed was divinely ordained. Many of his English subjects opposed his actions, in particular his interference in the English and Scottish Churches and the levying of taxes without parliamentary consent which grew to be seen as those of a tyrannical absolute monarch.[2]
Charles I of England Religious conflicts permeated Charles's reign. His failure to successfully aid Protestant forces during the Thirty Years' War, coupled with such actions as marrying a Catholic princess,[3] [4] generated deep mistrust concerning the king's dogma. Charles further allied himself with controversial religious figures, such as the ecclesiastic Richard Montagu, and William Laud, whom Charles appointed Archbishop of Canterbury. Many of Charles' subjects felt this brought the Church of England too close to the Catholic Church. Charles' later attempts to force religious reforms upon Scotland led to the Bishops' Wars, strengthened the position of the English and Scottish Parliaments and helped precipitate the king's downfall. Charles' last years were marked by the English Civil War, in which he fought the forces of the English and Scottish Parliaments, which challenged the king's attempts to overrule and negate Parliamentary authority, whilst simultaneously using his position as head of the English Church to pursue religious policies which generated the antipathy of reformed groups such as the Puritans. Charles was defeated in the First Civil War (164245), after which Parliament expected him to accept its demands for a constitutional monarchy. He instead remained defiant by attempting to forge an alliance with Scotland and escaping to the Isle of Wight. This provoked the Second Civil War (164849) and a second defeat for Charles, who was subsequently captured, tried, convicted, and executed for high treason. The monarchy was then abolished and a republic called the Commonwealth of England, also referred to as the Cromwellian Interregnum, was declared. Charles' son, Charles II, though he became king at the death of his father, did not take up the reins of government until the restoration of the monarchy in 1660.[2] In that same year, Charles I was canonised as Saint Charles Stuart and King Charles the Martyr by the Church of England and is venerated throughout the Anglican Communion.[5]
153
Early life
The second son of JamesVI of Scotland and Anne of Denmark, Charles was born in Dunfermline Palace, Fife on 19 November 1600.[2] [6] His paternal grandmother was Mary, Queen of Scots. Charles was baptised on 2December 1600 by the Bishop of Ross, in a ceremony held in Holyrood Abbey and was created Duke of Albany, Marquess of Ormond, Earl of Ross and Lord Ardmannoch.[7] Charles was a weak and sickly infant. When ElizabethI of England died in March 1603 and JamesVI of Scotland became King of England as JamesI, Charles was not considered strong enough to survive the journey to London due to his fragile health. While his parents and older siblings left for England in April and May that year, Charles remained in Scotland, with his father's friend and the Lord President of the Court of Session, Alexander Seton, Lord Fyvie, appointed as his guardian.[7] By the spring of 1604, Charles was three and a half and was by then able to walk the length of the great hall at Dunfermline Palace unaided. It was decided that he was now strong enough to make the journey to England to be reunited with his family, and on 13July 1604 Charles left Dunfermline for England, where he was to spend most of the rest of his life.[8] In England, Charles was placed under the charge of Alletta (Hogenhove) Carey, the Dutch-born wife of courtier Sir Robert Carey, who taught him how to walk and talk, and insisted that he wear boots made of Spanish leather and brass to help strengthen his weak ankles.[9] However, Charles apparently eventually conquered his physical infirmity,[10] which may be attributable to rickets[9] and grew to an about-average height of 5feet 4inches (162.56cm).
Charles I of England
154
Charles was not as valued as his physically stronger, elder brother, Henry, Prince of Wales; whom Charles personally adored and attempted to emulate.[11] In 1605, Charles was created Duke of York, which is customary in the case of the sovereign's second son. However, when Henry died of suspected typhoid (or possibly porphyria)[12] at the age of 18 in 1612, two weeks before Charles' 12th birthday, Charles became heir apparent. As the eldest living son of the sovereign Charles automatically gained several titles (including Duke of Cornwall[13] and Duke of Rothesay), and subsequently was created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester in November 1616.[14]
In 1613, his sister Elizabeth married FrederickV, Elector Palatine and moved to Heidelberg.[15] In 1617 the Catholic FerdinandII was elected king of Bohemia. The following year, the people of Bohemia rebelled against their monarch, choosing to crown FrederickV of the Palatinate, and leader of the Protestant Union in his stead. Frederick's acceptance of the crown in November 1619 thus marked the beginning of turmoil which would develop into the Thirty Years' War. This conflict made a great impression upon the English Parliament and public, who quickly grew to see it as a polarised continental struggle between Catholic and Protestant.[16] James, who was supportive of Frederick, and had been seeking marriage between the new Prince of Wales and the Spanish Infanta, Maria Anna of Spain, since Prince Henry's death,[15] began to see the Spanish Match as a possible means of achieving peace in Europe.
Unfortunately for James, this diplomatic negotiation with Spain proved generally unpopular, both with the public and James' court,[17] with 'Arminian' divines providing a unique source of support for the proposed union.[18] Parliament was actively hostile towards the Spanish throne, and thus, when called by James, hoped for a crusade under the leadership of the king[19] to rescue Protestants on the continent from Habsburg rule.[20] Attacks upon the monopolists by Parliament for the abuse of prices led to the scapegoating of Francis Bacon by George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham,[21] leading to Bacon's impeachment before the Lords; the first of its kind which was not officially sanctioned by the King in the form of a Bill of attainder since 1459. The incident set an important precedent in terms of the apparent authority of Parliament to safeguard the nation's interests and its capacity to launch legal campaigns, as it later did against Buckingham, Archbishop Laud, the Earl of Strafford and CharlesI. However, parliament and James came to blows when the issue of foreign policy was discussed, with James insisting that the Commons be exclusively concerned with domestic affairs. The members of the Commons, meanwhile, protested that they had the privilege of free speech within the Commons' walls.[22] In January 1622 James dissolved the Parliament.[23] Charles, and the Duke of Buckingham, James' favourite[24] and a man who had great influence over the prince, together travelled incognito to Spain in 1623 in an attempt to reach agreement on the long-pending Spanish Match.[25] The trip ended as an embarrassing failure however as the Spanish demanded that Charles must convert to Roman Catholicism and remain in Spain for a year after the wedding as hostage to ensure England's compliance with
Charles I of England all the terms of the treaty. Moreover, a personal quarrel erupted between Buckingham and the Spanish nation between whom was mutual misunderstanding and ill temper.[26] Charles was outraged, and upon their return in October, he and Buckingham demanded that King James declare war on Spain.[25] With the encouragement of his Protestant advisers, James summoned Parliament in 1624 so that he could request subsidies for a war.[27] At the behest of Charles and Buckingham, James assented to the impeachment of the Lord Treasurer, Lionel Cranfield, 1stEarl of Middlesex by the House of Commons, who quickly fell in much the same manner as Bacon had.[27] James also requested that Parliament sanction the marriage between the Prince of Wales and Princess Henrietta Maria of France,[28] whom Charles had met in Paris while en route to Spain.[29] It was a good match since she was a sister of LouisXIII[30] (their father, HenryIV, had died during her childhood). Parliament reluctantly agreed to the marriage,[30] with the promise from both James and Charles that the marriage would not entail a liberty of religion being accorded to any Roman Catholic not of the Princess' own household.[30] By 1624, James was growing sick, and as a result was finding it extremely difficult to control Parliament. By the time of his death, February 1625, Charles and the Duke of Buckingham had already achieved de facto control of the kingdom.[31] Both Charles and James were advocates of the divine right of kings, but whilst James' lofty ambitions concerning absolute prerogative[32] were tempered by compromise and consensus with his subjects, CharlesI believed that he had no need of Parliamentary approval, that his foreign ambitions (which were greatly expensive and fluctuated wildly) should have no legal impediment, and that he was himself above reproach. Charles believed he had no need to compromise or even explain his actions and that he was answerable only to God, famously stating: "Kings are not bound to give an account of their actions but to God alone".[33] [34]
