James Stewart, Earl of Moray: A Political Study of the Reformation in Scotland 9780231884815

Citation preview

JAMES STEWART, Carl of >565, Randolph to Cecil, ibid., II, 330-35. 104-5.

I50

M o r a y ' s

r e v o l t

Pope were far more explicit than he knew. On July 24 Mary wrote to Philip II, saying that she was now following a Catholic policy, that she had always been loyal to Rome, and asking for aid.73 The newly elevated Bishop of Dunblane informed the Pope that Mary was marrying Darnley in order to restore the Catholic religion in Scotland; for this purpose she needed money, which was hard to come by in Scotland, especially since she must not alarm her Protestant subjects unduly until she was in a position to crush them. 74 A f t e r Moray's rebellion actually broke out, the signs of Mary's Catholic leanings multiplied. Knox was forbidden to preach for a time. 75 Payments from the thirds to the Protestant clergy were ended, after the ouster of Wishart of Pitarrow, one of Moray's supporters, from the comptrollership. 76 Late in August a Catholic became Provost of Edinburgh. 77 For the Continental princes, Mary cast herself in the role of the persecuted Catholic: her subjects had rebelled, she said, to enforce the outrageous demand of the Kirk that she turn Protestant. 78 This was not entirely false; the General Assembly had made such a demand in June. 70 On September 1 o she wrote another letter to Philip of Spain requesting aid and advice on how to go about the restoration of Catholicism. Philip gave both, but Mary's messenger was drowned on his return voyage, and the money fell into the hands of the Earl of Northumberland, who, though a Catholic, would not give it up.80 On October 1 Mary instructed the Archbishop of Glasgow to ask for aid from France, but to do so secretly—presumably in order to keep the request from the Spanish.81 It is perfectly evident from all this that Moray was quite right in saying that the Darnley marriage was a serious menace to Prot7 4 Pollen, Papal Negotiations, Labanoff, Recueil, VII, 339-41. pp. 207-9. Knox, History, II, 497-98. Keith, History, III, 117-1S. 7 6 Knox, History, II, 515. Randolph reported Wishart's removal on August 27, 1565. C.S.P., Scot., II, 196-98. 7 7 Keith, History, III, 235-37. August 28, 1565, Bedford to Cecil, C.S.P., For., Eliz., 7 8 Pollen, Papal Negotiations, VII, 439. p. 228, note 1. ™ Knox, History, II, 484-87. 8 0 Labanoff, Recueil, I, 281-83. October 18, 1565, Philip II to Cardinal Pacheco, in Pollen, Papal Negotiations, pp. 213-15. Fleming, Mary Queen of Scots, pp. 377— 78. « Labanoff, Recueil, I, 288-90.

73

75

MORAY'S

REVOLT

estantism. H e did not, of course, k n o w the details of Mary's negotiations with the Continental Catholics, but he suspected what was going on. His misfortune was that not enough people would believe him. H e had denounced the bad faith of Mary's repeated promises that Protestantism was not in danger, and he was borne out b y the events of the winter of 1565-66. T h e realization that he had been right after all was partly responsible for the upheaval that enabled him to return in the following year. T h e rest of the disastrous story of Moray's rebellion, which is k n o w n to history as the Chase-about Raid, is quickly told. Early in October he learned the fatal news that Elizabeth would not support him. Mary's levies were assembling. T h e Master of Maxwell, in whose territories he was, had been intriguing with both sides for some time, and now was about to go over to M a r y — which he did after Moray's flight—in return for a pardon. 82 T h e game was up. Moray notified Bedford that he proposed to take advantage of Elizabeth's offer of asylum, and on October 6 he crossed the border and entered Carlisle, accompanied b y Chatelherault, Rothes, Glencairn, Boyd, and others. 83 A r g y l e , w h o was perfectly safe in his mountain fastnesses, remained behind. Mary had w o n . T h u s ended a fiasco to which Moray had laid himself open b y his policy of the last five years. His major error lay in assuming that Elizabeth and Cecil, simply because they were Protestants, would view the problems of Protestantism in the same light as he did. H e had believed that he and Maitland could bring about a modus vivendi between Mary and Elizabeth. In working for this, he alienated his former allies, the Protestant zealots, because they disliked his " s o f t " policy toward the idolatrous Queen. T h e n his whole system collapsed in his face. Elizabeth proved unmanageable. M a r y turned to other advisers and another policy, both of which were wormwood and gall to Moray, but which in the eyes of most Protestants did not appear dangerous enough to Protestantism to justify drastic measures. Moray's opposition led him to 82 Knox, History, II, 512. 83 October j , 1565, Bedford to Cecil, C.S.P., For., Eliz., VII, 480-81. October 7, 1565, Bedford to Elizabeth, ibid., p. 482.

152

MORAY'S

REVOLT

a futile rebellion during which, first, large numbers of his onetime supporters, then Elizabeth, despite her promises, abandoned him. Deserted by his former comrades in arms, shamefully betrayed by Elizabeth, vengefully pursued by his sister, he fled to the country of his betrayer because he could do nothing else.

C H A P T E R

V I I

The Turn of the Tide

I

for Moray that he possessed a good deal of courage, for the fiasco of the Chase-about Raid and the almost hopeless situation that resulted from it were enough to drive a lesser man to despair. In adversity Moray was to display much the same sort of temper as did his French and Dutch coreligionists; he never gave up hope of finding a way to restore himself and the Protestant party to power in Scotland. This proved to be a difficult task, one which might well have been beyond his powers, had not events in Scotland presented him with a ready-made solution to his problem, which he eagerly adopted. What this solution was, we shall see in due course. Moray felt, and with reason, that Elizabeth had treated him very badly by reneging on her promise of aid during the rebellion. After some days of deliberation he resolved to go to London and see the Queen personally. 1 He paved the way for this step by writing a wounded letter to Cecil and Leicester on October 14, in which he held the English government responsible for the pitiable position in which he now found himself.2 This was basically true enough, although somewhat exaggerated in the telling. Elizabeth's first reaction, on hearing of Moray's approach, was to order him not to come at all. Her messenger caught Moray at Ware, some forty miles from London; the Earl replied that he would stay there and await a summons.3 This came almost at once. Elizabeth had thought the matter over, and evidently decided that if she refused to see Moray, he might well broadcast her duplicity to the world. T WAS W E L L

1 October 13, 1565, Bedford to Elizabeth, C.S.P., For., Eliz., VII, 487-88. 3 2 CS.P., Scot., II, 223-24. C-SJ 5 ., For., Eliz., VII, 497. CSJP., Scot., II, 226-27.

154

THE

TURN

OF

T H E

TIDE

On October 2 3 Moray and the Abbot of Kilwinning, one of the Hamiltons, modestly dressed in black, had their famous interview with Elizabeth, in the presence of the French ambassador. Elizabeth started out severely, telling Moray that she was surprised that he dared present himself before her. De Foix was there, she said, as an impartial witness, so that he could inform Mary that England had given her no cause for hostility, since she (Elizabeth) had heard that there was a lying rumor going around to the effect that she had encouraged Moray. She understood that Moray had rebelled because of the political and religious implications of the Darnley marriage. Was this so? Moray evasively replied that these considerations had occurred to him, but that Mary had always been kind to him, and that his revolt had not been directed against her personally. Elizabeth's rejoinder was that Moray had sinned grievously in taking arms against Mary. Moray explained that he had been outlawed on account of the altercation that had arisen out of the Lennox plot against him at Perth in June. Moray had refused to reveal what he knew of the plot in order to protect the lives of his informants. He was thus more or less worried into rebellion. He closed by asking Elizabeth to intercede with Mary for him. The Queen replied that she did not see how she could, but that she would discuss it with her council. She then dismissed Moray with the reminder that he could be grateful that he had not been shown the inside of an English prison. This interview has been described at length because most historians have come to conclusions of various kinds about it without taking the trouble to analyze exactly what was said. The above account is taken from a letter of De Silva, the Spanish ambassador, who got it from Elizabeth herself, and it is undoubtedly substantially accurate, since De Silva had his own sources of information, and had no interest in presenting the case of either Elizabeth or Moray in a favorable light.4 De Silva added in his letter that he understood that Moray had been briefed the night 4

The letter Is dated November j, 1565 (CS.P., Span., I, 499-501). This version is substantially the same as the official English account sent to the English ambassador in France; CS.P., Scot., II, 227-28.

THE

TURN

OF

THE

TIDE

*55

before, and that therefore the interview was collusive. All the more reason for De Silva to report it accurately, just as he heard it from Elizabeth; if the whole affair was fraudulent, there would be nothing gained by a colored report. T h e charge of collusion is borne out by the interview itself. Each side passed gracefully over a lie told by the other: Moray's statement of the reasons for the revolt, and Elizabeth's denial that she had aided the rebels. The general tone of the interview was friendly. Elizabeth did not indulge in name-calling, as Sir James Melville alleges.5 If she had been unpleasant to Moray, she would certainly have so informed De Silva. The reasons for lies and friendliness alike are not far to seek. Elizabeth knew well enough that Moray's defeat was a serious matter for her, and that her own behavior during the rebellion had given Mary a perfect opportunity to summon her French and Spanish friends to war on England. Elizabeth, for her own sake, had to clear herself of the charge of complicity in the rebellion. She could not, therefore, afford to antagonize Moray. The primary object of Moray, on the other hand, was to get back to Scotland. A pardon might be obtained through Elizabeth's intercession. This could only be effective if Mary was convinced that Elizabeth had nothing to do with the revolt. Moray was doubtless aware that Mary knew far too much to be deceived by Elizabeth's protestations of innocence, but little could be lost by trying, and he could have Elizabeth's support on no other terms. And France and Spain, at least, might be fooled. So Moray played Elizabeth's game, in return for the latter's intervention on his behalf with his sister. Knox's continuator reports that after the French ambassador had departed, Moray rebuked Elizabeth in private for her behavior, but this is most unlikely, since Moray knew well that Elizabeth had to be handled with kid gloves.6 Possibly the story was spread, by Moray himself or by others, as a face-saving maneuver. This was very necessary, because Elizabeth's conduct had not sat well with the Scottish Protestants as a whole. Many of them, including several who had supported Moray during the rebellion, 5 8

Sir James Melville, Memoirs of his own Life, pp. 135-36.

John Knox, History of the Reformation in Scotland, II, 513.

I56

THE

TURN

OF

THE

TIDE

were so angry that they decided to wash their hands of England completely: English friendship seemed to be as dangerous as English enmity, and far more humiliating. Argyle in particular felt this, and for the rest of his career was bitterly hostile to England. Chatelherault, a lukewarm Protestant at best, soon made his peace with Mary, on condition that he surrender his fortified places and live in exile for five years. 7 Moray was made of different stuff, however. He, who had the most reason to be angry with Elizabeth, never wavered from his conviction that Anglo-Scottish friendship was necessary and beneficial, for political and religious reasons alike. But the alienation from England of many of his coreligionists was to raise a host of difficulties for him in future. After his interview Moray settled down rather miserably in Newcastle. He could do nothing for himself; he could but hope that Elizabeth's representations would have some effect. H e wrote occasional letters to the Queen and Cecil, urging them to do something for him.8 H e was sinking into poverty: Elizabeth would give him no money, and of course he could get none from his estates in Scotland. B y Christmas Randolph reported that he had less than 200 crowns to his name.9 T h e new year, the Earl informed Leicester, would simply complete his ruin, unless something happened soon. 10 That something, fortunately for him, was to happen. T o understand what it was we must consider what had been going on in Scotland. Mary had every reason to congratulate herself in October 1565. She had outwitted Elizabeth, married the one man who would strengthen her claim to the English throne, and driven her rebels across the frontier in ignominious flight. This, she ultimately decided, was but the first step in the great Catholic design to which she had committed herself. T h e next move was to restore the old religion in Scotland; once this was accomplished she could come to grips with her "good sister" in London, with Spanish aid, and reign over a united, Catholic Britain. If A4ary had succeeded in " December 3, 1565, Chatelherault to Cecil, C.S.P.. Scot., II, 243. On December 4 Morav informed Cecil that he approved of the Duke's arrangements. Ibid., p. 244. 8 See ibid., pp. 231 fF., for these letters. » December 25, 156?, Randolph to Cecil, ibid., pp. 247-48. 10 December 25, 1565, Moray to Leicester, ibid., p. 248.

T H E

T U R N

OF

T H E

TIDE

157

this grandiose scheme, the death knell of Protestantism would have sounded all over Europe. It is not too much to say that the course of events in Scotland in the winter of 1565-66, which culminated in the ruin of Mary's plans, was one of the decisive factors in assuring the survival of British, and hence of European, Protestantism. Mary did not adopt this Catholic plan without hesitation, however. She was well aware of the enormous risks involved. It was by no means certain that she could carry even her own coterie with her, since many of them were Protestants. Many influential people were not anxious to see extreme measures against the rebels carried into effect. Among them were the Master of Maxwell, who had played a double game during the rebellion, and Morton and Maitland. On November 12 Randolph reported that Maitland was trying to get Moray the right to live outside Scotland on his income from his Scottish estates. 11 Knox from his pulpit was urging the government to forgive the banished lords and, when Mary's courtiers murmured, found himself in the unusual position of having his language and intentions defended by Maitland. 12 Sir James Melville urged Mary to pardon her rebels, and thus end their dependence on England. If she were generous, he said, Moray and his friends would be everlastingly grateful and would turn their backs on England forever. 1 3 Elizabeth was also putting pressure on Mary to the same end. On October 24, the day after her interview with Moray, she sent a message urging Mary to pardon Moray and ratify the Treaty of Edinburgh. Elizabeth, in return, would, among other things, look into the matter of the succession. But the main burden of the message was its insistence that Elizabeth had not aided Moray at all during the rebellion. 14 This overture met with some success: Mary could not as yet afford to come to blows with England, since her Catholic friends in Europe had given her nothing more substantial than encouraging words. On November 7 Randolph reported that Mary was willing to deal with England; at the same 12 «Ibid., pp. 237-38. Knox, History, II, 514. 13 Melville, Memoirs, pp. 139-40. 14 CS.P, Scot., II, 229. October 29, 1565, Elizabeth to Randolph, ibid., p. 230.

I

5

8

T H E

T U R N

OF

T H E

T I D E

time the ambassador urged that Elizabeth intervene more decisively, or Moray would be lost. 15 Mary showed no signs of relenting toward Moray, as the Earl himself knew well. 10 But in December she consented to a meeting of commissioners for Border questions. 17 Upon being notified of this, Elizabeth appointed Bedford and Forster to meet with Mary's nominees and informed Randolph that the purpose of the meeting, from her point of view, was the restoration of Moray. 1 8 B y mid-January, then, it seemed that Mary might yield to this pressure and pardon her brother; she had been particularly impressed by the argument that this move would lead to the abandonment by the Protestants of their associations with England. 19 If Mary had pardoned Moray for these reasons, it would have meant no more than a change in tactics, not in overall purposes: she would try conclusions with Elizabeth before she attacked Protestantism, instead of afterwards. That she was seriously thinking of this alternative is shown by the fact that she postponed for a month the Parliament which was to have met in February to forfeit Moray and his friends. 20 O n January 24 Randolph reported that Mary was perceptibly softening toward her brother. 21 Then, very suddenly, Mary abandoned all thought of pardoning Moray and decided to push her Catholicizing plans with vigor. Her change of heart was due to a letter from the Cardinal of Lorraine, which arrived on January 27, urging her to take measures against November 7, November 8, 1565, Randolph to Cecil, C.S.P., For., Eliz., VII, 510; C.S.F., Scot., II, 255-36. 1 9 See his letters of December 31, 1565, to Cecil and Elizabeth, ibid., p. 249. Mar)' throughout had refused to hear of any mercy for her brother. Her most outspoken declaration came in a letter to De Foix on November 8, 1565, in which she ridiculed Elizabeth's suggestion that she pardon Moray in return for the release bv Elizabeth of Lady Lennox. A . Labanoff, ed., Recueil des lettres de Marie Stuart, I, 299-307. 1 7 December 23, 1565, Randolph to Cecil, C.S.F., Scor., II, 245-47. 1 8 January 10, 1566, Elizabeth to Randolph, ibid., p. 251. Morav was not pleased b y the appointment of Bedford and Forster, against whom, he feared, Mary* would be prejudiced. January 15, 1566, Moray to Cecil, in R. Keith, The History of the Affairs of Church and State in Scotland, III, 343-44. 1 9 Melville, Memoirs, pp. 146-47. 20 December 25, 1565, Moray to Leicester, C.S.P., Scot., II, 248. Andrew Lang, A History of Scotla?id from the Roman Occupation, II, 155. 2 1 Keith, History, III, 344-45. 15

THE

TURN

OF

THE

TIDE

159

her heretics now. 2 2 T h i s familiar advice was almost certainly reinforced by some talk of a Catholic League. Father Pollen asserts that no such league ever existed, and his reasoning is convincing. 2 3 But all of Protestant Europe believed in it, and there was certainly some discussion of it in Catholic circles. M a r y had expressed to Philip her desire to join such a league. 24 Probably Mary was induced to f o l l o w the Catholic policy, which she much preferred in any case, b y the representations of her French friends, w h o either through ignorance or design informed her that the league was in process of organization and that she must follow an uncompromising policy in order to be accepted and helped by it. Mary's letter of January 31 to Pius V , expressing the opinion that n o w was the time to strike at Scottish Protestantism, was a clear indication of h o w the wind was blowing. 2 5 T h e r e were other signs, which could be read b y all. Douglas of Lochleven, Moray's half-brother, made a vain effort to bribe Riccio in behalf of the exiled Earl. 26 O n February 7 Randolph reported that Popery was flourishing, that royal pressure was being used on various lords to get them to go to Mass, and that Moray was certain to be ruined unless Elizabeth gave ground on the succession question. 27 N e x t day Bedford w r o t e that Moray's lands had been given to others. 28 In mid-February Randolph himself was in difficulties. Mary accused him of having conveyed English gold to Moray during the rebellion, and his recall was demanded. 29 Randolph left, but went no further than Berwick, where he was able to keep in touch with Scottish affairs. M a r y was perfectly justified in ridding her court 2 2 J. H . Pollen, ed., Papal Negotiations with Mary Queen of Scots, p. ci. Melville, Memoirs, pp. 147-48. February 7, 1566, Randolph to Cecil, C.S.P., Scot., II, 2 3 Pollen, Papal Negotiations, 254-55. pp. xxxviii-xliii. 24 October 24, 1565, Philip II to De Silva, C.S.P., Span., I, 497-99. « Labanoff, Recueil, VII, 8-10. 2 9 T . McCrie, The Lije of John Knox, II, 144-45, note 2. T h e story that Moray himself attempted to bribe Riccio, by means of a diamond, rests only on a passage in Melville, Memoirs, pp. 146-47, and is most improbable. Morav knew well enough what Riccio was up to, and must have known that such an attempt would be futile. Douglas, as far as w e know, acted without Moray's knowledge. 28 Keith, History, III. 345. « C.S.P., Scot., II, 2J4-5J. 20 February 17, 1566, Mary to Robert Melville, in Maitland Club, Miscellany, III, 179-83. February 19, March 6, 1566, Randolph to Cecil, C.S.P., Scot., II, 256-57, 261-64.

iöo

THE

TURN

OF

T H E

TIDE

of a man who trafficked with rebels, but her timing of the move made it plain to everyone that she no longer cared f o r an agreement with Elizabeth. B y February, then, Alary had made up her mind to pursue the Catholic policy, and the crucial test would come at the March Parliament, when Moray was to be forfeited and Catholicism restored to at least an equal footing with Protestantism, 30 which would eventually mean, of course, the extinction of the latter. Only the extreme Mariolators have ever contended that Mary favored toleration as a long-run solution to the religious question; such a notion was foreign to sixteenth-century thought. It seemed, too, that nothing could stop Mary. Unfortunately f o r her, however, there were various weaknesses in her position, which she did not take seriously enough, and which were to ruin her. T h e first of these lay in the personality and position of the two men who were closest to her, Darnley and Riccio. E v e n before Moray's rebellion, Riccio had become Mary's most trusted adviser; now he "ruled all," as Randolph never seemed to tire of saying. A s has been pointed out, he was detested b y the Protestants, not only by those w h o had rebelled but also b y those w h o remained. 31 H e was looked on as an arrogant upstart, a fact which Riccio himself seemed to recognize. 32 Under these circumstances it was absolute folly f o r Mary to favor Riccio as ostentatiously as she did. Her knowledge of Scottish history should have warned her of the fate of lowborn royal favorites. But Mary continued to ignore the storm signals in this direction. Mary might have behaved more intelligently in regard to Riccio, but there was v e r y little she could do about Darnley. It did not take her long to realize that she had married a man who was worse than useless to her politically, and w h o was becoming most objectionable personally. Even before Moray had been driven from Scotland there were domestic disputes in the royal household over the question of the appointment of a Lieutenant 30 .Mary indicated as much in a letter of April 2, 1566, to the Archbishop of Glasgow, in Labanoff, Recueil, I, 341-50. 31 For the attitude of Morton and Maitland, see March 6, 1566, Randolph to Cecil, C.S.F., Scot., II, 261-64; E. Russell, Maitland of Leihmgton, pp. 248-49. 82 Melville, Memoirs, pp. 132-34.

