[Supervisors Name] [Subject] [Date] Queen Mary of Scots In the darkness of February 9th 1567, a track of gunpowder was lit in the basement of a residence in the backstreets of Edinburgh. The outburst reduced the domicile to rubble and Lord Darnley, the companion of Mary, Queen of Scots, was murdered. Ever since, historians have argued whether Mary was involved in this outrage, and only recently has incriminating new evidence come to light. At the heart of the anonymity lies double-crossing politics of the Scottish Court, and love letters written by Mary to her clandestine paramour, James Hepburn, the Earl of Bothwell. Mary Stuart, who was given birth at Linlithgow by her mother, on 8th December, 1542; expired at Fotheringay, 8th February, 1587. The Tudors endeavored by war to strengthen on a match with Edward VI of England.
Mary, however, was sent to France, 7 August, 1548, where she was outstandingly educated, as is now admitted by both friend and foe. On 24 April, 1558, she wedded the dauphin Francis and, on the death of Henri II, 10 July, 1559, became Queen Consort of France.( Alexander Wilkinson; 22) Instantaneously after the accession of Elizabeth, her committee made plans to “help the divisions” of Scotland by aiding those “tending to true religion”. The rebellion broke in in May, and with Elizabeth’s relieve soon gained the advantage. Elizabeth’s birth being unlawful, Mary, though disqualified by the will of Henry VIII, might state the English Throne as the rightful heir. Mary’s dilemma were still further increased by the Huguenot increasing in France, called le tumulte d’Amboise (6-17 March, 1560), making it without a solution for the French to assistance Mary’s side in Scotland. (Allan,73) Finally the ravenous French garrison of Leith was indebted to yield to a large English force, and Mary’s legislative body signed the Treaty of Edinburgh (6 July, 1560).
The Essay on Queen Elizabeth I 4
... Catholicism, Spain and France. The situation with Mary Queen of Scots was most vexing to Elizabeth. Mary, in Elizabeth's custody beginning in 1568 ... (mainly Catholics) doubted Elizabeth's claim to the throne. Continental affairs added to the problems - France had a strong ... the fore because of Elizabeth's penchant for knowledge, courtly behavior and extravagant dress.Good Queen Bess, as she came ...
One section of this agreement might have disqualified from the English throne all Mary’s offspring, amongst them the present reigning house, which claims through her. Mary would in no way confirm this treaty. Francis II died, 5 December, and Mary, face down for a time with grief, awoke to find all power disappeared and rivals installed in her place. Elizabeth refused a passport, and ordered her fleet to watch for Mary’s vessel. In 1562 Father Nicholas de Gouda visited her from Pope Pius IV, not lacking hazard to his life.( Jane ,66) Mary was a woman who leant on her advisers with full and wife-like self-assurance. Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, a great-grandson of Henry VII of England, with claims to both English and Scottish crowns, had always a potential candidate for Mary’s hand, and, as more powerful suitors fell out, his chances improved. Mary, at first cool, soon fell violently in love. The Protestant lords rose in arms, and Elizabeth backed up their mutiny, but Mary drove them victoriously from the country and married Darnley before the dispensation required to eradicate the impediment arising from their being first cousins had at home from Rome.
Darnley now entered into a band with the same lords who had lately risen in rebellion against him: they were to seize Rizzio in the queen’s presence, put him to bereavement, and obtain the crown matrimonial for Darnley, who would secure a pardon for them, and reward them. The scheme succeeded: Rizzio, torn from Mary’s table, was poignarded external her door (9 March, 1566).
Mary, although kept a prisoner, managed to escape, and once more triumphed over her foes; but respect for her companion was no longer possible. Bothwell, who was charged with it, was found not guilty by his peers (12 April), and on the 24th he carried Mary off by power to Dunbar, where she consented to wed him. Bothwell thereupon, with outrageous violence, carried a separation from his wife through both Protestant and Catholic courts, and conjugal Mary (15 May).
The Essay on Elizabeth England Queen Mary
In 1554, Queen Mary I attempted to restore Catholicism as a single faith in England. Under Mary's reign, Protestants were either executed or they fled abroad. Despite the fact that Elizabeth had supported Mary's accession and attended Catholic services, Mary believed Elizabeth was leading Protestant conspiracies to take the power. Before her death, Mary tried to convince Elizabeth to defend the ...