155
Early reign
On 11 May 1625, Charles was married by proxy to Henrietta Maria in front of the doors of the Notre Dame de Paris,[35] before his first Parliament could meet to forbid the banns.[35] Many members were opposed to the king marrying a Roman Catholic, fearing that Charles would lift restrictions on Roman Catholics and undermine the official establishment of Protestantism. Although he stated to Parliament that he would not relax restrictions relating to recusants, he promised to do exactly that in a secret marriage treaty with Louis XIII of France.[36] Moreover, the price of marriage with the French princess was a promise of English aid for the French crown in the suppressing of the Protestant Huguenots at La Rochelle, thereby reversing England's long held position in the French Wars of Religion. The couple were married in person on 13 June 1625 in Canterbury. Charles was crowned on 2 February 1626 at Westminster Abbey, but without his wife at his side due to the controversy. Charles and Henrietta had seven children, with three sons and three daughters surviving infancy.[37] Distrust of Charles' religious policies increased with his support of a controversial ecclesiastic, Richard Montagu. In his pamphlets A New Gag for an Old Goose, a reply to the Catholic pamphlet A New Gag for the new Gospel, and also his Immediate Addresse unto God alone, Montagu argued against Calvinist predestination, thereby bringing himself into disrepute amongst the Puritans.[38] After a Puritan member of the House of Commons, John Pym, attacked Montagu's pamphlet during debate, Montagu requested the king's aid in another pamphlet entitled "Appello Caesarem"(1625), (a reference to an appeal against Jewish persecution made by Saint Paul the Apostle).[39] Charles made the cleric one of his royal chaplains, increasing many Puritans' suspicions as to where Charles would lead the Church, fearing that his favouring of Arminianism was a clandestine attempt on Charles' part to aid the resurgence of Catholicism within the English Church.[40]
Charles I of England Charles' primary concern during his early reign was foreign policy. The Thirty Years' War, originally confined to Bohemia, was spiralling into a wider European war. In 1620 Frederick V was defeated at the Battle of White Mountain[41] and by 1622, despite the aid of English volunteers, had lost his hereditary lands in the Palatinate to the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II.[42] Having agreed to help his brother-in-law regain the Palatinate, Charles declared war on Spain, which under the Catholic King Philip IV had sent forces to help occupy the Palatinate.[43] Parliament preferred an inexpensive naval attack on Spanish colonies in the New World, hoping that the capture of the Spanish treasure fleets could finance the war. Charles, however, preferred more aggressive (and more expensive) action on the Continent.[44] Parliament only voted to grant a subsidy of 140,000; an insufficient sum for Charles.[45] Moreover, the House of Commons limited its authorisation for royal collection of tonnage and poundage (two varieties of customs duties) to a period of one year, although previous sovereigns since 1414 had been granted the right for life.[45] In this manner, Parliament could keep a check on expenditures by forcing Charles to seek the renewal of the grant each year. Charles' allies in the House of Lords, led by the Duke of Buckingham, refused to pass the bill. Although no Parliamentary Act for the levy of tonnage and poundage was obtained, Charles continued to collect the duties.[46] The war with Spain under the leadership of Buckingham went badly, and the House of Commons began proceedings for the impeachment of the duke.[47] Charles nominated Buckingham as Chancellor of Cambridge University in response[48] and on 12 June 1626, the House of Commons launched a direct protestation, stating, 'We protest before your Majesty and the whole world that until this great person be removed from intermeddling with the great affairs of state, we are out of hope of any good success; and we do fear that any money we shall or can give will, through his misemployment, be turned rather to the hurt and prejudice of your kingdom.'[48] Despite Parliament's protests, however, Charles refused to dismiss his friend, dismissing Parliament instead. Charles provoked further unrest by trying to raise money for the war through a "forced loan": a tax levied without Parliamentary consent. In November 1627, the test case in the King's bench, the 'Five Knights' Case' which hinged on the king's prerogative right to imprison without trial those who refused to pay the forced load was on a general basis, upheld.[49] Summoned again in 1628, Parliament adopted a Petition of Right on 26 May, calling upon the king to acknowledge that he could not levy taxes without Parliament's consent, impose martial law on civilians, imprison them without due process, or quarter troops in their homes.[50] Charles assented to the petition,[51] though he continued to claim the right to collect customs duties without authorisation from Parliament. Despite Charles' agreement to suppress La Rochelle as a condition of marrying Henrietta Maria, Charles reneged upon his earlier promise and instead launched a poorly conceived and executed defence of the fortress under the leadership of Buckingham in 1628[52] thereby driving a wedge between the English and French Crowns that was not surmounted for the duration of the Thirty Years' War.[53] Buckingham's failure to protect the Huguenots indeed, his attempt to capture Saint-Martin-de-R then spurred Louis XIII's attack on the Huguenot fortress of La Rochelle[54] furthered Parliament's detestation of the Duke and the king's close proximity to this eminence grise. On 23 August 1628, Buckingham was assassinated.[55] The public rejoicing at his death accentuated the gulf between the court and the nation, and between the crown and the Commons.[56] Although the death of Buckingham effectively ended the war with Spain and eliminated his leadership as an issue, it did not end the conflicts between Charles and Parliament over taxation and religious matters.[57] [58]
156
Charles I of England
157
Personal rule
In January 1629, Charles opened the second session of the Parliament, which had been prorogued in June 1628, with a moderate speech on the tonnage and poundage issue. Members of the House of Commons began to voice their opposition in light of the Rolle case, in which the eponymous MP had had his goods confiscated for failing to pay tonnage and poundage. Many MPs viewed the confiscation as a breach of the Petition of Right,[59] arguing that the petition's freedom-from-arrest privilege extended to goods. When Charles ordered a parliamentary adjournment on 10 March, members held the Speaker, Sir John Finch, down in his chair so that the dissolving of Charles I, King of England, from Three Angles, Parliament could be delayed long enough for resolutions against the Triple Portrait by Anthony van Dyck. Catholicism, Arminianism and poundage and tonnage to be read out.[60] The lattermost resolution declared that anyone who paid tonnage or poundage not authorised by Parliament would "be reputed a betrayer of the liberties of England, and an enemy to the same", and, although the resolution was not formally passed, many members declared their approval. Nevertheless, the provocation was too much for Charles, who dissolved parliament the same day.[61] Moreover, eight parliamentary leaders, including John Eliot, were imprisoned on the foot of the matter,[62] thereby turning these men into martyrs, and giving popular cause to a protest that had hitherto been losing its bearings. Shortly after the proroguing of Parliament, without the means in the foreseeable future to raise funds for a European War from Parliament,[63] or the influence of Buckingham, Charles made peace with France and Spain.[64] The following eleven years, during which Charles ruled without a Parliament, are referred to as the Personal Rule or the Eleven Years' Tyranny.[65] (Ruling without Parliament, though an exceptional exercise of the royal prerogative, was supported by precedent. By the middle of the 17th century, opinion shifted, and many held the Personal Rule to be an illegitimate exercise of arbitrary, absolute power.)
Economic problems
The reigns of Elizabeth I and James I had generated a large fiscal deficit for the kingdom.[66] Notwithstanding the failure of Buckingham in the short lived campaigns against both Spain and France, there was in reality little economic capacity for Charles to wage wars overseas. England was still the least taxed country in Europe, with no official excise and no regular direct taxation.[67] Without the consent of Parliament, Charles' capacity to acquire funds for his treasury was theoretically hamstrung, legally at least. To raise revenue without reconvening Parliament, Charles first resurrected an all-but-forgotten law called the "Distraint of Knighthood", promulgated in 1279, which required anyone who earned 40 or more each year to present himself at the King's coronation to join the royal army as a knight.[68] Relying on this old statute, Charles fined all individuals who had failed to attend his coronation in 1626.