THE

TURN

OF

THE

TIDE

161

of the Marches. 33 Darnley was further annoyed by the pardoning of the Hamiltons. 34 Mary soon discovered that her husband was quite unfitted for public business. A stamp bearing his signature was made and turned over to Riccio, Mary giving as her justification for this the entirely accurate reason that Darnley was generally absent from court, on pleasure bent. 35 B y Christmas Randolph reported that husband and wife were quarreling frequently. 38 T h e real root of the difficulty was that Darnley wanted the crown matrimonial, which Mary had evidently promised him in the first flush of her amorous enthusiasm.37 Such a grant would have given him equal authority with Mary in public business and would further have meant that Darnley would be King in his own right if Mary predeceased him. If she died childless, the crown would pass to the Lennox family. Mary had no intention of granting her foolish husband such authority at this point, and Darnley by his displays of childish resentment simply confirmed her in her decision. T h e object of Darnley's wrath was Riccio, who, he felt, was urging Mary to deprive him of all authority. T h e King was getting into a dangerous frame of mind. Darnley was not, as we have seen, the only person in Scotland who disliked Riccio. T h e large and powerful group of Protestant lords who still remained in Scotland was coming to view the development of Mary's policy with great alarm. Mary naturally pursued her negotiations with the Catholic powers with great secrecy, but the trend of her policy was unmistakeable.38 Ever since Moray's flight the Protestant lords, led by Morton and Maitland, had been working hard on one point: Moray must be pardoned and recalled. If this were done, they felt, it would be an indication that Mary contemplated no attack on Protestantism, which it was vital to them to preserve. For a while it seemed that they might October 2, i$6$, Cockburn to Cecil, C.S.P., For., Eliz., VII, 477. D. H. Fleming, Mary Queen of Scots, p. 369. a e Knox, History, II, 520. 36 December 2j, 1565, Randolph to Cecil, C.S.P., Scot., II, 247-48. S7 On this point see January 16, 1566, Randolph to Cecil, in J. Stevenson, ed., Selections . . . Illustrating the Reign of Mary Queen of Scotland, pp. 146-48. 38 See, for example, her demands on Morton and Douglas of Lochleven, The Register of the Privy Council of Scotland, I, 390-91, 396-97, 417; and her treatment of the Protestant ministers, Knox, History, II, 515. 33

I 62

T H E

T U R N

OF

T H E

TIDE

succeed. Then Mary suddenly changed her mind, at the end of January 1566, steeled herself to push through her Catholic policy, and refused to hear any more of pardon for Moray. Maitland, on February 9, wrote to Cecil that now there was nothing for it but to "chop at the very root." 39 The lords, too, were getting into a dangerous frame of mind. There was, thus, material enough for a first-class explosion against Mary's policy, and that explosion was almost certain to be directed against Riccio, who was regarded by all concerned as the man really responsible for that policy. Darnley was now becoming convinced of the truth of a rumor which had been current for some time: that Mary was Riccio's mistress.40 As early as October 1565 Randolph reported this story, and used it to explain Mary's implacable hatred of Moray, who, said Randolph, had found out his sister's guilty secret. 41 Elizabeth herself repeated the tale to De Foix in this wise: Moray was being persecuted by Mary because he "wished to hang an Italian named David, whom she loved and favored, giving him more credit and authority than was consistent with her affairs and honor." 42 There was almost certainly no truth in this story, which doubtless grew from the undue amount of confidence placed by Mary in her Italian secretary; but Darnley believed it, unhappily for Riccio, for Mary, and for himself. In such circumstances it was inevitable that a plot should develop against Riccio, and develop it did, in February 1566. It is of little importance whether the Protestant lords or Darnley was the prime mover—each party later threw the onus on the other 43 9»C.S. P., Scot., 11,255. February 13, 1566, Randolph to Leicester, quoted in P. F. Tytler, History of Scotland, VII, 19. Fleming has collected these rumors (Mary Queen of Scots, pp. 41 380-81). October 13, 1565, Randolph to Cecil, C.S.P., Scot., II, 222-23. *- October 16, 1565, De Foix to Charles IX, quoted in Fleming, Mary Queen of Scots, p. 381. 13 Damley's public declaration on this point is reported in T . Thomson, ed., A Diurnal of Remarkable Occurrents that Have Passed within the Country of Scotland, p. 99 Ibid., p. J09. 10« Ibid., p. J10.

234

M O R A Y ,

M A R Y ,

AND

E L I Z A B E T H

As a matter of fact, Moray did not receive Elizabeth's letter until after his arrival in England. 101 He had had some difficulty in forming his commission. His principal supporters were not anxious to go, since Mary might be restored after all, and all those who were on the commission could be assured of her undying animosity. 102 Finally he resolved to go himself, and with him as commissioners went Morton, Lindsay, the Bishop of Orkney, and the Commendator of Dunfermline. T o these were added some assistants: McGill, Balnaves, Buchanan—and Maitland. 103 Maitland's inclusion, according to Buchanan, was due not to his diplomatic skill but to Moray's fear that he would cause trouble at home if he were left behind.104 It is rather a pity that the Regent did not take Knox with him too; the conference would probably have been far livelier as a result. Before setting out for England, on September 16, Moray took formal possession of the Casket. 105 On the twenty-seventh he and his fellow commissioners arrived in Berwick, 1 0 6 and a week or so later they entered York, which had been designated as the site of the meeting. The stage was set for the extraordinary drama which was to seal the Regent's triumph over his sister and to mark the end of Mary's career as an independent political agent. T o a consideration of the events of this drama we must now turn. 101

His acknowledgement is dated September 28, IJ68, the day after his arrival in 102 Berwick, ¡bid., p. 513. Buchanan, History, II, 540-41. 103 Moray's commission is dated September 18, 1568. Anderson, Collections, I V , Pt. 11, 35-37. Robert Pitcairn, Commendator of Dunfermline, was a comparative newcomer to high politics at this time. Moray made increasing use of him in various negotiations with England, and he served as Secretary of State during Morton's regency. 104 Buchanan, History, II, 540-41. Mary had earlier expressed hope of winning Maitland over. July 27, 1568, Knollys to Cecil, C.S.P., Scot., II, 461-62. 105 Register of Privy Council, I, 641. 106 September 27, 1568, Hunsdon to Cecil, CS.P., For., Eliz., VIII, 555.

C H A P T E R

XI

The Tork-Westminster Qonference

T

between the English commissioners and those of the two Scottish factions during the winter of 1568-69, collectively known to history as the Y o r k Westminster Conference, present a maddening problem to the historian. The difficulty is that the formal sessions of the conference, especially those at York, were almost meaningless. The really significant events of those weeks took place behind closed doors, and it is almost impossible to deduce with any certainty just what did occur. Though the upshot of all the devious machinations at the sessions at Westminster is plain enough, the course of events there had been largely predetermined by the clandestine intrigues at York. A good deal of the following account, therefore, is unproven and unprovable surmise, but it offers, in the writer's opinion, the most reasonable hypothesis which can be constructed from the conflicting and biased evidence available to us. Elizabeth nominated a three-man commission to represent her at York. T w o of its members, Sir Ralph Sadler and the Earl of Sussex, were loyal followers of the Queen and of Cecil. But the influence of these two was negligible; real control of the English commission lay in the hands of its principal member, the Duke of Norfolk—and Norfolk, who, though a Protestant himself, was hand in glove with the English Catholics, was by no means illdisposed toward Mary. If we may believe Bishop Leslie, Mary felt confident of his friendship in mid-September, well before the conference opened. 1 Norfolk, however, was a man of no particuHE M E E T I N G S

1

November 6, 1571, examination of Leslie in the Tower, in W . Murdin, ed., The Burghley Papers (1511-1596), pp. J2-J4.

236

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

lar intelligence or courage. Had he been left to himself, he probably would not have dared to give rein to his pro-Marian proclivities. But he succumbed to an intelligence stronger than his own, and thus set his foot on the path that was to lead him to the block in less than five years. Mary appointed a numerous commission, but for all practical purposes she had but two representatives at the conference, Lord Herries and Bishop Leslie. In her instructions, dated September 29, she insisted above all that the meeting was in no sense to be regarded as anything more than a conference; it was to have no judicial character. Furthermore, it was to be understood that the only purpose of the meeting was to arrange for her restoration. H e r abdication was invalid, since it was signed under duress, and any evidence in her handwriting which Moray and his friends might produce which incriminated her in any w a y was discounted in advance as forged; it was very easy, she explained, to counterfeit her handwriting. 2 Mary's concept of the purpose of the conference squared with the promises Elizabeth had made to her, but had no relation to Elizabeth's real intentions. T h e instructions for the English commissioners contained an elaborate reconciliation scheme, it is true, but this plan would have been unacceptable to both sides, since it involved virtual English suzerainty over Scotland. It seems to have been included mainly to frighten Moray, since the instructions also authorized the English commissioners to renew Elizabeth's promise of September 20 to the Regent if he showed signs of wavering. 3 Worse still from Mary's point of view, her principal commissioners, while undoubtedly the ablest men she could find to represent her, did not really believe in her innocence. Herries had already indicated as much. In June 1568, when the possibility of a conference was being discussed, he had asked Elizabeth what her attitude would be if it were shown that Mary was not an injured innocent, and he had actually informed Mary that he had asked this question.4 Bishop Leslie also had his doubts, 2

A. Labanoff, éd., Recueil des lettres de Marie Stuart, II, 193-210. J. Anderson, éd., Collections Relating to the History of Mary Queen of Scots, IV, Pt. 11, 8-25. 4 June 28, 1568, Herries to Mary, in A. Teulet, ed., Relations politiques de la France et de l'Espagne avec FEcosse au XVle siècle, II, 380-87. See also October 3

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

237

as his behavior during the conference, and in later years, was to make clear. 5 Mary's contemporary supporters were far less convinced of the justice of her cause than her champions of later days. Moray was looking forward to the coming meeting with no great amount of j o y . H e was faced b y a choice of evils. If Elizabeth really wanted reconciliation between the factions, he would have to acquiesce or face the consequences, w h i c h w o u l d doubtless be war. If, on the other hand, she wanted him to accuse Mary of murder and produce the Casket Letters, he would, of course, comply, but at the cost of permanently alienating all of Mary's well-wishers and perhaps provoking foreign intervention. T h e second course was less dangerous, and was preferred b y Moray and b y most of his f e l l o w commissioners, w h o f o r one reason or another stoutly opposed any reconciliation, but there were grave perils in either policy. T h e one man among the Regent's commissioners w h o took a different view was Maitland, and, curiously enough, it was Maitland w h o was the key figure in the early weeks of the conference. Maitland wanted a reconciliation and the restoration of M a r y , for t w o principal reasons. In the first place, he feared that the open accusation and besmirching of the Queen b y M o r a y would give Elizabeth a plausible pretext f o r barring M a r y and her heirs from the English succession, which the Secretary still ardently desired for the Stewart line. Secondly, he was worried about his own safety. If M a r y were accused of the murder, she might well reply b y naming the others involved, including himself.® Spurred on b y these considerations, the subtle Secretary set to w o r k . Maitland's carefully worked-out plans began to develop soon after the conference opened. T h e various parties to the meetings arrived at Y o r k early in October, and the first session of the conference was held on October 7. Mary's commissioners delivered 6, 1568, the English commissioners to Elizabeth, in Anderson, Collections, IV, Pt. 11, 25-32, for Herries's behavior on the wording of the oath to be taken at the conference. 6 For Leslie's character, and his curious confession after the uncovering of the Ridolfi Plot, see November 8, 1571, Wilson to Cecil, in Murdin, Burghley Papers, P-S76 On this point see June 12, 1568, W o o d to Maitland, in Maitland Club, Miscellany, IV, 120-21.

238

Y O R K - W E S T M I N S T E R

C O N F E R E N C E

their opening accusation of Moray and his friends, who were charged with treason and rebellion. Moray demanded time to study the charges and frame his answers; he also made a series of requests to the English commissioners which indicate the influence of Alaitland. T h e Regent asked them to repeat Elizabeth's guarantee of September 20 that Mary, if found guilty, would not be restored, and N o r f o l k complied. This was all very well, said Moray, but Mary's followers were claiming that she had a written promise from Elizabeth that she would be restored in any case. N o r f o l k expressed his doubts, but Moray was not satisfied, and presented the Duke with four questions, to which he wanted precise answers: 1. Did the English commission have the authority to pronounce a verdict on Mary's connection with the murder? 2. If so, would they do so without delay, once the evidence was presented? 3. If Mary were found guilty, would England turn her over to the Scots? 4. In the same circumstances, would England recognize the government of James V I ? N o r f o l k , caught unprepared, could only give tentative answers, until he could consult his government. 7 Consequently the Regent decided that until he was answered, he would refrain from making any serious accusations against Mary. Maitland's hand is clearly visible in all of this. H e had shaken Moray's confidence in Elizabeth's guarantee of September 20, which was sufficiently vaguely worded to justify a certain amount of doubt, and had succeeded in persuading the Regent to withhold his accusation until he had received more explicit promises from Elizabeth. Moray, who had suffered in the past from putting undue confidence in Elizabeth's word, was not unwilling, and on October 1 1 , in his official reply to the accusations of the Marians, he defended himself merely on the grounds of the Bothwell marriage and Mary's voluntary abdication. 8 Maitland had gained little more than time by this maneuver, but time was of the essence. He had already established contact with Herries, 9 and he even succeeded in turning Moray's next move 7

October 9, 1568, the English commissioners to Elizabeth, in Anderson, Collections, IV, Pt. ii, 41-48, 55-56. s C.S.P., Scot., II, 525. 9 October 9,1568, Knollys to Cecil, ibid., p. 523.

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

2

39

to some account. The Regent, in the hope of getting a speedy and favorable answer to his demands, decided to tip his hand, unofficially: on October 1i the Casket Letters were privately shown to the English commissioners. The latter were properly horrified and wrote a fairly detailed account of them to Elizabeth. 10 Ultimately this maneuver won the game for Moray, because it confirmed Elizabeth in her decision never to rest until the Regent had been compelled to reveal the Letters officially. It was a damaging blow to Maitland's schemes, but he contrived to make the best of it by informing Leslie, and through him Mary, of what had occurred, so that the Scottish Queen would be more amenable to compromise. 11 Norfolk was shocked; his letter of October 11 indicated that he was cured of whatever pro-Marian leanings he may have had. 12 Maitland, who desperately needed a friend in the enemy's camp, nevertheless realized that the Duke was the only possibility, and on October 16, he contrived to have a long private interview with Norfolk. The miracle was accomplished: Norfolk now became extremely favorable to Mary, and revealed to Maitland that the object of Elizabeth's policy was to force an accusation out of Moray. Maitland quickly passed this information on to Mary, though he concealed it from the Regent. 13 What had caused Norfolk's change of heart? Mary's defenders have maintained that Maitland must have proved to Norfolk that the Letters were forgeries. Possibly Maitland did attempt to shake the Duke's confidence in the genuineness of the Letters, but there is no real evidence for this, and there is nothing in Norfolk's record to indicate that he was such a disinterested lover of justice that the proof of Mary's innocence would cause him to place himself in dangerous opposition to his government, especially given the normal Tudor reaction to the disloyalty of noble subjects. One thing, and one 10 October n , 1568, the English commissioners to Elizabeth, in Anderson, Collections, IV, Pt. 11, 58-63. 11 October 14, 1568, Knollys to Norfolk, C.S.P., Scot., II, 529--30. In June Moray had offered to show the Letters to the English, but there is no evidence to showthat he actuallv did so at that time. Sec above, p. 2:9. 12 C.S.P., Scot., II, 528-29. 13 C. October 18, 1568, Leslie to Mary, ibid., pp. 533-34.

240

Y O R K - W E S T M I N S T E R

C O N F E R E N C E

thing alone, could have caused Norfolk's volte-face: Maitland had held out hopes to him of an eventual marriage with Mary. Such a prize, with the prospect of the English succession, would be well worth the risk. Alary understood Maitland's game; on October 21, for the first time, she indicated that she was willing to be divorced from Bothwell. 14 Norfolk now sought out Moray, and in an interview with him proceeded completely to misrepresent Elizabeth's policy. The Queen, he confidently predicted, would never hand down a favorable decision, which explained why she had refused to promise explicitly in writing that she would do so. Furthermore, if Moray produced his accusations against his sister, he would be jeopardizing the Scottish chances for the succession. Norfolk in his eagerness tipped his hand slightly and spoke of the advantages that would accrue to Scotland and to Moray personally if Mary had more children: with each child the Hamiltons' chances of obtaining the Scottish throne would become more and more remote Moray was doubtless aware of what lay behind this rather transparent suggestion, but he was sufficiently impressed by Norfolk's arguments to agree to a compromise proposed by the Duke, which was that Mary should ratify her abdication and agree to reside ir England, in return for which she would receive a pension frorr Scotland and Moray would remain silent on the matter of th( murder. 15 This solution would preserve Moray's regency for hirr and assure the continued dominance of Protestantism; it woulc prevent civil war in Scotland; and it would be impossible for Elizabeth to object, since her avowed object was a reconciliation. Th< Letters could always be kept in reserve, to assure Mary's continued good behavior. So the Regent sent Robert Melville to Bolton to propose thi plan to Mary, and the latter, probably more frightened than sh< cared to admit by Moray's evident willingness to use the Letter if need be, assented. Success was within Maitland's grasp. On Oc tober 2 5 Melville set out for London to present Elizabeth with th< " L a b a n o f f , Recueil, II, 219-22. 15 Sir James Melville, Memoirs of his own Life, pp. 208-9. October, 1569, Mora' to Cecil, in W . Robertson, The History of Scotland, III, 368-74.