Bothwell was allowable to escape, but Mary who surrendered on the thoughtful that she should be treated as a queen, was handled with rough violence and immured in Lochleven Castle. There were a number of well-informed representative Catholics at Edinburgh throughout the significant period.
The pope had sent Father Edmund Hay, a Jesuit; Philibert Du Croc was there for France, Rubertino Solaro Moretta represented Savoy, at the same time as Roche Mamerot, a Dominican, the queen’s confessor, was also there. The most ideal documentary evidence is that of the so-called “casket letters”, said to have been printed by Mary to Bothwell during the deadly crisis. The Protestant lords avoided a searching inquiry as much as Mary had done; and she alone suffered, while the others went free. The chest letters were then shaped against Mary, and a thousand filthy charges, afterwards embodied in Buchanan’s “Detectio”. Mary, however, wisely refused to shield herself, unless her poise as queen was respected. Eventually an open verdict was found. “Nothing has been sufficiently proved, whereby the Queen of England should envisage an evil opinion of her sister” (10 January, 1569).
Norfolk, however, had not the scheme to carry the scheme through.
The Catholics in the North rose in his support, but, having no association, the rising at once collapsed (14 November to 21 December, 1569).
Mary had been swift south by her gaolers, with orders to kill her rather than allow her to flee. Lord Acton’s erroneous idea, that Ridolfi was in employment by Pius V to obtain Elizabeth’s murder, seems to have arisen from a mistranslation of Gabutio’s Latin Life of St. Pius in the Bollandists (Retha, p.75).
Cecil eventually exposed the intrigue; Norfolk was beheaded, 2 June, 1572, and the Puritans clamored for Mary’s blood, but in this particular Elizabeth would not gratify them. Elizabeth’s existence was by no means in hazard for a moment.
Plans for Mary’s freedom were indeed seldom formed abroad, but none of them approached within any quantifiable distance of realization. As Morgan was at the present in communication with Ballard, the only priest, so far as we know, who fell a sufferer to the temptation to plot against Elizabeth, Mary’s threat was now grave. (Retha,52) In due course Ballard, through Anthony Babington, a young gentleman of wealth, wrote, by Gifford’s means, to Mary. It seems that the confederates refused to join the plot unless they had Mary’s approval, and Babington wrote to inquire whether Mary would reward them if they “dispatched the usurper”, and set her free. Against the advice of her secretaries, Mary answered this letter, promising to reward those who aided her escape, but saying nothing about the assassination (17 July, 1586).
The Essay on Mary Queen of Scots 2
It can be argued that a member of individuals contributed to death of Mary Queen Scots; Elizabeth, her advisers, foreign powers and Mary herself. To what extent was Mary responsible for her own death In 1567 Scotland rebelled against their Catholic Queen, Mary. She was imprisoned at Loch Leven castle where she remained until her escape in May 1568 when she fled to England. This was the action ...
Babington and his fellows were now in detention, tried and executed, then Mary’s trial began (14 and 15 October).
Mary freely confessed that she had always sought and always would seek means of run away.
Mary, moreover, always contended that the Queen of Scotland did not incur everyday jobs for the plottings of English subjects, even if she had known of them. During the whole process of her trial and implementation, Mary acted with magnificent courage worthy of her noble nature and queenly rank. Works Cited Allan J. Crosby, John Bruce; Accounts and Papers Relating to Mary Queen of Scots; Book Camden Society, 1867 . Jane E. A. Dawson; The Politics of Religion in the Age of Mary, Queen of Scots: The Earl of Argyll and the Struggle for Britain and Ireland; Book Cambridge University Press, 2002 Retha Warnicke;Mary Stewart in France and Scotland: Retha Warnicke Examines the Tumultuous Career of Mary, Queen of Scots, before Her Long Incarceration by Her Cousin Elizabeth I of England; Journal article History Review, 2003 Retha Warnicke; My Heart Is My Own’: The Life of Mary Queen of Scots; Journal article History Review, 2004 Alexander Wilkinson; Mary Queen of Scots and the French Connection: Alexander Wilkinson Considers What the French Made of the Controversial Royal Who Played a Pivotal Role in the French Wars of Religion, Both as Queen of Scots and Queen of France; Magazine article History Today, Vol.
54, July 2004.