Shilling of Charles I
Later, Charles reintroduced obsolete feudal taxes such as purveyance, wardship, and forest laws.[69] Chief among these taxes was one known as Ship Money,[69] which proved even more unpopular, and lucrative, than poundage and tonnage before it. Under statutes of Edward I and Edward III, collection of ship money had been authorised only
Charles I of England during wars, and only on coastal regions. Charles, however, argued that there was no legal bar to collecting the tax during peacetime and throughout the whole of the kingdom. Ship Money provided between 150,000 to 200,000 annually between 16341638, after which yields declined steeply.[70] This was paid directly to Treasury of the Navy, thus making Northumberland the most direct beneficiary of the tax.[71] Opposition to Ship Money steadily grew, with John Hampden's legal challenge in 1637 providing a platform of popular protest.[70] However, the royal courts declared that the tax was within the King's prerogative. The king also derived money through the granting of monopolies, despite a statute forbidding such action (The Monopolies Act, 1624), which, though inefficient, raised an estimated 100,000 a year in the late 1630s in royal revenue.[72] Charles also gained funds through the Scottish nobility, at the price of considerable acrimony, by the Act of Revocation (1625), whereby all gifts of royal or church land made to the nobility were revoked, with continued ownership being subject to an annual rent.[73]
158
Religious conflicts
Throughout Charles's reign, the issue of how far the English Reformation should progress was constantly brought to the forefront of political debate. Arminian theology contained an emphasis on clerical authority and the individual's capacity to reject salvation, and was consequently viewed as heretical and a potential vehicle for the reintroduction of Roman Catholicism by its opponents. Charles's sympathy to the teachings of Arminianism, and specifically his wish to move the Church of England away from Calvinism in a more traditional and sacramental direction,[74] consistently affirmed Puritans' suspicions concerning the perceived irreligious tendencies of the crown. A long history of opposition to tyrants who oppressed Protestants had developed since the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, most notably during the French Wars of Religion (articulated in the Vindiciae contra tyrannos),[75] [76] and more recently in the Second Defenestration of Prague and eruption of the Thirty Years' War.[77] Such cultural identifications resonated with Charles's subjects. These allegations would haunt Charles because of the continued exacerbating actions of both king and council, particularly in the form of Archbishop William Laud. William Laud was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633,[78] [79] and began a series of unpopular reforms such as attempting to ensure religious uniformity by dismissing non-conformist clergymen, and closing Puritan organisations.[80] His policy was opposed to Calvinist theology, and he insisted that the Church of England's liturgy be celebrated using the form prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer, and that the internal architecture of English churches be reorganised so as to emphasise the sacrament of the altar, thereby attacking predestination.[81] To punish those who refused to accept his reforms, Laud used the two most feared and most arbitrary courts in the land, the Court of High Commission and the Court of Star Chamber.[80] The former could compel individuals to provide self-incriminating testimony, whilst the latter, essentially an extension of the Privy Council, could inflict any punishment whatsoever (including torture), with the sole exception of death.
Charles I of England
159 The first years of the Personal Rule were marked by peace in England, partly because of tighter central control. Several individuals opposed Charles's taxes and Laud's policies, and some left as a result, such as the Puritan minister Thomas Hooker, who set sail for America along with other religious dissidents in the Griffin (1634). By 1633 Star Chamber had, in effect, taken the place of High Commission as the supreme tribunal for religious offences as well as dealing with Crown cases of a secular nature.[82] Under Charles's reign, defendants were regularly brought before the Court without indictment, due process of the law, or right to confront witnesses, and their testimonies were routinely extracted by the Court through torture.
However, when Charles attempted to impose his religious policies in Scotland he faced numerous difficulties. Although born in Scotland, Charles had become estranged from his kingdom; not even paying visit until his Scottish coronation in 1633.[83] In 1637 the king ordered the use of a new Prayer Book to be used within Scotland that was almost identical to the English Book of Common Prayer, without consultation with either the Scottish Parliament or Kirk.[83] Although this move was supported by the Scottish Bishops,[84] it was resisted by many Presbyterian Scots, who saw the new Prayer Book as a vehicle for introducing Anglicanism to Scotland.[85] In 1637, spontaneous unrest erupted throughout the Kirk upon the first Sunday of its usage, and the public began to mobilise around rebellious nobles in the form of the National Covenant.[84] When the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland abolished Episcopalian government (that is, governance of the Church by bishops) in 1638, replacing it with Presbyterian government (that is, governance by elders and deacons),[86] Charles sought to put down what he saw as a rebellion against his authority.
William Laud shared Charles's views on Calvinism
In 1639, when the First Bishops' War broke out, Charles did not seek subsidies to wage war, but instead raised an army without Parliamentary aid.[71] However, Charles's army did not engage the Covenanters as the king was afraid of the defeat of his forces, whom he believed to be significantly outnumbered by the Scots.[87] In the Pacification of Berwick, Charles regained custody of his Scottish fortresses, and secured the dissolution of the Covenanters' interim government, albeit at the decisive concession whereby both the Scottish Parliament and General Assembly of the Scottish Church were called.[88] Charles's military failure in the First Bishops' War in turn caused a financial and military crisis for Charles, which ultimately ended the period of Personal Rule.[89] Charles's peace negotiations with the Scots were merely a bid by the king to gain time before launching a new military campaign. However, because of his financial weakness, Charles was forced to call Parliament into session by 1640 in an attempt to raise funds for such a venture. The risk for the king lay in the forum that Parliament would provide to his opponents, whilst the intransigence of the 1628 Parliament augured badly for the prospects of obtaining the necessary subsidy for war.
Charles I of England
160
By this stage Thomas Wentworth, created Earl of Strafford and elevated to Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in January 1640,[96] had emerged as Charles' right hand man and together with Laud, pursued a policy of 'Thorough' in support of absolute monarchy.[97] Although originally a major critic of the king, Strafford defected to royal service in 1628 (due in part to Buckingham's persuasion),[98] and had since emerged as the most capable of Charles' ministers. Having trained up a large army in Ireland in support of the king and seriously weakened the authority of the Irish Parliament, particularly those members of parliament belonging to the Old English,[99] Strafford had been instrumental in obtaining an independent source of both royal revenue and forces within the three kingdoms.[71] As the Scottish Parliament declared itself capable of governing without the king's consent and, in September 1640, moved into Northumberland Portrait of Charles I with Seignior de under the leadership of Montrose,[100] Strafford was sent north to command the St Antoine English forces following Northumberland's illness.[101] The Scottish soldiery, many of whom were veterans of the Thirty Years' War,[102] had far greater morale and training compared to their English counterparts, and met virtually no resistance until reaching Newcastle where, at the Battle of Newburn, Newcastle-upon-Tyne and hence England's coal supply fell into the hands of the Covenanter forces.[103] At this critical juncture, the English host based at York was unable to mount a counterattack because Strafford was incapacitated by a combination of gout and dysentery.[101] On 24 September Charles took the unusual step of summoning the magnum concilium, the ancient council of all the Peers of the Realm, who were considered the King's hereditary counsellors, who recommended making peace with the Scots and the recalling of Parliament.[104] A cessation of arms, although not a final settlement, was agreed in the humiliating Treaty of Ripon, signed October 1640.[105] The treaty stated that the Scots would continue to occupy Northumberland and Durham and be paid 850 per day, until peace was restored and the English Parliament recalled (which would be required to raise sufficient funds to pay the Scottish forces).[104] Consequently, in November Charles summoned what was later to become known as the Long Parliament. Of the 493 MPs of the Commons, 399 were opposed to the king, and only 94 could be counted on, by Charles, for support.