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

24I

fait accompli. There he was met by Hemes, who, much to Melville's surprise, knew all about the negotiations, and who countermanded his instructions in Mary's name: the Queen had changed her mind. Maitland's laboriously built edifice came crashing to the ground. He had overreached himself in one particular, and that was enough to ruin him. Norfolk, who had been enticed into the scheme by the bait of a marriage with Mary, had become so bemused by the idea that he had decided that there was no profit in marrying an abdicated dowager when he could have a queen regnant who might, one day, elevate him to the English throne. He had urged Mary to refuse to ratify her abdication, and the latter, knowing that her main hope of success lay in retaining Norfolk on her side, and probably overestimating the influence of the Duke on the English government, had assented.16 Elizabeth, meanwhile, was becoming increasingly annoyed by the snaillike and friendly goings-on at York. This was not what she had had in mind at all. The glaring difference between Moray's private and public statements caused her to decide to expedite matters by removing the conference to Westminster, where she and Cecil could keep an eye on the proceedings; this was done on November 3. 17 She also began to put pressure on Moray by threatening to support Chatelherault's claim to the regency. Moray drew up a long statement to prove that, on constitutional grounds, his claim was superior to Chatelherault's; this matter was evidently argued out at York on October 20, at which time all parties were anxious to avoid discussing the real issues of the conference.18 There were difficulties involved in the transfer and continuation of the conference, as the English well knew. In order to persuade Moray to present his case against Mary, it would be necessary to make some sort of answer to the questions he had raised. On October 30 the English Council resolved to answer the Regent favor18

This paragraph is based mainly on the confession of Robert Melville, made in 1J73, when he was captured by Morton; Melville at that time had gone over to Mary's party. It is cited in Andrew Lang, The Mystery of Mary Stuart, pp. 2067 , 1 1 j - 1 6 . T h e date of Melville's departure for London is established by Knollys's letter of October i$, 1568, CST., Scot., II, 541. 1T S. Haynes, ed., The Burghley Papers (1542-1570), p. 488. is CST., Scot., II, 536-38. Haynes, Burghley Papers, pp. 484-86.

242

Y O R K - W E S T M I N S T E R

C O N F E R E N C E

ably. It also decided that after Moray had produced his evidence, and the conference was over, he was to be permitted to resume his rule in Scotland. Mary was to be removed to a safer place of confinement, to obviate any possibility of her escape. 19 In other words, the threat of support for Chatelherault was simply a bogey to frighten Moray; and, more important, Mary's case had been virtually prejudged. Whatever one's opinion of Mary, it cannot be denied that Elizabeth's conduct of the conference was extremely unfair. There was a further difficulty f o r the English in transferring the conference, which was that M a r y would demand more forcef u l l y than ever that she be allowed to appear and defend herself in person. Mary, in fact, did just that, on November 22, in her new instructions to her commissioners, and considerable weight was given to her demand by Elizabeth's blunder in receiving Moray in audience. 20 This problem had been anticipated by Sussex, who on October 22 warned Cecil against permitting M a r y to appear. If she did, he said, it would prove very difficult to convict her. 21 Mary's defenders have taken this to mean that Sussex was not convinced of the authenticity of the Letters. This is possible, but it is at least equally likely that Sussex felt that if Mary were given an opportunity personally and publicly to repudiate the Letters, it would be extremely risky f o r Elizabeth to decide against her, especially in view of England's rapidly worsening relations with Spain, which reached the breaking point in December 1568. Mary's reputation must be blasted, and no opportunity f o r a real public defense was to be afforded, as the sequel was to show. ii Moray, as he awaited the reopening of the conference at Westminster, had reverted to his position of early October, with some modifications. T h e collapse of Maitland's reconciliation scheme ended any possibilities in that direction. So Moray prepared to 19

Ibid., pp. 487-88. Labanoff, Recueil, II, 232-37- Moray evidently arrived in London about November 13. November 7, 1568, Sussex to Cecil, CS.P., Scot., II, 546. 21 This letter is given in J. Hosack, Mary Queen of Scots and Her Accusers, pp. 517-21.

20

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

243

accuse his sister of murder, provided Elizabeth gave him the necessary guarantees. But now he was willing to accept less definite promises from England. He was worried by the possibility of English support for Chatelherault. It also seems that Elizabeth had got wind of the N o r f o l k marriage plan, though not of Moray's connection with it. She warned Norfolk, but did nothing more. 22 A t all events, Moray was now prepared to settle f o r something less than the formal guarantees he had demanded in October. The conference reopened on November 25 at Westminster, with a much larger English commission this time, the most important addition being Cecil himself. On the following day the English answered Moray's questions in an entirely satisfactory manner. 23 Thus reassured, Moray produced his "eik," or addition to his previous statement, and accused his sister of murder. Melville, in recounting this scene, tells us that even after the English statement Moray was still hesitant, but that the Bishop of Orkney snatched the " e i k " from the hand of Wood and threw it on the table, amid cries of " W e l l done, Bishop T u r p y ! " and that the Regent was greatly embarrassed.24 If this is so, it is obvious that Moray had stage-managed the affair, so that he could claim, if necessary, that the accusation had been produced against his will. T h e fat was now fairly in the fire. There could no longer be any reconciliation between Mary and her brother; furthermore, Moray and Maitland now stood at the parting of the ways. T h e two men drifted further and further apart, because the Secretary, obsessed by his desire to unite the kingdoms, felt that Moray had wrecked all possibility of this by destroying Mary's good name. Within a year there was an open break between them, and Maitland, after Moray's death, became, in Mary's behalf, the soul of the armed opposition to Moray's party. He had come to believe that Elizabeth could be made to grant the succession only by force, and he permitted this idea to dwarf all other considerations in his mind. Maitland adopted this extremely rigid view simply be22

January 20, 1J70, charges against Norfolk, in Haynes, Burghley Papers, pp. 573-75. Melville's story (Memoirs, p. 210), that Morton revealed the plan to the 23 English is improbable. CS.P., Scot., II, 554-55. 24 Melville, Memoirs, pp. 210-12.

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

cause he was so politically minded. He failed to see that, in a religious age, religious considerations were bound to be decisive, even in political matters such as the succession. In this respect Moray was wiser than Maitland. H e never mentioned the succession to Elizabeth again, trusting to time and community of interest, especially religious interest, to solve the problem. A n d solve it they did. 25 Once Moray had made his accusations, the conference moved along at a rapid pace which was much more to Elizabeth's liking. Lennox was allowed to add his voice to those of Mary's other accusers. 26 Mary's commissioners indignantly denied Moray's charges and demanded that Mary be permitted to defend herself in person. 27 On December 3 Leslie informed Elizabeth that the admission of Moray's statement gave grounds f o r a dissolution of the conference, since the English Queen had promised to allow no mention of anything compromising to Mary. 2 8 T h e English Council met the next day to consider the matter. Before the meeting Leslie and Herries blundered badly, telling Cecil and Leicester that they still wanted a compromise and a reconciliation. Such a statement, after Moray had publicly accused Mary of murder, showed their lack of belief in the justice of their cause, and Elizabeth righteously informed them that the time f o r compromise was past. She meant, she said, to charge Moray with slander; pending his conviction or acquittal on this charge, it was impossible f o r her to see Mary. 2 9 It was obvious now that Mary's commissioners were going to withdraw from the conference and declare it dissolved. Elizabeth and Cecil had no intention of ending matters until Moray had revealed his proofs, but it would look better, f o r foreign consumption, if Moray did this while the Marians were still officially participating in the conference. So, on December 6, Leslie's declara25 This interpretation of Maitland's policy substantially follows that of E. Russell, Maitlcmd of Lethington, pp. 403-5. 26 Anderson, Collections, IV, Pt. 11, 121-24. Lennox had been in York when the conference was in session there, but had not been permitted to appear before it. See his letter of October 9, ij68, to Cecil, CS.P., Scot., II, 523-24. 27 Anderson, Collections, IV, Pt. 11, 125-33. 28 29 ¡bid., pp. 133-34, 158-61. Ibid., pp. 134-40.

Y O R K - W E S T M I N S T E R

C O N F E R E N C E

245

tion of dissolution was rejected on technical grounds, and pressure was put on Moray to justify himself. On that day the Regent handed in his Book of Articles, a chronological account of the case against Mary, which, if it is the one printed by Hosack, was largely the work of Buchanan and was highly inaccurate.30 This by no means satisfied Cecil, and in the next few days, before the Marians presented a satisfactory proclamation of dissolution, he got what he wanted. Moray produced the Letters and a good deal of subsidiary material, including Morton's statement as to the discovery of the Casket and the depositions of Bothwell's henchmen, at least one of which was edited in order to protect some of Moray's allies, according to Lang. 31 This material was examined by the English Council on December 14 and 15, and they admitted, after studying Moray's proofs, that in the circumstances it would be dishonorable for Elizabeth to receive Mary. 32 Elizabeth's objective had been attained, but the victory, she now realized, could not be turned fully to account. The situation in Europe was dangerous. England was on the verge of war with Spain, a war which neither Elizabeth nor Cecil wanted, but which might well come if Mary were too roughly handled at this juncture. Furthermore, there was some talk of a Franco-Spanish trade agreement directed against England. 33 Elizabeth therefore found it necessary to temporize. In spite of their "dissolution" of the conference, the Queen called in Herries and Leslie on December 16 and expressed her sorrow at Moray's unexpected revelations. She hoped that Mary would reply to them—not in person, of course; that was impossible—but by messenger. Otherwise it must be presumed that she was guilty. 34 Elizabeth nevertheless would not send copies of Moray's proofs to Mary until the latter promised to answer them.35 Mary, however, refused to make any such 30

Ibid., pp. 144-49. Hosack, Mary Queen of Scots, pp. j 2 2-48. Anderson, Collections, I V , Pt. 11, ijo-59. C.S.P., Scot., II, 730-31. Andrew Lang, A History of Scotland from the Roman Occupation, II, 208, and Mystery of Mary Stuart, pp. 117-25. The Marian declaration of dissolution was accepted on 32 December 9. Anderson, Collections, IV, Pt. 11, 170-78. 33 December 28, 1568, La Mothe-Fenelon to Catherine de Medici, in A. Teulet, ed., Correspondance diplomatique de La Mothe-Fenelon, I, 70-73. 34 Anderson, Collections, IV, Pt. 11, 179-82. 35 December 20, 1568, Elizabeth to Knollys, C.S.P., Scot., II, 586-88. Elizabeth's 31

246

Y O R K - W E S T M I N S T E R

C O N F E R E N C E

promise—which w o u l d have been tantamount to a c k n o w l e d g i n g English jurisdiction over her—until she had seen the documents. A deadlock resulted. Elizabeth did not really want M a r y to d e f e n d herself, however. H e r real objective n o w was, curiously enough, v e r y similar to Maitland's plan of October. O n D e c e m b e r 2 2 she instructed K n o l l y s to suggest to M a r y that she should r a t i f y her abdication and recognize M o r a y ' s government. If M a r y did this, the w h o l e business w o u l d g o no further—Elizabeth w o u l d pronounce no judgment. 3 8 M a r y w o u l d have none of this, h o w e v e r . N o w that she had been accused of the murder, her acquiescence in this plan w o u l d be a virtual admission of guilt. 3 7 Elizabeth was not to get out of her predicament so easily as that. It w a s necessary, however, f o r the Queen to do something. M o r a y w a s clamoring f o r a decision; he had to go home, w h e r e conditions w e r e most unsettled. O n J a n u a r y 10, therefore, the R e g e n t and his colleagues w e r e summoned before the English commissioners, and Cecil pronounced his Queen's judgment: nothing had been said which in any w a y impaired their honor or allegiance. A t the same time, they had said nothing which could induce Elizabeth to think badly of M a r y . 3 8 In other words, both sides w e r e innocent. A s T y t l e r rightly observes, this "is perhaps the most absurd judicial opinion ever left upon r e c o r d . " 3 9 B u t Elizabeth, of course, was not concerned with justice. She had never had any intention of deciding in f a v o r of M a r y . But at this juncture it w a s politically impossible f o r her f o r m a l l y to pronounce in f a v o r of M o r a y , on account of the danger of w a r w i t h Spain. 4 0 Practically, of course, the decision was favorable to M o r a y . H e w a s permitted to return home, and M a r y w a s retained decision on this point was supported by the English Council on January 13, 1569. Ibid., pp. 600-601. 36 Haynes, Burghley Papers, pp. 497-98. Whatever Mary's answer, however, the English had decided to support Moray's government. See Cecil's memorandum of December 22, 1568, CS.P., Scot., II, 589. 37 January 9, 1569, Mary's Declaration, in Labanoff, Recueil, II, 274-77. 38 D. Calderwood, The History of the Kirk of Scotland, II, 471-72. 38 P. F. Tytler, History of Scotland, VII, 217. 40 On January 3 the news of Alva's embargo on English property in the Netherlands reached London. Four days later England retaliated in kind, and on January 8, two days before Elizabeth's pronouncement, the Spanish ambassador was placed under house arrest. J. B. Black, The Reign of Elizabeth, p. 97.

Y O R K - W E S T M I N S T E R

C O N F E R E N C E

2

47

in England as a prisoner. Small wonder that, as the French ambassador reported, Moray left for Scotland well pleased with the results of the conference. 41 It is difficult to justify any of the parties to the conference on moral grounds. In spite of the accusations leveled against her, Mary emerges with more credit than anyone else, simply because her opponents, and Elizabeth in particular, were so manifestly dishonest and unfair. As Lang says, "It was the fate of Elizabeth and of Murray [sic] to make Mary's appear the better cause by the incredible dishonesty and hypocritical futility with which they handled her case." 42 For Elizabeth no defense is possible. Moray, at least, was not responsible for the fact that his accusations went unanswered. The principal charge against him is that he deliberately manipulated his evidence in order to protect those of his associates who were involved in the murder. W e have seen why he found it necessary to do this. Aside from this, the Regent's role was not especially discreditable; he has suffered in the eyes of posterity more by association with Elizabeth's crookedness than for his own iniquities. The whole affair was a sorry business at best. It is not to be denied that the chief gainers were Moray and his party, for Mary's reputation was hopelessly besmirched, and her political prospects mortally damaged, and Elizabeth's triumph over her rival was to prove far more costly and dangerous to England than she had ever imagined it could be. iii Moray had been impatient for some time to get back to Scotland. As early as October 15 he had complained to Elizabeth that the conference was dragging and that, unless he could return home soon, Scotland would soon be in chaos.43 Actually the situation in Scotland at this time was not particularly bad. There was a good deal of Border turmoil, as always, and an outbreak of the plague in Edinburgh, but until mid-December the Regent's parti41 January 30, 1569, La Mothe-Fénélon to Catherine de Medici, in Teulet, Cor42 respondance diplomatique, I, 160-62. Lang, History of Scotland, II, 209. 43 C.S.P., Scot., II, 530. See also his statement of October 21, 1568, ibid., pp. 536— 38.

248

Y O R K - W E S T M I N S T E R

C O N F E R E N C E

sans, Mar, Kirkcaldy, and the rest, kept matters pretty well in hand.44 In December, however, the situation rapidly worsened. This was due to ¿Moray's public accusation of Mary. N o reconciliation between brother and sister was possible after this, and Mary began to do what she could to stir up trouble north of the Tweed. About December 1 o she wrote to the Commendator of Arbroath, one of the Hamiltons, and to others, accusing Moray and Elizabeth of plotting to do what Henry V I I I had attempted in the 1540s. Little James and the leading fortresses of Scotland were to be handed over to England. Moray planned to declare himself the next heir and to recognize English suzerainty over Scotland.45 All of this was designed to rouse the country against Moray, and in spite of the falsity of Mary's charges she was successful in putting an end to the uneasy truce which had existed in Scotland since August. Argyle, Huntly, and the Hamiltons were preparing to rise, Hunsdon warned on December 20.46 B y the thirty-first things had become bad enough for Kirkcaldy to write a rather alarmist letter to Moray, urging him to hurry home as soon as possible.47 The Marians made some progress against the Regent's men.48 Early in January Mary attempted to add fuel to the fire by means of the "Protestation of Huntly and Argyle," discussed above, and by announcing to her friends the imminent prospect of French and Spanish aid.49 Shortly thereafter Huntly and Argyle had the effrontery to request the officials of Edinburgh to issue their proclamation summarizing Mary's letter of December 1 o.60 Kirkcaldy, far from making a defiant reply, wrote a polite letter to 41

R . Lindsay of Pitscottie, The Chronicles of Scotland, II, 213. On the Border situation at this time, see Hunsdon's letters of November IJ and December 6, 1568, Calendar of the Manuscripts of the Marquis of Salisbury, I, 371, 376. 46 45 Haynes, Burghley Papers, pp. 496-97. C.S.P., Scot., II, 574-7J. 4T CS.P., Scot., II, 594. 49 T . Thomson, ed., A Diurnal of Remarkable Occurrents that Have Passed within the Country of Scotland, p. 139. January 8, 1569, Huntly to Mary, in C. Innes, ed., Registrum Honoris de Morton, I, 39-40. 49 See above, pp. 183-84. January 18, 1569. Mary to Archbishop Hamilton, C.S.P., Scot., II, 604. 50 Innes, Registrum Honoris de Morton, I, 40-41. Argyle actually did issue this proclamation, which is given in A . I. Cameron and R . S. Rait, eds.. The Warrender Papers, I, 57-60.

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

249

Huntly. He was sure, he said, that Moray was being maligned.51 Moray, on hearing of this, felt it necessary to ask Elizabeth to proclaim publicly that these stories were lies, which the Queen accordingly did, on January 22.62 Enough has been said to indicate that Moray's presence was urgently needed in Scotland. The conference had ended, and Mary's commissioners, when asked point-blank by the Regent if they wanted to accuse him of any connection with the murder of Darnley, had replied in the negative, after considerable shuffling.63 The Border was rapidly being reduced to absolute chaos, and even Hume was having much ado to defend his position.84 Yet still Moray delayed. One reason was his financial embarrassment; this was eased by a loan of £ 5,000 from Elizabeth.65 But it was not primarily lack of money which kept the Regent in England. It was fear for his own safety. Moray knew that Argyle and Huntly were preparing to resist his return by force. 66 But this did not worry him so much as his journey through northern England, which was heavily Catholic and very much aroused by his attack on Mary. He rightly discerned that the man chiefly responsible for this unhappy situation was Norfolk, who was embittered by the public accusation of Mary: it made his marriage to her far less feasible. Some writers have represented Moray's accusation of his sister as a "betrayal" of Norfolk, since he had agreed at York not to reveal the evidence against her. This is sheer nonsense. Moray made that pledge with specific reservations: he would honor it only if Elizabeth's policy turned out to be what Norfolk said it was, and if Mary consented 51 January 14, 1569, Kirkcaldy to Huntly, CS.P., Scot., II, 607-8. Kirkcaldy had been Captain of Edinburgh Castle since September, 1 $67. Thomson, Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 124. 52 January 21, 1569, Moray to Cecil, CS.P., Scot., II, 607. Elizabeth's proclamation is given in Calderwood, History of the Kirk, II, 474-76. 53 Ibid., pp. 472-73. G . Buchanan, The History of Scotland, II, J47-48. Leslie's "Discourse," in Anderson, Collections, III, 33-34. Moray took this step because Mary, in a set of instructions to her representatives, dated December 19, 1568, denied the charge of murder and accused Moray's party of the crime. Labanoff, Recueil, II, 257-61. 64 January 15, January 19, 1569, Hunsdon to Cecil, Calendar of the Manuscripts 55 of the Marquis of Salisbury, I, 391-92. C.S.P., Scot., II, 603. 66 January 1 j , 1569, Hunsdon to Cecil, in Haynes, Burghley Papers, pp. 502-3.

2$0

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

to ratify her abdication. On neither count did the conditions hold good: Elizabeth had promised, fairly definitely, to condemn Mary if the facts warranted an adverse judgment, and Alary had not ratified her abdication—at Norfolk's instigation. If anyone was guilty of betrayal in this business, Norfolk was. Nevertheless the Duke was aggrieved, and the Regent, fearing that " m y throat might be cut before I came to Berwick," as he put it, decided to approach him.®7 Moray met the Duke at Hampton Court, and, by his own admission, brought up the subject of Norfolk's marriage to Mary. The Regent said that he had been forced to accuse Mary in order to save himself, but that he really had nothing but affection for his sister, and could wish her no better husband than Norfolk—provided Elizabeth consented.58 Norfolk, more ambitious than intelligent, was taken in by this, and ordered his friends in the north to stay their hands.59 Mary was not optimistic about the situation, but she knew that her marriage to the Duke was, for the present, the only possibility that offered any hope at all of regaining her former position. So on January 30 she wrote Archbishop Hamilton, telling him to have her partisans in Scotland adopt a waiting game on Moray's return; she had reason to believe, she said, that the Regent would not attempt to handle them severely. 80 Moray's behavior in this affair was certainly something less than straightforward. B y no conceivable stretch of the imagination could he have desired a marriage between Mary and Norfolk, except on condition that Mary ratify her abdication, but of this he made no mention. His motive in bringing the matter up was, as he explained to Cecil, simply to make sure that he would get back home with a whole skin. In his description of the affair Moray went on to say that he adopted this course because he also feared that, in spite of all, some sort of compromise with Mary might be 5T

October, 1569, Moray to Cecil, in Robertson, History of Scotland, III, 368-74. October, 1569, Moray to Cecil, ibid., pp. 368-74. 59 Norfolk's northern allies obeyed his instructions, although the Catholic Westmoreland collected a force and demonstrated for Moray's benefit, by wav of persuading the Regent to continue to favor Norfolk. Melville, Memoirs, p. 115. 00 Labanon, Recueil, II, 294-95. ss

Y O R K - W E S T M I N S T E R

C O N F E R E N C E

25I

crammed down his throat by Elizabeth, and he had good grounds for this fear, since Elizabeth had refused to render a favorable decision at the conference. Nevertheless, as the sequel was to show, even if Elizabeth did want a compromise, this particular one was most distasteful to her. Moray doubtless guessed as much, and by making his approval dependent on that of Elizabeth, he left himself with an almost infallible means of wrecking the whole marriage scheme. It was fortunate for Moray that Norfolk, whose head was turned by his dreams of a crown, did not see the pitfalls that awaited him. B y the end of January Moray was on his way north. Elizabeth provided him with an escort through northern England, and ordered her Marcher Wardens to recognize Moray's government and to admit no Scot to England who did not carry the Regent's passport.61 This was further than Elizabeth had ever gone before on the path to complete official recognition of James V I . Moray on January 31 thanked her and Cecil for the escort and for publicly denying the rumors which the Marians were spreading, and urged Cecil to be sure that Mary could not escape.62 These letters were written from Berwick; on February 2 the Regent entered Edinburgh. 83 Moray had every right to feel satisfied with the results of his four months' sojourn in England. He had picked his way through a maze of intrigue and had come out with virtually all he wanted. From the strictly judicial point of view, of course, the conference had settled nothing. N o verdict of "guilty" had been handed down. But Moray, and everyone else, knew that, allowance being made for the exigencies of the foreign situation, English support could now be depended on, and with that support the dominance of Protestantism was assured. This did not mean, however, that the Regent's troubles were over. There remained the problem of Mary's supporters in Scotland, a problem which had increased in seriousness owing to the conference. The patent dishonesty of the proceedings at West61 63

Haynes, Burghley Papers, pp. 501-2. Thomson, Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 139.

62

Ibid., pp. JOJ-6.

252

YORK-WESTMINSTER

CONFERENCE

minster, coupled with Mary's belated decision to renounce Bothwell, had produced a split in the Regent's party. Maitland and his friends must be regarded as enemies from now on. Moray had gained more than he lost, for the support of Elizabeth was more valuable than that of Maitland. Nevertheless the difficulties were great. T o these difficulties the Regent now addressed himself.

C H A P T E R

X I I

The jÇast Tear of the

33

Calvin, John, 3; 64; Knox a disciple of, 22; letter to, re monarchia! idolatry, 9°

Calvinism, distinctive stamp upon Scottish Protestantism, 22, 23; and Confession of Faith, 64; great public characters fashioned by, 284; see also Knox, Protestantism Carberry Hill, 197 Carew, Henry, 268 Carlisle, 151

INDEX

296 Carlos, Don, son of Philip II, most desirable match f o r Queen Mary, 75, 1 1 1 ; negotiations f o r the marriage, 75, 112 ff.; scheme brought to naught, 114; effect of negotiations on English policy, 1 1 9 ff. Casket Letters, 188, 240; Lords gain possession of: trump cards against M a r y , 202; exhibited in Parliament, 220; Moray offers to reveal, 229; privately shown to English commissioners: account of them sent to Elizabeth, 239; produced by Moray, 145 Cassilis, Gilbert Kennedy, 4th Earl of, 23277,

256

Cateau-Cambresis, Peace of, 3, 4, 34 Catherine de Medici, Queen of France, 74; opposed to a Spanish marriage f o r M a r y , 7$, 1 1 4 - 1 5 ; in alliance with Guises, 1 1 1 - 1 2 , 114-15; offer to renew alliance with Scotland, 202; attempt to win over Moray, 206-8 Catholic Church, see Roman Catholic Church Catholic League, talk of a, 145, 159 Cecil, Sir William, 58, 67, 69, 72, 80, 85, 86, 94, 125, 127, 129, 153, 156, 162, 164, I6J, 167, 174, 177, 184, 185, 192, J1 J i *33. 2 3J> *4>. 2 4*. *44i 145. 150. 2 j 1, 254, 267-9; ways out of dilemma re heir to English crown, 5-6; problem of English aid to Scottish Protestants put before, 44; convinced Scottish link with France must be snapped, 45; caution of, 4546; letter to Knox: fears Congregation might come to terms with Regent, 46; sends Sadler north, 47; asked to aid Arran, 47; urged to send financial aid to Congregation, 48; policy toward Scotland, 48, 83; urges Protestants to attack Leith, 50; decides on intervention, 54 ff.; sent to negotiate with French, 59; negotiates T r e a t y of Edinburgh, 59-62; L o r d James confers with, 76, 79; dislike of plan f o r Mary's succession, 84; and the problem of the interview between the queens, 95, 96, 102, 103; attitude toward a Catholic marriage f o r M a r y , 119; did not want her to marry at all, 119, 122; not anxious to

have her wed Darnley, 124; taken in by "foreign threat," 130; pressed to fulfill pledge to M o r a y , 147 f.; Moray's reliance upon, 193; policy after Carberry, 203; Moray's steadfast ally, 213; persuades Elizabeth to support Moray's government, 226; urges him to reduce country to obedience, 228; commissioner at Westminster, 243; pronounces Elizabeth's judgment, 246; attitude toward restoration of M a r y , 259-60; and N o r f o l k marriage plan, 260-61; sympathized with Moray's policy, 281 Charles I X , King of France, 74; Philip's fear that Mary might wed, 1 1 4 ; hand not offered to M a r y , 1 1 5 ; approves Darnley match, 140; sponsor f o r Prince James, 185 Chase-about Raid, Moray's revolt, 13552; see further Stewart, James, Earl of Moray Chatelherault, James Hamilton, D u k e of, 104, 200, 263; heir apparent to Scottish throne: regency, 15 ff.; promoting marriage of son to Queen M a r y , 17; ousted as Regent, 18; made Duke of Chatelherault, 19; logical choice to resume regency, 28; rights safeguarded, 29-31, 56; Protestants favor: trying to keep a foot in each camp, 34; continuance in Regent's camp, 40; effort to keep him on her side, 42; Protestants' hope of winning, 44; scheme to bring about his adhesion to Congregation, 45; scheme bearing fruit, 47; importance, 48; joins Congregation, 49; leads Congregation into Edinburgh, 50; on committee to govern kingdom after deposition of Mary of Guise, 50; a dubious asset to Congregation, 52; Treaty of Berwick negotiated in name of, 56n\ pleased b y property clauses of Treaty of Edinburgh, 60; upset by Elizabeth's rejection of Arran, 72; forced to surrender D u m barton Castle, 101; Knox's Protestant band aimed at, 108; allied with Moray and A r e y l e , 135, 144; personal motives of, 136; would M o r a y have elevated to throne? 143; warned

INDEX not to aid Moray, 144; and Edinburgh fiasco, 146; accepts Elizabeth's offer of asylum, 151; conditions of his peace with Mary, 156; submission to Moray sought, 214; French reject request to assist Mary, 231; granted permission by France to return home, 232; Elizabeth's threat to support claim to regency, 241; a false threat, 242; Moray worried by possibility of English support for, 243; request for protection against Moray, 254; agreement with Moray, 255; Moray's meeting with: refusal to acknowledge authority of James VI, 256; clapped into Edinburgh Castle, 256; Kirkcaldy threatens to release, 271; death, 278; see also Hamiltons Church see Roman Catholic Church Church property, feuing of lands, 1213; a factor in conversion of nobility to Protestantism, 22-23; Morton and Lome greedy for land, 26; iconoclasm of Protestants, 36-37; Lcith settlement provides protection for, 43; not discussed at Reformation Parliament, 64; Knox demands, for Kirk, 64-6$; settlement of 1561-62, 91-93; Kirk demands complete control of, 201; Kirk fails to acquire, 219 Cockbum, Sir James, of Skirling, 193, 2i8n

Cockburn, John, of Ormiston, 99; robbed by Bothwell, J3 Coldstream, 267 Coligny, Admiral, 206, 284 Condé, Louis, Prince de, 206 Confession of Faith, 64-65; opposition to, 67 Congregation, the, see Protestants, Protestant party Congregation, wars of the, 6, 27-62; see further Protestantism; Protestants; Protestant party Convention of the Estates, see Estates, Convention of the Corrichie, battle of, 107, 126, 2j8 Council, see Privy Council Council of Trent, see Trent, Council of Craigmillar, Castle of: conference on problem of Darnley, 183-85

297 Crawford, David Lindsay, 10th Earl of, 232«, 2J7

Crawford, Thomas, 265 Croft, Sir James, 53; urged to encourage Congregation, 46; his aid, 55 Crossraguel, Abbey of, 126 Cupar, 40 Darnley, Henry, Lord: 143, 180; suggested as husband for Queen Mary, 7j; Mary preparing counterstroke revolving around, 123; his place in the English succession, 123; English attitude toward marriage of, with Mary, 124,130, 137; Moray's attitude toward marriage of, with Mary, 125, 131, 133-34, '37-38; Mary must get into Scotland, 126, 128; could not marry without Elizabeth's consent: permitted to go to Scotland, 130; causes antagonisms in Scotland, 13132; attack of measles: Mary infatuated with, 133; belief that marriage would jeopardize Protestantism, 13J, 150-51; Knox worried by possibility of marriage, 136; Maitland's attitude, 138-39; created Earl of Ross: oath of allegiance to Mary, 139; ordered home, 139; Spain and France approve marriage of, with Mary, 140; rumor of plan to kidnap: refused to obey Elizabeth's orders of recall, 140; a nonentity: unpopular, 142, 160; marriage would mean collapse of friendship with England, 142; marriage to Mary: proclaimed King, 144; no proof of plan to murder Moray, 144; proclamation of as King without consent of Parliament, illegal, 149; at Mass, 149; friction with Mary, 160-61; wants crown matrimonial, 161, 163; motives for elimination of Riccio, 162-63; promises to Moray and his friends: their promises to him, 163-65; tool used to break Catholic threat, 166; after Riccio's murder orders Parliament dissolved, 167; Mary turns to, for aid, 167; asks pardon for conspirators, 168; escape to Dunbar, 168; proclaims his innocence of murder: fellow conspirators enraged, 172; treacheries revealed, doom sealed,

INDEX

298 Darnley, Henry, Lord (Continued) 173; full blame for murder laid on, 173; Temporary reconciliation with Mary, 176; threatens Moray's life, 177; erratic behavior, 181; responsible for Queen's illness, 182; conference at Craigmillar on problem of, 183-85; events leading to murder and its accomplishment, 184 ff., 190; aftermath of murder: its consequences, 191 ff.; great men involved could not be prosecuted, 217; pursuit of lesser men involved, 217-18; Elizabeth to use murder to blast Mary's reputation, 227; Maitland accused of foreknowledge of murder of, 265 Denmark, Frederick II, King of, Mary not interested in marrying, 78; refuses to extradite Bothwell, 215 De Silva, Guzman, Spanish ambassador, 140; report of interview between Elizabeth and Moray, 154; conversations with Moray, 206, 209 Dieppe, 24. 206 Douglas, Archibald, Earl of Angus, 26n, 12j Douglas, George, plan to accuse Moray of complicity in Riccio's murder, 174 Douglas, George, of Lochleven, 220 Douglas, James, Earl of Morton, see under Morton Douglas, Margaret, Lady, see Lennox, Margaret, Countess of Douglas, Margaret Erskine, 9871; Lord James illegitimate son of, 17-18 Douglas, Robert, of Lochleven, husband of Moray's mother, 17, 18 Douglas, Robert, of Lochleven, halfbrother of Moray, 98« Douglas, Sir William, of Lochleven, 198; effort to bribe Riccio, 1J9 Drury, Sir William, 174, 194, 220, 231, 273 Du Croc, Philibert, sieur, 18m, 183; believes Mary guilty of murder of Damley, 192, 198 Dudley, Robert, Earl of Leicester, 84, 153, 156, 244, 27j; Elizabeth's flirtation with: death of wife, 70; negotiations for marriage with Mary and succession, 119-33, P^sim; Elizabeth

promised to look into succession question if Mary married, 137; and Norfolk marriage scheme, 262 Dumbarton Castle, 100; surrendered to Queen Mary, 101; only strong fortress in hands of Marians, 214, 224; siege of, 225; Glencairn and Sempill to conduct siege of, 264; revictuaied, 2

73

Dumfries, 146, 148, 224 Dunbar, 55, 167; Regent retires to, 41; Mary and Darnley escape to, 168; fighting men streaming into, 169; surrender, 214 Dunblane, William Chisholm, Bishop of, 149, 150, 21571; attempt to get French help for Mary, 232« Dundee, 37; witches burned at, 258-59 Dundee, James Haliburton, Provost of: property seized, 145 Dunfermline, Commendator of, see Pitcairn, Robert Dunkeld, meeting of nobles at, 192, 194 Edinburgh, 10, 42, 50, 55, 59, 64«, 97, 145, 168, 182, 190, 214, 248, 269, 271, 273; outbreaks against French 21; St. Giles Day riot, 32; Protestant forces enter: weakness: strength of French forces, 41; Protestants to evacuate, 43; re-enter, 50; evacuate again, 53; town council orders Catholics to leave: officials deposed, 90; Mass said in Queen's chapel: its consequences, 117; Moray enters in force for Bothwell's "law day," 136-37; Moray's fiasco at, 146; Catholic evensong and Mass in, 149; a Catholic made provost of, 150; Mary enters in force, 169, 172; Damley taken to, by Queen Mary, 188-89; explosion, at Kirk of Field, 190; Mary led into as captive, 197; public opinion of, hostile to Mary, 204; Moray enters, 209; Moray proclaimed Regent at, 210-n; Moray returns to, 251; conference to be held at, 255; Moray buried at, 275 Edinburgh, Treaty of, 61, 63», 69, 78, 84; negotiations leading to, 59-62; problems of armorial bearings and Treaty of Berwick, 60-61; provision re complaints of Catholic clerics defied, 66; approved by Parliament, 66;

INDEX Francis and Mary refuse to ratify Scottish part, 66; efforts to procure Mary's ratification of, 76, 84, 94, 157; Mary refuses to ratify, 78, 82; problem becoming acute: the demceps clause, 82-83; Elizabeth agrees to consider revision of demceps clause, 95, 96; why obnoxious to Mary, 97; England no longer insists on immediate ratification, 103; Elizabeth willing to negotiate a revision, 186 Edinburgh Casue, in hands of Erskine, 41; Congregation fails to obtain, 43; Mary of Guise enters, 57; Bothwell imprisoned in: escapes, 101 ; Arran confined in, 101; Erskine holds against Moray, 146; James V I born in, 176-77; Cockbum of Skirling Captain of, 193; Balfour Captain of, 197«; murder band rumored destroyed in, 218; Kircaldy Captain of, 2491; Chatelherault and Herries clapped into, 256; Maitland removed to, 265-66 Edward VI, 22; Henry VIII's desire to wed to Queen Mary, 15 Eglinton, Hugh Montgomerie, 3rd Earl of, 196, 23272; leaves Moray's party, 216 Elboeuf, René, Marquis d', 99 Elizabeth, Queen of England, 58, 60, 74, 77, 82, 86, 138, 152, 1 $6, ij8, 164, 167, 207, 236, 238, 244, 248, 250, 261, 268; accession, j , 33; unlikely to engage in foreign adventures, 34; aid to Congregation, 54; wants to end struggle in Scotland, 57, 59; and Arran marriage plan, 67 ff.; flirtation with Dudley: refusal to marry Arran, 70; conditions of recognition of Mary as heir, 72-73; Lord James confers with, 76, 79; efforts to obtain ratification of Treaty of Edinburgh (q.v.), 76, 78, 82-83, 9j, 96; refused Mary safe-conduct through England, 78, 8j; Lord James's letter to, on succession question, 83-84; Lord James's hope for agreement between Mary and, before Mary's return, 85; belated volte-face on safe-conduct, 85, 94; on succession question, 95; negotiations for interview with Mary, 95, 97, 101, 102; interview opposed on

299 account of religious strife in France, 102; postponed, 103-4; intervention in civil war in France on side of Huguenots: 1 1 1 ; illness of, 1 1 1 ; believes Catholic marriage for Mary serious threat to throne, 119; did not want Mary to marry at all, 119, 122; on Mary's marriage to Dudley, 119 ff.; building up Damley as a potential successor, 123; attitude toward return of Lennox family to Scotland, 123, 124, 125; not anxious to have Mary wed Darnley, 124, 137, 142; Mary's attempt to throw dust in eyes of, 127; talcen in by Mary's "foreign threat," 130; will make no decision on succession question, 13132; insincere in offer of Leicester to Mary, 133; vainly orders Damley home, 139-40; prepared to support Moray, 142; Moray requests aid from, 143, 147; decision not to support Moray, 145; pressed to fulfill pledge to Moray, 147 f.; offer of asylum accepted by Moray, 151; interview with Moray and Abbot of Kilwinning, 154; collusion in interview, 1 JJ; overture to Mary in behalf of Moray, 157; aware of plot against Riccio: minatory letter to Mary, 165; requested to hand over Morton and associates to Mary: urged by Moray to shelter them, 174; forced to be circumspect in regard to Morton, 175; not pleased by birth of heir to Mary, 177; Mary compared with, 179-80; sponsor for Prince James, r8j; baptismal gift, 186; willing to discuss succession question and to negotiate a revision of Treaty of Edinburgh, 186; advises Mary to avenge murder of Darnley, 191; policy always a calculated one, 193; Kirkcaldy asks support of, 195; Melville sent to pacify, after Mary's marriage, 196; desires Mary's restoration, 201, 233, 260; sends Throckmorton to demand it, 201; reason for lords' refusal to submit to, 201-2; policy toward Mary disliked by Maitland and Throckmorton: shift in attitude, 203; angered at Moray, 209; refusal to deal with Moray's ap-