Charles I of England 21 April, in the Commons the Bill went virtually unopposed (204 in favour, 59 opposed, and 250 abstained),[113] the Lords acquiesced, and Charles, fearing for the safety of his family, signed on 10 May.[113] The Earl of Strafford was beheaded two days later.[114] In May 1641, Charles assented to an unprecedented act, which forbade the dissolution of the English Parliament without Parliament's consent.[115] Ship money, fines in destraint of knighthood and forced loans were declared unlawful, monopolies were cut back severely, and the Courts of Star Chamber and High Commission were abolished.[116] All remaining forms of taxation were legalised and regulated by the Tonnage and Poundage Act.[117] On 3 May, Parliament decreed The Protestation, attacking the 'wicked counsels' of Charles' government, whereby those who signed the petition undertook to defend 'the true reformed religion', parliament, and the king's person, honour and estate. Throughout May, the House of Commons launched several bills attacking bishops and episcopalianism in general, each time defeated in the Lords.[118] Although he made several important concessions, Charles improved his own military position by securing the favour of the Scots that summer by promising the official establishment of Presbyterianism. In return, he was able to enlist considerable anti-parliamentary support.[119] However, following the attempted coup of 'The Incident' in Scotland, Charles' credibility was significantly undermined.[120]
161
Charles I of England
162
The English Parliament did not trust Charles' motivations when he called for funds to put down the Irish rebellion, many members of the House of Commons fearing that forces raised by Charles might later be used against Parliament itself. The Militia Bill was intended to wrest control of the army from the King, but it did not have the support of the Lords, let alone the king.[135] Indeed, the Militia Ordinance appears to have been the single most decisive moment in prompting an exodus from the Upper House to support Charles.[136] In an attempt to strengthen his position, Charles generated great antipathy in London, which was already fast falling into anarchy, when he placed the Tower of London under the command of Colonel Thomas Lunsford, an infamous, albeit efficient, career officer.[137] When rumours reached Charles that Parliament intended to impeach his Catholic Queen, Henrietta Maria,[138] the king decided to take drastic action which would not only end the diplomatic stalemate between himself and Parliament, but signal the beginning of the civil war.
Charles suspected, correctly, that there were members of the English Parliament who had colluded with the invading Scots.[129] On 3 January, Charles directed Parliament to give up six members on the grounds of High Treason. When Parliament refused, it was possibly Henrietta who persuaded Charles to arrest the five members by force, which Charles intended to carry out personally.[129] However, news of the warrant reached Parliament ahead of him, and the wanted men Pym, John Hampden, Denzil Holles, William Strode and Sir Arthur Haselrig slipped away shortly before Charles entered the House of Commons with an armed guard on 4 January 1642.[139] Having displaced the Speaker, William Lenthall from his chair, the king asked him where the MPs had fled. Lenthall famously replied, "May it please your Majesty, I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place but as the House is pleased to direct me, whose servant I am here."[140] Charles abjectly declared 'all my birds have flown', and was forced to retire, empty-handed.[139] The botched arrest attempt was politically disastrous for Charles. In one stroke Charles destroyed his supporters' arguments that the king was the only bulwark against a rising tide of innovation and disorder.[141] No English sovereign ever had (or has since that time) entered the House of Commons by force.[142] Parliament quickly seized London, and on 10 January 1642, Charles was forced to leave the capital, where he began travelling north to raise an army against his Parliament.[143]
Charles I of England He was then transferred first to Oatlands and then Hampton Court, where more involved but fruitless negotiations took place. He was persuaded that it would be in his best interests to escapeperhaps abroad, to France, or to the custody of Colonel Robert Hammond, Parliamentary Governor of the Isle of Wight.[147] He decided on the last course, believing Hammond to be sympathetic, and fled on 11 November.[148] Hammond, however, was opposed to Charles, whom he confined in Carisbrooke Castle.[149] From Carisbrooke, Charles continued to try to bargain with the various parties. In direct contrast to his previous conflict with the Scottish Kirk, Charles on 26 Dec. 1647 signed a secret treaty with the Scots. Under the agreement, called the "Engagement", the Scots undertook to invade England on Charles' behalf and restore him to the throne on condition of the establishment of Presbyterianism for three years.[142] The Royalists rose in July 1648, igniting the Second Civil War, and as agreed with Charles, the Scots invaded England. Most of the uprisings in England were put down by forces loyal to Parliament after little more than skirmishes, but uprisings in Kent, Essex, and Cumberland, the rebellion in Wales, and the Scottish invasion involved the fighting of pitched battles and prolonged sieges. But with the defeat of the Scots at the Battle of Preston, the Royalists lost any chance of winning the war.
163
Trial
Charles was moved to Hurst Castle at the end of 1648, and thereafter to Windsor Castle. In January 1649, in response to Charles' defiance of Parliament even after defeat, and his encouraging the second Civil War while in captivity, the House of Commons passed an Act of Parliament creating a court for Charles' trial. After the first Civil War, the parliamentarians accepted the premise that the king, although wrong, had been able to justify his fight, and that he would still be entitled to limited powers as King under a new constitutional settlement. It was now felt that by provoking the second Civil War even while defeated and in captivity, Charles showed himself responsible for unjustifiable bloodshed. The secret treaty with the Scots was considered particularly unpardonable; "a more prodigious treason", said Cromwell, "than any that had been perfected before; because the former quarrel was that Englishmen might rule over one another; this to vassalise us to a foreign nation."[142] Cromwell had up to this point supported negotiations with the king, but now rejected further diplomacy.[142]
The idea of trying a king was a novel one; previous monarchs (Edward II, Richard II and Henry VI) had been overthrown and murdered by their successors, but had never been brought to trial as monarchs. Charles was accused of treason against England by using his power to pursue his personal interest rather than the good of England.[150] The charge against Charles I stated that the king, "for accomplishment of such his designs, and for the protecting of himself and his adherents in his and their wicked practices, to the same ends hath traitorously and maliciously levied war against the present Parliament, and the people therein represented...", that the "wicked designs, wars, and evil practices of him, the said Charles Stuart, have been, and are carried on for the advancement and upholding of a personal interest of will, power, and pretended prerogative to himself and his family, against the public interest, common right, liberty, justice, and peace of the people of this nation."[150] Estimated deaths from the first two English civil wars has been reported as 84,830 killed with estimates of another 100,000 dying from war-related disease;[151] this was in 1650 out of a population of only 5.1million, or 3.6% of the population.[152] The indictment against the king therefore held him "guilty of all the treasons, murders, rapines, burnings, spoils, desolations, damages and mischiefs to this nation, acted and committed in the said wars, or occasioned thereby."[150]
Charles I of England The High Court of Justice established by the Act consisted of 135 Commissioners but only 68 ever sat in judgement (all firm Parliamentarians); the prosecution was led by Solicitor General John Cooke. Charles' trial on charges of high treason and "other high crimes" began on 20 January 1649, but Charles refused to enter a plea, claiming that no court had jurisdiction over a monarch.[153] He believed that his own authority to rule had been given to him by God and by the traditions and laws of England when he was crowned and anointed, and that the power wielded by those trying him was simply that of force of arms. Charles insisted that the trial was illegal, explaining, "Then for the law of this land, I am no less confident, that no learned lawyer will affirm that an impeachment can lie against the King, they all going in his name: and one of their maxims is, that the King can do no wrong."[154] When urged to enter a plea, he stated his objection with the words: "I would know by what power I am called hither, by what lawful authority...?"[153] The court, by contrast, proposed an interpretation of the law that legitimised the trial, which was founded on "...the fundamental proposition that the King of England was not a person, but an office whose every occupant was entrusted with a limited power to govern 'by and according to the laws of the land and not otherwise'."[155] Over a period of a week, when Charles was asked to plead three times, he refused. It was then normal practice to take a refusal to plead as pro confesso: an admission of guilt, which meant that the prosecution could not call witnesses to its case. However, the trial did hear witnesses. The King was declared guilty at a public session on Saturday 27 January 1649 and sentenced to death. Fifty-nine of the Commissioners signed Charles' death warrant. After the ruling, he was led from St. James's Palace, where he was confined, to the Palace of Whitehall, where an execution scaffold had been erected in front of the Banqueting House.