300 Elizabeth, Queen of England (Cont.) pointees: change in attitude, 213; authorized Border Wardens to collaborate with Moray's, 213, 216; efforts to obtain extradition of Bothwell, zi5; Mary's jewels sold to, 219, 221; effort to persuade Hamiltons to rise, 220; refuses to recognize Moray's regency: negotiates with him unofficially, 221; Moray's most effective card in reestablishing relations with, 222; drastic shift in Scottish policy of, 226; determined to force Moray to reveal proofs of Mary's iniquity, 226, 239; what she really wanted, 226«; letter to Mary: decision to blast her reputation and justify her imprisonment, 227; sternness toward Moray, 228-29; Moray's pertinent and embarrassing question, 229; Moray evades demands of, 230; refuses to allow Mary to request French aid, 231, 233; refuses Lennox's request to appear at trial, 233; promise that u guilty Mary would not be restored, 233, 238; commission nominated to represent, at York, 235; Norfolk misrepresents policy of, 240; annoyed by goings-on at York: decision to remove conference to Westminster, 241; conduct of conference unfair, 242 ; feigns sorrow at Moray's revelations: hopes Mary would reply, 245; forced to temporize, 245; does not want Mary to defend herself, 246; absurd judicial opinion: not concerned with justice, 246; triumph proved costly and dangerous to England: dishonesty and hypocrisy, 247; proclaims stories maligning Moray to be lies: loans Moray C 5,000, 249; move toward recognition of James V I , 251 ; Marians disheartened by shift of, 254; effort to eliminate Mary as source of danger: proposals to Moray, 259-60; cause of renewed friendliness to Mary, 262; suggestions for Mary's restoration rejected, 263; threatening letters to Moray, 264; enraged by news of Norfolk marriage scheme: demands information from Moray, 267; demand that Moray turn

INDEX Northumberland over to her, 272; Moray demands help from, 272-73; reaction to Moray's death, 275; brings about Lennox's regency, 276; aids King's Party, 276; signed Mary's death warrant, 278; policy marked by vacillation and inconsistency, 281; why supported French and Dutch Protestants, 282 Elphinstone, Nicholas, Moray's messenger to Mary, 207; carried conditions of surrender of Northumberland to England, 272 England, Protestantism in, 4; question of succession to throne of, 5-6, 74-75, 83-84, 94-97, 186, 280-81; tax-collecting system compared with Scotland's, 8; revenues of, compared with Scotland's, 1 1 ; James V's policy toward, 14; growing sentiment in Scotland for alliance with, 16 (see also Anglo-Scottish alliance); war with Scotland, 16, 18, 24-25; persecution in, 20; Congregation's hope for support of: problem put before Cecil (q.v.), 44 ff.; Protestants appeal to, for aid, 46; Arran arrives in, 48; Maitland's policy of friendship with, 51-52, 280; alliance with, a principle of Moray's, 52, 209, 280-81; plea for open intervention of, 53; promise of military aid to Congregation. 54; plea to, to hurry aid, 55; Treaty of Berwick negotiated with, 55-56; negotiation between France and, 5862; difficult diplomatic situation owing to Spanish pressure, 58; Scots seek alliance of, through Arran marriage, 67-70; rigid attitude on ratification of Treaty of Edinburgh, (q.v.), 82-83; a n d Border problem (q.v.), 93-94; and Mary's marriage, Chap. V , passim, 135-144; Moray takes refuge in, 151-52; friendship as dangerous as her enmity, 156; importance of Riccio murder in history of, 169-170; Scottish relations with, after murder, 174-75; lords not dependent on aid of, 201; Moray's friendliness to, 212-13, 221-22, 280-81; aloofness could not continue on account of problem of Borders, 213; Moray's attempt to exert pressure

INDEX on, by friendly gestures to France, 221; danger of war with Spain, 242, 245, 246; Catholics aroused by Moray's attacks on Mary, 249; support of, could now be depended on, 251; Northern Rebellion, 263, 26871; significance of Morton's regency for alliance with Scotland, 277; Moray's contributions to, 280; Protestant, Anglophile Scotland of cardinal importance to, 281; effect of elimination of Catholicism in, on Europe, 282; see further under Cecil, Sir William; Elizabeth, Queen of England Errol, Earl of, 98 Erskine, John, 6th Lord, later Earl of Mar, 181, 248, 255, 27m; appointed governor of Edinburgh Castle, 41-, refusal to join Protestants, 43; neutrality, 52; aid sought by Mary of Guise, 54; to be bribed to remain neutral, 55; receives Regent into Edinburgh Castle, 57; Knox's abuse of, 65; claims title of Earl of Mar, 97; becomes Earl of Mar: turns guns of Edinburgh Castle on Moray, 146; a follower of Moray, 176; given captaincy of Stirling and charge of Prince, 193; a key figure in Stirling meeting, 196; a leader of the rebels against Mary, 199; as Regent: death, 276, 278 Erskine, John, of Dun: aids Knox in plan to convert nobility, 22; revolutionary document signed by, 26; explanation of assembly of Protestants at Perth, 35-36; Protestant representative there, 37; must be killed to root out Protestantism, 47; a superintendent of the Kirk, 63 Estates, Convention of the: difference between Parliament and, 8n; to select men to make up governing council, dominated by Congregation, 61; meeting to determine Protestants' position, 71; commissioners sent by Queen Mary to summon, 76; Mary to seek consent of, to marry foreign prince, 78; meeting of May, 1561, 80; to settle religious question, 89; called to decide question of Mary's restoration, 262; proposals rejected, 263

30I Feuing, feu farms to meet insecurity of land tenure, 12; of Church lands, 1213, 92-93; adverse effects of, for peasants, 24; feus by Catholic prelates declared void, 66; Mary uses power to confirm feu charters to gain support, 142 Fife, 41; Lord James repulses English raids, 18; invaded by Regent's troops, 40; a Protestant stronghold, 40; need of a fleet to protect, 54; Lord James prepares to defend, 54; invasion of, 55; Mary deals with Moray's supporters in, 147 Findlater, Castle of: refused to surrender to Mary, 106; siege of, 106-7 First Band of the Lords of the Congregation, 26, 28 Fleet, English: Congregation's need for aid of, 54; arrival of, in the Forth, 55 Fleming, John, jth Lord, 232«; Captain of Dumbarton, 225«; forfeiture, 231 Fleming, Mary, Maitland in love with, Foix, Paul de, French ambassador in England, 154, 162 Forrester, an Edinburgh burgess, 266; Maitland lodged in house of, 265 Forster, Sir John, i8j; appointed commissioner for Border questions, 158 France, 3, 33, 42, 68, 79, 84, 112, 128, 145; Protestantism in, 4, 282; Scottish alliance with, 14, 17; unpopular, 16, 20-22; Mary of Guise represents cause of, in Scotland, 18-19; Knox urges action against, 24; request for aid in Hapsburg-Valois wars, 24-25; Mary of Guise committed to policy of French domination in Scotland: anti-French feeling, 25-26; policy of absentee government for Scotland, 28; attitude toward marriage treaty (q.v.), 29-30; Protestants use defense of Chatelherault's rights against, 3435, 50, 56; plan to make Scotland a dependency of, 44; English attitude toward, 44-45; plan to aid Mary of Guise, 50; Lord James's attitude toward, 51-52; threat of a Protestant revolt against Guises, 54; expedition to aid Mary of Guise wrecked, 56; proposals for a settlement with England, 57; negotiations with England

302 France (Continued) and the Congregation, 58-62; rumor of new invasion of Scotland, 67; threat of invasion by, eliminated after death of Francis, 70; Catherine de Medici in control of, 74; Mary wishes to renew alliance with, 76; Mary departs from, 86-87; religious strife in, 102-3; Elizabeth intervenes in, 1 1 1 ; attitude toward Spanish match, 114-15; approval of Darnley match, 140; Mary's request for aid from, 150; government advises Mary to avenge murder of Darnley, 191; offer to aid coalition of lords of Scotland, 196, 201-2; Moray the subject of hostile Catholic scrutiny in, 206; efforts to win Moray to an alliance with, 207-8; failure in this, 213; Moray makes friendly gestures toward, 221-22; Elizabeth refuses to allow Mary to ask aid from, 231; possibility of armed intervention, 232; rumor of trade agreement with Spain, against England, 245 Francis I, King of France, death, 16 Francis II, King of France, 47; (as Dauphin), marriage negotiations and marriage, 17, 29 ff.; Scots declare loyalty to, 30, 50, 56; vested with crown matrimonial, 31; becomes King of France, 44; English arms on escutcheon of, 44; agreement to stop using, 60; refusal to assent to acts of Parliament, 66; requested to support marriage of Elizabeth and Arran, 68; death: advantage for Congregation, 70 French (in Scotland), Scots fear encroachments of, upon independence: administrative power conferred on, zi, 23; outbreaks in Edinburgh against, 21; troops in Scotland, 25, 41-42; none to be quartered in Perth, 38; Protestant hostility to, 42, 58; reinforcements arrive with wives and families, 43; more troops arrive, 49; invasion of Fife: retreat, 55; Cecil and Wotton sent to negotiate with, 59; driven from Scotland, 61 Gates, Sir Henry, 273 General Assembly, 80, 118, 150, 259; of

INDEX December, 1561, 91; debate between Knox and Maitland at, 122; to appoint to small benefices, 178; protest against restoration of Archbishop Hamilton, 186; power thrown into hands of, 200; demands of, 200-201, 218-19 Geneva, 22, 24 Glasgow, 53, 141, 142, 146, 188, 190n, 1 1 1 , 224; Moray rallies forces at, 223 Glasgow, Archbishop of, see Beaton, James Glencairn, Alexander Cunningham, 4th Earl of, 26, 35, 36, 80, 146, 16471, 196, 199, 255, 256, 27m, 280; arrival of troops of, at Perth, 37, 38; sent to request Elizabeth's marriage to Arran, 68; opposed to Darnley marriage, 130; accepts Elizabeth's offer of asylum, 151; resumes seat on Privy Council, 173; told off to conduct siege of Dumbarton, 264; death, 278 Gordon, Lord George, see Huntly, George Gordon, 5th Earl of Gordon, Sir John, feud with Ogilvie of Findlater, 105; rumored planning to ambush Mary, 106; execution, 107 Gordons, 7; rcduced to helplessness, 109, 110; see further Huntly, George Gordon, 4th Earl of; Huntly, George Gordon, 5th Earl of Gouda, Nicholas, 66n, 103-4 Grey, William, 13th Baron, joins forces with Congregation, 57 Guilds, 11 Guise, Francis, Duke of, 102 Guise, Mary of, see Mary of Guise Guises, threat of a Protestant revolt against, 54; unable to aid Regent, 57; want a Spanish husband for Mary, 75; and French civil war, 1 1 1 ; alliance with Catherine de Medici, 111-12, 114; shift in view on Mary's marriage, 114-15; see also Lorraine, Cardinal of Haddington, Treaty of, 78 Hamilton, Mary's supporters flock to her headquarters at, 223 Hamilton, James, 2d Earl of Arran, see Chatelherault, Duke of Hamilton, James, 3d Earl of Arran, see Arran, James Hamilton, 3d Earl of

INDEX Hamilton, James, of Bothwellhaugh, assassin of Moray, 274; pensioned by Mary, 278 Hamilton, John, Archbishop of St. Andrews, 232«, 2jo, 263, 278, 280; disliked by Protestants, 19; did not persecute: opposed pro-French policy of Mary of Guise, 20; on bad terms with her, 27; unable to prevent Knox preaching at St. Andrews, 40; proclamation attributed to, 1087», 22371; bold enough to say Mass, 115; jailed: released, 116-, restored to consistorial jurisdiction, 186, 198; reasons for supporting Queen Mary, 200; offers submission if lords would execute her, 204; instigates murder of Moray, 274 Hamiltons, 7, 240, 272; unpopular, 68; nepotism of, 69; breach between Lord James and, 70; maneuver to marry Arran to Queen Mary, 72; fear Mary's return, 73; displeased by solution to question of clerical property, 99; weakened by Arran-Bothwell affair, 101; reduced to helplessness, 109, 110; at feud with Lennox, i2j; Moray resumes alliance with, 135; Darnley annoyed by pardon of, 161; untrustworthy allies of Mary, 203; Marian victory would mean domination by, 223; forfeiture, 231; preparing to rise, 248; murder of Moray planned, 274; Scottish factions ready to exterminate, 275 Hampton Court, Moray meets Norfolk at, 250 Hapsburgs, 21; wars between Valois and, 3, 4, 24 Hawick, raided, ioiw, 216 Hay, Captain, 106 Hay, Edmund, Scottish Jesuit: quoted, 104 Hay, John, of Balmerinoch: sent to win Elizabeth's consent to Darnley match, 140; lack of success in England, 14:; sent to offer Moray pardon, 169 Hay of Talla, confession re band for Darniev's murder, 184 Hector of Harlaw, 270 Henry II, King of France, interest in Scotland, 17; request for commis-

sioners to negotiate marriage treaty between Queen Mary and Dauphin of France, 29; grants to, from Mary, 30; quarters English arms on escutcheon of Dauphin and wife, 44 Henry VIII, King of England, 3, 5, 48; bribery of Scottish nobles. 9, 16; ineffective hectoring of James V, 14; efforts to bring Scotland under his domination, 1$; death, 16; troops of, in war of 1540s, 36; marries niece to Lennox, 123 Hepburn, James, Earl of Bothwell, see under Bothwell Hepburn of Riccarton, 21871 Heresy laws, ijn, 32; repealed, 66 Herries, John Maxwell, 4th Lord (Master of Maxwell to 1566), 146, IJ7, 21 jn, 241, 245, 255, 263, 271; double game of, 151; submission to Moray, 214,216; deserted by western lairds, 216; continues to cause trouble, 216; Mary's principal agent at English court, 22871; termed traitor, 231; attempt to bludgeon England into a pro-Marian attitude, 232; Mary's representative at York-Westminster Conference, 236 ff.; did not really believe in her innocence, 236; blunders, 244; clapped into Edinburgh Castle, 256 Highlands, state of, 7; Mary's tour of, 104-9; a thorn in the side of Scottish and British governments, 258 Holyrood, result of Mass being said at, 117; murder of Riccio at, 167-68 Hume, Alexander, 5th Lord, 27, 133, 167, 224, 249, 270; present at opening of Casket, 202; friendly to Moray, 216; rewarded by Moray, 218; Moray cannot entirely depend on, 221; leads Maitland's friends to Edinburgh for his "day of law," 269 Hunsdon, Henry Carey, 1st Baron, 183, 248, 253, 256, 267; on reaction to capture of Northumberland, 270, 271 f.; ordered to give Moray assistance, 273 Huntly, George Gordon, 4th Earl of, 58, 80; alienated by policy of Mary of Guise, 21; sides with her enemies, 25; an unscrupulous intriguer, 34; more interested in power than in re-

INDEX H u n t l y , 4th Earl of ( C o n t i n u e d ) ligion, 53; w o n over b y Congregation, 57; causing trouble, 67; promise to aid Queen Mary, 75; most powerful Catholic member of Mary's council, 88; prevents burning in effigy of a priest, 89; altercation with L o r d James, 90; arouses Mary's displeasure, 105; ambiguous behavior of, 105-10Ó; put to the norn: capture and death, 107; Mary's opinion of his ruin, 108 H u n t l y , George G o r d o n , j t h Earl of, 223, 225, 2 3 2 » , 2 j j , 2J9, 261, 272; (as

L o r d G o r d o n ) , condemned f o r treason: later restored by Parliament, 108; resurrection might prove useful, 136; restored and becomes Earl of H u n t l y , 144 and n\ escape after Riccio's murder, 167; leads ñghting men into Dunbar, 169; reconciliation with Protestant leaders, 173, 181; effort to persuade Mary to w a r d Moray, 176-77; at Craigmillar, 183; accused of signing band for Darnley's murder, 184; offers submission if lords would execute Mary, 204; submission to Moray, 214; signs band acknowledging James VI, 21571; deserted by western lairds, 216; Bothwell's accomplice, 217, 218; courted b y Moray, 218; campaigns ineffectually against Moray, 231; preparing to rise, 248; preparing to resist Moray's return b y force, 249; proclamations against, 256; submission t o Moray: terms offered, 257; submissions of followers of, 258; vote in Convention of the Estates, 263; ordered to settle complaints against him, 264; prepares to revolt, 271; death, 278 Idolatry, Knox regards Mass as, 23; propriety of preventing monarchical, by force, 64, 90 Inverness, 106; Mary refused admission t o castle, toy; Moray at, 258 Irish problem, 175 ff. James, Lord, see Stewart, James, Earl of Moray James V, King of Scotland, method of

caring f o r bastard sons, 12; permits feuing of Church lands, 13; reasons f o r not going over to Protestantism, 13-14; death: policy of alliance with France and hostility to England, 14; Lord James illegitimate son of, 17 James VI, King of Scotland (James I, of England), 6, 213; levy f o r baptism of, 8; birth, 177; Lady M o r a y in charge of, 178; fear that divorce of Darnley might destroy legitimacy of, 183; baptism: sponsors, 185; Elizabeth's baptismal gift, 186; Mar in charge of, 193; to be defended f r o m Bothwell, 196; effort to have Prince sent to grandmother in England, 201-3; Mary's abdication in favor of: crowned, 205; Moray proclaimed Regent for, 210-11; on recognition of authority of, i\$n, 229, 238, 254, 255, 256, 259, 263, 272; rule in Scotland: accession to English throne, 277; struggle f o r political control over Kirk, 278 Jedburgh, 93; justice court at, 182; Mary's illness at, 182-83; raided, 253 Jesuit appointed to sec of Dunblane, 149

Jesuit order, 4 Keith, Agnes, see Agnes, Countess of Moray Kelso, 269 Kerr, Sir Thomas, of Fernichirst, 271 Killigrew, Sir H e n r y , English ambassador in Scotland, 176, 177, 179, 181 Kilwinning, Gavin Hamilton, Abbot of: interview with Elizabeth, 154; offers submission if lords would execute M a n - , 204; submission to Moray, 214 King's Party, victors in civil war, 276 Kirk of Scotland, 92; "superintendents" of, 63; Knox's demand that property of Catholic Church be turned over to, 6$, 91; and the thirds, 91-92; favors shown once more to, 178; and small benefices, 178; angered b y restoration of A r c h bishop Hamilton's court, 186; Parliament to give, control of Church property, 201; gains, 218; legal jurisdiction: effect of concessions to, 219;

INDEX ousts Papists from University of Aberdeen: burns witches, 258; financial aid to Moray, 259; support of, necessary to Moray, 264; jurisdiction over cases involving witchcraft and divorce: loyalty to Moray, 265; battle between King and, for control of Scottish state, 277; see further, General Assembly Kirkcaldy, Sir William, of Grange, loó, 215, 278; query re English attitude in event of upheaval, 44; supporter of Moray, 144; property seized, 145; comes to terms with Mary, 169; returns to court, 173; aid to Moray, 175; on Queen's infatuation for Bothwell, 195; on CatholicProtestant coalition, 196; authorized to set out after Bothwell, 206; and Moray's victory at Langsidc, 224; letters to Moray and to Huntly, 248 f.; Captain of Edinburgh Castle, 249»; carries Maitland off to Edinburgh, 265; forges Moray's signature, 266; remains loyal to Moray, 266; threatening to desert and release prisoners, 271; at Moray's funeral, 175; hanged, 277 Kirk of Field, Darnley brought to, 188; blown up: Darnley dead, 190 Knollys, Sir Francis, 232; suggests that Mary ratify her abdication and recognize Moray's government, 246 Knox, John, 29, 35, 80, 113, 131, 178, 198, 234; and organization of Protestantism in Scotland, 15; in French galleys, 20; early career: a thorough Calvinist: return: plan to convert nobility, 22; contributions to Protestantism, 22-23; invited to return to Scotland, 24; urges rebellion against French and Popery, 24; incendiary letters, 26; effort to convert Mary of Guise, 27; an activist, 28; returns to Scotland, 36; sermon against idolatry, 36; its consequences, 36-37; appeals for support at Perth, 37; accusation against Lord James and Argyle, 38; skeptical of agreement at Perth, 38; manifestos during Perth affair, 39; preaching at St. Andrews, 40; encouraged by Cecil, 46; false accounts of terms of truce, 46; influence seen

35 in anti-Catholic petition, 64; presses for solution of church property question, 65, 91, 92; protests against tne Mass, 71, 89, 115; favors Axran's marriage to Mary, 72; averse to Queen Mary's homecoming, 73, 8j, 87; attitude toward Maitland and Lord James, 73, 89, 90; interviews with Mary, 89 f., nj-16; constant railing at Queen: sermon against Anglicans, 96; Lord James and Agnes Keith married by, 97; part in ArranBothwell reconciliation, 99-100; persuades western gentry to sign a Protestant band, 107 f.; alienated by Maitland and Moray, 109, 116; infuriated by Moray's policy, 117; urges Protestants to attend trial of brethren, 117; treason: acquitted of charge: vote of confidence, 118; opposes Catholic marriage for Mary, 120; admirer of Dudley, 121-22; debate between Maitland and, 122; opposition to Mary's marriage with Darnley, 124, 136; opinion of Riccio, 127; zealous in behalf of Leicester match, 135; breach with Moray closed, 135-36; forbidden to preach, 150; urges pardon for banished lords, 157; attitude toward conspiracy against Riccio, I6J; retires to Ayrshire, 169; protest against restoration of Archbishop Hamilton, 186; austere in regard to Mary, 204; officiates at coronation of James VI, 205; supports band of nobility against Papists, 270; sermon at Moray's funeral, 275; internal menace to Protestantism removed through efforts of Moray and, 277; policy of, represented by Melville, 278; death, 278; part in Scottish Reformation, 279 La Mothe-Fenelon, French ambassador in England, 275 Land tenure, 9; feu farm a new type, 12 Langside, victory of Moray's forces at, 224 Largs, Marians meet at, 230 Laureo, Vincenzo, Bishop of Mondovi, 178 Leicester, Earl of, see Dudley, Robert

3O6 Leith, 31, 32, 126«; surrenders to Mary of Guise: she begins to fortify, 43; requested to desist, 49, 50; Protestants urged to attack, 50; center of military activity, 56; siege begins, 57; Congregation demands dismantling of fortifications of, 58, 61; assault on, repelled, 59 Lennox family, Elizabeth requests permission for their return to Scotland, 123; Mary asked to rescind permission, 124; rights to throne if Darnley obtains crown matrimonial, 161-, Moray promises to uphold right of, to crown if Mary dies childless, 164; right to throne improved if Prince James crowned, 200 Lennox, Margaret, Countess of, 123, 124, 130, 201 Lennox, Matthew Stewart, 4th Earl of, 34, 123, 130, 132, 133, 137, 148, 265; Moray hopes return would weaken Hamiltons, 125; returns to Scotland, 125; Moray's coalition based on dislike of, 135; ordered home by Elizabeth, 139; rumor of plan to kidnap: refuses to obey Elizabeth's orders of recall, 140, 141W; no proof of plan to murder Moray, 144; go-between in plot against Riccio, 163, 164; opinion of what was proposed at Craigmillar, 185; demands action against slayers of Darnley, 192; obtains trial of Bothwell, 194; joins Protestant lords, 199; interest powerful in the west, 201; Elizabeth refuses request of, to appear at York, 233; one of Mary's accusers, 244; elevation to regency made civil war inevitable: death, 276 Leslie, John, Bishop of Ross, 79, 80,183, 235; on Lord James's behavior in 1558, 35W; mission to Mary, 72, 75; effort to persuade her to ward Moray, 176-77; forfeiture, 231; Mary's representative at York-Westminster Conference, 236 if.; did not really believe in her innocence, 23637; declaration of dissolution of Westminster Conference, 244; blunder, 244; interview with Elizabeth, 245; stand on Mary's restoration, 260; revenues of bishopric confiscated, 263

INDEX Lignerolles, sent to negotiate a new Franco-Scottish alliance, 208; with Moray in Edinburgh, 209; departure from Scotland, 213 Lindsay, Sir David, 14 Lindsay, Patrick, 6th Lord (Master of Lindsay to 1563), 106, 165, 196, 1 7 m ; conditions for support of Darnley, 163; servants and relatives put to the horn, 172; with Morton, pardoned by Mary, 187; a member of the coalition against Mary, 199; accompanies Moray to Lochleven, 210; commissioner at Mary's trial, 234; no political ability, 280 Linlithgow, 169; Moray assassinated at, 273-74 Livingston, William, 6th Lord, 140; ordered to stop feuding, 177 Lochleven, 118, 205, 210; Mary imprisoned in, 198, 220; Mary's escape from, 222; Northumberland imprisoned in, 271, 273 London, 79, 102, 1 0 3 , 1 1 2 , 114, 119, 147», 153, 177, 207, 208, 24272, 267, 272 L o m e , Lord, see Argyle, Archibald Campbell, jth Earl of Lorraine, Cardinal of, 108; negotiations f o r hand of an Austrian archduke for Queen Mary, 115; urges Mary to take measures against heretics, 158 Lyons, 206 McGill, James, Clerk Register, assistant at Mary's trial, 234; altercation with iMaitland, 263 Macon, Lord James Commendator of Priory of, 19» Maitland, William, of Lethington, 6, 23, 107, 1 1 3 , 123, i j i , 1 6 j , 171, 177, 185, 199, 205, 224, 246, 268, 280; joins Congregation: goal, 51; influence on L o r d James, j i - 5 2 ; sent to England to plead for open intervention in behalf of Congregation, 53, 54; Congregation's representative in AngloFrench negotiations, 58-60; may have deleted section of Confession of Faith, 64-65; assailed by Knox, 65; qualms over ratification of Treaty of Berwick, 66; sent to request Elizabeth's marriage to Arran, 68; attitude toward the marriage, 69-70-, angered

INDEX by Arran's maneuvering, 72; policy toward Mary, 72-73; disturbed by English attitude on ratification of Treaty of Edinburgh, 82-83; fears Mary s return prior to agreement with Elizabeth, 8j; believes Mary will try to wreck Protestantism and the English alliance, 85, 86; "in highest credit" with Queen, 88; attempt to restrain Knox, 89; opposition to Knox, 91; sent to England to discuss succession question, 94; proposes meeting of Mary and Elizabeth, 9597; in London to arrange meeting of queens, 102; failure, 103; secure in die Queen's confidence: Knox and preachers alienated, 109; negotiations for Mary's Spanish marriage entrusted to: had no religious scruples, 112; in London to negotiate with Spain: circumstances which brought scheme to naught, 114-15; Knox's triumph over, 118; attitude toward Mary s marriage with Dudley, 11921; debate between Knox and, 122; angry letter to Cecil, 12$; negotiations with Elizabeth and Cecil re marriage and succession, 127 ff.; in love with Mary Fleming, 1 3 1 ; Moray could not be sure of, 133; opposition to Bothwell, 136; sent to England to negotiate about Damley, 137; attitude toward Darnley match, 138; refusal to obey Mary's order, 138; loyal to Mary during Moray's revolt, 144; effort to get Moray the income from his Scottish estates, 157; works for Moray's recall, 161; advice to "chop at the very root," «62; conditions of support of Darnley, 163; not horned after Riccio's murder, 172; return of, advocated by Moray, opposed by Bothwell, 173-74; pardoned and restored to favor, 178, 181; on cause of Mary's illness, 182; at Craigmillar, 183-84; accused of signing band for Darnley's murder, 184; with Bothwell, visits Morton re murder, 187; deserts Mary to join lords, 197; Bothwell could drag down with him, 197; meetings with Throckmorton, 201203, 212-13; present at opening of Casket, 202; wants M a r y s restora-

307 tion, 204; would favor Mary's restoration if she deserts Bothwell, 217; Bothwell's accomplice, 217, 218; favors to, 218; Moray could not entirely depend on, 221; opposes blanket forfeitures at Parliament, 231; assistant at Mary's trial, 234; at York-Westminster Conference, 237 ff.; wants reconciliation and restoration of Mary, 237; blow to schemes, 239; holds out hopes to Norfolk of marriage with Mary, 240; overreaches himself, 241; collapse of reconciliation scheme, 242; and Moray at parting of the ways, 243; now an enemy of Moray, 252; Moray's fear of an open break with, 254, 261; possibility of rebellion discounted, 262; vote in Convention of the Estates, 263; with his friends, permanently alienated, 264; accused of foreknowledge of Darnley murder: arrested, 26j; accusation of, attributed to Morton, 266; preparations for his "day of law": postponed, 269; effort to curry favor with Moray, 270; shocked by Moray's murder, 27j; followers of, and Marians, drawing together, 276; death, 277; policy of, represented by King James, 278; policy of friendship with England, 280; basic difference in aim between Moray and, 281 Mar, John Erskine, Earl of, see Erskine, John, Earl of Mar Marches, see Border Marians, 212, 216, 251; motives for supporting Mary, 199-200; Throckmorton negotiates with, 203; unreliability of, 203-4; tackled promptly and firmly by Moray, 214; promise loyalty to James VI, 215», 220-21; possible additions to, 216-17, strength in western Scotland, 222; victory by, would mean domination by Hamiltons, 223; defeated at Langside, 224; Moray's severity toward, 225; Moray refuses to end attacks on, 228-29; p ' a n to march against Moray, 230; punitive measures against, adopted by Parliament, 231; obey Mary's order to remain passive, 23 m; Moray accused of treachery by, 232;

308

INDEX

Marians (Continued) spread rumors of Mary's restoration, 233-, Moray's official reply to accusations, 238; prepare to rise against Moray, 248; lieges of the Lowlands summoned to inarch against, 253; Moray's desire to come to terms, 254; agreement with Moray, 2jj; broken, 2j6; Moray's success in dialing with, 2j6-j7; weakness of, 262; drawing-together of, 276; failure in civil war, 276, 277 Marischal, William Keith, 4th Earl, 68, 97, 27 m Marriage treaty between Queen Mary and Dauphin of France, commissioners to negotiate, 29 ff.; refusal to bring Scottish crown to France: death of four commissioners, 30; approved by Parliament, 31 Mary of Guise, Regent of Scotland, 8n 17, 46, 47, JI, 58, 61, 135; devotion to Franco-Catholic cause in Scotland: decision to oust Arran and assume regency, 18; proclaimed Regent, 19; does not persecute Protestants, 20; policies, 21, 23®., 27, 28, 29, 32-33; crisis in regency, 24; summons nobility to war on "auld enemy": their refusal to enter England: reaction, 2j; effect of war policy, 26; effort to convert, to Protestantism, 27; obtains crown matrimonial for Dauphin, 31; Protestant petitions to, 31, 32; would do nothing: protestation of activists, 32; Protestants' support no longer necessary, 33; summons to Protestant ministers led to civil war, 33; ends policy of toleration, 34; reto Erskine of Dun re mob at

^ th, 35; orders preachers put to

the hom, 36; negotiation with Perth Protestants, 37; accepts unfavorable settlement, 38; violates it, 39; failure at Cupar: new truce, 40; retreats to Dunbar, 41; charges against Lord James: effort to hold Chatelherault, 42; truce with Protestants: begins to fortify Leith, 43; entire resources of France at command of, 44; appeal for French aid: effort to detach Lord James, 49; requested to desist from fortifying Leith, 49, jo; refusal to

desist: deposed, 50; a true prophet, 52; enters Edinburgh: orders seizure of Lord James's property, J4; invasion of Fife, 55; effort to forestall English invasion, $7; enters Edinburgh Castle, 57; negotiations with, collapsed: death: character, 59; "Robin Hood" festivities forbidden by, 8on Mary, Queen of Scots, 49,60, 81,83, 84, 164, 172; right of succession (q.v.) to English throne, 5, 72 ff., 97; Scottish crown passed to, 14-, negotiations for marriage to Prince Edward, 15; sent to France to be brought up, 17; negotiations for, and marriage with Dauphin of France, 29 ff. (see also Marriage treaty); commitments to King of France, 30; ascends French throne, 44; controversy over use of English arms on escutcheon, 44, 60, 82, 83; Scots declare loyalty to, 56; refusal to assent to acts of Parliament, 66; requested to support Arran's marriage to Elizabeth, 68; early death expected, 68; death of Francis II, 70; would probably come home, 70, 72; Lord James sent to by Congregation, 71; Arran wishes to marry, 72; Lord James's and Maitland's policy toward, 72-73; country divided on matter of return, 73, 85; alternative methods of reaching English throne, 74-7j; interview with Leslie, 75-76; sends commission to Scotland, 76; Elizabeth's efforts to induce, to ratify Treaty of Edinburgh, 76, 78, 82, 86, 94-97, 157 (see further Edinburgh, Treaty of); interview with Lord James at St. Dizier, 77 ff.; safe-conduct through England refused, 85; diplomatic skill, 86; returns to Scotland, 86-87; first year of rule, 88-110; chooses Protestant council, 88; Protestants angered over holding of Mass, 88, 90; proclamation on religious question, 89; interviews with Knox, 89 f., 115; power to confirm feu charters, 92, 142; ratification of Treaty of Edinburgh hinges on succession question, 94-97; proposals for a meeting with Elizabeth, 95, 97, 101-103, 12377; possible

INDEX convertibility, 96, 102; interview opposed on account of religious strife in France, 102; postponed, 103; in Aberdeen, 104-, displeased with Huntly, 104 f.; at Inverness, refused admission to castle: surrender of castle, IOJ; wish to reduce Huntly's power, 106; attitude toward ruin of Huntly, 108; marriage schemes, 1 1 1 34; negotiations for a Spanish marriage, Don Carlos, 112-18, 75; promise to effect a religious settlement at her first Parliament, 116; clash with Knox, 117-18; talk of an Anglo-Scottish alliance, 119-34; the Dudley marriage plan, 119-23, 127-33 passim; asks Elizabeth whom she would have her marry, 120; the Damley marriage plan, 123-33; recall of Lennox, 12425; effort to lull Protestants into a false sense of security, 126; rise of Riccio, 127; attempts to fool Elizabeth, 127-28; nurses Darnley; becomes infatuated, 133; Protestants' fear of Darnley marriage, 135; Protestant and Catholic partisans, 136; Elizabeth opposed to Darnley match, 137, 142; effort to win Moray over, 137-38; efforts to win Elizabeth's favor, 140; gains French and Spanish support, 140; hope of amity with Elizabeth gone: proclamations re religious status quo, 142; recall of Bothwell, 142; strength increasing, 144; married to Damley, 144; and Moray's revolt, 145-52; signs of Catholic leanings multiplied, 149 f.; promises Protestantism not in danger: victor)' over Moray, IJI; success of first step in her great Catholic design, 156; urged to pardon rebels: willing to deal with England, 157; unrelenting toward Moray, 158, 162; urged to take measures against heretics, 158; determined to pursue Catholic policy, 158, 160, 162; desire to join a Catholic League, 159; ready to strike at Scottish Protestantism, 159; weaknesses in position, 16061; root of difficulty with Darnley, 161; said to be Riccio's mistress, 162; rushing toward disaster, 166; courage in crisis after Riccio's murder, 167;

turns to Darnley for aid in escape, 167; escape to Dunbar, 168; pardons rebels of 1565 in order to pursue murderers, 169; enters Edinburgh in triumph, 169; turning point in career, 170; desire to reconcile leaders of the two factions, 173; attitude toward Maitland, 174, 178; requests Elizabeth to hand over Morton to her, 174; O'Neill a potent weapon against Elizabeth: effort to win Argyle, 175; preparing for arrival of child, 176; birth of son: claim to English succession strengthened, 177; on justice eyre in Border districts, 177, 182; dealings with Laureo, 178; favors to Kirk, 178; why, restored Moray to power, 179; compared with Elizabeth, 179; succumbing to her love for Bothwell, 180, 185; becoming estranged from Damley, 181; illness: causes, 182; suicidal threats, 183; Craigmillar conference: divorce discussed and rejected, 183; decision to reopen succession question, 186; baptism of Prince James, 186; pardons Morton, 187; brings Damley to Kirk of Field, 188; foreknowledge of Darnley's murder? 188, 191, 198; downfall of, >91-211: account of Damley murder: donothing policy, 191; shielding Bothwell, 193; rumors of plan to marry Bothwell, 194; collusive "kidnapping" of, by Bothwell: marriage by Protestant rites, 195; Pope's refusal to deal further with, 195»; endeavor to break up noble coalition, 196; Carberry Hill: surrender to lords: led into Edinburgh as a captive, 197; refuses to renounce Bothwell: committed to fortress of Lochleven, 198; inability to understand Calvinist morality, 199; Elizabeth promises to aid, 201; letters to Bothwell, 202 (see also Casket Letters); refusal to divorce him, 202; shift in Elizabeth's attitude toward, 203; supporters not to be relied on, 203; refusal to divorce Bothwell forces lords' hand, 204; compelled to abdicate in favor of Prince James: choice of Moray as Regent, 205; news of Moray's friend-