164
Execution
Charles Stuart, as his death warrant states, was beheaded on Tuesday, 30 January 1649. Before the execution it was reported that he wore two shirts to prevent the cold weather causing any noticeable shivers that the crowd could have mistaken for fear or weakness.[2] The execution took place at Whitehall on a scaffold in front of the Banqueting House. Charles was separated from the people by large ranks of soldiers, and his last speech reached only those with him on the scaffold. He declared that he had desired the liberty and freedom of the people as much as any, "but I must tell you that their liberty and freedom consists in having government.... It is not their having a share in the government; that is nothing appertaining unto them. A subject and a sovereign are clean different things."[142]
Charles put his head on the block after saying a prayer and signalled the executioner when he was ready; he was then beheaded with one clean stroke. His last words were, "I shall go from a corruptible to an incorruptible Crown, where no disturbance can be."[2] Philip Henry records that moments after the execution, a moan was heard from the assembled crowd, some of whom then dipped their handkerchiefs in his blood, thus starting the cult of the Martyr King; however, no other eyewitness source, including Samuel Pepys, records this. Henry's account was written during the Restoration, some 12 years after the event though Henry was 19 when the King was executed and he and his family were Royalist propaganda writers.[1] The executioner was masked, and there is some debate over his identity. It is known that the Commissioners approached Richard Brandon, the common Hangman of London, but that he refused, and contemporary sources do
Charles I of England not generally identify him as the King's headsman. Ellis's Historical Inquiries, however, names him as the executioner, contending that he stated so before dying. It is possible he relented and agreed to undertake the commission, but there are others who have been identified. An Irishman named Gunning is widely believed to have beheaded Charles, and a plaque naming him as the executioner is on show in the Kings Head pub in Galway, Ireland. William Hewlett was convicted of regicide after the Restoration.[156] In 1661, two people identified as "Dayborne and Bickerstaffe" were arrested but then discharged. Henry Walker, a revolutionary journalist, or his brother William, were suspected but never charged. Various local legends around England name local worthies. An examination performed in 1813 at Windsor suggests that the execution was carried out by an experienced headsman. It was common practice for the head of a traitor to be held up and exhibited to the crowd with the words "Behold the head of a traitor!" Although Charles' head was exhibited, the words were not used. In an unprecedented gesture, one of the revolutionary leaders, Oliver Cromwell, allowed the King's head to be sewn back onto his body so the family could pay its respects. Charles was buried in private on the night of 7 February 1649, inside the Henry VIII vault in St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. The royal retainers Sir Thomas Herbert, Capt. Anthony Mildmay, Sir Henry Firebrace, William Levett Esq. and Abraham Dowcett (sometimes spelled Dowsett) conveyed the King's body to Windsor.[157] [158] The King's son, King Charles II, later planned an elaborate royal mausoleum, but it was never built. Ten days after Charles' execution, a memoir purporting to be written by the king appeared for sale. This book, the Eikon Basilike (Greek: the "Royal Portrait"), contained an apologia for royal policies, and it proved an effective piece of royalist propaganda. William Levett, Charles' groom of the bedchamber, who accompanied Charles on the day of his execution, swore that he had personally witnessed the King writing the Eikon Basilike.[159] John Cooke published the speech he would have delivered if Charles had entered a plea, while Parliament commissioned John Milton to write a rejoinder, the Eikonoklastes ("The Iconoclast"), but the response made little headway against the pathos of the royalist book.[160] Following the death of the king, several works were written expressing the outrage of the people at such an act. The ability to execute a king, believed to be the spokesman of God, was a shock to the country. Several poems, such as Katherine Phillips' Upon the Double Murder of King Charles, express the depth of their outrage. In her poem, Phillips describes the "double murder" of the king; the execution of his life as well as the execution of his dignity. By killing a king, Phillips questioned the human race as a wholewhat they were capable of, and how low they would sink.[161]
165
Legacy
With the monarchy overthrown, and the Commonwealth of England declared, power was assumed by a Council of State, which included Lord Fairfax, then Lord General of the Parliamentary Army, and Oliver Cromwell. The final conflicts between Parliamentary forces and Royalists were decided in the Third English Civil War and Cromwellian conquest of Ireland, whereby all significant military opposition to the Parliament and New Model Army was extinguished. The Long Parliament (known by then as the Rump Parliament) which had been called by Charles I in 1640 continued to exist (with varying influence) until Cromwell forcibly disbanded it completely in 1653, thereby establishing The Protectorate. Cromwell then became Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland; a monarch in all but name: he was even 'invested' on the royal coronation chair. Upon his death in
The image of Charles being mocked by Cromwell's soldiers was used by French artist Hippolyte Delaroche in his 1836 painting, Charles I Insulted by Cromwell's Soldiers, rediscovered in 2009, as an allegory to the more recent similar events in France, felt to be still too recent to paint
Charles I of England 1658, Cromwell was briefly succeeded by his son, Richard Cromwell. Richard Cromwell was an ineffective ruler, and the Long Parliament was reinstated in 1659. The Long Parliament dissolved itself in 1660, and the first elections in twenty years led to the election of a Convention Parliament which restored Charles I's eldest son to the monarchy as Charles II. Following the Restoration, Oliver Cromwell was exhumed and posthumously beheaded. Republicanism thus had a brief tenure in British governance, but nevertheless, the monarchy never regained the heights of power it had experienced under the Tudors and early Stuarts. Moreover, continued fears concerning the accession of a Catholic heir, and consequent persecution of the Protestant Church (as under Mary I), or foreign intervention by the Habsburgs or French, meant that the right of succession was closely guarded. Ultimately, in the conflict between William III, and James II, it was William, the foreign usurper, who became the popular defender of Protestantism. Throughout the 19th century Parliament gradually assumed greater effective control of British government, whereby the king's prime minister became the de facto leader of the United Kingdom. The Colony of Carolina in North America, which later separated into North Carolina and South Carolina was named after Charles I, as was the major city of Charleston. To the north in the Virginia Colony, Cape Charles, Charles River Shire and the Charles City Shire were all likewise named after him, although the king personally named the Charles River.[162] Charles City Shire survives almost 400 years later as Charles City County, Virginia. The Virginia Colony is now the Commonwealth of Virginia and retains its official nickname of "The Old Dominion" bestowed by Charles II because it had remained loyal to Charles I during the English Civil War. English furniture produced during the reign of Charles I is distinctive and is commonly characterised as Charles I period.
166
Sainthood
Major shrine Church of King Charles the Martyr Feast Patronage 30 January Society of King Charles the Martyr, artists
During the reign of his son Charles II, Charles I was officially canonised by the Church of England as King Charles the Martyr and Saint Charles Stuart, the only saint to be officially canonised within the Anglican Communion. His feast day varies depending on local Anglican liturgical calendars. He is considered a martyr who died for the
Charles I of England preservation of Apostolic Succession in the Anglican Church. There are many societies dedicated to his devotion.
167
Assessments
Archbishop William Laud described Charles as "A mild and gracious prince who knew not how to be, or how to be made, great."[163] Ralph Dutton says: "In spite of his intelligence and cultivation, Charles was curiously inept in his contacts with human beings. Socially, he was tactless and diffident, and his manner was not helped by his stutter and thick Scottish accent, while in public he was seldom able to make a happy impression."[164]
Charles I of England
Royal styles of
19 November 1600 27 March 1625: Prince (or Lord) Charles 23 December 1600 27 March 1625: The Duke of Albany 6 January 1605 27 March 1625: The Duke of York 6 November 1612 27 March 1625: The Duke of Cornwall 4 November 1616 27 March 1625: The Prince of Wales 27 March 1625 30 January 1649: His Majesty The King
During his time as heir apparent, Charles held the titles of Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Duke of York, Duke of Albany, Marquess of Ormond, Earl of Carrick, Earl of Ross, Baron Renfrew, Lord Ardmannoch, Lord of the Isles, Prince and Great Steward of Scotland. The official style of Charles I was "Charles, by the Grace of God, King of England, France and Ireland, King of Scots, Defender of the Faith, etc." (The claim to France was only nominal, and was asserted by every English King from Edward III to George III, regardless of the amount of French territory actually controlled.) The authors of his death warrant, however, did not wish to use the religious portions of his title. It referred to him only as "Charles
168
Honours
KG: Knight of the Garter, 24 April 1611 27 March 1625
Arms
As Duke of York, Charles bore the arms of the kingdom, differenced by a label argent of three points, each bearing three torteaux gules. As Prince of Wales he bore the arms of the kingdom, differenced by a label argent of three points.[165] Whilst he was King, Charles I's arms were: Quarterly, I and IV Grandquarterly, Azure three fleurs-de-lis Or (for France) and Gules three lions passant guardant in pale Or (for England); II Or a lion rampant within a tressure flory-counter-flory Gules (for Scotland); III Azure a harp Or stringed Argent (for Ireland).