INDEX Mary, Queen of Scots (Continued) liness conveyed to, 107; interview with Moray: urges him to take regency, 210; with downfall of, threat to British Protestantism vanished, 2 1 1 ; problem of continued imprisonment or restoration, 216; public opinion inflamed against, 217; jewels of, sold to Elizabeth, 219, 221; actions taken against, pronounced legitimate: continued imprisonment, 220; friends within her prison, 220; escape from Lochleven, 222; supporters rally at Hamilton, 222, 223; band pledging her restoration: army, 223; defeat of army at Langside, 224; appeal to Elizabeth: flees to England, 224; retention in England fraught with difficulties, 226; Elizabeth's letter to: decision as to her procedure toward, 227; preparations for trial, 227-34; York-Westminster Conference, 23J-J2; confident of Norfolk's friendship, 235; representatives at York-Westminster Conference: her concept of purpose of conference, 236; marriage with, suggested to N o r f o l k , 240; her willingness to divorce Bothwell, 240, 260; Norfolk's compromise proposal, 24041; to be removed to a safer place of confinement: case prejudged, 242; demand to be allowed to defend herself, 242, 244; accused of Darnley's murder: reconciliation with Moray no longer possible, 243, 248; refuses to promise to answer Moray, 245; refusal to ratify abdication and recognize Moray's government, 246; retained in England as prisoner, 246; reputation hopelessly besmirched, 247; effort to rouse country against Moray, 248; Moray reopens marriage plan to N o r f o l k , 250-51; source of all Moray's difficulties, 253; Norfolk marriage Marians' best hope f o r restoration of, 254; meeting of members of each part)' to discuss problem of, 255-56; a serious embarrassment to Elizabeth: alternatives laid before Moray, 259; Convention of the Estates called to decide question of restoration and divorce, 262; acri-

monious dispute over issue of divorce, 263; Protestant opinion inflamed by tactlessness of: proposals rejected, 263; plan to return, to Scotland as a captive, 268, 271-72; accused of responsibility for Northern Rebellion, 271; only hope for restoration, 277; death at block: pensioned Moray's murderer, 278; Moray and, 282-83 Mary Tudor, Queen of England, 4, 5, 29, 95; accession, 20; effort to be conciliatory in Hapsburg-Valois wars, 25; death, 33 Mass, 90; regarded as idolatry, 23; saying of, forbidden, 66; Lord James favors permitting private, for Mary, 71; private, held by Mary at Holyrood, 88; Knox prcachcs against, 89; Mary's High Mass, 90; Catholics grow bold enough to say: Knox's protest, 115; disturbance as result of, at Holyrood, 117; attendance at, increases, 149 Maxwell, Master of, see Herries Melville, Andrew, 278 Melville, Sir James, 39, 155, 167, 177, 243, 266, 284; mission of conciliation to Elizabeth, 127; urges Mary to pardon rebels, 157; on Mary's abdication. 205« Melville, Robert, 240, 24171; sent to London by Moray, 14772; on Catholic-Protestant coalition, 196; sent to England by Mary, 196; on Mary's abdication, 2057J Merchant guilds, stranglehold on municipal governments, 11 Methven, Henry, 2nd Lord, 220 Mewtas, Sir Peter, sent to demand Mary's ratification of Treaty of Edinburgh, 94 Middlemore, Henry, 227, 228 Miln, Walter, 32 Ministers, Protestant: proponents of action, 28, 32; Regent's summons to, 33; obey summons, accompanied by multitude, 35; ordered put to the horn, 36; rift between nobility and, 89-91, 109-10, 122; revenue from thirds, 91-92; payments from thirds to, ended, 150: rift with nobility ended by Riccio affair, 170-71; pay-

INDEX ments from thirds to, resumed, 178; Privy Council's decree re stipend from the thirds, 186; rejoice in Mary's ruin, 199; had done much to pull her and Bothwell down: what they asked at the Assembly, 200-201; wish Mary's death, 204; thirds to be paid directly to, 219; support of Moray, 265 Minto, Laird of, 256 Montrose, William Graham, 2nd Earl of, 196, 27m; leaves Moray's party, 216

Moray, James Stewart, Earl of, see Stewart, James Moray, Lady, see Agnes, Countess of Moray Moray, Patrick Hepburn, Bishop of, 21871 Moretta, Bertino Solaro, signor di, believes Mary guilty of murder of Damley, 192 Morton, James Douglas, 4th Earl of, 23, 35, 61, 1J7, 173, 175, 198, 203, 208,

212, 216, 24372, 245, 255, 280; signs First Band of the Lords of the Congregation, 26; reasons for caution, 34; more interested in power than in religion, j3; won over by Congregation, 57 f.; sent to request Elizabeth's marriage to Arran, 68; opposed to Darnley marriage to Mary, 130; won over by Mary, 144; working for Moray's recall, 161; conditions of support of Darnley, 163; brought to forefront of Scottish politics, 165; assured victory of Protestantism and English alliance, 166; suspicious of Darnley, 168; flees to England, 169; servants and relatives put to the horn, 172; Moray's effort to obtain pardon for, and associates: urges Elizabeth to befriend them, 174; Mary requests that exiles be handed over to her, 174; pardoned, 187; would have nothing to do with Darnley murder, 187; recall of, the price Moray exacted for his help against Darnley, 187, 189; meeting with Moray, 192; Tantallon returned to, 195; a key figure at Stirling meeting, 196; Bothwell could drag down with him, 197; a leader of the op-

position to Mary, 199; support of ministers vital to, 200; Casket Letters in hands of, 202; accompanies Moray to Lochleven, 210; could be accused with Bothwell, 217; indispensable to Moray: rewarded, 218; financial aid to Moray, 219, 224ft; commissioner at Mary's trial, 234; accusation of Maitland attributed to, 266; opposes surrender of Northumberland, 271; as Regent, 276; ruin and death, 277; executed for part in murder of Darnley, 278 Murray, Sir William, of Tullibardine, 204, 206

Nantes, Edict of, 3 Nau, Claude, 168, 18271 Netherlands, the, 4, 282 Newcastle, 156, 164 Noailles, Gilles de, 76 Nobles, responsible for Scotland's Protestantism, 6; power of, 7 ff.; stake in church property, 13, 14; alienated by pro-French policy of Mary of Guise, 21; Knox's plan to convert, 22; urged to rebel against French tyranny and Popery, 24; would not acquiesce in French control, 25; summoned to war: refuse to enter England, 25; many motivated by greed, 34; majority noncommittal, 42, 52, 53; neutral, won to Congregation, 57; Scotland ruled by a group of, 61; worried about church lands, 64; majority welcome Queen's return, 73; church property question settled favorably to, 91-93; struggle for political hegemony, 277; see also Marians, Protestant party, Roman Catholics Norfolk, Thomas Howard, 4th Duke of: instructed to prepare an army to aid Congregation, 54; negotiates Treaty of Berwick, 567;; ordered to advance against French, 57; scolded by Elizabeth, 133; on Elizabeth's commission at York, 235 ff.; not illdisposed toward Mary, 235; unprepared for Moray's questions, 238; shocked by Casket Letters, 239; cause of volte-face, 239-40; misrepresentations of, 240; urges Mary to refuse to

312 Norfolk, Duke of (Continued) ratify abdication, 241; warned by Elizabeth, 243; embittered by public accusation of Mary, 249; Moray's meeting with: marriage to Mary discussed, 2 j o - j i ; Marians' best hope for Mary's restoration, 254; marriage looked on favorably by English nobles, 260; ultimate purpose, 260-61; ruin of plans, 26}; friends begin to desert, 264; marriage plan revealed to Elizabeth: decision not to rebel, 267 Norris, Sir Henry, English ambassador to France, 208 Northern Rebellion, 267, 268; Scots forbidden to aid: Moray's army to assist in suppression of, 269; broken, 270; Mary declared responsible for, J7' Northumberland, Thomas Percy, 7th Earl of, 1 jo; in Northern Rebellion, 267; captured by Moray, 270; reaction to capture of, 270 ff., 276; imprisoned in Lochleven, 271, 273; negotiations for extradition of, 27173 Northumberland, raid into, 27 Ochiltree, Andrew Stewart, 2nd Lord, 1647? Ogilvie of Airlie, wounded by Sir John Gordon, 105 Ogilvie of Findlater, feud with Sir John Gordon, 105 O'Neill, Shan, and the Irish question, 175 ff. Orkney, Adam Bothwell, Bishop of, 2 34. J 43 Orléans, 206 Oysel, Henri Cleutin d', French commander in Scotland, 40; border raids, Paris, 77, 79 Paris, French, confession, 265, 267 Parliament, 15n, 160, 164, 168; powers of, 8; difference between Convention of Estates and, 8n\ of 1557, 29; of '5j8. 31. 32; of 1560, most important ever held in Scotland, 63; anti-Catholic petition: Confession of Faith, 64;

INDEX actions in religious affairs, 65-66; Francis and Mary regard as illegal, 66; of 1J63, 116-17; '$64. 92, 142; planned for July, 1565: not held, 139; of 1566, postponed, 158; under pressure to draw up a bill against Moray, 166; ordered dissolved, 167; of April, 1567, 108, 194; of December, 1567: Acts of 1560 reaffirmed, 218-19; a c ~ tion toward Mary, 220; of 1568: summoned: Elizabeth's objection to holding, until after Mary's trial, 230; punitive measures against Marians, 231; justification for, 232 Peasants, 10; standard of living, 9; insecurity of tenure, 9, 12 Percy, Sir Henry, 44 Perth, 44; "embracefs] the truth," 33; Protestants swarm into, 3$; riots, 36; Regent's decision to negotiate with Protestants, 37; terms of agreement, 38; garrisoned with Scots in French pay, 39; Regent's garrison forced to capitulate, 41; Convention at, 139, 140; Moray alleges plot to murder him at, 140, 143-44, 154; Moray holds Convention at, 262-64 Philip II, King of Spain, 3, 159; and Carlos marriage plan, 7j, 114-15; approval of Darnley match, 140; Mary's request for aid, 150; not disposed to help Mary, 2267: Pinkie, English victory at, 17 Pitarrow, see Wishart of Pitarrow Pitcairn, Robert, Commendator of Dunfermline, 265; commissioner at Mary's trial, 234; sent to England, 264; carries account of Mainland's arrest, 267 Pittenweem, 56; Lord James Commendator of Priory of, 19w; obtains all temporalities of, 194 Poissy, Colloquy at, 96 Pope, task of reform, 4; inability to prevent excessive feuing, 13; application to, for confirmation of feu charters, forbidden, 92; expected to approve Darnley match, 124; Mary requests aid of, 150; Mary's letter to, 159; refuses to deal further with Mary, 19577; not disposed to help her, 22671 Preachers, set Ministers

INDEX

313

established as state religion, 2 2 1 ; Prestonpans, L o r d G r e y joined forces dominance assured, 2 5 1 , 2 7 7 ; internal with Congregation at, 5 7 crisis of British, 2 5 3 ; N o r f o l k marPrivy Council, 8 , I O J , 123H, 1 1 6 » , 1 3 9 , riage plan and, 2 6 0 - 6 1 ; A n g l o - S c o t 194, 2 2 I , 25871; chosen b y M a r y , 88-, tish friendship necessary to, 280; see decision on C h u r c h property, 9 1 ; also Protestants, Protestant party commission to L o r d James, 9 3 ; c o n Protestants, Henry VIII tries to use, 15; sents to interview between the support M a r y of Guise, 1 9 ; w h y queens, 1 0 2 ; Ruthven appointed to, English, fled to Scotland, 2 0 ; swarm 1 1 5 ; trial of K n o x before, 1 1 8 ; into Perth, 35; urged t o come to trial M o r a y ordered to appear before, of brethren arrested in Edinburgh, 143-441 Catholic complexion o f , 1 4 4 , 1 1 7 ; angered by Elizabeth's conduct 1 4 9 ; M o r a y , A r g y l e , Glencairn reduring revolt, I J J ; alienation f r o m sume seats on, 173; M o r a y ' s influence England, 1 5 6 ; only, allowed to hold felt in, 1 7 7 ; grant t o ministers, 1 8 6 ; public office, 219; see also Protestantoffers reward f o r apprehension of ism, Protestant party Darnley's murderers, 1 9 1 ; G e n e r a l Protestant party, premature attempt Assembly's demands entered in to form, 1 5 - 1 6 ; as formed b y K n o x , Register of, 200; M o r a y ' s commit2 3 ; urged to rebel b y K n o x , 2 4 ; ments to, 211; approves M o r a y ' s acmotives of nobility o f , 2 5 - 2 6 ; pretions in England, 253 pared to act, 2 6 ; solidification, 2 7 ; Protestantism, coming o f , 3 - 2 6 ; condipolicy of activist w i n g , 2 8 ; not tions necessary f o r survival, 4 ; united on question of action, 2 8 ; Moray's great contribution, 6 , 1 0 4 , policy and weaknesses of Fabian 2 7 9 - 8 2 ; grows in Scotland: hostility wing, 28-29; religious policy, J I ; of James V , 13-14; loses its invidious petitions to Regent, 31, 3 2 ; protestaconnection with England, 1 9 ; R e tion of activists, 32; increasing p o w e r gent's policy contributes to g r o w t h of activists, 3 3 ; actions preceding of, 2 0 - 2 1 ; influence of Calvinism, 22, outbreak of civil w a r : Fabian fac23, 2 8 4 ; turning point f o r Scottish, tion, 3 4 - 3 5 ; leaders responsible f o r 24; survival of, depended on E n g devastation, 3 6 ; clash with Regent at land's remaining Protestant, 5 2 ; n o Perth, 37-38; proponents of delay mention of, in T r e a t y of B e r w i c k , join the activists, 3 8 ; failure to face 5 6 ; T r e a t y of Edinburgh a complete consequences of behavior, 3 9 ; clash victory for, 6 1 ; establishment of, b y with Regent in Fife, 4 0 ; at Perth and Parliament of IJ6O, 6 3 - 6 6 ; succession Stirling, 4 1 ; seize Edinburgh, 4 1 ; question and, 7 2 - 7 3 ; to M a r y , exists political difficulties: conditions of on royal sufferance only, 8 9 ; Spanish obedience to Regent, 4 2 ; truce with match a threat to, 112-13; another Regent, 4 3 ; move to hold Congregachallenge to, I I J ; Darnley marriage tion together: hope f o r support of believed a menace to, 1 3 0 , 1 3 2 , 1 3 5 , England and Chatelherault, 4 4 ; Cecil 150; Mary's specious promises, 1 4 7 ; urged to aid, 45, 4 8 ; Cecil's true feelM o r a y claims, he rebels in defense ings toward cause in Scotland, 4 6 ; of, 1 4 8 - 4 9 ; events in Scotland deGuises believe k e y figures must be cisive factors in survival of, 157 ff., killed, 4 7 ; English aid to, 4 8 ; Chatel1 7 0 - 7 1 ; M a r y prepares to attack, 1 5 8 herault joins, 4 9 ; enter Edinburgh, 60; D a m l e y agrees to safeguard, 1 6 3 ; 50; deposition of Regent: committee Morton's role in triumph of, 1 6 6 , to govern kingdom, 5 0 ; Maitland 2 1 2 , 2 7 7 ; flourishing, 1 9 0 ; f o r c e of joins, 5 1 ; political and military probCalvinist public opinion in matters lems, 5 2 ; defeats b y French: evacuaot morality, 1 9 3 ; Mary's backhanded tion of Edinburgh, 5 3 ; need f o r a legal recognition of, 1 9 4 ; M o r a y as fleet, 54; military aid f r o m England, Regent means triumph of, 2 0 9 ; 5 4 ; signs T r e a t y of B e r w i c k with M o r a y swears to uphold, 2 1 1 ;

INDEX

3*4 Protestant party (Continued) England, 56; neutral lords w o n over, 57; demands removal of French and of Regent, dismantling of Leith fortifications, 58; Treaty of Edinburgh a complete victory for, 61; plan to marry Arran to Elizabeth, 67; belief that Arran would be enthroned: thought Mary would soon die, 68; ranks of Congregation split, 71 ff.; attitude toward Treaty materially changed, 82; attempt of zealots to seize "idolator" priest, 88; split widens, 89-91, 109, 136, 144; Church property question settled favorably to, 91-93°, zealots estranged from Moray, 113, 116-17; Dudley marriage plan may unite, 121-22; moderates and zealots poles apart, 122; favors showered on, by Mary, 126; hostility to Riccio, 127; split persists, despite reconciliation of Moray and Knox, 135-36, 144; Mary prepared to defy, 137; Elizabeth's promises of support to, 139, 142; Elizabeth deserts, 14748; Mary's victory over, i j i ; views Mary's policy with alarm, 161-62; convinced their religion was in danger, 163, i6j; reunited by contemplated attack on Riccio, i6j; must never again become disunited, 170-71; Mary desires reconciliation with, 173, 176; Moray's effort to rebuild, 174; Moray's plan f o r victory of, after Darnley's murder, 193; gains Catholic support against Bothwell, 196, 199; solid core of strength against Mary, 199; increased influence of ministers in, 200-201; decides to force Mary's abdication, 205; M o r a y as Regent means triumph of, 209; Moray as leader of, 279-80; see also Protestantism, Protestants "Protestation of Huntly and A r g y l e , "

183 ff., 187, 248

Quadra, Spanish ambassador in London, 112, 115, 119 Raid of Baith, 14172 Randolph, Thomas, English envoy in Scotland, 64, 69, 83, 85, 86, 88, 09,

101, 102, 104, 108, 121, 122, 129, 133,

134, 136, 138, 149, 156, 157, 158, 161,

162, 173; accompanies Arran to Scotland, 49; appointed resident ambassador, 65n\ attempts to convince Knox of Lord James's sincerity, 90; on meeting of the t w o queens, 96; instructed to advise Mary to wed an Englishman, 119; instructed to consult with Moray, 119-20; English delegate at Berwick conference, 12728; dinner with Moray, 130-31; quoted, 132; misrepresentations of, 1397J; instructed to support Moray, 139, 142; meeting with Moray, 141; urges support of Moray, 145; instructed to resume negotiations with Mary, 148; recall demanded, 159-60; on murder of Riccio, 163; aware of plot against Riccio, 165; on O'Neill affair, 175, 176«; to be sent to Scotland again, 273 Reformation in Scotland need for, 1214; Knox's most important contribution, 22-23, 279-80; iconoclastic demonstrations which disfigured, 36; M a n ' little understood causes, 196«; Moray chiefly responsible for triumph of, 279, 280; Knox; see also Protestantism; Protestant party; Stewart, James Religion, political uses, 15«; Mary's proclamations re question of, 89, 147, 196; see also Protestantism; Roman Catholicism Riccio (or Rizzio) David, 133; influence, 127; Mary's chief counselor, 149; effort to bribe, 159; storm signals in direction of, 160; stamp bearing Darnley's signature turned over to, 161; responsible for Mary's policy, 162; plot to eliminate, 162 ff.; murder of, 166; its brutality, 167, 168; murder a decisive event in British history,

170

"Robin H o o d " riot in Edinburgh, 80n Roman Catholicism, w h y Scots rallied to Catholic, pro-French party, 16, 21; Mary of Guise represents cause of, 18; Knox urges Protestants to rebel against, 24; anti-Catholic petition handed in at Parliament of 1560, 64; Parliament's action against, 66; M a r y may attempt to restore

INDEX through marriage, 74-75,110; negotiations for such a marriage, m - 1 5 ; Moray fears, Mary plans to restore, 143, 149; Mary's marriage an effort to restore, IJO; her plan, 156-60; its failure, 170; utterly abolished, 219; see also, Mass, Protestantism, Roman Catholics, Roman Catholic Church Roman Catholics, 104, 192; execution of old priest f o r heresy, 32; nobility mostly intriguers, 49; unable to get a favorable decision from a court of law, 66; reaction expected, 67; nobility would oppose attempt to depose Mary, 68; send representative to Mary, 72, 75-76; welcome Mary's return, 73; Protestants moderate toward, 80; Lord James advises Mary against, 81; bold enough to say Mass, 115; outcry against, 115-16; Mary takes advice of, 133; support Mary, 136; rumors of a secret Catholic League, 145, 159; jailed and pilloried, 149; Mary's favors to, 149-50; Mary pleads with Moray not to persecute, 18:; alienated from Mary by Bothwell marriage, 195, 196; many join coalition against her, 199; hostile to religious settlement of 1567, 221; Marians denounced as, 254; quiescent during Northern Rebellion, 270; failure in civil war, 276, 277; could regain control only by foreign invasion, 277; see also Roman Catholicism, Roman Catholic Church Roman Catholic Church, why it succumbed to Protestants, 12 ff.; nobility's stake in property of, 12-14; statutes against vices ineffective, 13; corrupt, unable to reform itself, 13, 19; and the French alliance, 16; Provincial Council of 1559, 33; clergy's avarice and neglect, 36; Protestants did not intend to allow hierarchy any power, 39; property question, 65,91-93; laws favorable to, repealed, 66; Kirk demands complete control of property of, 201; fails to obtain, 219; see also Roman Catholicism, Roman Catholics Ross, Bishop of, see Leslie, John Rothes, Andrew Leslie, 5th Earl of, 146, 16472; property seized, 145; ac-