Charles I of England
169
Painting of Charles I's children. The future Charles II is depicted at centre, stroking the dog
Charles I of England
170
Name Charles James, Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay Charles II, King of England, Scotland and Ireland Mary, Princess Royal
Birth
Death
Notes
Married Catherine of Braganza (16381705) in 1663. No legitimate issue. Charles II is believed to have fathered such illegitimate children as James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth, who later rose against James VII and II.
24 December Married William II, Prince of Orange (16261650) in 1641. She had one child: William 1660 III of England 16 September Married (1) Anne Hyde (16371671) in 1659. Had issue including Mary II of England 1701 and Anne of England; Married (2) Mary of Modena (16581718) in 1673. Had issue. No issue.
James VII and II, King of England, Scotland and Ireland Elizabeth, Princess of England Anne, Princess of England
Died young.
16 June 1644 30 June 1670 Married Philip I, Duke of Orlans (16401701) in 1661. Had legitimate issue. Among her descendants were the kings of Sardinia and Italy.
Notes
[1] "HistoryCharles I (16001649)" (http:/ / www. bbc. co. uk/ history/ historic_figures/ charles_i_king. shtml). British Broadcasting Corporation. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [2] "Charles I (r. 162549)" (http:/ / www. royal. gov. uk/ HistoryoftheMonarchy/ KingsandQueensoftheUnitedKingdom/ TheStuarts/ CharlesI. aspx). Royal.gov.uk. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [3] "Queen Henrietta Maria, 160969" (http:/ / www. british-civil-wars. co. uk/ biog/ henrietta-maria. htm). British-civil-wars.co.uk. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [4] "Queen Henrietta Maria, 160969" (http:/ / www. british-civil-wars. co. uk/ glossary/ parliament-1625-29. htm). British-civil-wars.co.uk. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [5] "Charles, King and Martyr" (http:/ / www. skcm. org/ SCharles/ scharles_main. html). SKCM. . Retrieved 16 October 2008. [6] "Memorable Christians" (http:/ / justus. anglican. org/ resources/ bio/ 92. html). justus.anglican.org. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [7] Carlton, 2 [8] Carlton, 3 [9] Gregg, 11 [10] Gregg, 22 [11] Gregg, 19 [12] Gregg, 29 [13] Gregg, 38 [14] Gregg, 47 [15] Loades, 352 [16] Loades, 356 [17] Coward, 152 [18] Coward, 153 [19] Trevelyan, 107 [20] Trevelyan, 110 [21] Trevelyan, 108 [22] Trevelyan, 111 [23] Amith, 385 [24] The Western Heritage, Eighth Edition, chapter 13, page 420 [25] Amith, 156
Charles I of England
[26] Trevelyan, 112 [27] Loades 367 [28] Gregg, 106 [29] Gregg, 80 [30] Gardiner, 577 [31] Trevelyan, 113 [32] Loades, 359 [33] "Lecture 7: The English Civil War" (http:/ / www. historyguide. org/ earlymod/ lecture7c. html). History Guide. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [34] "Timeline English Civil War" (http:/ / www. historyonthenet. com/ Chronology/ timelinecivilwar. htm). History on the Net. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [35] Trevelyan,117 [36] Trevelyan, 119 [37] "Info Please: Charle I's Early Life" (http:/ / www. infoplease. com/ ce6/ people/ A0920728. html). Infoplease.com. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [38] Gregg, 130,131 [39] See Acts 25:1012 (NRSV translation): "Paul said, 'I am appealing to the emperor's tribunal; this is where I should be tried. I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you very well know. 11Now if I am in the wrong and have committed something for which I deserve to die, I am not trying to escape death; but if there is nothing to their charges against me, no one can turn me over to them. I appeal to the emperor.' 12Then Festus, after he had conferred with his council, replied, 'You have appealed to the emperor; to the emperor you will go.'" [40] Gregg, 131 [41] Sturdy, 38 [42] Reddaway, 129 [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74] [75] [76] Sturdy, 108 Loades, 368 Gregg, 129 Gregg, 138 Gregg, 149 Gregg, 150 Coward, 162 Smith, 116 Coward, 163 Sturdy, 128 Trevelyan 119 Quintrell, 32 Coward, 518 Carlton, 111 Kenyon, 9697, 10105 Schama, 6974 "Info Please: Charles I's Reign" (http:/ / www. infoplease. com/ ce6/ people/ A0920729. html). Infoplease.com. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. Adamson, 16 Kenyon, 105-06 Loades, 375 Carlton, 170 Carlton, 172 Carlton, 154 Gregg, 40 Gregg,220 Quintrell, 460 Quintrell, 62 Adamson, 8 Adamson, 9 Loades, 385 Gregg, 286 "Charles I of England" (http:/ / www. spiritus-temporis. com/ charles-i-of-england/ ). Spiritus-temporis.com. . Retrieved 24 April 2008. Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos, edited by George Garnett, Cambridge, 1994. Judson, 10
171
[77] Sturdy, 35 [78] "Archbishop William Laud, 15731645" (http:/ / www. british-civil-wars. co. uk/ biog/ laud. htm). British-civil-wars.co.uk. . Retrieved 24 April 2008.
Charles I of England
[79] "William Laud" (http:/ / www. nndb. com/ people/ 435/ 000107114/ ). Nndb.com. . Retrieved 24 April 2008. [80] Coward, 175 [81] Coward, 174 [82] Loades, 393 [83] MacCulloch, 521 [84] MacCulloch, 522 [85] Trevelyan, 166 [86] Coward, 180 [87] Cust, 246-7 [88] Adamson, 10 [89] Murphy, 211235 [90] Adamson, 11 [91] Loades, 401 [92] Adamson, 14 [93] Adamson, 15 [94] Adamson, 17 [95] "CHARLES I (r. 162549)" (http:/ / www. royal. gov. uk/ output/ Page76. asp). Royal.gov.uk. . Retrieved 27 October 2008. [96] Gillespie, 124 [97] Smith, Alan G.R. 278 [98] Quintrell, 46 [99] Gillespie, 125 [100] Glover, 171 [101] [102] [103] [104] [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] [115] [116] [117] [118] [119] [120] [121] [122] [123] [124] [125] [126] [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] Gregg, 313 Stevenson, 101 Carlton, 216 Loades, 404 Stevenson, 212 Gregg, 325 Carlton, 222 Hibbert, 151 Gillespie, 130. Hibbert, 154 Carlton, 224 Carlton, 225 Smith, 123 Coward, 191 Kenyon, 127 Gregg, 335 Kenyon, 129 Kenyon, 130 Starky, 112 Kenyon, 133 Gillespie, 131 Gillespie, 137 Gillespie, 3 Loades, 413 Siochr, 108 Moody, Martin, 197 Lennon, 322 Moody, Martin, 200 Starky, 113 Loades, 415 Kenyon, 135 Loades, 414 Gillespie, 144 Loades, 416
172
Charles I of England
[138] Loades, 417 [139] Starky, 114 [140] Sparrow, Andrew (28 October 2000). "Some predecessors kept their nerve, others lost their heads" (http:/ / www. telegraph. co. uk/ news/ uknews/ 4790900/ Some-predecessors-kept-their-nerve-others-lost-their-heads. html). The Daily Telegraph (UK). . Retrieved 3 June 2009. [141] Loades, 418 [142] "King Charles I" (http:/ / www. luminarium. org/ encyclopedia/ kingcharles. htm). Luminarium Encyclopedia. . Retrieved 8 April 2010. [143] Kenyon, 139 [144] Loades, 422 [145] Loades, 423 [146] "Info Please: Charles I's Civil War" (http:/ / www. infoplease. com/ ce6/ people/ A0920730. html). Infoplease.com. . Retrieved 20 April 2008. [147] [List "of Persons Desired by His Majesty to Attend Him the Isle of Wight, The Parliamentary or Constitutional History of England, 1763"]. List. [148] "Message from the King; on His Escape from Hampton Court, that He will appear again if He can be heard, and will give Satisfaction." (http:/ / www. british-history. ac. uk/ report. asp?compid=37160#s15), Journal of the House of Lords (http:/ / www. british-history. ac. uk/ source. asp?pubid=191), 9, London, South East, South West, East, Midlands, North, Scotland, Wales: (History of Parliament Trust), 12 November 1647, pp.519522, [149] "Letter from Colonel Hammond, that he has ordered, no Persons shall come in or go out of the Isle of Wight without his Pass;and desiring the King's former Allowance may be continued to Him." (http:/ / www. british-history. ac. uk/ report. asp?compid=37165#s16), Journal of the House of Lords (http:/ / www. british-history. ac. uk/ source. asp?pubid=191), 9, London, South East, South West, East, Midlands, North, Scotland, Wales: (History of Parliament Trust), 18 November 1647, pp.531533, [150] Samuel Rawson Gardiner (ed.) (1906). "The Charge against the King" (http:/ / www. constitution. org/ eng/ conpur082. htm). The Constitutional Documents of the Puritan Revoltion 16251660. Oxford University Press. . Retrieved 8 April 2010. [151] Samuel Charles Carlton (1992). "Going to the Wars: the experience of the British Civil Wars, 16381651" (http:/ / users. erols. com/ mwhite28/ warstat0. htm#EnglCW). Oxford University Press. . Retrieved 8 April 2010. [152] David B. Grigg (1980), Population growth and agrarian change: an historical perspective (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=vxo7AAAAIAAJ& printsec=frontcover& dq=grigg& cd=1#v=onepage& q), Cambridge University Press, p.84, ISBN9780521296359, , retrieved 8 April 2010 [153] Robertson, Crimes, 5 [154] Samuel Rawson Gardiner (ed.) (1906). "The King's reasons for declining the jurisdiction of the High Court of Justice" (http:/ / www. constitution. org/ eng/ conpur083. htm). The Constitutional Documents of the Puritan Revoltion 16251660. Oxford University Press. . Retrieved 8 April 2010. [155] Robertson, Tyrannicide [156] "Selections from the Trial and Execution of Col. Daniel Axtell in October 1660" (http:/ / www. axtellfamily. org/ axfamous/ regicide/ DanielAxtellTrial1660. htm). Axtell Family. . Retrieved 27 October 2008. [157] A Narrative by John Ashburnham of His Attendance on King Charles I, 1830 (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=jMMBAAAAYAAJ& pg=PA410& lpg=PA410& dq=levet+ mildmay), Google Books, 1830, , retrieved 27 October 2008 [158] Memoirs of the two last years of the Reign of King Charles I, Thomas Herbert, 1815 (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=czoIAAAAQAAJ& pg=PA213& lpg=PA213& dq="thomas+ herbert"+ levet), Google Books, 1815, , retrieved 27 October 2008 [159] The Life of Charles the First, the Royal Martyr, Charles Wheeler Coit, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1926 (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=Hv__9MKX1aMC& pg=PA299& lpg=PA299& dq="william+ levett"+ king+ charles), Google Books, 2006-07, ISBN9781428656673, , retrieved 27 October 2008 [160] Almack, Edward (1896), The Life of Charles the First, the Royal Martyr, Charles Wheeler Coit, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1926 (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=2H6gpNM-yFcC& pg=PA91& lpg=PA91& dq="william+ levet"+ marlborough), Google Books, , retrieved 27 October 2008 [161] Broadview Anthology of British Literature, Vol. 2 [162] Stewart, George R. (1967) [1945], Names on the Land: A Historical Account of Place-Naming in the United States (Sentry edition (3rd) ed.), Houghton Mifflin, pp.38, ISBN1590172736 [163] Archbishop Laud, quoted by his chaplain Peter Heylin in Cyprianus Angelicus, 1688 [164] Dutton,232 [165] "Marks of Cadency in the British Royal Family" (http:/ / www. heraldica. org/ topics/ britain/ cadency. htm). Heraldica.org. . Retrieved 27 October 2008. [166] "Britannia: Monarchs of Britain" (http:/ / www. britannia. com/ history/ monarchs/ mon47. html). Britannia. . Retrieved 20 April 2008.
173
Charles I of England
174
References
Adamson, John (2009), The Noble Revolt, London: Phoenix, ISBN9780297842620 0297842625 Amith, Alan (1984), The Emergence of a Nation State, London: Longman, ISBN0582489741 9780582489745 0582489733 9780582489738 Ashley, Maurice (1987), Charles I and Cromwell (http://www.amazon.com/ Charles-I-Cromwell-Maurice-Ashley/dp/0413162702/ref=sr_1_2ie=UTF8&s=books&qisbn=1208807323& sr=1-2), Methuen, ISBN978-0413162700 Carlton, Charles (1995), Charles I: The Personal Monarch, Great Britain: Routledge, ISBN0415121418 Coward, Barry (1994), The Stuart Age, London: Longman, ISBN0582482798 9780582482791 0582488338 9780582488335 Cust, Richard (2005), Charles I: A Political Life, London: Longman, ISBN978-1405859035 Dutton, Ralph (1963), English Court Life: From Henry VII to George II, London: B.T. Batsford, ISBN978-1405859035 Gardiner, Samuel Rawson (1962), The Constitutional Documents of the Puritan Revolution 16251660 (Third ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press Gillespie, Raymond (2006), Seventeenth Century Ireland (Third ed.), Dublin: Gill and McMillon, ISBN9780717139460 0717139468 Glover, Janet R. (1964), The Story of Scotland, London: Faber and Faber, ISBN0571049311 9780571049318 0571049354 9780571049356 Gregg, Pauline (1981), King Charles I, London: Dent Hibbert, Christopher (1968), Charles I, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson Hill, C. (1991), The Century of Revolution, 16031714 (http://books.google.com/?id=k1P9UCxwmUkC), Great Britain: Routledge, ISBN0415051789 Holmes, Clive (2006), Why was Charles I Executed?, Continuum International, ISBN1852852828 Kenyon, J.P. (1978), Stuart England, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Lennon, Colm (1995), Sixteenth Century IrelandThe Incomplete Conquest, Dublin: St. Martin's Press, ISBN0312124627 Loades, D.M. (1974), Politics and the Nation, London: Fontana Moody, T.W.; Martin, F.X. (1967), The Course of Irish History, Cork Murphy, Derrick (2002), Britain 15581689, London: HarperCollins Publishers, ISBN0-00-713850-4 Siochr, Michel (2001), Kingdoms in Crisis, Dublin, ISBN1851825355 Quintrell, Brian (1993), Charles I 16251640, Harlow: Pearson Education, ISBN0582003547 9780582003545 Reeve, L. J. (1989), Charles I and the Road to Personal Rule (http://books.google.com/?id=kszoNS3KM4oC), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN0521521335 Robertson, Geoffrey, Crimes Against Humanity: The Struggle for Global Justice (Second ed.), Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, ISBN978-0141010144 Robertson, Geoffrey (2005), The Tyrannicide Brief: The Man Who Sent Charles I to the Scaffold, Chatto & Windus, ISBN0-7011-7602-4 Reddaway, W.F. (1948), A History of Europe Volume VI, London: Methuen Rushworth, J. (1959), The Trial of King Charles I, Lockyer Schama, Simon (2001), A History of England, Vol. II, New York: Simon and Schuster Smith, Alan G. R. (1984), The Emergence of a Nation State, London: Longman, ISBN0582489741 9780582489745 0582489733 9780582489738 Smith, David L. (1999), The Stuart Parliaments 16031689, London: Arnold Starky, David (2006), Monarchy, London: Harper Perennial Stevenson, David (1973), The Scottish Revolution 163744, Newton Aboot: David & Charles
Charles I of England Sturdy, David J (2002), Fractured Europe 16001721, Oxford: Blackwell, ISBN0631205128 9780631205128 0631205136 9780631205135 Trevelyan, G.M (1996), A History of England England under the Stuarts, London: The Folio Society
175
Further reading