3*5 cepts Elizabeth's offer of asylum, 151 Ruthven, Patrick, 3rd Lord, ordered to put an end to Protestantism in Perth, 33; ousted from provostship of Perth, 39; appointed to council, 115; conditions of support of Damley, 163; suspicious of Damley, 168; flees to England, 169; servants and relatives put to the horn, 172; puts blame for Riccio slaying on Darnley, 174; death, 175» Ruthven, William, 4th Lord, 196, 27m; a leader of coalition against Mary, '99

Sadler, Sir Ralph, 15, 53; sent to sow dissension between Regent and Congregation, 47; meeting with Balnaves, 48; aid to Congregation, 55; on Elizabeth's commission at York, 235; on surrendering of Northumberland, 271-72 St. Andrews, 188; capture of Beaton's murderers in, 16, 20; Lord James made Commendator of Priory of, 17; attends University of, 17; Protestants' decision to "reform": destruction following Knox's sermon, 40; objective of French invasion, 55; Moray retires to, 134, 135; obtains all temporalities of Priory of, 194; witches burned at, 258 St. Andrews, Archbishop of, see Hamilton, John St. Dizicr, meeting of Mary and Lord James at, 77 ff. St. Giles Day, celebration broken up, 32

Sandilands, James, of Calder, helps Knox convert nobility, 22; petition to Regent, 31, 33; failure of mission to France, 66 Savoy, Duke of, sponsor for Prince James, 185 Scotland, influence upon Protestantism in England, 4-6, 170, 280-82; sixteenth century, 6 ff.; power of nobility, 7 ff. (see also Nobles); impotence of royal authority: lack of standing army and money, 7, 8; peasantry of, 9-10; towns or burghs: business, 10; economic backwardness, 11; Catholic Church in, 12-14; political scene,

316 Scotland (Continued) 14 ff.; failure of attempt to create a Protestant, pro-English party, 15; war with England, 16, 18; changes in political situation, 19; why English Protestants fled to, 20; elements of political and religious revolution, 22; policies of Mary of Guise, 2} ff.; wars of the Congregation, 27-62; effort to effect change in government's religious policy, 27 ff.; prospect of being ruled by a series of regents, 28; Mary signs over to France, 30; English policy toward, 44-48, 53-54, 59-62, 82-83, 8 4. 94. " 9 . I2 4i "9-30. '37. '45. '$i- '74-76. 186. ">i, 213, 225-29, 245-47, 259-60, 267, 272; Mary of Guise deposed: committee set up to govern, 50; Maitland's view of >olitical goal, 51 ; alliance with Engand: Treaty of Berwick, 56; religious question entangled with issue of French domination, 59 f.; Protestantism established in, by Parliament, 63-66; Mary's plan to re-Catholicize, 111-12, 123-24, 149-51, 156-60; its failure, 169-70; parties in, after Mary's fall, 198-200; conditions in April, 1568, 220-22; temporarily reduced to Moray's will, 262; succession of regents after death of Moray, 276; importance of Moray in history of, 279-80; revolution in foreign policy, 280 Scrope, Henry le Scrope, 9th Baron, ordered to cooperate with Moray on Border, 268 Sempill, Robert, 3rd Lord, 271M; sent to negotiate with Perth Protestants, 37; at siege of Dumbarton, 225, 264 Seton, George, 5th Lord, a supporter of Regent, 49 Solway Moss, battle of, 14, 25 Spain, 4, 24, 124, 155, 180, 248, 277, 282; and wars of the Congregation, 45, 46, 58; support of Mary, 143, 149-50; hostile to England, 145; danger of war with England, 242, 245, 246, 259; see also Carlos, Don; Philip II Spanish marriage for Queen Mary, negotiation for, 75, 78, 81, 85, 11218; Moray opposed to, 79n, 112, 120 Spens, John, of Condie, 49

f

INDEX Stewart, Elizabeth, 98 Stewart, Francis, 196« Stewart, James, Earl of Moray, triumph of Protestantism in Scotland due to, 6; Prior of St. Andrews, 12; birth and early years, 17; dispensation from bastardy, 17; in military sphere, 18; converted by Knox, 22; initial venture into high politics: support of Mary of Guise as Regent, 27; in Fabian wing of Protestant party, 28 ff. passim; on commission to negotiate marriage treaty between Queen Mary and Dauphin of France, 29; illness attributed to poison, 30; deputed to take crown to France, 31 ; why he did not go, 33; joins Regent's forces: sent to negotiate with Perth Protestants, 37; pressured to declare for the Congregation: coup de grâce to his Fabianism, 38; charged with treachery to Regent and with aiming at the crown, 39, 42; agrees to join Congregation, 38, 39; sees that a religious uprising would lead to a political upheaval, 39; checks Regent at Cupar, 40; seizure of Stirling and Edinburgh, 41; fails to win over Erskine, 43; must be killed to root out Protestantism, 47; reproached by Francis and Mary, 47; Regent's effort to win over, 49; on committee to govern kingdom after deposition of Mary of Guise, 50; importance of Maitland in life of, 51; his two fixed principles, 52; pursuit of Bothwell, 53; defeat of, 53; Regent orders property of, seized: his seizure of her supply ship, 54; defense of Fife, 55; helps negotiate Treaty of Berwick, 56; helps win over neutral lords, 57; view of Anglo-Scottish alliance, 58; assistance to Cecil, 60; attitude to property settlement advocated by Knox, 65; attitude toward marriage of Elizabeth and Arran, 69; breach between Hamiltons and, 70; mission to Mary, 71, 76-79; request re revenues from his French benefices, 7173; angered bv Arrar.'s maneuvering, 72; hampered by Knox and extremists, 73; conferences with Elizabeth and Cecil, 76, 79; accused

I N D E X of betraying sister's secrets, 77; reformation in the North: letter to Mary, 80-82; disturbed by English attitude on ratification of Treaty of Edinburgh, 82; letter to Elizabeth re recognition of Mary as her successor, 83; does not fear Mary's return prior to agreement with Elizabeth, 8j-86; member of Privy Council: "in highest credit" with Queen, 88; protects Mary at private Mass, 88; attempt to restrain Knox, 89; altercation with Huntly, 90; importance of settlement of problem of Church property to, 92-93; concern with Border problems, 93; hopeful of Mary's conversion, 96; granted earldom of Moray and title of Earl of Mar: marriage, 97; married life: children, 98; early betrothal: illegal possession of Buchan lands, 9872; regards Bothwell as a political danger, 101; favors meeting between Mary and Elizabeth, 102; importance in making and keeping Scotland Protestant, 104; publicly assumes title of Earl of Moray, ioy; victory at Corrichie, 107; results of northern progress, 108; weaknesses in position of, 109; religion paramount motive: aware of consequences of Spanish marriage, 112; in a political dilemma, 113; support of Knox, in protest against resumption of saying Mass, IIJ; temporary eclipse of, 115; blunder in religious question, 116; breach with Knox, 117; attitude toward Mary's marriage negotiations, 120; attitude toward Mary's marriage with Dudley, 121, 125; angry letter to Cecil re return of Lennox to Scotland, 125; believes Darnley marriage a menace to Protestantism, 125, 132, 133, 136, 138, 1 jo; restored to control of internal affairs, 126; negotiations with Elizabeth and Cecil re marriage and succession, 127 fF.; on Leicester match, 131; revolt, 135-52; departure from court, 135; renewal of old alliances, 135-36; opposes restoration of Bothwell, 136; ordered to come to court at Stirling, 137; story that Lennox faction

317 plotted his assassination, 140; rumor of plan to seize Darnley and Lennox, 140; appeals for English aid, 141, 143, 147; Randolph instructed to support, 142; outgeneraled by Mary, 143; put to the horn, 144; Elizabeth's decision not to support: property seized, 145; in Edinburgh: cold reception: retreat, 146; offered asylum in England: proclamation justifying his conduct, 148; accepts Elizabeth's offer of asylum, 151; turn of tide, 153-71; courage in adversity, 153; famous interview with Elizabeth, 154; collusion in interview, 155; conviction that Anglo-Scottish friendship was necessary, 156; living in poverty, 156, 165; Elizabeth requests Mary to pardon, 157; Mary refuses to pardon, 158; lands of, given to others, 159; forfeiture imminent, 163; Darnley agrees to restore, and to safeguard Protestantism, 163; informed of plot against Riccio: Darnley's promises to, 164; signs band to Damley, 164-65; Morton and, 16566; summoned to hear his forfeiture, 166; in capital after Riccio's murder: moved by Mary's distress, 167; suspicions disarmed, 168; announcement to empty room of Parliament, 168; offer of pardon, 169; ordered to retire to Argyle's estates: refuses to oppose his friends, 169; and his religion saved from impending ruin: leader of most powerful political party, 170; resumes seat on Privy Council, 173; hostility to Damley, 173; reconciliation with Bothwell and Huntly, 173; disagreement with Bothwell over return of Maitland, 173; effort to obtain pardon for exiles: urges Elizabeth to befriend them, 174; and the O'Neill affair, 175, 180; influence with Mary nonexistent, 176, 177; restored to power and favor: life threatened, 177; band of friendship between Bothwell and Huntly and, 181; Mary begs, not to persecute Catholics, 182; at Craigmillar, 183, 184; protest against restoration of Archbishop Hamilton's court, 186, 188, 189; trades his help

3I8 Stewart, James (Continued) against Darnley for Morton's pardon, 187, 189; leaves Edinburgh before murder of Darnley, 188; dawns on, that Damley is to be murdered: opinion of Bothwell, 189; not responsible for Darnley's death, 190; alarmed by Mary's do-nothing policy after murder, 192; decision to go abroad: confidence in Elizabeth, 193; in Berwick, 194; believes Casket Letters genuine, 102; only possible choice as Regent, 205; in France, subject of hostile Catholic scrutiny, 206; reaction to Carberry and Mary's imprisonment, 207; temporizes in negotiations with French, 207; in London: leams why Mary imprisoned and forced to abdicate, 208; angry interview with Elizabeth, 208; not anxious to undertake regency, 209; interview with Mary, 210 Regency: proclaimed Regent of Scotland, 211; major problems, 212; desire to send an ambassador to England, 213; stabilizing his regime, 213; deals with Mary's supporters, 21415; problem of dealing with own supporters, 216; accomplices of Bothwell among trusted advisers, 217; use of patronage, 218; extreme Protestant policy, 219; financial difficulties of government, 219, 249; visit to Mary, 220; trusts relatives too fully, 220; undependable wing of party: dependable supporters, 221; negotiations with England, 221; most effective card in reestablishing relations with Elizabeth, 222; gains wiped out by Mary's escape: laced by a major strategic decision, 222; decides to remain and summon lieges to Glasgow: army, 223; Marians' challenge to, 224; victory at Langside: determines on thorough pacification of Border, 224; policy of conciliation abandoned for one of destructiveness, 225; Elizabeth determined to force, to reveal proofs of Mary's iniquity, 226; Elizabeth's stern attitude softened by secret message from Cecil, 228; refuses to

INDEX end attacks on Marians, 229; query to Elizabeth re recognition of James VI, 229; agrees to "trial," 229; summons Parliament, 230; policy of conciliating Mary, 230; fear of a French invasion, 231; leniency in Parliament, 231; accused of treachery in matter of forfeitures, 232; Elizabeth's promise that if guilty, Mary would not be restored, 233; appoints commission for trial: takes possession of Casket, 234; at York-Westminster Conference, 237 ff.: faced by a choice of evils, 237; confidence in Elizabeth's guarantee shaken, 238, official reply to accusations of Marians, 238; reveals Casket Letters to English commissioners, 239; agrees to Norfolk's compromise proposal, 240; Elizabeth's threat to support Chatelherault's claim to regency, 241; England to permit to resume rule in Scotland, 242; accuses Mary of murder, 243; and Maitland at parting of ways, 243; never mentions succession to Elizabeth again, 244; pressure put on, to justify himself: produces Casket Letters, 245; decision favorable to: permitted to return home, 246; pleased with results of conference, 247; reputation suffers by association with Elizabeth's crookedness, 247; impatient to return to Scotland, 247; no reconciliation with Mary possible, 248; stories maligning, proclaimed to be lies, 249; urgentlyneeded in Scotland, 249; did not "betray" Norfolk, 249-50, 268; meeting with Norfolk, 250; attitude toward Norfolk's marriage to Mary, 250, 254, 261; approval of marriage dependent on that of Elizabeth, 251, 268; return to Scotland, 251; split in party, 252; Mary source of all his difficulties, 253; last year of regency, 253-75; policy of conciliation toward Marians, 253-55; request for English support against Marians, 254, 255; agreement with Chatelherault, 255; Marians to agree to acknowledge authority of, 255; imprisons Chatelherault, Herries, 256; submission of Huntly to, 257; expedition against

INDEX H u n t l y ' s domain and to reassert authority in north, 258; granted part of Kirk's income, 259; conditions of Elizabeth's effort to promote reconciliation with M a r y , 259; plan of N o r f o l k ' s party to coerce, into acquiescence in M a r y ' s restoration, 260-61; decision to reject Elizabeth's and Mary's proposals, 262; supported b y Convention of the Estates, 263; involved in accusation of Maitland? 266; change in Elizabeth's attitude toward, 267; prorogues Maitland's trial, 269; and N o r t h e r n Rebellion, 269 ff.; hold on country secure, 270; captures Northumberland: accused of subservience to "auld enemy," 270; purpose in seizing N o r t h u m b e r land, 271; conditions of surrender of Northumberland to Elizabeth, 272; warned to avoid Linlithgow, 27}; assassination, 274; Elizabeth's reaction to death of, 275; funeral, 2 7 j ; epitaph, 275«; death leads t o civil w a r , 276; final triumph of p o l i c y , 277; internal menace to Protestantism removed through efforts of K n o x and, 277; character and accomplishments, 278 ff.; chiefly responsible f o r triumph of Reformation in Scotland, 279, 280; indispensable as a party leader, 280; contributions to Europe and to England, 280-82; basic difference in aim between Maitland and, 281; political consistency and devotion to principle, 281; religion the underlying factor in his behavior, 282; M a r y and, 282-83; personality, 283-84; spoken of as "the G o o d Regent," 284 Stewart, James of D o u n , "bonny Earl o' M o r a y , " 98 Stewart, Margaret, 98 Stewart, Matthew, Earl of Lennox, see Lennox Stewart, Robert, Commendator of H o l y r o o d , 27, 98, 132, I8J; ordered to stop feuding, 177 Stirling, 44, J3, j j , 137, 138, 143, 185, 265; ministers summoned to, 33, 3536; Regent outmaneuvered at, 41; Moray's supporters meet at, 142; Mar made Captain o f , 193; meeting of

319 lords at, 196; James V I c r o w n e d at, 205; Lennox killed at, 276 Strachan, James, rector of University of St. A n d r e w s , 17 Succession question, significance o f , f o r Protestantism, 5-6; L o r d James and Maitland's policy toward Queen M a r y hung on, 72-73; M a r y ' s policy hinged on: suitable marriage involved, 74 ff.; and the deinceps clause, 82; efforts to persuade Elizabeth to recognize M a r y as her successor, 83 ff., 131; Maitland sent to England to discuss, 94; Elizabeth's attitude, 95, 132; political factor, 95; Mary's belief that Maitland and M o r a y able to arrange satisfactory solution, 109; English statesmen oppose Mary's claim, 111; M a r y w o u l d not marry Dudley without a guarantee on, 121, 123, 125-26; Elizabeth building up Darnley as a potential successor, 123 f.; Darnley match strengthens Mary's claim, 124, 156; Elizabeth's procrastination, 127-28; her decision, 132; Mary's claim strengthened b y birth of son, 177; decision to reopen: Elizabeth willing to discuss, 186; poses problem for Elizabeth, 226; Maitland's attitude at Y o r k Conference, 237; M o r a y and Maitland differ on, 243-44, J 8i Superintendents of the K i r k , 63 Sussex, T h o m a s Radcliffe, 3rd Earl of, 271; on Elizabeth's commission at Y o r k , 233, 235; warns against permitting M a r y to defend herself, 242; requests that M o r a y seize English rebels, 270 Sutherland, John Sutherland, 10th Earl of, 164; guilty of treason: restored b y Parliament, 108 Taxation, 7, 8; M a r y of Guise's scheme of 1556, 8, 21, 23 Tenants, insecurity of tenure, 9, 12 Thirds, payment from, to ministers, tee Ministers T h r o c k m o r t o n , Sir Nicholas, 47, 54, 67, 70, 75, 84, 88, 207, 210, 214; instructed to smuggle A r r a n out of France, 45; L o r d James's interview with, in Paris, 77-79; demand that

320 Throckmorton, Sir Nicholas (Cont.) M a r y ratify T r e a t y of Edinburgh, 82; on Lord James's effort to persuade his sister to come home, 86; sent to Scotland, 137; interview with M a r y at Stirling, 138-39; sent to Scotland to demand Mary's restoration, 201; his negotiations, 201-j, 21213; leaves Scotland, 213 Towns, in Scotland, 10-12 Treaties, see under name of treaty, i.e., Berwick, Treaty of Trent, Council of, 4, 103 Tudor, Margaret, j , 123 Tullibardine, see Murray, Sir William Valois, wars with Hapsburgs, 3, 4, 24 Villeroy, in Scotland to renew "auld alliance," 202 Wars of the Congregation, 6, 27-62 Westminster, Conference at, see YorkWestminster Conference Westmoreland, Charles Neville, 6th Earl of, 25077; in Northern Rebellion, 267; flees to Scotland, 270; protected from Moray, 271 Whitelaw, Alexander, 67

I N D E X Whitelaw, Patrick, defends Dunbar, 214 Winter, Sir William, Admiral, arrival in the Forth, 55 Wishart, George, martyrdom, 19; Knox converted by, 22 Wishart, Sir John, of Pitarrow, Comptroller, 91, 1 3 1 ; Protestant representative at Perth, 37; ousted from Comptrollership, 150; comes to terms with M a r y , 169 Witches, burned, 258 W o o d , John, Moray's secretary, 229, 243; sent to England, 228; exploits shift in English attitude, 232-33; sent to check up on Maitland, 261 Wotton, Nicholas, to help Cecil negotiate with French, 59 W y n r a m , J o h n , Subprior of St. Andrews, deleted section of the Confession of Faith, 64 Y o r k , Moray's commissioiners at, 234 York-Westminster Conference, 23552; Casket Letters (q.v.) shown to English commissioners, 239; see further Maitland, Mary Queen of Scots, Stewart, James