Abbott, Jacob (1901), Charles I, Great Britain: Harper & brothers, ISBN1409909840 Abbott, Jacob (1900), History of King Charles the First of England, Great Britain: Henry Altemus company Kishlansky, Mark A. (2005), "Charles I: A Case of Mistaken Identity" no.189, Past and Present,4180 Mackintosh, James; Wallace, William & Bell, Robert (1835), London: Longman Turnbull, Mark (2009), Historical Fiction Decision Most Deadly (http://www.decisionmostdeadly.com), Toro Wedgwood, Cicely Veronica (1955), The Great Rebellion: The King's Peace, 16371641, Colins Wedgwood, Cicely Veronica (1958), The Great Rebellion: The King's War, 16411647, London: Collins Wedgewood, Cicely Veronica (1964), A Coffin for King Charles: The Trial and Execution of Charles I, London: Macmillan, ISBN978-0026255004 Williamson, D. (1998), The Kings and Queens of England, London: National Portrait Gallery, ISBN1-85514-228-7, OCLC153799778
External links
Chronology Charles I World History Database (http://www.malc.eu/history/Charles-I-England.biog.html) English Civil War World History Database (http://www.malc.eu/history/Civil-War-England.general.chron. html) The Royal Household. (2011). "Charles I." Official Web Site of the British Monarchy (http://www.royal.gov. uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensoftheUnitedKingdom/TheStuarts/CharlesI.aspx) Archival material relating to Charles I of England (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/nra/searches/ subjectView.asp?ID=P5401) listed at the UK National Register of Archives The Parliamentary Archives holds the original of Charles I's death warrant (http://www.parliament.uk/ archives) The Society of King Charles the Martyr (http://www.skcm.org) The Society of King Charles the Martyr (United States) (http://www.skcm-usa.org) Biography of King Charles I, 16001649 (http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/biog/charles1.htm) Rediscovered painting of Charles I to be shown at National Gallery (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/ tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article6930426.ece) Works by or about Charles I of England (http://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n79-132433) in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
Charles I of England An Historical and Critical Account of the Lives and Writings of James I and Charles I, and the Lives of Oliver Cromwell and Charles II by William Harris (1814): Volume I (http://www.archive.org/details/ anhistoricaland02harrgoog), Volume II (http://www.archive.org/details/anhistoricaland00harrgoog), Volume III (http://www.archive.org/stream/anhistoricaland03harrgoog), Volume IV (http://www.archive.org/ stream/anhistoricaland05harrgoog), Volume V (http://www.archive.org/details/anhistoricaland01harrgoog) The Trials of Charles the First, and of Some Regicides (http://www.archive.org/stream/ trialscharlesfi00petegoog) (published by John Murray, 1820) The High Court of Justice; Comprising Memoirs of the Principal Persons Who Sat in Judgment on King Charles the First (http://www.archive.org/stream/highcourtofjusti00caul), by James Caulfield (1820) A History of the British Empire, From the Accession of Charles I to the Restoration by George Brodie (1822): Volume I (http://www.archive.org/details/ahistorybritish00brodgoog), Volume II (http://www.archive.org/ stream/ahistorybritish03brodgoog), Volume III (http://www.archive.org/stream/ahistorybritish02brodgoog), Volume IV (http://www.archive.org/details/ahistorybritish01brodgoog) Memoirs of the Court of King Charles the First by Lucy Aikin (1833): Volume I (http://www.archive.org/ stream/memoirscourtkin05aikigoog), Volume II (http://www.archive.org/stream/memoirsofcourtof02aikiiala) The Great Civil War of Charles I and the Parliament (http://www.archive.org/details/ greatcivilwarofc00cattiala) by Richard Cattermole, with illustrations by George Cattermole (1845) History of Charles the First and the English Revolution, from the Accession of Charles the First to His Execution by Franois Guizot, trans. Sir Andrew Scoble (1854): Volume I (http://www.archive.org/details/ historyofcharles01guiz), Volume II (http://www.archive.org/details/historyofcharles02guiz) Charles I in 1646: Letters to Queen Henrietta Maria (http://www.archive.org/details/ charlesiinlette00chargoog), ed. John Bruce (1856) Arrest of the Five Members by Charles the First: A Chapter of English History Rewritten (http://www.archive. org/details/arrestoffivememb00forsiala) by John Forster (1860) The Spanish Match; or, Charles Stuart at Madrid by William Harrison Ainsworth (1865): Volume I (http:// www.archive.org/details/spanishmatchorch01ains), Volume II (http://www.archive.org/details/ spanishmatchorch02ains), Volume III (http://www.archive.org/details/spanishmatchorch03ains) Notes of the Treaty Carried on at Ripon between Charles I and the Covenanters of Scotland (http://www. archive.org/stream/notestreatycarr00borogoog) by John Borough, ed. John Bruce (1869) Charles I (http://www.archive.org/stream/charlesi00abboiala) by Jacob Abbott (1876, 1904) Eikon Basilike (http://www.archive.org/stream/portraiturehism00gaudgoog), ed. Catherine Mary Phillimore (1879) The Fall of the Monarchy of Charles I, 16371649 by Samuel Rawson Gardiner (1882): Volume I (16371640) (http://www.archive.org/details/fallmonarchycha02gardgoog), Volume II (16401642) (http://www.archive. org/details/fallmonarchycha00gardgoog) A Secret Negotiation with Charles the First, 16431644 (http://www.archive.org/details/ secretnegociatio00gardrich), ed. Bertha Meriton Gardiner (1883) History of England from the Accession of James I to the Outbreak of the Civil War, 16031642 by Samuel Rawson Gardiner (18831891): Volume I (16031607) (http://www.archive.org/details/ historyofengland01gard), Volume II (16071616) (http://www.archive.org/details/ historyofengland02gardiala), Volume III (16161621) (http://www.archive.org/stream/ historyofengland03gardiala), Volume IV (16211623) (http://www.archive.org/stream/ historyofengland04gardiala), Volume V (16231625) (http://www.archive.org/stream/ historyofenglan05gardiala), Volume VI (16251629) (http://www.archive.org/details/ historyofenglan06gardiala), Volume VII (16291635) (http://www.archive.org/details/ historyofengland07gardiala), Volume VIII (16351639) (http://www.archive.org/details/ historyofengland08gardiala), Volume IX (16391641) (http://www.archive.org/details/
176
Charles I of England historyofengland06gardiala), Volume X (16411642) (http://www.archive.org/stream/ historyenglandf21gardgoog) History of the Great Civil War, 16421649 by Samuel Rawson Gardiner (18861901): Volume I (16421644) (http://www.archive.org/stream/historygreatciv07gardgoog), Volume II (16441647) (http://www.archive. org/stream/historygreatciv04gardgoog), Volume III (16451647) (http://www.archive.org/stream/ historygreatciv00gardgoog), Volume IV (16471649) (http://www.archive.org/stream/ historygreatciv06gardgoog) The Picture Gallery of Charles I (http://www.archive.org/stream/picturegalleryof00philrich) by Sir Claude Phillips (1896) Historical Sketches of Notable Persons and Events in the Reigns of James I and Charles I (http://www.archive. org/details/historicalsketc00carlgoog) by Thomas Carlyle (1898) A History of the George Worn on the Scaffold by Charles I (http://www.archive.org/details/ historyofgeorgew00payniala) by Sir Ralph Payne-Gallwey King Charles I: A Study (http://www.archive.org/stream/kingcharlesistud00dodgiala) by Walter Phelps Dodge (1912) Commons Debates for 1629 (http://www.archive.org/details/commonsdebatesfo00noterich), ed. Wallace Notestein & Frances Helen Relf (1921)
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
License
189
License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported //creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/